Consultants cannot help Companies to innovate themselves

 Today there seems to be a lot of confusion about the trends that are developing on the Market: for each Trend, there are interpretations of a completely opposite sign.

At the basis of everything there is – as often happens in modern culture – a semantic question, of meanings of terms.

It happens that over time some terms that describe social aspects of human life take on a different meaning from the original one.

.

● The difficulty of understanding (to explain) the concept of radical change (disruptive innovation) -  There is a lack of of the meaning of the terms referred to innovation like "radical", "different" ("disruptive"). This does not allow the majority of the Market Player to develop a truly salable value. These terms indicate a substantial difference, or something absolutely new which is found on a plan completely different from the previous one. but today efforts are being made to develop "different" strategies which, however, remain on the same level, on the same qualitative level as the previous strategies.

● The basic misunderstanding on real (disruptive) innovation - Disruptive innovation is a “revolution” of the context in which it operates: this means “radical change” (from the roots) of culture, of the mindset used up to that point (change of operating principles, of conception of values, of a design approach, of types of communication, etc.).

● The lack of a real Innovation - Today there is no real innovation (attractive and sustainable for Customer), both by the part of the Big Player of the Market and by the part of the Public Administration.

● Disruptive innovation: religion, scam or necessity for those who want to stay in the market? – Today the market continues to apply a non-disruptive mindset even when the data indicate this modality  inexorably fails.

To innovate means to change. When there are major changes in the Society, it is necessary to adapt. There is no choice.

Are we sure that we understand what radical (disruptive) innovation is?

● The misunderstanding on the real meaning of the Trends (Meta-trends and Fake-trends) [1]

.

● Disruptive innovation is not based on technologies

● The misunderstanding on ecology: electrification of devices that are not ecological in themselves

● Towards a new (real) sustainability: the mistake of focusing on the low price

● Misunderstanding: the future is not futuristic as one imagines it today°

● “Futuristic vision” and insustainable products: cases of Flying cars, self-driving cars and electric city car°

● The misunderstanding on Innovation by Manager, Consultants and Pundits - Today Managers and Consultants & the “intellectuals” are focused on the past: it is not bad faith, but it is a lack of ability to recognize the new.

● The misunderstanding on Industry 4.0: towards Manufacturing 4.0 - The “revolution” (dirsruption) that is transforming the world of production is a phenomenon radically different from the one today defined as Industry 4.0.

The change concerns not only the product, but everything connected to it. Today it is necessary: a rethinking - the why of a product - the ideation/design process - the production/distribution process. We move on to a new era of the new Economy: the Context economy.

● Does it really exist to the possibility of having an Artificial Intelligence? (the unsustainability of the AI) [1] - Can a “machine”  actually make correct decisions? Science, with foundamentals principles (many  Nobels) says No.

● The great Firms are not able to develop disruptive innovation within them - the consolidated companies of the market literally can’t develop disruptive innovation within them. they are the object of disruption, and therefore can not be the subject. the problem: ● lack of “intuition” ● lack of culture of (real) innovation. a real (disruptive) innovation can only come with a fresh start, from new comers.