By World War I, the public (and later, many historians) had come to believe that teams of anonymous scientists in corporate research and development (R&D) laboratories had displaced “heroic” individual inventors like Thomas Edison and Alexander Graham Bell as the wellspring of innovation. However, the first half of the twentieth century was actually a long transitional period when lesser known independents like Chester Carlson (Xerox copier), Earl Tupper (Tupperware), Samuel Ruben (Duracell batteries), and Edwin Land (Polaroid camera) continued to make notable contributions to the overall context of innovation. Accordingly, my dissertation considers the changing fortunes of American independent inventors from approximately 1900 to 1950, a period of expanding corporate R&D, the Great Depression, and two world wars. Contrary to most interpretations of this period, I argue that individual, “post-heroic” inventors remained an important, though less visible, source of inventions in the early twentieth century.
Does America need more innovators?We posed the question to highlight how innovation has become a national imperative pursued through the transformation of people. Societal goals such as regional development and international competitiveness take shape through initiatives to make innovators. Contributors have shown that such programs are ubiquitous and pervasive. Innovator initiatives target all age groups and career stages, from kindergarteners to senior scientists. Innovators train in formal and informal educational settings, supported by public and private funding. The innovator imperative operates at all scales, from individual garage inventors to interdisciplinary teams, regional innovation districts, and global federations.But asking the question implies doubt. It calls attention to the fact that the demand for innovation is at a crossroads. The contributors to this volume join journalists, policy advocates, and scholars in challenging the assumptions and impact of innovator initiatives. They have demonstrated that innovation training programs are historically prone to failure, they have questioned the efficacy of supposedly universal models, they have documented gender and racial disparities across the enterprise, and they have argued that innovation-once a means for solving societal problemshas become an end unto itself.Finally, we inquired about the need for innovators to open a dialogue about the purpose of innovator initiatives and whom they serve. We assembled champions, critics, and reformers to explore innovation's contradictory dimensions; to engage practitioners directly; and to do so via a reflective approach that treated participants symmetrically. Contributors collectively contextualized the assumptions, goals, practices, and consequences of the demand for innovators. This dialogue fosters opportunities for seeing how the imperative can be remade.
Contributors 375Index 379Academy of Arts and Sciences (AAAS) declared in its 2015 report "Innovation: An American Imperative." To be a "global innovation leader" requires federal support, tax incentives, the pursuit of emerging technologies, a welcome environment for talent, better STEM education, and a meritocratic culture. But, warns "Innovation" and its five hundred signatories from Google to the American Dairy Science Association, "now is not the time to rest on past success." While competitors have adopted our playbook, the United States has stagnated, putting the American dream at risk. 1 Variations on the AAAS's manifesto dominate visions of the future of the United States. Corporate executives, government leaders, and local schoolboards agree that Americans must innovate. The imperative is remarkably capacious. Innovation today describes everything from the commercialization of new technology to economic policy, design, artistic imagination, and grassroots community renewal.The demand for innovation is as much a call for new kinds of people as it is for national investment. Implicit in the AAAS's plan is an imperative to create innovators, the citizens who will make new discoveries, disrupt old ways, solve once intractable social problems, create wealth, and ensure national supremacy. These innovators include not only engineers and scientists but also entrepreneurs, inventors, designers, and civic leaders with the mindsets and tools of "change makers."The movement to cultivate a new generation of innovators has fueled the rise of innovation experts. These champions of innovation lead initiatives to make innovators at all career stages. Business gurus sell how-to books, while universities such as Stanford and Arizona State offer models for producing entrepreneurs, start-up companies, and regional growth. 2 Innovator 1 The Innovator Imperative Matthew Wisnioski The Innovator Imperative 3 views, the contributors assembled here agree that the widespread effort to educate and train new innovators has become a dominant imperative of our time, one that is increasingly on trial. In what follows, policymakers, design executives, and educators explore the imperative alongside historians, ethnographers, and social critics. Contributors ask themselves and one another: Why did programs for making innovators emerge? How have they evolved? What is their track record? What are their collective assumptions and shortcomings? How might they be improved? What is their future? Championing Innovation From Thomas Edison's laboratory in Menlo Park, New Jersey, to Facebook's headquarters in Menlo Park, California, stories abound of technological wizards whose very force of personality drives breakthroughs and generates fortunes. 6 These young, gritty, and creative men (in such tales they are almost always men) overcome failure and naysayers to create products that remake the world. With varying shades of plausibility, their biographical accounts offer the prospect that you, too, can follow in their footsteps to become the next...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.