question
stringlengths 18
1.2k
| facts
stringlengths 44
500k
| answer
stringlengths 1
147
|
---|---|---|
What was invented by Karl Dahlman , in 1963 , to aid gardeners ? | I will now elaborate on my answer from
Exercise 1
. I'm doing this because my internet search revealed more than I've written in the above answer, and to show that the invention of the telephone and its use by consumers is not as plain and simple as you may think. You were not expected to provide the kind of detail below and my search took much more than 1 hour.
4.2 When and where was the telephone invented?
I'd read in the past that the telephone was invented in 1876 by Alexander Graham Bell. However when I looked more closely at the history it turns out that the idea had been ‘in the air’ for almost half a century.
The distance communication technology of the time, the telegraph, was based on sending pulses of electricity along a wire to control an electromagnet at the receiving end. The sender completed an electric circuit by pressing a key and the receiver's electromagnet controlled a pen that made marks on a moving paper tape. Samuel Morse devised a code whereby the letters of the alphabet could be represented by different combinations of dots and dashes. Later, telegraph operators learned to interpret the Morse code from the sound made by the electromagnet and the paper tape became redundant.
In 1854 Charles Bourseul suggested that speaking close to a diaphragm would cause it to vibrate and that these vibrations could be used to make or break an electrical circuit, as in the telegraph. The process could then be reversed by a receiving diaphragm turning the signal back into speech. Bourseul didn't pursue this idea himself but it was taken up by other inventors. A self-taught German physicist and schoolteacher, Philipp Reis, demonstrated a form of telephone based on these ideas in 1861. Although it could transmit music and certain other sounds along a wire his ‘telephon’ could not transmit intelligible speech. Moreover Reis suffered from ill health and lack of resources so did not patent or develop his prototype.
In Italy, Innocenzo Manzetti had been working on an automaton since 1849. His attempts to make his robot speak led him to develop a prototype telephone that was demonstrated to the Italian press in 1865. It is said that his humble nature and lack of finance meant he didn't try to commercialise his prototype.
In 1871 an Italian immigrant to the USA, Antonio Meucci, filed a caveat for his ‘teletrofono’ invention based on a communication link he had rigged up between his basement lab and his second-floor bedroom to keep in touch with his ailing wife. (A caveat is a warning to others that he was in the process of inventing a device and has a general description of the invention not yet perfected.) Once again though, like Reis, Meucci suffered from illness and lack of resources. Not only could he not afford to convert his caveat into a full patent application, he couldn't afford the annual renewal fee and allowed his caveat to expire. In 2001 in a resolution acknowledging Meucci's contribution to the invention of the telephone, the US Congress said, ‘if Meucci had been able to pay the $10 fee to maintain the caveat after 1874, no patent could have been issued to Bell’.
Bell was an elocution teacher of deaf pupils who was working on a device to translate sound into visible patterns that would allow deaf people to ‘see’ speech. While working on this device he realised the potential for improving the telegraph if a wave of undulating current could be transmitted along the wires instead of the existing intermittent pulses. This would allow a larger number of signals to be transmitted on the same telegraph circuit – each signal using a different musical note. This would make the system more efficient and reduce the need to erect many more new lines to cope with the growth in traffic.
Bell was among a number of inventors racing to be the first to produce a working prototype of what became known as the musical or harmonic telegraph. On 3 June 1875, while working on a prototype of the harmonic telegraph, Bell heard the sound of his assistant Watson plucking a metal reed on the sending device. After further experimentation Bell filed an application for a patent – said to be the single most valuable patent in history – on 14 February 1876 for an ‘improvement to telegraphy’ in which the transmission of ‘noises or sounds’ was merely one of the ‘other uses to which these instruments may be put’. There was no mention of speech. Amazingly, however, only a few hours later another inventor, Elisha Gray, filed a caveat at the US Patent Office for a similar device. In other words, to say the telephone was invented in 1876 doesn't tell the whole story – invention is an ongoing process not a one-off event.
4.3 Who invented the telephone?
The popular image of Bell inventing the telephone, while it has some truth, is by no means the whole story. The two most significant players in the invention of a practical working telephone were Bell and Elisha Gray.
Gray was the co-owner and chief scientist of a company that manufactured telegraphic equipment. Bell's patent description had sound transmission as a minor purpose. But Gray's caveat declared that the main purpose of his device was ‘to transmit the tones of the human voice through a telegraphic circuit and reproduce them at the receiving end of the line, so that actual conversations can be carried on by persons at long distances apart’. Although Bell had built a prototype, it wasn't a working telephone system, and while his early devices worked as receivers they never worked well as transmitters. In fact Gray's idea was sounder in concept than Bell's (including using liquid in the transmitter, an idea that Bell later adopted, some say copied), and Gray's intentions were clearer, but he hadn't built a working prototype either. The US patent system of the time didn't require inventors to produce a working prototype.
Gray chose to register his detailed specification as an incomplete invention, while Bell registered his partial specification as a complete invention. On the one hand, it could be said that Bell was displaying the self-confidence needed by any inventor. However, it was discovered in a Congressional inquiry 10 years later that an official from the Patent Office had informed Bell's lawyers of the content of Gray's caveat rather than just of its existence. Therefore when, a few weeks later, Bell was called to explain the similarities of his patent to one he had been granted a year earlier for a harmonic telegraph, it is suggested that he was able to use inside information to persuade the examiner that his was a new device – the telephone. A patent was granted to Bell in March 1876.
When doubts finally emerged about the propriety of Bell's original patent, the US government brought a case in 1887 to annul the Bell patent on the grounds of ‘fraud and misrepresentation’. However, the claims could not be substantiated, most of the rival claimants had died or been bought off and the Bell patent was due to expire in 1893. To quote Congress, ‘the case was discontinued as moot without ever reaching the underlying issue of the true inventor of the telephone entitled to the patent’.
To be fair, Gray never claimed to be the sole inventor of the telephone but seemed to believe it was a case of ‘simultaneous invention’. However, with both men intent on exploiting the invention commercially it was inevitable that there would be a patent dispute. Gray lined up with Western Union, which funded his research, and which had obtained control of Thomas Edison's patent for a carbon transmitter. The giant telegraph company had set up a subsidiary, the American Speaking Telephone Company, to exploit the emerging technology that was being greeted enthusiastically by some of their best telegraph customers, the New York stockbrokers. Bell had a growing organisation on his side to exploit his invention – the Bell Telephone Company had become National Bell.
When Western Union started to use a system incorporating Edison's transmitter but Bell's receiver, National Bell resorted to the courts to stop it. At the same time Bell had Emile Berliner (later the inventor of the gramophone) working to produce a rival transmitter to go with Bell's superior receiver – and to bypass Edison's patent.
In 1879 an agreement was finally reached that saw Western Union agree to drop its counter-suits and sign over its own telephone patents. Apparently Western Union thought the telephone would only ever be a rival to the telegraph over short distances. In exchange National Bell agreed to drop its cases, buy out its rival's subscribers and equipment and pay Western Union a 20 per cent commission on each telephone rental for the remaining 15 years of the patents (this eventually totalled $7m). In addition Gray was paid $100 000 and Western Electric (Gray's company) was contracted as Bell's sole equipment supplier – an arrangement that lasted for almost 100 years.
Although there were many more patent cases brought both by and against Bell, Gray's had been the most significant. From this point on it was Bell's name and company that were associated with the invention and development of the telephone.
So the identification of a particular individual as the inventor of a new technology is not necessarily straightforward. Boldness and determination, allied with sufficient resources and a good support team – especially good patent lawyers – seem to be just as important as technical ingenuity. There also seems to be an element of history being written by the winners.
4.4 What was innovative about the telephone?
The most obvious innovative aspect was that speech was being transmitted, so in principle anyone could use a telephone for communication. The use of the telegraph required skilled operatives. A message had to be translated into the dots and dashes of Morse code and transmitted using a single keypad making and breaking the connection in an electrical circuit. At the other end of the wire another Morse operator translated the received clicks into the words of the message. With the telephone no specialised skills or training were needed to use it and the efficiency of communication was not limited by the speed and translating ability of the Morse operators. As a means of communicating across distance the telephone was easier to use and more efficient. Quite a competitive advantage.
However, for early versions of the telephone much of this advantage was merely potential. It needed improvements in performance and a considerable growth in the telephone network before significant numbers of people were prepared to switch from the telegraph. Subsequent innovations, such as the manual exchange, pay phones, the automatic exchange, metering, trunk dialling and the more recent introduction of digital systems, have all contributed to the spread of the telephone as a technological product.
4.5 Was the telephone invented in response to a need or because of developments in technology?
As with many truly innovative technologies it's difficult to claim that people were demanding its invention. Most people were satisfied with the existing means of communicating across distances. It took a great deal of imagination to foresee that the ability to speak to others at a distance would eventually replace the telegraph in business and the letter in personal communications. People weren't expressing a need to be able to communicate more rapidly but once the means became available to do so they steadily took advantage of the new technology. Then positive feedback took over and the better the technology became the more people got used to its benefits and the greater their need became for more innovation.
Developments in technology can create a need that provides a ready market for improved versions of the technology. And so it goes on.
4.6 Was the telephone an immediate success?
By the end of 1876 Bell had managed to build an experimental device that could carry a conversation across 2 miles of wire. The following year the first operational telephone line was erected over the 5 miles between Charles Williams’ factory in Boston and his home in Somerville. It was done there because Bell had conducted some of his experimental work in Williams’ electrical workshops a couple of years earlier. These first telephones were still fairly crude devices and arranged in pairs to connect two particular sites – there was no network. The sound they produced was weak and indistinct, and deteriorated with distance.
There was immediate scepticism expressed about the telephone from the telegraph companies and others. It wasn't so much that the telegraph companies saw the telephone as a threat, at least not in the early days. It was more that they had their own well-established technology, employed most of the people with any expertise in this area and saw no need to change.
Furthermore not everyone can appreciate the potential of a very new technology. Even Bell might not have realised the significance of the invention to start with. Later in the same year, after he was granted his patent, he and his financial backer offered to sell the patent to the Telegraph Company, which was the forerunner of Western Union. The offer was turned down, allegedly with the new invention being dismissed as ‘hardly more than a toy’.
New technologies can encounter resistance from people with a stake in established technologies. For a new technology to succeed it must be clear what advantage it has to offer over existing technology, and it has to capture enough users to make itself economically viable. For a decade or more after its invention there was still some uncertainty about the best use for the telephone. A London company offered multiple headsets for connecting telephone subscribers and their friends and family to theatres, concerts and church services. In Paris and Budapest an all-day telephone news service was offered – this actually continued for 30 or 40 years. But any potential for high-quality sound from the telephone had been sacrificed in the interest of maximising the number of conversations that could be carried along a single wire. In other words it was designed for one-to-one conversation and that became its main function.
The first significant users of the telegraph had been the stock market and newspapers who contributed to its widespread diffusion. These two groups were also among the early users of the telephone and Bell's marketing was almost exclusively aimed at commercial users. Even in the USA the telephone was mostly a business tool for the first 50 years of its development. It wasn't until after the Second World War that a majority of US households had a private telephone.
So the telephone was by no means an immediate success but rather experienced a steady growth, starting with a small number of specialised users and gradually diffusing into more general and widespread use.
4.7 Has telephone design changed over time?
As you can see from
Figure 5
the design of the telephone has changed considerably over its lifetime, reflecting the improvements in technology, materials, components and manufacturing processes. Figures 1(a) to (f) show some of the early progress.
Figure 5
(a) is a replica of Bell's ‘liquid transmitter’ of 1876 and
Figure 5
(b) is a Bell telephone and terminal panel from 1877 showing the adaptation for two-way conversation. Edison's wall telephone (
Figure 5
c) was developed by 1880 and the classic ‘candlestick’ table top phone (
Figure 5
d) by 1900. As the technology improved both transmitter and receiver were incorporated into a single handset (
Figure 5
e), and once automatic exchanges had been invented room had to be found for a dial (
Figure 5
f, the Strowger automatic dial telephone, 1905). The appearance of synthetic plastics, starting with Bakelite in the 1920s, permitted new shapes (
Figure 5
g, Bakelite handset), and later developments led to colour being used in telephones for the first time (
Figure 5
h, plastic handset from the 1960s;
Figure 5
i, Trimphone, 1970s). Dials were gradually superseded by push buttons (
Figure 5
j, Keyphone, 1972). Finally digitalisation and miniaturisation have challenged designers to fit an increasing number of functions into ever-smaller handsets.
Figure 6
(k) shows Motorola's MicroTAC personal cellular phone, which was the smallest and lightest on the market in 1989, and
Figure 5
(l) is Samsung's A800 ‘hinged’ mobile phone of 2004.
Figure 5 Since its invention the design of the telephone has evolved (Sources: (a) to (g) Science & Society Picture Library; (h) Science Photo Library; (i) Sam Hallas; (k) Northwood Images)
Figure 5
4.8 Has the telephone led to any related or spin-off products?
There have been a number of branches of the telegraph and the telephone family tree where research and experiment into one technology have contributed to the development of another.
An early example was Edison inventing the phonograph. He'd been working on a telegraph repeater to record telegraph signals using a stylus to vibrate onto and indent a sheet of paper. The idea was that when the indented paper passed across the stylus again the indentations would cause identical vibrations and the telegraph message would be repeated exactly. Edison was also experimenting to improve the telephone.
When feeling the vibrations caused when sound passed through the diaphragm in a telephone mouthpiece, Edison realised that the repeater idea could be applied to the human voice being transmitted by the telephone. His first working prototype of the phonograph was hand-cranked and used tinfoil as the recording medium. Though there was something almost miraculous about hearing the human voice reproduced by this simple mechanical device there was no obvious use for it, particularly when the quality of recording was so poor. One of Edison's first ideas was to use it to record telephone conversations for posterity. After the initial excitement Edison abandoned the phonograph to work on the electric light.
Ten years later, under pressure from Bell who was developing an improved version of the phonograph, Edison finally produced a commercial phonograph using an electric motor and hard wax-coated cylinders that delivered much better sound quality. Around the same time Emile Berliner was inventing a means of recording onto a flat wax-coated zinc disk. Even this was initially regarded and marketed as a toy, but eventually the gramophone formed the basis of a huge industry for selling recorded music.
Another of the branches led to radio and then mobile telephony. The work of Bell, Edison and others on improving the telegraph and transmitting sound along wires led eventually to wireless transmission – Marconi was transmitting Morse code messages from ship to shore in 1897 and eventually across the Atlantic in 1901. The first commercial transatlantic radio voice service began in 1927. The first radiotelephone service for vehicles was introduced in the US in 1946.
In 1947 microwave radio transmissions started to be used for long-distance telephony and by the early 1960s telecommunications satellites were being used for round-the-world contact. The first portable cellular phone appeared in 1979. Today's mobile phones might seem like a different product from Bell's early prototypes but there's a continuous line of scientific discoveries and developments in technology and materials connecting the two (
Figure 6
).
Figure 6 A family tree showing the development of telephone technology. It shows a progression but does not try to show every kind of product developed
Figure 6
4.9 A consumer's experience of innovation
First phone in 1968
As I mentioned earlier my parents first acquired a domestic telephone in 1968 – more than 90 years after its invention.
Before then other ways of communicating seemed good enough. In the early 1950s in our street of around 100 houses only one family had a private telephone. My family used public call boxes occasionally but we didn't know many people with their own phone so not many calls needed to be made. When we needed to communicate with people at a distance we sent a letter. In emergencies or for urgent communications we sent or received telegrams – but these were usually reserved for bad news.
Product awareness
My parents and I had been aware of the telephone all our lives but it seemed like a luxury item and was lower in our priorities than, say, a car (that we bought in 1956) or a television (1958). Even by 1970 only around 30 per cent of households in the UK had a home telephone – this had risen to 95 per cent by the year 2000.
New but familiar
There didn't seem to be anything particularly novel about our first telephone. On the surface the design had not changed significantly for 40 years, consisting of a dial on the front and a large handset sitting on a cradle on top. The most obvious changes were in the materials used – moulded plastic had replaced Bakelite and metal. These material changes in our 1968 telephone had been introduced in 1959 with the launch of the 700-series telephone (
Figure 7
diffusion and suppression
intellectual property and patents.
Although innovation is the term applied to one particular stage, it is also common to talk about the whole process from invention to diffusion as the innovation process.
To illustrate these concepts I will use the example of a significant invention with which you are familiar and that has come to symbolise the inspired moment at the heart of invention – the electric light. This example also illustrates the range of factors behind the success of one of the most famous inventors of all time, Thomas Edison. The irony, as you will discover, is that there was no clear ‘Eureka!’ moment in this invention. It was the product of sheer hard work and demonstrated Edison's famous saying in a newspaper interview, ‘Genius is 1 per cent inspiration and 99 per cent perspiration’.
5.2 Inventors and inventions
An inventor is an individual or group able to generate an idea for a new or improved device, product or process. The idea must then be transformed into concrete information in the form of a description, sketch or model.
An invention is an idea, concept or design for a new or improved device, product or process that is available as concrete information in the form of a description, sketch or model.
So an inventor may have many ideas for new products or improvements to existing processes, say, but these do not constitute an invention until the ideas have been transformed into something real, such as drawings or a prototype with the potential for practical application. As you will see later on, the conditions for granting a patent to protect an invention from being copied are that the invention must be new, must not be obvious to someone who knows about the subject and must be capable of industrial application.
Given that the process of invention takes place over time it is often not possible to be precise about the exact moment that an inventive idea becomes an invention. For example in 1878 the prolific US inventor, Thomas Edison, began work on inventing an incandescent lamp powered by electricity. He was enthused by a new kind of generator that had been developed to power a small arc-light system and realised the commercial possibilities of being the first to provide a large-scale electric lighting system. He had a vision of lighting up an entire city district with such a generator.
However the arc-light (bright light produced by a continuous electric arc leaping between two electrodes) suffered from two problems: burnout of the tips of its electrodes meant regular replacement, and the problem of controlling the gap between the electrodes when they were constantly being burned up by the arc. Edison saw the need for inventing an electric lamp that would be effective and long lasting. He thought that the solution might lie in the incandescent lamp – that is, a lamp in which light is produced by using electricity to heat some substance to a high temperature, causing it to glow.
Others had been trying for years to achieve this goal, and in fact the first patent on an incandescent lamp was taken out in Britain in 1841. The situation of many people working towards solving the same technological problem is common and often results in simultaneous invention – as you saw with the invention of the telephone. The most notable of these other inventors was Joseph Swan, an Englishman who had produced a design that featured a carbonised paper filament that glowed inside a glass when electricity was passed through it (
Figure 8
). The air was evacuated from the inside of the bulb so that oxygen would not cause the filament to burn up. However no one, including Swan, had managed to produce a filament that would glow for a useful length of time before being destroyed.
Figure 8 On the left is Swan's experimental carbon pencil lamp, 1878–9. On the right is the first prototype of Edison's incandescent lamp, 1879. (Source: Science & Society Picture Library)
Figure 8
Edison's challenge was to find a suitable material for the filament that would permit a bright glow without burning up too quickly. He had ideas about how it might be done but it took a year of searching for and experimenting with thousands of different filament materials. He also searched for a method of achieving the necessary vacuum inside the light bulb. Eventually he produced a working prototype of his carbon filament lamp in October 1879. This consisted of a thread of carbonised cotton bent into the shape of a horseshoe and mounted inside a glass bulb (
Figure 8
, right) that had the air sucked out of it(
Figure 9
). When connected to an electric current the new ‘electric candle’ burned for almost 2 days.
Figure 9 Light bulb evacuation pumps
Figure 9
This apparatus was a combination of several existing technologies – Geissler and Sprengel's mercury pumps and McLeod's vacuum gauge. After only a few weeks of improvements in late 1879, Edison's team could evacuate a bulb to a millionth of an atmosphere in 20 minutes.
This first reliable working prototype could be said to be the invention. However before the electric light could be offered for sale to customers there was still a great deal of work to be done by Edison and his team of workers at his Menlo Park laboratory in north-east USA (
Figure 10
).
Figure 10 Edison's Menlo Park laboratory with experimental light bulb apparatus on the left, in front of a table of batteries
Figure 10
Activity 2
Can you think of an inventor other than those named previously in this unit?
I thought of Owen MacLaren, the retired engineer and grandfather who invented the lightweight, foldable baby buggy in the 1960s.
Activity 3
Can you think of a recent invention other than those mentioned previously in this unit?
The proximity card is fairly new. It gives access to secure buildings when it is held near to an electronic sensor that is connected to an electric door lock.
5.3 Designs
A design comprises drawings, instructions or models that contain all the information for the manufacture of a product or the introduction of a process or system.
So Edison's early prototypes were different designs that physically embodied the new ideas on which his invention was based. But developing an invention in a laboratory or workshop is one thing, manufacturing an innovation to sell to others is a different matter.
Edison quickly realised that he needed to develop a complete electric lighting system, not just the electric lamp. Further, Edison had to ensure that his electric light and its related subsystems could be reproduced on the large scale that would be required to achieve commercial success. This involved producing designs of every component of his electric lighting system, in other words specific plans, drawings and instructions to enable the manufacture of products, processes or systems related to his invention (
Figure 11
). So design has a vital role to play in the commercial manufacture of new inventions, to specify and communicate what is to be made.
Figure 11 Design for screw socket, September 1880 (Source: Edison National Historic Site)
Figure 11
Edison's long-time associates, Edward H. Johnson and John Ott, were principally responsible for designing fixtures in the autumn of 1880. Their work resulted in the screw socket and base very much like those widely used today.
Edison and his team continued to develop and improve the lamp itself and the related devices necessary for reliable, large-scale lighting systems. They worked on techniques for creating better vacuums inside glass bulbs, improvements to the design of generators and distribution systems, and so on.
5.4 Product champion
Throughout the development of this innovation Edison endeavoured, by means of persuasive argument and demonstrations of progress, to convince those people who were in a position to help further the success of the electric light that it had great potential. These people included financiers who could provide capital for more research and development, industrialists who might install it in their factories, and politicians who might agree to the large-scale city installation of a lighting system.
This is a key role in the development of any invention; it needs a product champion. This will be an individual or group committed to promoting the development of a certain product, process or system.
Usually such championing takes place in an institutional context where the champion is trying to persuade the organisation that it is worth investing in a particular new product, or is prepared to defend an innovative product from attack once the process of development is under way. Sometimes, however, this takes place outside an organisation, where a sympathetic supporter will promote the qualities of an invention to those who might be willing to finance its development. If no outside support is forthcoming, or if even more support is needed to give momentum to the innovation process, the original inventor will need to take on the additional role of champion, as did Edison.
5.5 Entrepreneur
From this it is clear that money is a key requirement for transforming an invention into an innovation. Money pays for the people and equipment needed to refine the invention into a practical working prototype, and money pays for manufacturing it.
A key role in providing this vital monetary support is played by the entrepreneur. This is a persuasive individual or group providing the resources and organisation necessary to turn the invention into an innovation.
Entrepreneurs are likely to be involved at an early stage of an innovation's development, either taking the risk of investing their own money or raising money for a project from others. Most people with money to invest will be inclined to wait until it is clearer whether an innovation is going to be successful before investing. Part of the task of the entrepreneur is to persuade them to take a risk. It is often the case that at the early stage of the innovation process an individual inventor or entrepreneur is unable to persuade people to risk investing in a new and untried invention. In the absence of the necessary financial support an inventor can either give up or take on the entrepreneurial role themselves.
Edison was one such inventor-entrepreneur. He used earnings from the commercial success of his earlier inventions – mainly related to improvements to the telegraph – together with some outside investment to build his Menlo Park workshops in 1876 (
Figure 12
). Edison and his team of technicians and mechanics at Menlo Park produced 400 patented inventions over the next 6 years including the microphone, the phonograph and the vacuum tube, which was later used in wireless telegraphy. This innovative laboratory therefore provided Edison with a firm technical base from which to develop the electric light, and freedom from the monetary pressures that bring down many inventors if they are unable to secure a quick return on investment in their invention. However, Edison was not typical of inventor-entrepreneurs. His reputation for commercially successful inventions was so high that within a few weeks of announcing his intention to develop electric lighting, financiers were queuing up to invest in the Edison Electric Light Company – a situation the majority of inventors can only dream about.
Even Edison, though, could not combine perfectly the creative skills of invention and innovation with the business and managerial skills of the entrepreneur. It is said, ‘he so totally mismanaged the businesses he started that he had to be removed from every one of them to save it’ (Drucker, 1985).
Figure 12 Menlo Park laboratory staff, 1880. Edison is seated third from the left, second row from the top, holding a straw hat (Source: Edison National Historic Site)
Figure 12
5.6 Improver
At different stages of the process of invention, design and innovation there's a role that can be played by improvers. The improver is an individual or group whose concern is to do things better by making improvements to existing products or processes.
Such people can help transform an inventor's first prototype and early design into a commercial product. Edison's team at Menlo Park included a number of engineers, chemists and mathematicians who contributed to the improvement of the electric light, as well as other inventions.
Another contribution of improvers is at a slightly later stage in the innovation process when they can make incremental improvements to other people's inventions. For example, in 1877 Edison developed a carbon transmitter that helped improve Bell's recently invented telephone.
5.7 Innovation
The point at which the electric light first became available on the market was the moment the invention became an innovation. So an innovation is a new or improved product, process or system that has reached the point of first commercial introduction.
Even this moment of achieving innovation is sometimes difficult to pinpoint in a particular case. The first full-scale use of the electric lamp outside of the laboratory was in May 1880 when Edison installed 115 of them on the new steamship Columbia at the suggestion of its owner, Henry Villard, who had become an enthusiast for the electric light after seeing a demonstration at Menlo Park (
Figure 13
). The electric system was more suitable than open-flame lighting in the confined spaces of a ship. It was so effective that it was 15 years before it was replaced with more modern equipment. However it could be argued that this was not the moment of innovation as there was an element of personal favour rather than it being a purely commercial transaction.
Figure 13 The first installation of the Edison system outside of Menlo Park was aboard the steamship, Columbia in 1880, shown here in a Scientific American engraving (Source: Smithsonian Institute)
Figure 13
It gave Edison an opportunity to put his light into operation under carefully managed conditions, as well as offering the chance for a public demonstration
One of the first commercial installations of Edison's complete electric light system (generators, distributing circuits and the bulbs) was for the lithography factory of Hinds, Ketcham & Company, New York, in early 1881. Electric lighting allowed the factory to operate at night without difficulty in distinguishing colours.
The first full-scale public demonstration of Edison's urban lighting system was along the Holborn Viaduct in London (
Figures 14
and
15
). The first generator started up in January 1882 and the Holborn installation was a testing ground for a number of key elements of his more famous installation at Pearl Street Station in New York, which began service later that year.
Figure 14 Plan for lighting the Holborn Viaduct, London (Source: Smithsonian Institute)
Figure 14
Figure 15 Edison's Jumbo dynamo. Site unknown but probably the Holborn Viaduct station, London, 1882 (Source: Edison National Historic Site)
Figure 15
The Holborn Viaduct project was intended as a temporary demonstration, not a permanent commercial station. By choosing the viaduct, Edison's London agents were able to install the system quickly and with minimal cost because the electrical conduits could be hung underneath without excavations or the need for permits. The viaduct was a testing ground for several key elements of Edison's system.
5.8 Dominant design
In most examples of evolving technological innovation there is a period when rival designs are competing to outperform each other, both in what they do and how well they appeal to the consumer. Certain features of a product or process come to be recognised as meeting key needs and they are incorporated in subsequent improved versions of the design. Other features might meet too narrow a set of needs to be economical and are dropped.
Gradually what emerges is a dominant design, which is the product whose form and function have evolved to become the accepted market standard.
The dominant design defines the expected appearance of a particular innovation and how it is meant to work. A dominant design is not necessarily the one with the best performance but its performance will be good enough so that, together with its other desirable features, it will meet the needs of many different types of user (
Figure 16
).
Figure 16 The Ediswan carbon-filament lamp, 1884 became a dominant design (Source: Science & Society Picture Library)
Figure 16
Activity 4
Can you think of a dominant design other than those named previously in this unit?
Examples I thought of were the office stapler, the briefcase and the wheelbarrow. Different manufacturers’ versions of these products have common design features and similar overall appearance.
5.9 Robust design and lean design
In the case of the incandescent lamp the first dominant design had emerged by 1884, only 4 years after the first lamps had gone on public display around Menlo Park. It consisted of a screw-in metal base, a carbonised bamboo filament with platinum electrical wiring attached to a glass stem, all of which was sealed into a pear-shaped glass bulb that had been evacuated. This design was so successful that competitors did not try to devise a different design but merely copied Edison's; the company spent the next 7 years repeatedly suing rivals for infringement of the patents until its dominance was clearly established.
Further, a new product is more likely to be commercially successful if it is a robust design and suitable for different uses. A new product is likely to be less successful it if is a lean design, too highly optimised and only suitable for specific uses. So Edison's lamp was a robust design because it could fit into existing gas lamp brackets, and this increased its chances of catching on because it could make use of some of the existing infrastructure in homes and offices.
5.10 Radical innovation and incremental innovation
The electric light might be said to be an example of a radical innovation – a new product, process or system resulting from a technological breakthrough, or an application of a technology having a far-reaching impact.
Radical innovations can have a widespread and sometimes revolutionary impact on our lives and are said by some to account for technological progress. However, as you saw with the example of the telephone, most radical innovations are actually an accumulation of much smaller improvements, often carried out by many different individuals and organisations over time. The notion of the electric light might seem like a radical idea but it was actually the product of an attempt to provide a form of lighting that improved on existing methods. Apart from candles and oil lamps, these were mainly the gas light (increasingly used in urban homes but with an associated fire hazard and impact on air quality) and existing electric arc-lighting (too dazzling for domestic use and suffering from control and maintenance problems).
Furthermore the provision of an effective system of electric lighting depended upon the steady incremental improvement in a range of associated technologies – glass blowing, vacuum pumping, electricity distribution, and so on.
Therefore the application of the label radical innovation depends on the context and the time scale. Radical innovations are often incremental in terms of their scientific and technological development but radical in their application and ultimate impact on society. Also the early, often unreliable, examples of an innovation might not seem to be a significant improvement on existing technology until improvements in performance encourage more people to buy the innovation, which increases its impact.
Activity 5
Can you think of another example of a radical innovation?
I think the passenger aeroplane and man-made fibres used in clothing were radical innovations when they first appeared. They have had an impact on people's lives, for example the aeroplane brought tourism to remote communities.
So an apparently radical innovation actually involves much incremental innovation – technical modifications to an existing product, process or system and sometimes known as evolutionary innovation. The analogy with biological evolution is not precise, however, because technological evolution involves conscious and deliberate choice.
Activity 6
Can you think of an incremental innovation?
There are kitchen utensils sold under the brand name of Good Grips. They are designed to be easy for disabled people to use. I also thought online ticket booking could be considered to be an incremental innovation, although it also has some features of a disruptive innovation.
5.11 Sustaining innovation and disruptive innovation
As it's sometimes difficult to say whether a particular innovation is radical or incremental, a useful distinction made recently is between sustaining innovations and those that are disruptive. You'll read more about these ideas in Part 3.
Briefly, a sustaining innovation is a new or improved product that meets the needs of most current customers and serves to sustain leading firms in their market position. So in this context improvements to gas lighting, say, would be sustaining innovations.
By contrast, a disruptive innovation is a new or improved product or technology that challenges existing companies to ignore or embrace technical change.
Often new companies emerge to exploit a disruptive innovation. Such innovations can seem unpromising in the early stages of their development. However if they go on to become successful they can form new markets in which established companies lose their market leadership. Edison's electric light led to the creation of a whole new system for the generation and supply of electricity and its conversion into lighting. This in turn required a whole infrastructure of companies to supply raw materials and components for what became a new industry. It had a disruptive effect on the existing market for lighting.
5.12 Process innovation
Once a product innovation is well established creative energies tend to turn towards incremental improvements and process innovation, which is an improvement in the organisation and/or method of manufacture that often leads to reduced supply costs.
These two factors typically result in a better-performing product yet one that can be manufactured in less time, possibly using fewer components and possibly using machinery operated by less skilled, less costly workers. For example incremental improvements in the type of filaments used, tungsten gradually replacing carbon, led to a threefold increase in the efficiency of the electric light. And process innovations made the manufacturing more efficient – for example hand blowing of bulbs was replaced by a semi-automated machine in 1894.
All of these process innovations can lead to a dramatic fall in the production costs, and therefore the sales price, of an innovation in the early years of its use. For example, after 15 years of production, the number of steps involved in producing an electric lamp had been reduced from 200 to 20 and the labour time from nearly an hour to 20 seconds. Not surprisingly the price of a carbon filament electric lamp over this period fell to less than 20 per cent of its original price.
5.13 Diffusion and suppression
As an innovation becomes accepted by an increasing number of individual and organisational users it goes through the process of diffusion, which is the process of adoption of an innovation over time from limited use to widespread use in the market.
From its original installation within the grounds of Edison's Menlo Park laboratory in late 1879, his system of electric lighting was installed in increasing numbers of individual factory and textile mill installations, and urban street lighting. This included the fulfilment of one of his visions when his electric light system started operating in the Pearl Street district of lower Manhattan in 1882 (
Figure 17
). His system gradually eclipsed its rivals and diffused into widespread use in commercial, civic and domestic situations.
Figure 17 Interior of the Pearl Street generating station, 1882 (Source: Smithsonian Institute)
Figure 17
As you saw earlier with the example of the telephone there are also factors that can lead to suppression or delayed adoption of an innovation in the early years of its availability when it may compete with a dominate design.
First of all there may be patent disputes over the ownership of the invention. These can delay widespread sales until it becomes clear who has the right to market the innovation. Then for the duration of the patent other inventors are discouraged from devising improvements when they can't benefit from them.
There are also those individuals and companies currently providing technology and products that might be threatened by a newcomer, like telegraph companies faced with the telephone. They can sometimes use their power and influence to make it difficult for the new product to succeed – from influencing government legislation to outright sabotage. Then there's also a certain degree of protective inertia in business and institutional structures that tends to resist change in order to allow innovation to be absorbed in a steady evolutionary way rather than a more disruptive revolution.
Once an innovation has achieved widespread diffusion so that most of its market has been captured and the dominant design has had incremental improvement until it is relatively stable or mature, then one of two things usually happens. Either the mature innovation continues to sell with only minor modifications, unchallenged by any serious competition, or a radical new invention is devised that sets off another cycle of the innovation process to challenge what already exists.
5.14 Compact fluorescents and new developments
In the case of the electric light there were a series of incremental product innovations (metal filaments, gas filled bulbs, frosted bulbs) as well as process innovations (some of which were mentioned above), which steadily improved performance and reduced price until, by the 1930s, the incandescent light was mature and diffused in many nations.
Then in the mid-1930s a new invention appeared that was to challenge the incandescent lamp – the fluorescent lamp. This was the culmination of around 70 years’ research into fluorescence (the conversion of one kind of light into another). In the modern fluorescent light a heated electrode emits electrons into a tube of mercury vapour causing the vapour to emit ultraviolet light, which is invisible to the human eye. This causes the phosphor coating on the inside of the tube to emit visible white light. Another cycle of innovation was under way when the new lamp was first introduced commercially in 1938.
Gradually the fluorescent light began to encroach on the market captured by the incandescent lamp, first in the workplace and then increasingly in the home, especially after the introduction of compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) onto the domestic market in the 1980s (
Figure 18
). Compact fluorescents last 10 times as long as incandescents and use 20 per cent of the electricity. By 2004, with the unit cost falling, CFLs had broken through the 10 per cent barrier achieving the status of having a substantial market share (10–20 per cent) rather than being a niche market (over 1 per cent). Some projections expect them to achieve a 15 per cent share by 2010. This would still not be sufficient for CFLs to achieve the ultimate status of becoming the industry norm or the dominant brand.
Figure 18 Domestic compact fluorescent lamp, 2005
Figure 18
Box 1 Race for the future of lighting
The problem with filament bulbs like those made by Edison and his successors is that they generate more heat than light – only about 10 per cent of the electricity becomes light – and turning them on and off shortens their life. The next generation of electric light is under development at the moment, based on more recent scientific discoveries and more advanced technological applications. But will it be one technology that wins or will several find their own niches in the lighting market? Along with fluorescent lighting there are currently (2005) at least two other competing technologies.
Electrodeless induction lamps
In the early 1990s an invention was revealed that might be the subject of the next cycle of lighting innovation – electrodeless induction lamps. The device, from a small Californian firm, Intersource Technologies, used a magnetic coil to generate radio waves that excited gases in the lamp, causing the phosphorous-coated interior surface of the glass cover to glow. The company estimated that the operational life of the lamp would be 15 000 to 20 000 operating hours, compared with 750 to 1000 hours for a conventional incandescent lamp. Without a filament or electrode, lamp failure is most likely to be due to the gradual degradation of the gas. Repair would then require the replacement of the glass cover only, rather than the expensive base and electronic components, making the system even cheaper to run.
Further electrodeless lamps were subsequently developed by Philips (QL system,
Figure 19
), General Electric (Genura) and Fusion Lighting (Solar 1000 sulfur lamp).
Figure 19 Philips QL 85-watt electrodeless induction lamp system (Source: Philips Lighting BV)
Figure 19
Although all of these lamps have proved significantly longer lasting than incandescent and compact fluorescent lamps (for example Philips claims 100 000 hours for the QL), there are several factors that explain why we aren't all using them in our homes at the moment. They are all being tested in different environments and technical improvements made in response to the users’ feedback – in other words the technology is still being developed and hasn't reached a stable enough state for mass manufacture. Current small-scale manufacture also means that the unit cost of existing versions of these lamps is high. In fact Philips’ QL and Fusion's lamp are complete systems rather than replacement bulbs and are expensive on first installation. High purchase prices mean the product isn't taken up by consumers on a large enough scale to ensure its commercial success and to enable manufacturers to reduce prices.
So this technology is stuck in the vicious circle common to many innovations. Some of the companies developing these new lamps are hoping for assistance from government legislation on energy efficiency. Pierre Villere, chairman of Intersource, hopes the US government's Energy Policy Act will provide the incentive needed to interest buyers. Villere thinks, ‘We will see … the same thing happen in high-efficiency lighting that we saw in terms of safety and emission control in the automobile industry’ (quoted in Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1998).
White LEDs
Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) are devices that generate light when electrons pass between two kinds of semiconducting material. Normally the diodes emit a single colour depending on the amount of energy an electron is losing during its transition. You will be familiar with LEDs used in the displays of digital clocks, watches, and electrical appliances. They're also used in remote controls (emitting infrared light) and increasingly in car brake lights, traffic lights and giant TV screens. They convert about 90 per cent of their energy input into light and are very hard-wearing.
The challenge has been to find a way of getting LEDs to make white light for general-purpose use. One approach, first adopted by the Nichia Corporation of Japan in 1996, has been to coat the inside of the light bulb with a phosphorescent coating that gives off white light when hit by the LED's particular wavelength. But the phosphor wears over time – present (2005) estimates are for a 100 000-hour life. Another solution is to try to mix the appropriate primary colours but it's more difficult to make blue light than red and getting the balance right is difficult. However solutions have been found and the devices are being improved. White LEDs are being used in some specialised products such as torches and cave lamps.
As with the electrodeless lamps above, the technical performance of white LEDs is steadily improving and their cost is coming down as the price of semiconductor devices has fallen. However they are still much more expensive than incandescent and fluorescent lights, although arguably cheaper over the lifetime of a typical bulb. In 2003 the UK gadgets company EFX launched a range of white LED downlighters to replace halogen lighting for domestic and commercial use. EFX is using the slogan ‘Global lighting to halt global warming’.
By the time you read this the situation will have moved on and its outcome may be clearer. Or maybe a completely different technical solution will have emerged – that's the nature of the innovation process.
5.15 Intellectual property and patents
At any stage of the innovation process, from invention to diffusion, a bright idea with market potential can be a target for unscrupulous copying. Or, as you've seen with simultaneous invention, people might be working on similar ideas in parallel and the origins of inventive ideas might be difficult to identify with precision. So it is sensible for inventors to establish their claim to a particular invention and to protect it against unauthorised exploitation by others.
There are different forms of legal protection to guard against the copying of intellectual property. The concept of intellectual property allows people to own and control the results of their creativity and ingenuity in the same way they own physical property. The most well known of these is the patent, which is an intellectual property right relating to inventions. It gives a right to stop others from exploiting the invention without permission.
Patents are a means by which inventors are granted, by the state, exclusive rights to make, use or sell a new invention for a limited period (16–20 years in most countries) in exchange for agreeing to make public the details of their invention. The word patent comes from the Latin litterae patentes, meaning open letters, as in an official document that was open to inspection by all. The patent secures for the inventor a temporary monopoly protected by law and the state secures an addition to the body of technological knowledge that encourages further invention, technological progress and wealth creation.
A patent application is required to contain a description of the invention and the reasoning that led to it in sufficient detail to enable it to be reproduced by a third party. It often contains background information on previous related technology (known as prior art). Therefore patents provide an enormous amount of technical information that is used by many individuals and companies (
Figure 20
).
Figure 20 Extracts from the patent for the novel features of the Workmate portable workbench (Source: Patent Specification 1267032 ‘A Workbench’)
Figure 20
Once granted a patent gives an invention the legal status of personal property that can be sold or bequeathed to heirs of the inventor. In addition the owner of a patent may authorise others to make, use or sell the invention in exchange for royalties or other compensation.
According to the UK Patent Office , to be granted a patent an inventor's product or process must satisfy four criteria.
It must be new – the idea must never have been disclosed publicly in any way, anywhere, prior to the claim being filed.
It must involve an inventive step – the idea must not be obvious to someone with a good knowledge and experience of the subject.
It must be capable of industrial application – it must take the physical form of a substance, product or apparatus, or of an industrial type of process.
It must not be excluded – an invention is not patentable if it is of a type listed as specifically excluded, although such lists vary in different countries.
In 2005 the UK exclusions were:
a discovery
(d) Edison's bamboo-filament light bulb.
(a) BIC ballpoint pen – innovation.
It is an innovation that not only reached the market – initially the military then the civilian market – but also went on to achieve great commercial success and become widely diffused throughout society.
(b) Flettner's rotor ship – between invention and innovation.
This example is on the boundary between an invention and an innovation. It reached the working prototype stage but arguably not quite the point of first commercial use, with only one ship being commissioned by a third party.
(c) Edison's tinfoil phonograph – invention.
It was the wax cylinder version that went on to be sold as an innovation.
(d) Edison's bamboo-filament light bulb – innovation.
It was the dominant design used in the early commercialisation of the light bulb, compared with the carbonised cotton used in the initial invention.
SAQ 2
desire to help others.
10.2 Scientific or technical curiosity
Some inventors understand a scientific phenomenon and set about inventing a technological device to exploit the phenomenon.
The invention of the laser grew from the interest of two researchers in studying the structure and characteristics of a variety of molecules. During the Second World War, Charles H. Townes worked on developing radar navigation bombing systems. After the war he had the idea of modifying the radar techniques and using microwaves to study molecular structure. Subsequently he and Arthur L. Schawlow collaborated at Bell Labs in the USA on using the shorter wavelengths of infrared and optical light to develop an even more powerful tool – the laser (short for light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation). They were granted a patent in 1960. However they had no thoughts about any applications of their invention other than its use in their scientific research. Schawlow recalled:
We thought it might have some communications and scientific uses, but we had no application in mind. If we had, it might have hampered us and not worked out as well.
(Bell Labs, 1998)
It was left to others to devise ways of exploiting this invention in a commercial product. Although initially perceived by some as a weapon (a death ray), one of the first practical applications was in medicine for eye surgery. Lasers have gone on to have widespread use in industry for cutting and welding, in commerce for bar code readers, at home for entertainment (CD players, DVD players), in data storage and retrieval in computers, and so on (
Figure 23
). The world market for laser technology is now over $100 billion a year.
Figure 23 Originally developed for scientific research into the structure of molecules, the laser now has a huge range of applications. (a) Laser surgery to correct short-sightedness Source: Science Photo Library. (b) Laser heart surgery Source: Science Photo Library. (c) Industrial carbon dioxide laser cutting metal Source: Science Photo Library. (d) Bar-code reader at supermarket checkout Source: Science Photo Library. (e) A laser beam is creating a digital track of information on a master disc. The master disc is then used to mass-produce CDs. The information will be read off a CD in a domestic player by using a similar laser beam (Source: Science Photo Library)
Figure 23
Inventions can arise from the technical curiosity of creative individuals rather than to meet a clear need. There are many examples, particularly in the past but still occasionally nowadays, of so-called talented tinkerers. Read
Box 2
for an account of what talented tinkering can produce.
Box 2 Talented tinkering and the hovercraft
Christopher Cockerell was an electrical engineer who left the Marconi company to become a boat builder in Norfolk. He developed an interest in increasing boat speed by reducing friction between the hull and the water. He had the idea of supporting a craft on a low-pressure cushion of air contained within a high-pressure curtain of air (
Figure 24
). He built a mock-up to test his idea using a cat food tin inside a coffee tin connected to a vacuum cleaner reversed to blow, all mounted above a set of kitchen scales to measure the pressure exerted (
Figure 25
). It was three times the pressure of the blower without the tins and confirmed his theory. There had been previous attempts to build a vehicle that floated on air but Cockerell was the first to devise a way of containing the air cushion. Next he constructed a radio-controlled balsa wood model of his hovercraft to prove the hover principle would work in practice (
Figure 26
Although there are still commercial and military hovercraft in operation (
Figure 29
), high development costs, technical problems and cheaper competing technologies have meant they did not go on to become widely used. Rather they are used in specific situations where their ability to cross varied surfaces inaccessible to conventional vehicles gives them an advantage.
Figure 29 US naval hovercraft are still in use (Source: Textron Systems)
Figure 29
Cockerell resigned from Hovercraft Development Ltd after a dispute and the UK government persuaded him to sell his patent for £150 000 in 1971. He continued to work as an inventor, including designing a system of rafts to generate electricity from waves, but never really profited from his inventions. He had devised 36 inventions worth millions of pounds for Marconi and was paid £10 for each one. The money he received for his hovercraft patent didn't cover his development costs. Unsurprisingly he remained bitter at what is characterised as the UK's repeated failure to capitalise on the inventive ideas of creative individuals.
10.3 Constructive discontent
Inventive ideas often arise because existing technology or design proves to be unsatisfactory in some way – perhaps too costly, too inefficient or too dangerous. Using a product or process for a while can reveal inadequacies in its performance and is often vital preparation for producing ideas for improvements. You may have become dissatisfied either with an existing product or process or with the fact that something doesn't exist to meet a need you've identified. But creative individuals go further than this unfocused dissatisfaction and actually try to do something about it.
James Dyson became dissatisfied with the wheel of a conventional wheelbarrow sinking into sand and soft soil so in 1974 he re-invented the wheel. His Ballbarrow is designed with a ball-shaped wheel to ride over soft ground without sinking and to absorb the shock when used on rough ground (
Figure 30
). It also has feet that don't sink in the mud and a plastic bin that doesn't rust – both drawbacks of previous wheelbarrows he'd used.
Figure 30 Dyson's Ballbarrow. The ball-shaped wheel improves the ride over rough or soft ground (Source: courtesy of Dyson Ltd)
Figure 30
Box 4 Constructive discontent and the invention of photocopying
In the early 1930s, US patent lawyer Chester Carlson began to be dissatisfied with existing methods of copying patents that he required for his work. He was determined to find a better means than the existing photographic methods, which were slow and inefficient.
After an extensive search through patents and other literature he identified some promising ideas. He began experimenting and in 1938 produced the first print using a process that eventually was to become the basis of the modern photocopier (
Figure 31
).
Figure 31 Chester Carlson, the inventor of xerography, with his first xerographic apparatus (Source: Rank Xerox UK Ltd)
Figure 31
Static electricity was the key to his invention. Carlson started with a sulfur-coated plate, though later this was developed into a selenium drum, which was given an overall negative electrical charge. An image of a document was then projected or reflected onto the charged surface. The charge was removed where the light struck the surface, leaving only the dark part of the image, such as text characters, negatively charged. Positively charged particles of dry powder were then applied that stuck to the negatively charged portions of the plate or drum. The powder was then transferred to paper and fused on to it by heating, leaving a permanent image.
In his 1939 patent Carlson called this process electrophotography (
Figure 32
). But he soon came to call it xerography – from the Greek xeros, meaning dry, and graphein, meaning to write.
Figure 32 Extract from Chester Carlson's 1939 patent application on electrophotography, which established the essential principles of photocopying (Source: van Dulken, 2002)
Figure 32
His invention was a radical departure from existing technology, however, and it took many years both to develop and improve the invention and to persuade a company to invest in it. In 1944 the Battelle Memorial Institute, a non-profit-making organisation, agreed to finance the invention and after a few years of development signed an agreement with a small photographic materials company, the Haloid Corporation, to market the invention.
The first electrostatic copier, the Haloid 1385, came onto the market in the late 1940s. It was manually operated and took several minutes to make each copy. Not surprisingly it was not successful at first because it did not offer an advantage over existing methods of copying, which by this time were a combination of carbon paper for a small number of copies and electromechanical stencil duplicators for a larger volume. Finally, after another decade of effort at improving the technology, the first automatic, plain-paper photocopier, the Xerox 914, was launched onto the market in 1959 – Haloid had changed its name to Xerox. This was an automatic machine that operated at the push of a button and could produce seven copies a minute. It was the foundation for a huge multibillion dollar business in which Xerox, thanks to its patents, had a monopoly until the late 1980s.
When the patent protection expired, rivals, mainly Japanese, began to enter this lucrative market in competition with Xerox. The original fairly straightforward need has been cultivated by what the ever-improving technology has made possible – monochrome copiers producing a hundred copies a minute and capable of collating, stapling, enlarging and reducing. The colour photocopier was brought out in 1973 and the laser colour copier in 1986.
Now it is impossible to imagine a modern office without photocopying facilities. Xerox also took advantage of the increasing use of computing in the office to diversify into computer printers, scanners, fax machines and multifunction machines. Many people predicted that the spread of computers would lead to the paperless office. However recent estimates suggest people are making 500 billion photocopies each year, and 15 trillion (15 000 000 000 000) copies on photocopiers, computer printers and multifunction machines combined in the USA alone (Lyman, 2003).
10.3.1 Cats eyes and road conditions
Sometimes the discontent comes from the fact that there isn't a product to satisfy a particular need. Percy Shaw was a road mender who was aware of the dangers of driving along unlit, often fog-bound, roads. One night in 1933 he was driving his car near his home in the north of England when his headlights were reflected in the eyes of a cat. This inspired him to invent the cat's-eye reflector that, when embedded at intervals in the centre of the road, reflected a vehicle's headlights and made it easier to pick out and follow the course of the road (
Figure 33
).
Figure 37 Extract from the patent for cat's-eyes – an example of a highly successful patent for a simple but ingenious idea. ‘FIG.6.’ shows how a rubber insert (part ‘F’) cleans the lenses when they are depressed by a passing vehicle (Source: van Dulken, 2002)
Figure 37
With hindsight the need and the solution seem self-evident – like many ingenious ideas. But Shaw's act of insight was to recognise the need and work out a means by which it could be met.
Seventy years after Shaw's invention a new generation of cat's-eyes have been developed and have been tested in sites around the UK and several other countries. Called intelligent road studs, they have a built-in microprocessor and sensors that can detect different weather conditions as well as the speed of passing traffic (
Figure 34
). They are powered by a solar cell feeding a rechargeable battery.
Figure 34 (a) These intelligent road studs not only reflect but can also actively project light of different colours. (b) Intelligent road studs being tested on a public road (Source: courtesy of Reflecto Ltd)
Figure 34
In addition to passively reflecting light up to 80 metres, the studs can actively project light of different colours that is detectable at up to 1000 metres. When a stud detects fog it can emit a flashing white light. When it detects a significant drop in temperature it can emit blue light to indicate the possibility of ice. In a hazardous situation studs can leave a trail of orange lights behind passing vehicles to warn against following too closely. Studs can even communicate with each other so that, for instance, a vehicle detected on the wrong side of the road can trigger red warning lights in studs on the other side of a blind hill or corner.
10.4 Desire to make money
While most inventors might dream of growing rich from their inventions few invent for that reason alone. There are some exceptions though.
Take the case of the safety razor. One person, a travelling salesman named King Camp Gillette, was primarily responsible for the original invention and prototype. Unlike many lone inventors Gillette was not inventing something arising from a hobby or a field of technology with which he was already familiar. He was deliberately searching for a winner. He'd been advised by William Painter, the inventor of the disposable crown cork bottle cap, to try to invent a disposable product for which the consumer would develop a continuing need, guaranteeing a steady market for the innovation.
In 1895 while shaving with his cut-throat razor Gillette realised that the edge of the razor was the key to shaving. He had the bright idea of dividing the components into a handle and holder for a disposable blade. The blade could then be thrown away when blunt, avoiding the need for regular sharpening. However his limited practical skills could take the invention no further than the prototype stage. To make further progress Gillette obtained the help of William Nickerson, the inventor of the pushbutton elevator control mechanism. Nickerson worked on refining the razor and on improving the process of sharpening the steel blades.
Gillette's safety razor finally went on sale in 1903. With only the very edge of the blade exposed to the skin it was far safer than the old cutthroat razor. Furthermore, beards were becoming less popular so Gillette anticipated large sales. At first he was disappointed – in the first year he sold only 51 safety razors and 168 blades. In the following year though, sales took off – 90 000 razors and 12.5 million blades.
The Gillette company, based around the safety razor, went from strength to strength. It's a familiar and successful company 100 years on (
Figure 35
). Though still largely based around razors it has diversified slightly into so-called grooming products, toothbrushes and oral care, and into batteries. The concept of disposability still applies to many of its products. In 2002 it was the largest razor manufacturer in the world and its net sales were $8.45 billion.
Figure 35 Recent Gillette safety razors with disposable blades
Figure 35
10.5 Desire to help others
This is a less common motivation but it shows not everyone is driven by money.
In 1991 the inventor Trevor Baylis saw a BBC documentary about the spread of HIV/AIDS in Africa. What was needed was a way of broadcasting the safe-sex message to people in areas without electricity and where batteries for a radio could cost a month's wages. Solar power wouldn't necessarily help as most people who could get to a radio listened in the evening after work. While absorbing this information he imagined himself as a colonial administrator in the Sudan, sipping gin and listening to an old-fashioned wind-up gramophone.
Then Baylis had the inspired thought that if a simple clockwork spring could power a gramophone then it could be applied to a spring-driven radio. Months of experimentation eventually produced a prototype of a hand-cranked clockwork mechanism that drove a tiny generator that powered a radio for 14 minutes on a 30-second wind. After a 4-year period of fund-raising, market research, design and development, the first Freeplay radio was launched in 1995.
For a number of years the radio was made by disabled workers in a factory in South Africa. Subsequently the manufacture of Freeplay products was transferred to China. However the spirit behind Trevor Baylis's invention has found an outlet in the Freeplay Foundation that, since 2000, has complemented the work of various agencies by distributing self-powered radios free as part of a range of humanitarian initiatives.
10.6 What drives invention in organisations?
Much invention and nearly all innovation nowadays take place inside organisations – from small start-up companies to well-established multinationals. This is mainly because increasingly invention and innovation require access to technology and resources beyond the scope of most individuals. But it is also because competitiveness and survival depend on the continual improvement of a company's products and processes. This provides a strong incentive for companies to invest in both the incremental improvement of existing products and the invention of new products.
Invention in organisations is usually driven by one or more of these:
business strategy
need to improve product or process
opportunity offered by a new material, technology or manufacturing process
government policy, legislation and regulations.
10.7 Business strategy
Invention can be driven by a company's business strategy. In descending order of inventiveness the main strategies are first to market, follow the leader, and opportunist.
10.7.1 First to market
Some companies have an offensive strategy in which they aim to be first to market with a new product. Such companies can be a major source of new products. This is risky as it requires a large investment in developing the product and cultivating the market before any return can be expected from sales. However it can be the most rewarding strategy, especially if the market can be sustained by continual incremental improvements to the product and the market share defended against competitors.
In the 1970s and 1980s Clive Sinclair's company Sinclair Research was first to market in the UK with a series of inventive products including pocket calculators, digital watches and home computers. For example the Sinclair ZX80 microcomputer, launched in 1980, was the first computer made to appeal to the mass market. Developed as a build-it-yourself programmable computer, it was designed to connect to a television set and to a cassette recorder for loading programs. It was small and lightweight, weighing just 340 grams and was accessible to a wide sector of the population, being priced at just £99. All these characteristics made the Sinclair ZX80 the forerunner of a whole generation of personal computers. Its successor, the ZX81, had a better programming language called BASIC, fewer components, a simpler design and was £30 cheaper.
In 1982 the ZX Spectrum added colour, became the company's most significant commercial success and enabled Sinclair Research to achieve market dominance in the UK in the early 1980s. However the company was eventually out-performed by a number of companies that had followed it into the microcomputer market that Sinclair Research had helped to establish.
10.7.2 Follow the leader
Some companies have a defensive strategy and aim to follow the leader. Such companies hope to profit from the mistakes of the first-to-market company by devising incremental design and performance improvements and cost reductions compared with the original product. In addition they hope to exploit the new market that has started to grow, so timing is important. In the area of consumer electronics, for example, most of the inventions (radio, television, audio and video tape recording) were first brought to the market by European and US companies. But it was the major Japanese companies (such as Sony, JVC, Toshiba) that captured a large share of the mass market through reducing the cost of these devices and improving their performance.
The best of these companies were able to use the resources gained from being successful followers to then adopt a more offensive strategy and invent new products, such as Sony with the Walkman. Sony was first to market with this innovative product, which quickly became an important contributor to the company's profits. A number of companies followed Sony into this market with variations on the Walkman. However Sony had sufficient a head start to the extent that almost 25 years later it still had the largest market share in most areas of personal audio.
Interestingly the area it isn't performing in as well yet is the newest, the market for digital music players. Here it wasn't first to market and currently (2005) this market is dominated by a mixture of smaller companies and a few big companies that developed players before Sony.
10.7.3 Opportunist
Some companies have an opportunist strategy and aim to identify new market opportunities, needs and demands. Rather than developing new products though, the inventiveness of such companies lies in finding new outlets for existing products. UK examples include Sock Shop and Tie Rack from the 1980s, and more recently the small companies that have made a profit selling a variety of ring tones for mobile phones.
10.8 Need to improve product or process
Even though an invention will have been thoroughly tested before launch it's not possible for a company to test its performance in every situation in which it will be used. Real users are likely to discover how the product might not perform well or how it doesn't meet their needs. Once a company learns about these deficiencies it can address them through redesign. There are a number of incentives to do this: improve the product's performance in order to increase its appeal to larger numbers of buyers; further reduce materials and manufacturing costs to the company to increase profit; reduce the purchase price to promote sales.
This invention driver accounts for much incremental invention. You've already seen an example of this process in the development of the telephone – new components, new features, and spin-off inventions are all the result of attempts to improve existing technology.
An extreme example of this process was Sinclair Research, mentioned earlier. In the early 1970s it launched a range of electronic calculators that were designed to be small and light enough to fit in the pocket. For example the Cambridge calculator was sold both as a kit and fully built. Although at £29.95 it was expensive when first introduced, a year later the price had fallen to below £15. The Cambridge calculator was small, even by modern standards, weighing only 100 grams. However it suffered from a design flaw; after a certain amount of use the calculator was impossible to turn off due to oxidation of cheap components used in the switch contacts. Some critics say that Sinclair Research's innovative products were often launched prematurely and early buyers used as developmental testers. Feedback from these buyers was then used to make improvements to the products. While this undoubtedly led to improved products, arguably it damaged the company's reputation as a supplier of reliable products and it was eventually edged out of the market by companies with more conventional business strategies.
I've already mentioned another, more conventional, example of incremental improvement. This was when Marcel Bich invented an improved manufacturing and assembly process to enable the BIC ballpoint pen to be manufactured on a large scale and for a significantly lower unit cost.
10.9 Opportunity offered by a new material, technology or manufacturing process
More often when new materials or technologies appear they are used to improve the performance of existing products. But in an increasing number of cases their appearance can make it possible to create new products.
10.9.1 New materials
The discovery of new materials, exploration of their properties and the invention of new industrial processes is a huge field of study in its own right. The potential rewards for a company discovering a successful application of a new material are great.
An example of this is shape memory alloys (SMAs). SMAs are mixtures of metals that, after being stress treated, can be deformed significantly but then triggered to return to their original shape. Some display unusual elastic properties and immediately spring back into shape, others recover their shape when heated. Originally made from an equal combination of nickel and titanium – still the most common SMA – further experiments have led to many more SMAs combining two or more different metals. These remarkable memory properties have been applied to an increasing number of new or improved products. One of the most visible applications is in superelastic spectacles that can regain their shape after you've sat on them.
There are currently dozens of other applications, particularly in the area of medical instruments. A stent is a tiny wire mesh tube used to reinforce weak arteries or to widen arteries narrowed by coronary heart disease (
Figure 36
). These are delivered to the heart in a catheter on the end of a wire usually inserted into an artery in the groin. Once in place they are expanded to their full size by inflating a balloon positioned inside the stent. However stents can now be made from SMAs and are stressed into a smaller diameter. When delivered by the catheter the stent expands to its intended size due to the heat of the body.
Figure 36 SMA stent that expands to its intended size when subjected to body temperature. These are predicted to replace stainless steel stents expanded with a balloon (Source: Nitinol Devices & Components Inc)
Figure 36
10.9.2 New technology
The appearance of a new technology often results in the possibility of developing a whole range of new products. The invention of the transistor in the USA by Bardeen, Brattain and Shockley in 1947 led to a vast market of improved consumer electronics goods such as portable radios, hi-fi and television. Later on, the related inventions of the integrated circuit in 1959 (by Jack St Clair Kilby at Texas Instruments) and the microprocessor in 1971 (by Marcian E. Hoff at Intel) allowed the development of personal computers.
Increasing miniaturisation and the improved computing capacity of microprocessors has permitted the addition of electronic components to many new products and processes. Examples are all around: palm-size mobile phones, programmable timing devices in electrical equipment, TV and video remote controllers. This trend is heading towards the invention of a growing range of new intelligent products that can store information about themselves and communicate with their environment (see
Box 4
Collecting information to help understand the problem better and produce initial solutions.
Step 3 – incubation
Periods of relaxation allow subconscious thought.
Step 4 – act of insight
A solution suddenly appears by a mental act that goes beyond the act of skill normally expected of a trained professional in that field.
Step 5 – critical revision
The solution is fully explored, tested and revised into a workable solution, possibly involving further acts of insight.
I will examine these key steps a little further. I've already covered the first two stages to some extent in looking at where inventions come from. Therefore I'll only deal briefly with steps 1 and 2 and look in more detail at the others.
11.2 Step 1 – identification of the problem
The activity of identifying a problem to be solved or a need to be met is a key step for the start of the innovation process. As you saw earlier there's a range of possible starting points. You've already seen examples where curiosity drives people to look for applications of certain scientific or technical principles such as Cockerell and air-cushion transport. Sometimes people identify an unsolved need, such as Percy Shaw and unlit roads. Sometimes people identify a need with an unsatisfactory current solution, such as James Dyson and his dissatisfaction with conventional wheelbarrows.
Another such starting point for invention is identifying possible new uses for existing products or processes. In such cases a key first step is the imagination to appreciate the technological possibilities and the market opportunities. Nowadays many organisations spend time actively seeking out new uses to which existing products and processes might be put as well as problems that need to be solved with new inventions. In the case of the Post-it note the challenge for the 3M company was to find a use for a new type of adhesive – a glue that wasn't very sticky. In this case the ‘problem’ was one of an existing product in search of a market need rather than an established need requiring a new technological solution.
11.3 Step 2 – exploration
This is the period when, following the identification of the problem, attempts are made to understand it better and to make a stab at designing a solution. This might be a short process or it could take years and involve a detailed search for information, experimenting with different designs, even redefining the problem as a result of this activity.
Alexander Graham Bell adopted a problem-focused strategy when exploring the problem of designing a working telephone. This strategy is one typically used by scientists and engineers and involves exploring and redefining the problem exhaustively before coming up with a solution. A different approach, often adopted by designers, is to move quickly towards an outline solution based on their own experiences and preferences, which is then tested against the problem and modified as necessary to solve the problem more effectively. This more directed approach, known as a solution-focused strategy, was often used by Thomas Edison.
In the case of Edison's incandescent electric light discussed earlier this process of exploration took more than 12 months. Before he finally achieved his first working prototype Edison systematically experimented with thousands of different materials that might be used for a filament. His first patent was for a bulb with a platinum filament that, although it worked, was a complicated construction compared with the bulbs that were in mass production less than 2 years later. These used a carbonised bamboo filament, itself later replaced by other materials (
Figure 42
). The point is that this experimentation led to a better understanding of the problem and its possible solution, which resulted in the eventual design being more reliable.
Figure 42 Page from one of Thomas Edison's notebooks showing the results of experiments on a carbonised filament electric lamp (Source: Edison National Historic Site)
Figure 42
11.4 Step 3 – incubation
Incubation is a period when the inventor, having been working on the problem for some time during identification and exploration, is no longer giving it conscious attention. The problem and its solution have been put to one side, on purpose or not, but the subconscious mind is capable of holding on to the problem. During this time, according to Roy (Open University, 2004, p. 34), ‘the relaxed brain [is] repatterning information absorbed during the period of preparation often after receiving a new piece of information that is perceived as relevant’. I think what Roy means about repatterning is that the brain can make links between information – a new piece of information can cause a new link to be made and a new insight achieved. Although it's not often possible to demonstrate incubation taking place, there are numerous examples of inventors doing something unrelated to their invention when a breakthrough insight is triggered.
11.5 Step 4 – act of insight
Suddenly an insight suggests a solution, or the means of achieving a solution, to the inventor. Legendary examples include Newton observing an apple falling from a tree and having his insight into the laws of gravitation or Archimedes leaping from his bath and running naked through the streets shouting ‘Eureka!’ (‘I've found it!’). These vivid images point to the fact that creative ideas can occur when someone is not consciously trying to solve a problem.
These acts of insight are not only dependent upon the state of mind of the inventor, however, but also on the circumstances in which they occur. The image of Archimedes’ moment of insight is familiar. Archimedes realised, allegedly as he lowered himself into his bath, that there was a relationship between his weight and the volume of water displaced.
Archimedes became excited because he realised this could provide him with a solution to a problem set for him by Hiero II, the ruler of Syracuse on the island of Sicily. Hiero had had a new crown made but suspected that his metal workers had stolen some of the gold and substituted it with a gold-silver alloy; so he wanted to know if the crown was pure gold or partly silver. Archimedes, a Syracusian mathematician and specialist in applied mechanics, realised that if the crown was partly silver it would be less dense than pure gold, would be bulkier for its weight and therefore would displace more water when immersed. As a consequence he had discovered a principle that would help him to determine whether the king's crown was pure gold or a mixture of gold and silver.
In his book The Act of Creation, Arthur Koestler (1989) points out that at the critical moment Archimedes was able to make the connection between two previously unconnected trains of thought that his mind was processing (incubating) simultaneously. Nobody before Archimedes had brought together those separate ideas and if those particular circumstances had not pertained – thinking about the crown problem while taking a bath – that particular eureka moment would not have occurred. It might have occurred to someone else on another occasion because the history of invention shows that many minds are often working on the same problem (remember Edison and Swan on the electric light), but it is possible that many such moments have passed unnoticed for want of the necessary conjunction of inventive mind and propitious circumstances.
Koestler comments that rather than the mental achievement being to draw that particular conclusion, the achievement was actually in bringing together the two apparently unconnected ideas – a process he calls bisociation. Bisociation is one example of what is called associative thinking, which can lead to inventive solutions to problems. There are other ways of bringing together associations of ideas, knowledge and techniques from different areas: adaptation, transfer, combination, and analogy.
11.5.1 Adaptation
Adaptation is where a solution to a problem in one field is found by adapting an existing solution or a technical principle from another. For example Karl Dahlman adapted the hovercraft principle embodied in land and sea vehicles for use in the first hover lawn mower, the Flymo, in 1963 (
Figure 43
What are the four main factors that motivate individuals to invent?
Individuals are motivated to invent by one or more factors:
(a) scientific or technical curiosity;
(b) constructive discontent about the way a technological product performs;
(c) desire to help others;
(d) desire to make money.
SAQ 5
What are the four main factors that motivate organisations to invent?
Organisations are motivated to invent by one or more factors:
(a) as part of a chosen business strategy;
(b) the need to improve existing products and processes;
(c) the appearance of new materials, technologies and manufacturing processes;
(d) government policy, legislation and regulations.
SAQ 6
From the brief description of Carlson's invention of xerography given earlier, how do the five key steps of the Usher-Lawson model fit that particular example?
(a) Identification of the problem. Carlson was dissatisfied with existing methods of copying documents by photography and by hand.
(b) Exploration. Carlson consulted existing patents and other information in a search for a solution to the problem.
(c) Incubation. The brief account above doesn't give any detail about the precise creative process involved in this invention.
(d) Act of insight. Carlson's act of insight involved the ‘transfer’ of techniques quite different from conventional photography and not previously used for copying. This is an example that shows that insight doesn't always come in a flash.
(e) Critical revision. Carlson's first electrostatic copier was the outcome of almost 10 years of developing and refining the technology. This process of critical revision is still going on more than 50 years after the launch of the innovation.
SAQ 7
To what extent would you describe the following inventions as predominantly arising from technology push or from market pull?
(a) early motor cars
clocks that should announce in articulate speech the time for going home or going to meals;
the preservation of languages by exact reproduction of the manner of pronouncing;
educational purposes, such as preserving the explanations made by a teacher, so that the pupil can refer to them at any moment, and spelling or other lessons placed upon the phonograph for convenience in committing to memory;
connection with the telephone, so as to make that instrument an auxiliary in the transmission of permanent and invaluable records, instead of being the recipient of momentary and fleeting communication.
Music reproduction was ranked fourth because Edison thought this was a relatively trivial use of his invention. Even when he started production of phonographs on a commercial basis – after a 10-year diversion into developing and improving the electric light – he concentrated on selling it as a dictation machine, resisting efforts to market it for playing music. Other people saw and exploited the entertainment potential of Edison's invention and carried out improvements to the technology to make it an effective and attractive product. It was not until the mid-1890s, however, that the inventor himself came to accept that the primary use of this invention was for entertainment rather than as a useful piece of office equipment.
Sometimes the take-up of an invention is delayed by the non-availability of suitable materials to enable the invention to perform effectively or by the lack of development of a process technology to enable the efficient and cost-effective manufacture of the invention. For example Frank Whittle's turbojet engine patented in 1930 did not work efficiently until manufacturers developed a new nickel-chrome alloy to enable the turbine blades to withstand the high temperatures and stresses involved. And it could not be manufactured on an industrial scale until improvements had been made in metal processing and manufacture. This was not achieved on any significant scale until after the Second World War, more than 10 years after patenting. By this time Whittle had long since allowed his basic patent to lapse because his employers, the RAF, had little faith in the feasibility or potential of his invention in the early stages of its development.
Sometimes the obstacle is that the most appropriate application for a new technology hasn't yet been found. There are often a number of different uses to which any invention can be put. The first uses are not necessarily those for which an invention will eventually become known. The first steam engines were not for transportation but were used to pump water from mines. The most widespread application of the hovercraft principle is in hovering lawn mowers. Soft paper tissue was developed by Kimberley-Clark as a substitute for cotton wool as a medical dressing during the First World War. As a result of looking for new applications it was marketed as a make-up remover from 1924. It was only when users reported on its qualities for nose blowing that it was relaunched as Kleenex tissue handkerchief (
Figure 62
).
Figure 62 Originally used for medical dressings during the First World War, then for sanitary towels and then makeup removers, the use of paper tissue as a handkerchief took some time to evolve (Source: John Frost Newspaper Service)
Figure 62
17.2 Getting finance and organisational backing
Like talk, ideas are cheap. Even generating a prototype of an invention can be cheap compared with the resources needed to produce and market an innovation. The independent inventor or designer is likely to have to rely on family and friends for financial backing, particularly in the early stages. Seed capital is sometimes available in the form of innovation grants from government bodies, such as the Department for Trade and Industry in the UK, which offers development funding to individuals and small businesses. Eventually, however, most inventors need to access the sort of funds only a company or a venture capitalist can provide.
Some inventors decide to go into business for themselves because they distrust organisations or because they failed to persuade an organisation to take up their invention. The inventor of the Workmate portable workbench, Ron Hickman, was one such inventor-entrepreneur. Hickman had developed craft skills through 10 years of practical experience as a designer with Lotus cars. As mentioned in Part 1 he was also a do-it-yourself enthusiast who became dissatisfied with existing devices after damaging a chair that was being used to support a piece of wood he was sawing.
He designed and built a prototype of a combined workbench and sawhorse. After he found it to be unexpectedly useful, he developed it further and by 1968 he had the mark 1 Workmate design (
Figure 63
). Next he tried to persuade relevant organisations in the DIY field of the commercial potential of his idea. However none of them was willing to risk investing in a completely new product for which there was no clear demand, being an unusual hybrid of sawhorse, vice and workbench. In 1968 Stanley Tools estimated potential sales could be measured in ‘dozens rather than in hundreds’ – by 1981 the 10 millionth Workmate had been sold.
Figure 63 Mark 1 Workmate manufactured by Ron Hickman, 1968 (Source: Science & Society Picture Library)
Figure 63
Hickman, however, had confidence in his invention and decided to manufacture the product himself. By 1972 he had sold 25 000 Workmate benches by mail order. Existing manufacturers of DIY products began to take an interest, including Black & Decker, which had been among the companies offered a licence in 1968. In 1972 Black & Decker finally took a licence on the Workmate. Even then the story was not straightforward.
It still required the efforts of a key individual within Black & Decker (Walter Goldsmith, general manager) to champion the product and persuade others that investing in the Workmate was an economically sound idea. He was helped in this by Hickman's success up to that point, which demonstrated the existence of a market for this unique product. Hickman would certainly not have been able to achieve sales of 10 million units over that period had he continued on his own. It was only by handing over control of his innovation to a large organisation for production and further product development that mass-market sales were achieved for the Workmate (
Figures 64
Figure 64 Workmate 2, manufactured by Black & Decker (Source: DIY Photo Library)
Figure 64
Figure 65 Black & Decker's Wm675 Workmate, 2004 (Source: © Copyright Black and Decker Inc, Workbench, 2004; reproduced with permission)
Figure 65
To be fair, potential investors often have to make judgements about whether to support an invention on the evidence of early prototypes. Perhaps it is not surprising there are many examples of companies that have turned down what became highly successful and profitable inventions. With hindsight it is easy to scoff at such apparent blunders but the decisions were often made for entirely sensible reasons. The invention might have been outside the company's existing product range at a time when their existing products were selling well and profitably. Some organisations resist investing in ‘outside’ inventions but rather prefer to develop their own in-house ideas – this is known as the not-invented-here attitude. The production, marketing and commercialisation of an unproven new idea are likely to be costly and run the risk of failure.
It takes a certain amount of courage to decide that an invention does have potential, particularly on the evidence of a partially developed prototype. Sometimes it takes a small, new company with an informal organisational structure, entrepreneurial values and little to lose to risk bringing a new technology to the market place. I will say more on this when I deal with sustaining and disruptive innovations later in Part 3.
As writer Arthur C. Clarke said,
Every revolutionary idea … seems to evoke three stages of reaction. They may be summed up by the phrases:
It's completely impossible – don't waste my time.
It's possible, but it's not worth doing.
I said it was a good idea all along.
(Clarke, 1968)
17.3 Choosing appropriate materials and manufacturing process
The choice of materials and manufacturing process for a particular new product is an important aspect of the innovation process. It is not necessarily the case that the materials chosen for the early prototypes of an invention are those best suited for the larger-scale manufacture of the innovation. Choice of materials can affect the performance, quality and economic manufacture of most new products, so it's important to choose wisely.
While inventors and designers usually need to seek specialist assistance when it comes to choosing materials, it helps to inform their choices if they have a broad overview of the main types of material and their properties. Designers need to consider a range of materials properties:
performance – behaviour of the material in the finished product;
processing – behaviour of the material during manufacture;
economic – cost and availability of material;
aesthetic – appearance and texture of processed material.
Increasingly environmental impacts are playing a part in the choice of materials. These impacts include the energy consumed and pollution produced in the extraction and preprocessing of raw materials as well as their final processing into a product; and the effect of chosen materials on the life of the product; the potential for recycling and environmentally sound disposal at the end of the product's life. With all these factors to consider it's not surprising the final choice of materials for a new product is often a compromise, strongly influenced by the costs both of the material itself and of processing it.
Now watch the video The total beauty of sustainable products by clicking the link below.
Total beauty of sustainable products (10 minutes)
Beauty Video
Edwin Datschefski
This is the legacy that designers have left us with: a huge mish-mash of different types of materials and objects. We've got PVC, we've got metal, we've got concrete, we've got engine oil, we got vinyl from the backs of car seats. You couldn't make this up. It's a weird concoction and somewhere a designer hasn't specified what happens at the end of the life.
Narrator
There are millions of different products on the world market. But few, if any, have been designed to be truly sustainable.
Edwin Datschefski
What do we mean by sustainability? It's about people, planet and profits. People means we've got to have good communities and we've got to have good conditions for the workforce. It's about the planet, it's about environment and we've got to have environmental sustainability. And it's also about profits. None of this is any good if we go out of business. And designers have a big role to play.
Narrator
Edwin advocates the concept of Total Beauty, where products are designed to minimise negative environmental and social impacts. The concept is based on a set of five key principles.
Edwin Datschefski
So, why are sustainable products hard to find?
Edwin Datschefski
Companies would like to say: ‘Yes, we'll make a super-green product and consumers will buy it in their droves'.
Unfortunately, they rarely do because, to get a product like that, you're going to have some kind of performance change. And I say change with good reason: it's going to perform in a slightly different way at a slightly different price point to the products that the consumers are used to. So, unless they see a real clear benefit for themselves, green by itself is not enough to sell more product. This makes the designer's job especially hard so they have to make the product better, and better for the environment: better in terms of performance, price and environment all at the same time. Hey, well that's why we pay designers — they've got to do something for their money!
In the same way that inventors and designers need knowledge of the range of materials available, they equally need to know the strengths and limitations of a range of manufacturing processes. As with the choice of suitable materials for a product there will often be a number of feasible processes. The following are the different criteria that can be applied to identify an optimum process in a particular case.
Cost – the capital cost of new equipment, the cost of dedicated tools such as moulds, the labour costs of setting up and operating the process, and the assumed rate of depreciation for tools and equipment.
Cycle time – how long it takes to process one item (part, component or product).
Product quality – the standards required in terms of performance properties, surface finish and dimensional tolerances, and maintaining quality over time.
Flexibility – how easy it is to produce different designs on the same equipment.
Materials utilisation – the amount of waste material generated during processing.
The relative importance of these criteria will vary depending on the volume to be produced and on whether the products will be identical or the same equipment will be used to manufacture different designs.
The ability to design and make a new product to the optimum quality specifications at the lowest cost and in the shortest time has been the general goal of manufacturers since the start of the industrial revolution. The means by which this goal has been achieved have developed as materials, techniques and the organisation of production have evolved. Not only has the transformation of the manufacturing process enabled many inventions of increasing complexity to reach the market and become successful innovations, the manufacturing process itself has been the subject of much innovation.
In a number of the examples earlier in this unit you've seen that the development of most innovations includes significant reductions in cost, which make the product affordable by larger numbers of customers. (Examples include the BIC ballpoint pen, Edison's electric light and the electronic tagging of products.) Often this cost breakthrough is due to decisions made in the area of materials and manufacture. A new material might be used in the product that makes it easier and cheaper to manufacture (the use of plastic for the bodies of ballpoint pens); a new assembly process might be more efficient with fewer components and fewer stages (recall that the assembly of Edison's electric light was reduced from 200 to 20 steps and the labour time from 1 hour to 20 seconds); a new manufacturing process might become applicable to the production of an innovation (fluidic self-assembly allowing production of RFID tags on an industrial scale).
Further savings might be achieved by regularly reviewing the design and manufacturing process for a product and aiming where possible for simplification and integration. Can the product be redesigned with fewer parts? Can parts be designed to serve more than one function? Can a new or different principle be used? Can parts be redesigned for ease of fabrication? Can fasteners be eliminated or reduced by using tabs or snap-fits? Can a product be designed to use standard components?
The basis of mass production is the complete interchangeability of components and the simplicity of attaching them to each other. With this increasing reliance on interchangeability in a world dependent on mass-produced products, it becomes more important than ever to know that products are being manufactured accurately to common standards and that their performance can be relied on.
Standards are another key component of the innovation process, providing guidance to the manufacturer on the expected quality and performance of a new product or process. And standards reassure the user that the product has been well tested before being launched onto the market. (See
Section 3: 1.4
.)
17.4 Standards and their role in innovation
Standards were originally related to units of measurement. The first ‘standard’ was the Egyptian royal cubit, which was made of black granite and was said to be equivalent to the length of the Pharoah's forearm and hand. This was also subdivided into finger, palm and hand widths – one ‘small cubit’ was equivalent to six palms. But because the human forearm was the master reference this meant that the cubit varied in different parts of the world. Over thousands of years agreement over units of measurement gradually spread. It was really industrialisation that brought a pressing need for better standards of measurement, both for parts of products and for manufacturing processes.
Essentially the incentive to standardise was economic. Standardised parts and methods of production meant that products could be made more accurately and efficiently, and the user could rely on their quality and performance with greater confidence. Furthermore maintenance and repair could be carried out more easily and cheaply by the replacement of one standardised part with another.
An early set of standards for the manufacture of a product were established in connection with steam boilers. Victorian engineers produced boilers of various shapes and sizes and therefore different performance characteristics. This resulted in uncertainty over how a particular boiler would perform and there were many boiler explosions and some deaths. There was pressure from insurance companies to reduce such risks by persuading engineers to conform to given standards for the manufacture of boilers and insurance cover was made conditional on compliance with manufacturing standards.
In 1901 the institutes for civil engineers, mechanical engineers, naval architects and the iron and steel industries formed a committee with the remit to standardise iron and steel sections for bridges, railways and shipping. One of the first standards was for tram rails, which led to a reduction in the number of different rails manufactured from 75 to 5. During the First World War standards were established that enabled aircraft to be made faster and that resulted in more reliable aircraft. In 1929 the standards committee became the British Engineering Standards Association and was granted a royal charter. Then in 1930 the association became the British Standards Institution (BSI) with a brief to oversee the establishing of national standards for the manufacture of a range of products. During the Second World War the standards for the manufacture of tins saved 40 000 tonnes of steel a year.
In 1947 the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) was founded to establish international standards for a wide range of industrial products.
Nowadays standards are agreed by committees drawn from government departments, research organisations, manufacturers and users. And standards aren't fixed but evolve to reflect changes in technology and society. By 2003 there were more than 14 000 international standards applying to film speeds, paper sizes, the dimensions of credit cards and the symbols on car dashboards. In the same year there were over 20 000 active British standards (1400 new standards were agreed in 2002 alone). As well as products, standards are developed to apply to ways of doing things – for example, the ISO 14000 series of international environmental management standards. Along with the information contained in patents, standards also represent a repository of know-how collected from wide experience of using products and processes. Some products in different countries nowadays are required by law to be tested against particular safety and performance standards before they can be offered for sale to the market. In the UK these include smoke alarms, emergency lighting, baby's dummies, fire extinguishers and fireworks. There are also many voluntary standards agreed upon by industries and trade associations because such standards can lead to more cost-effective production and maintenance, as well as greater customer confidence in the products concerned. For example the British Standard document (BS 1363:1995) for 13-amp fused plugs, socket-outlets, adaptors and connection units consists of four separate documents that specify the design, construction and performance characteristics of each product's components and details on how to test a new product design for compliance with the standard (
Figure 66
). The BSI Kitemark (itself a trade mark) shows that a product was initially tested and is regularly tested against appropriate standards. It has become a symbol of safety and quality for any product that carries it. Recently much effort has been devoted to agreeing standards for Europe's electrical plugs and sockets, so far without success.
Figure 66 Extracts from British Standard BS 1363:Part 2:1995 (Source: BSI)
Figure 66
Increasingly the acceptance of certain standards, such as for the audio cassette in the 1960s and the compact disc in the 1980s, has helped manufacturers to avoid wasteful duplication. But in the past any agreement on standards has usually come only after a period of intense rivalry between manufacturers striving to have their technology accepted as the standard. Such confrontations have sometimes been so intense that they have been labelled ‘format wars’. A classic example was the struggle between consumer electronics companies Sony and JVC for the video recording standard – Sony promoted the Betamax format and JVC the VHS format. Such battles can be fierce because the economic rewards of having a company's technology established as the international standard are enormous – just as the wasted production, development and marketing costs for the loser might be financially disastrous. Increasingly nowadays, however, much effort is devoted by groups of manufacturers, before expenditure on innovation has gone too far, to agree international standards and save themselves the expense of a format struggle. However innovation history has a habit of repeating itself. In 2003 two major groups of companies were lined up behind different standards for recordable DVDs. Hitachi, Panasonic, and Samsung supported DVD- (DVD minus) while Sony and Philips were behind the DVD+ (DVD plus) format. By the time you read this a common standard may (or may not) have been agreed. You may well be aware of more recent examples of such conflicts.
For more information on British and international standards you could visit the BSI and ISO websites.
Activity 13
Figure 69 Hoover Keymatic washing machine, 1963 (Source: Science & Society Picture Library)
Figure 69
18.2.2 Compatibility
An innovation that is compatible with the experiences, values and needs of its potential buyers will be adopted more rapidly than one that isn't compatible. For example mobile phones have spread rapidly because they are compatible with social and cultural trends towards faster communications, increased personal mobility and the desirability of high-tech gadgets. However the car seat belt, patented in 1903, wasn't adopted on any significant scale until the 1970s (
Figure 70
). It took decades of increasing traffic and growing casualties in road accidents for safety to become a pressing concern, government to pass legislation and the seat belt to become a newly compatible innovation.
Figure 70 Motor magazine in 1960 advertises the car seat belt (Source: John Frost Historical Newspaper Service)
Figure 70
18.2.3 Complexity
If an innovation is perceived as difficult to use it will diffuse more slowly than one that is easy to understand. For example users of early personal computers needed an understanding of a programming language in order to use their machines. For most potential PC users this made the innovation too complex to consider buying. Then a graphical user interface was developed and incorporated by Apple Computer into the Lisa computer in 1983 (
Figure 71
) and more successfully into the Macintosh computer in 1984. Users could control their computer by using a mouse to point at visible icons on a virtual desktop and software became simpler to use. This approach was taken up by newly emerging PC manufacturers and the rate of diffusion of the personal computer increased. Of course, other factors contributed to the spread of the PC, such as falling cost, improved performance and more powerful software, but reduced complexity for users was a significant factor.
Figure 71 Apple Lisa launched in 1983 with the screen showing the graphical user interface (Source: courtesy of Apple Computer Inc)
Figure 71
18.2.4 Observability
The easier it is for people to see an innovation being used the more likely they are to consider buying it themselves. Examples include types of motor car, mobile phones and computers. Less obviously, products such as solar panels in domestic housing can sometimes be found in clusters on a housing estate (
Figure 72
). Innovations that are harder to see tend to diffuse more slowly, though there may well be other factors involved.
Figure 72 Making solar energy more observable – solar panels on the roof of terraced houses (Source: Science Photo Library)
Figure 72
18.2.5 Trialability
It helps to be able to try innovations before buying. While this isn't common for most innovations it can reduce any uncertainty the buyer might have about committing to a purchase and can increase the speed of diffusion. Buying a car usually involves a test drive that, although it probably isn't a fair reflection of the range of conditions under which the product will eventually be used, is better than nothing.
18.2.6 Encouraging diffusion
In general, innovations that are perceived as having relative advantages, being more compatible, less complex, observable, and trialable will diffuse more rapidly than other innovations.
18.3 Characteristics of consumers and the market
As well as the characteristics of an innovation affecting the extent of its take-up, the nature of the market and the purchasing behaviour of consumers can influence success. Some people will always try to be among the first to buy a new product – Rogers (2003) calls people in this group innovators (
Figure 73
). They are typically young, affluent, well-informed, receptive to new ideas and willing to take risks. You probably know people who always seem to buy the latest gadget – it might even apply to you.
Figure 73 Rogers’ diffusion curve showing five groups of consumer in relation to product diffusion
Figure 73
The innovator group and the next group, called early adopters, are often targeted by a company's launch publicity. However these first two groups are more often influenced by information gathered from friends and colleagues and from reviews of new products in the technical press, specialised publications and the internet.
To the frustration of everyone involved with producing innovations, the majority of consumers are more cautious and inclined to wait to see a product established with any performance problems solved. Rogers calls this group the early majority and it is the target of intensive advertising campaigns to increase the rate of a new product's diffusion.
People's reticence is understandable, particularly with rapidly changing high-tech products. Who wants to be stuck with the latest equivalent of an eight-track audio cartridge or a Betamax video recorder?
Even more cautious consumers make up the group called the late majority, which tends to wait for the fall in price typical of mature products. The early and late majority tend to rely on the media and advertising for picking up information about a product.
Finally those in the laggards group buy a product close to the end of its life cycle, often shortly before it is replaced by a new, improved version of itself, or by something quite different. These last two consumer groups can also have economic reasons for delaying purchase.
There is also the question of timing. You saw above that some inventions can emerge before their time when the technology isn't sufficiently developed to deliver a reliable product. In other cases though, the inventive idea itself is okay and early products are satisfactory but it doesn't take off because the need for it is not yet established.
There have been a number of attempts to establish a market for the videophone over the last 50 years, with ever-increasing amounts of resources involved. In 2002 a few companies paid a staggering amount of money to acquire the operating licences for the so-called third generation of mobile telephony including video (£22 billion in the UK alone). Despite an intensive marketing campaign some mobile phone companies had only achieved around a tenth of their targeted market by 2004 and were nowhere near recouping the cost of the operating licence. (See
Box 8
.) Compared with the videophone, the relatively simple second generation technology of short message service (text messaging) clearly tapped into a need that mobile users had. By May 2002, 24 billion text messages were being sent each month and operators were getting from 10–20 per cent of their profits from text messaging.
Box 8 Diffusion of the videophone
The first experimental two-way videophone system was demonstrated in 1930 and linked the AT&T head office with its research department, which was called Bell Labs. In 1956 Bell Labs demonstrated its Picturephone system, which needed to use up to 125 telephone lines to achieve a reasonable picture. By 1968 Bell had improved the technology so that it would work with a relatively narrow bandwidth and finally the Picturephone video telephone was introduced by Bell Labs as a commercial product in 1971.
The Picturephone was thought by many inside Bell Labs to be an example of a perfect innovation. It had overcome significant technical obstacles yet still met its production schedule and cost objectives. Market research had predicted slow acceptance followed by rapid growth. It was, however, a costly flop. Reasons suggested for its failure include high cost (rental of $125 per month) or that it was black and white at a time when consumers in the US were getting used to colour TV. Fundamentally though it failed because the market was not ready for it – some said it didn't offer enough of a competitive advantage over the telephone to justify its intrusiveness.
Meanwhile further technical developments in the videophone continued, particularly in Japan (
Figure 74
). By the mid-1990s videophones had been made more efficient by the development of data compression technology and once more were being offered for sale. Also at that time video links between personal computers were starting to become more common, exposing an increasing number of people to the idea of two-way visual communication. A new need was in the process of being cultivated, with huge rewards for the leading producers once a mass market could be established.
Figure 74Different generations of videophone. (a) Japanese TV telephone, the model 500 Viewphone, 1954 Source: Hulton Archive. (b) Post Office video telephone, 1967 Source: courtesy of BT Archives. (c) British Telecom videophone, 2002 Source: courtesy of BT (UK) Ltd. (d) NEC third generation video mobile phone, 2003 Source: NEC 2001–2004, courtesy of NEC (UK) Ltd.
Figure 74
In recent years it seemed the mass market would be established with so-called third generation mobile telephony (
Figure 74
). This technology included the capacity for high-speed data exchange, mobile internet access and video streaming. The first licences for such services were awarded in 2002 but once again the market has been relatively slow to take up video telephony.
Of course in terms of the innovation process for third generation mobile telephony it's early days to be passing a judgement that the need doesn't exist on a sufficiently large scale or can't be encouraged to grow. Operators have had to cope with the teething troubles of an untried technology standard (imposed by European governments to ensure cross-border compatibility); colour screens and more ambitious operating requirements mean shorter battery lives; and purchase and service rental costs have been high, as they always are with a new technology and a small initial market. A common pattern would be for some of the early operators to withdraw from the market before the technology is improved, the need increases and the product becomes profitable and diffuses.
The diffusion of some innovations is encouraged by an existing infrastructure. The rapid spread of the telegraph was made possible because it was easy to string its wires alongside railway tracks, which provided a ready-made link between towns and cities. The telephone in turn was able to start by making use of the telegraph network, although it had to add many extra elements such as links to individual homes. You saw in Part 1 how the development of the modern business corporation created the need for inventions such as the typewriter and the telephone to improve the speed and efficiency of communications.
Some inventions rely for their diffusion on developments in related technological innovations or systems. A method of audio compression known as MP3 was originally developed as part of the system used for high-definition TV transmission and digital satellite systems. MP3 is a standard (see
Section 3: 1.4
) that is part of a set published by the Motion Picture Experts Group. By ignoring audio content outside of the range of frequencies normally audible to humans, MPEG compression produces sound quality that is good enough and it results in a file of digital audio that is much smaller than previous sound files.
MP3 players started appearing in the early 1990s as separate audio players but didn't arouse much interest. The need for personal, portable audio was met at the time by cassette players and, increasingly through the 1990s, CD players. It took innovation in other areas to create the conditions that led to a growing interest in MP3 innovations. These areas included the increasing access to personal computers, the growth of the internet, the improvement in storage capacity of digital devices and the development of file-sharing software (see
Section 3: 2.4
of this unit. What is it?
Section 1: 1.1
notes that the early ballpoint pens were on sale for approximately half the weekly wage of the time. A key contribution to this product made by Baron Bich was to develop a manufacturing process capable of reducing production costs and sales price significantly. The BIC disposable ballpoint pen now costs a few pence.
SAQ 9
Rogers gives five characteristics of an innovation that affect how well it will sell and how quickly it will diffuse. Briefly use these characteristics to explain the rapid diffusion of the mobile phone.
Relative advantage. The main competitive advantage of the mobile phone is its very mobility. It freed people from having to find a public phone if they needed to make a call when travelling. This proved an attractive feature to business people and also for use in emergencies. As the network spread to near universal coverage (in the UK) the relative advantage increased. For some people cost, compared with landline telephones, is a factor preventing even more rapid diffusion.
Compatibility. Mobile phones fulfilled people's need for rapid and instant communication, at first for business then increasingly for social purposes. They were also compatible with the image of the use of technical gadgets reflecting the modernity of the user. Resistance to purchase comes from those who don't find this image attractive and find the mobile phone intrusive – they'd rather keep the world at bay.
Complexity. Mobile phones are relatively easy to understand and use for those who are familiar with and confident users of technological gadgets. This explains the high take up among young users. As the technology has developed some mobiles are getting more complex in terms of their functions, but with the aid of good design they are easy enough to operate. Some people won't buy a mobile because they see them as complex devices.
Observability. The extent to which mobile phones can be seen being used by others has certainly been a factor in their diffusion. They are observable products, being used in public more often than most innovations. Once again this very observability has probably led to some resistance from potential buyers.
Trialability. As with many new products, the extent to which mobile phones can be tried out before purchase is limited. Apart from an in-store demonstration, borrowing someone's mobile for a call might be the only opportunity to try the product before purchase. Once tied into a contract users can change to a different mobile handset, but trialability doesn't seem to have been a significant factor in the diffusion of the mobile phone.
SAQ 10
| Lawn mower |
Which actress was married to Orson Welles from 1943 to 1948 ? | ��ࡱ� > �� & ���� B � ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������) ! " # $ % & |