Invention versus (commercialised) innovation.

In reference to my objects, I wouldn't consider them inventions as they utilise found materials and existing object are placed into a new construction re-contextualising them. They're often not new ideas, just re-contexualisted or adapted ones.

It many ways they can be linked to the idea of innovation - the adaption or development of existing objects. However, they rejected the notion of consumerist ideologies of marketable products, which Economist Joseph A. Schumpeter notes has become tied to innovation.

Schumpeter notes that after "inventor" was dissolved as a job title in the 1940's, companies shifted their researchers towards innovation ("in which ideas are transformed into marketable products and services") and diffusion (which sees those products and services distributed across markets). [1] To corporations, innovation becomes synonymous with risk, "Since great ideas often fail, and the best or most original product doesn’t necessarily win in the marketplace, the inventor came to be perceived as a relatively minor player in the equation." [2]

Nathan P. Myhrvol, founder of Microsoft research and former Microsoft technology officer, argues that big corporations lack motivation to invest into projects and inventions outside their existing product lines, "In other words, they tend to discourage invention, the often subversive effort to isolate new problems and generate unexpected solutions." [3] Myhrvold notes that “Invention is a side effect, not the focus. Most large organizations have a mission, and invention often takes you in another direction. When it comes to mission versus invention at most companies, mission wins.” [4] Then what we see from these major corporation is prolific developments / advancements or rather innovation - think the apple iPhone and it's many developments and iterations since 2007, rather than invention.

Ultimately, Myhrvold and others funding pure invention are out to debunk the perception that research labs make sense only when they are part of an existing corporate structure, and that the avoidance of opened ended invention by large corporation creates opportunities for smaller companies and the individual to become inventors who have greater more meaningful aspirations. "Now, with big corporate research laboratories focusing more and more on shorter-term product cycles, many see a growing opportunity for small companies, academic researchers, and individual inventors to generate breakthroughs that have longer-term impact.[5] Myhrvold, specifically identifies the medical field as an area where small companies and individuals are highly active as inventors, "In biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, and medical elec tronics—fields where every company is drawing on the same base of knowledge about the human body and the genome— about 25 percent of patents are being issued to small companies and individuals." [6]

This freedom to pursue invention for its own sake is the main hallmark of today’s climate." It’s been argued that moments of invention are little different from the rest of the research and development process—they are simply a matter of applying “normal problem solving to the right problem space...Dedicated inventors can recognize latent opportunities, problems that people don’t even know they have. [7]

Then what becomes interesting is purposeful inventions with a general purpose but free of corporate constraints around mission, brandability and aesthetics. Additionally, sourcing concepts for objects from observed problems means that these objects/inventions are being made in framework where there is an obvious need for them, and that they can be implemented and used. And, not just become apart of the existing debris of consumer / capitalist objects.

Inventor Jay Walker, founder of Walker Digital a research and development laboratory, notes that. “The field of management is about reducing the risk of bad out- comes involving people; the field of engineering is about reducing the risk of bad outcomes involving technology. But invention is about taking risks that will almost certainly fail in order to find the unlikely breakthrough.” [8] Utilising found and pre-existing materials in new or adapted objects could then be used to minimise the "rubbish" or debris of any failures.

[1] - [8] Evan I. Schwartz, "Sparking the fire of invention: One of the most radical business idea of the 21st century may be the creation of a new method of invention - individualistic, global and not bound to corporate missions." Technology Review, 2004, https://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=42c5a85f-56aa-4683-bea9-03d6fbc3fe0a%40sessionmgr103