Meaning - an Unexplored Path of Innovation

Home , Evolution (ride), RoboCoaster, Speed (ride)

Meaning - An Unexplored Path of Innovation

Åsa Öberg1* and Roberto Verganti2 Department of Information Design, Mälardalen University, Sweden1 School of Management, Politecnico di Milano, Italy1,2 [email protected], [email protected] *Corresponding Author

Received 27 August 2014; received in revised form 30 November 2014; accepted 9 December 2014

Abstract Over the last ten years, the practice and research around innovation has been dominated by one perspective: innovation is an activity of “creative problem solving”. According to this perspective, users have problems or needs, and innovation implies an understanding of those problems and the creation of better ideas to solve them (Kelley, 2001, Chesbrough, 2003, Brown, 2009, Martin, 2009). There is, however, a level of innovation that has been overlooked: the level of meaning. People are continuously searching for meaning. Whenever they do something in life, there is a meaning behind that action, a purpose, and a “why”. They also use products and services that support this search for meaning. For example, they use fast robots with the purpose of improving the productivity of a process. Firms often assume that meanings exist “out there” in the market. They just have to be understood, not innovated. Therefore, they search for new solutions, a new “how”, to serve this existing purpose better: a faster robot, for example. However, people are not only searching for new solutions to existing problems. They are also searching for new meanings because their life keeps changing and because they are delighted by the discovery of new directions. For example, hospitals buy slow robots, such as the DaVinci system, the leading prostatectomy device, not to replace doctors and increase productivity, but to help them in complex operations. This article contends that there is a third type of innovation that is overlooked by the existing frameworks of innovation, which focus on the innovation of technologies and markets: innovation as driven by meaning. By leveraging case studies of firms in consumer and industrial markets, this article: (1) identifies and defines this third type of innovation, the innovation of meaning (2) positions it in relation to the two other main drivers of innovation (technologies and markets); (3) identifies the peculiar nature of the innovation of meaning; and (4) indicates a possible research strategy to explore the process of the innovation of meaning.

Keywords: Innovation of meaning, innovation strategy, radical innovation, understanding users, design

innovation. A humanist by heart, however, 1. Innovation from the Outlaws he knew that technology is not the only dimension of innovation: there are other “A robot may not injure a human being or, directions of unexpected change, one of through inaction, allow a human being to come which is the purpose for which technology to harm”(First Law of Robotics.) is used. The Three Laws of Robotics were incorporated into the robots in Asimov’s Isaac Asimov predicted it correctly a novels to indicate what constitutes a mean- long time ago, in 1942, when he wrote the ingful purpose and what does not (The Three Laws of Robotics. A scientist by Three Laws of Robotics appeared in many education, he surmised that technology has novels of Isaac Asimov, who first intro- immense potential and is a major driver of duced them in the novel “Runaround”, major automotive clients. The RoboCoaster 1942). A novelist by profession, he played does not require revolutionary technology, on the intersection between technology and being based on an adaptation of a standard meaning: what if technological innovation heavy-duty robot made by KUKA, the KR challenges the laws and enables it to move 500, which can lift 350 kilograms (two beyond what is currently meaningful? In people plus the seat) and simultaneously particular, to move beyond the idea that have a long arm. The technology is acces- robots are meant to be “as far as possible sible to any manufacturer of industrial from people”. robots. Yet, after more than ten years, What Asimov did not expect, in his KUKA is still the only competitor in the creative mind, is that there was no need to field. Why have other companies failed to live in a futuristic imaginary scenario to recognize this opportunity? The point is challenge the first law of robotics. In 2003, that even if the RoboCoaster uses existing the German company KUKA Roboter technology, it challenges the existing para- Gmbh, a major player in the robotic indus- digmatic interpretation of what an industri- try, released the RoboCoaster, a robot used al robot is. There seem to be two shared in amusement parks to provide a totally laws among the executives of industrial new experience to people wishing to enjoy robotic products. The first one is that their the thrills of a breath-taking ride. It consists firms are in the business of efficiency. of a robotic arm with two seats at its end to Robots are serious stuff, meant to increase host people. During the ride the robotic productivity. The second one is that robots arm lifts the passengers in the air, swirls, need to keep a distance from humans, due stops suddenly, turns them upside down to their potential to severely harm people. and in many directions, with different Yet, the RoboCoaster is not used for im- speeds and dynamics, thanks to a practi- proving efficiency, but for entertainment. It cally unrestricted freedom of motion does not keep a distance from humans but, granted by its six axes of rotation and six instead, is the first passenger-carrying degrees of freedom. The peculiarity of the industrial robot. The RoboCoaster is a RoboCoaster is not only the unique com- revolutionary change in what industrial bination of movements it can allow, but robots are meant for. In other words, it is a also the possibility for passengers to pro- “radical change in meaning”. This new gram their 90 second ride themselves. meaning was not within the dominant as- Before sitting in the RoboCoaster, the pas- sumptions of incumbents in the industry. sengers use a software application in which When we talk about this application with they can select various motion profiles and robot professionals their reaction is skepti- speeds, depending on their age and how cal, sometimes ironic. KUKA is not ad- brave they want to be (more than 1.4 mil- dressing the innovation puzzles that the lion combinations are possible). They can innovators in the industry are focused on design a gentle, easy-going ride, or opting (speed, precision, strength) to solve the for a totally wild experience, whirling them “big problems” that are currently consid- up, down and sideways through the air. ered meaningful in the industry. The Ro- From the first ten robots delivered to the boCoaster is “outside of the law”. Instead, Legoland amusement park in 2003, to the it is simply a radical innovation of mean- recent adoption in the “Harry Potter and the ings that, by definition, are considered Forbidden Journey” ride in Universal's meaningless if looked at through the lenses Islands of Adventure theme park in Orlan- of traditional paradigms. do, KUKA has sold about 250 RoboCoast- The basis of theories of innovation, ers, opening an unexpected application for and especially of radical innovation, are not an industry that has recently experienced clear when relating to innovation as con- major turmoil due to the recession that hit nected to meaning, especially in its more radical form, when meaning changes sig- from each other, but also when acting in nificantly. In this paper we will first and combination, especially if combined with a foremost illustrate the existence of this type consideration for the depth of the innova- of innovation. We will also relate it to other tion, either incremental or radical. Studies types of innovation and discuss four di- have, therefore, proposed matrix frame- mensions to describe its nature. Further, we works based on two dimensions: innova- will show that radical innovations of tion can be described as taking place both meaning always occur, in every industry, in an existing market or a new market and as a consequence, have the power to (horizontal axes). Innovation can also hap- shape the competition thereafter. pen with the help of an existing or a new technology (vertical axes). This reasoning 2. A New Language and a is fundamental to the seminal frameworks New Context of innovation management, such as those proposed by Ansoff (1965) with his matrix 2.1 The Technology - Market Discussion on products and markets, Burgelman et al. Studies on innovation management (2004) on technology and market applica- typically point to two drivers of innovation: tions and Mcgrath and Mcmillian (2009) technology and market (see Figure 1 – for with their matrix on technologies and mar- an extensive review see Garcia and Calan- ket segments. tone 2002 and Calantone et al. 2010). Technological innovation has captured TECHNOLOGY most attention, especially as far as radical technological change is concerned. The Radical understanding that technology is a major driver of innovation goes back to early investigations on innovation and entrepre- Incremental neurship (Schumpeter, 1934). In recent MARKET decades, this understanding has spurred a Existing New rich stream of studies that have explored Figure 1: The Technology and Market Dimen- the antecedents of technological break- sions through (Abernathy and Clark 1985, Hen- derson and Clark 1990, Utterback 1994, Despite the combination of this range Christensen and Bower, 1996). Conse- and depth, none of these theories seem to quently, studies on technological innova- fully capture a type of innovation such as tion are seen as being concerned with the the one described in the RoboCoaster ex- “how” of things, offering novel ways of ample. Indeed, on the one hand, the Ro- solving customers’ problems. boCoaster is not a technological innovation, The innovation of markets has played a new “how”. Instead, it is the application a secondary role, and gained traction only of an existing technology (the adaptation of recently, thanks to studies that have inves- an existing product conceived for the au- tigated firms’ capabilities of addressing tomotive market), to a new context: the new market segments or uncontested mar- market of amusement parks. On the other kets. The studies of Kim and Mauborgne hand, it is not just a market innovation. (2005) and those of McGrath and MacMil- There is, indeed, an entrance into a new lan (2009) represent the most extensive market but not as traditionally interpreted, investigations in this regard. In these stud- using an existing approach to solve the ies, a market innovation is seen as con- problems of new markets. The RoboCoast- cerning the “who” of things, changing the er is not merely the transfer of existing subject of innovation, the customer. technology (and user experience) from one These two drivers of innovation have market to another. Nor is it the “lifting been considered not only independently capacity for efficiency” that finds a new market to serve. The revolution is not just innovation, therefore, becomes a moving from one context (car industry) to a three-dimensional construct. new one (amusement parks) and it is not just the “who” that changes. The move TECHNOLOGY includes more than this. What is different is that the purpose of why to use this product changes as well. The purpose (and also the MARKET answer to the question “Why do we use this product”) is no longer “because we are looking to raise capacity to create efficiency and control”. That is, the robot is not MEANING used in the amusement park to lift and Figure 2: The Dimensions of Innovation: Tech- assemble ride equipment. Instead, the an- nology - Market - Meaning swer would be, “because we are looking to raise the capacity to create emotions”. The This partially mirrors Abell’s model for movements, therefore, deliver something business definition (Abell, 1980). However, else: from being precise and accurate to while Abell’s third dimension points to the offering the freedom of selection that “how” of a product by discussing different makes every ride different and unique. To “functions” to fulfill customer needs, our sum up, the move to a new context also proposal stresses the “why” by discussing includes a shift in the purpose. Innovation, the “meaning” searched for by users. This in this sense, has to do with the why of meaning, when translated into solutions using a product (i.e. the meaning of it), not (“how”) may include not only utilitarian only about who uses it (the market) or how and functional needs, but also emotional they use it (the means, functions or tech- and symbolic needs. In other words, the nology). question "why" looks at products from a The two dimensions of market and wider perspective, going beyond visible technology, therefore, struggle to explain and tangible functions. Another difference this type of innovation. There is something to Abell’s model is that our perspective is that is not captured, namely the perspective dynamic (on innovation) rather than static of meaning. From this vantage point, a (on business definition). We could also call central element is how the user constructs this innovation “design-driven innovation” the purpose for using the product. If we (Verganti, 2009) as the word design (from want to understand and fully capture this the Latin de-signare) is etymologically type of innovation, we would, therefore, related to “making sense of things” need to introduce a third dimension in the (Heskett, 1985; Krippendorff, 1989 ). De- innovation framework, concerning how the sign, by definition, includes “to bring user creates their purpose, in other words, meaning”. their meaning. Even more, when interested Note that the innovation of meaning in innovation in its radical form, we would can be based on existing or new technolo- need to understand the nature of this type gies. An example of change in meaning of innovation. associated to new technology is the Robot- Studio simulator introduced by ABB Ro- 2.2 Innovation in 3D: Introducing the botics in the early 80s (see Figure 3). Ro- Dimension of Meaning botStudio was developed thanks to break- By introducing the dimension of through software technology that could “meaning” to the debate about innovation, better predict the movement and efficiency we expand the scope. From a two dimen- of the robot. Instead of designing, building sional construct of technology and market, and trialing a robot in real life on the fac- we include an additional lens, the meaning tory floor, this application enabled car perspective (see Figure 2). The space of

manufacturers to optimize the performance customers and to compete better, or differ- of the manufacturing process in the “virtual ently (Verganti 2009; Moon 2010). world” of a computer screen. This simula- TECHNOLOGY tion capacity made it possible to visualize RoboCoaster and predict the manufacturing operations before construction of the robot. The MARKET meaning, therefore, moved from selling an efficient robotic arm (hardware) to selling the knowledge of how to use it (software). This meant, for example, that the current MEANING RoboCoaster ideas (at that time) of robots as “fast mov- ers”, diminished a bit. Now, even a slow Figure 3: Different Kinds of Innovation of robot could be more valuable than a faster Meaning (The Robocoaster and the RobotStu- one, if it was used in an efficient way. dio) Studies on radical technological change, especially in the field of socio-technical 2.3 Meaning in Other Fields change and Actor Network Theory, have Meaning, as a driver of innovation, deeply explored the interactions between does not make a loud voice in the field of meaning and technologies (Latour, 1987; innovation management. In other fields, Bijker & Law, 1994). However, the direc- however, one can find both loud, outspoken tion of these investigations is the opposite and more silent, subtle reflections on to our purpose. They consider innovation to meaning. Philosophy for example, and be driven by technology and a change in especially the branch of hermeneutics, meaning as an enabler or a consequence. focuses on how people understand and Here, instead, we focus on innovation interpret life, and, thereby, how people driven by the search for a new meaning, create meaning. According to hermeneutics, with technology being an enabler. interpretation comes by addressing both the Similarly, the innovation of meanings “parts and the whole”, implying the devel- concerns both existing and new markets. opment of new understanding by iteratively The RobotStudio is targeted toward tradi- considering both the details (the parts) and tional robotic clients, such as industrial the context (the whole) (Alvesson and manufacturers. However, it still implies a Sköldberg, 2008). In our studies, one of the radical change in the reason why they buy main inspirations comes from the German robots, from searching for speed and effi- philosopher Gadamer, who sees a novel ciency, to the quest for knowledge about meaning as emerging from a blend of many how to use robots. Instead, the RoboCoast- minds, or as a” fusion of horizons” (Gada- er introduces robotics to a totally new arena, mer, 1975). A similar perspective is pre- transforming roller-coasting from a ride sented by the French philosopher Ricoeur that is predictable and standard to an expe- from the “clash of interpretations”, where rience that is unpredictable and customiza- several critical perspectives collide in the ble by passengers. The coaster’s visitors do search for new understanding (Ricoeur, not merely get on the ride and sit there, but 2010). The focus on the individual and her instead take an active and creative role in capability to reflect upon herself is also the experience. Whichever the case (ei- discussed in the field of logo therapy, a ther an existing or new technology is ap- branch of psychology where the strive for plied or an existing or new market is tar- meaning is believed to be the strongest of geted), these cases demonstrate that there is human forces. According to Victor Frankl a third dimension of innovation: new (Frankl, 1988, 1995), this awareness, con- meanings that are searched for and de- nected to a person per se, is what makes it signed, as a way of providing new values to possible to understand the meaning of a certain situation. Another close perspective perspective though, is the one of “meaning comes from Mark Johnson who discusses making“ (Jahnke, 2012, 2013). This ap- meaning from both a cognitive and an proach sets designers as the catalysts of aesthetic perspective (Lakoff and Johnson meaning change by stressing the im- 1980; Johnson 2007). This theory stresses portance of a critical, even humoristic or that meanings, (unconsciously created ironic perspective of innovation. Neverthe- within us, even before we are aware of less, the focus is on design and product. them) come to full expression through the There is no explicit framework for a third arts. dimension of innovation. These philosophical and psychological These streams of literature all relate to approaches present different ways to relate meaning and have served as a valuable to meaning. They cover meaning and life, basis for our investigation (for a more but are not fully applied to research within extensive literature review see Öberg, innovation management that also incorpo- 2012). Still, as we have identified, there is rates discussions on products (or artifact) room for a more extended discussion on and business. Nevertheless, product and meaning in the context of innovation. meaning encourage much discussion, from Many theories relate to meaning inde- cultural artifacts and connotations, (Bu- pendently from each other (in so- chanan 2001, Holt 2003), to active contrib- cio-cultural contexts, in product design, in utors in complex systems (Hirschman, organization theory), but none bring to- 1982), “cultural industries” gether the three notions of meaning, prod- (Hesmondhalgh 2007) and meaning change uct and innovation management that are in networks (Tuomi 2006). Further, within core elements in this study. semiotics and branding (Karjalainen 2004) and in design (Schön 1983, Heskett 1985; 3. What Is Innovation of Meaning Krippendorff 1989, Verganti 2009). Close business perspectives that con- … something with implied or explicit signifi- nect to meaning instead, are primarily those cance, with an important or worthwhile quality, within organizational studies focused on a purpose… The English Oxford Dictionaries sensemaking (Weick 1995) and sensegiving (Gioia and Chittipeddi 1991) and on the There are mainly two types of expla- capacity to see and reflect upon changes nation for meaning. First, a semiotic ex- (Ocasio 1997; Ocasio 2011; Weick and planation, or, more precisely, a semantic Sutcliffe 2006). But, also studies on how acceptance, where meaning indicates the humans interact through conversation, relation between signs and the things to through “communities of practice” or the which they refer (as semantics is the use of a common language, also show how meaning of words and phrases). Second, people create meaning (Brown and Duguid the definition also includes a philosophic, 1991, Wenger and Snyder 2000, Boland less tangible and visible function by in- and Tenkasi 1995). cluding the words “implied, explicit, im- Our perspective, though, that embrac- portant worthwhile, quality and purpose”. es both meaning, product and innovation These terms suggest a personal involve- management, does not make a loud voice ment and judgment and could be connected in these studies. Focus is either on product to philosophy (as the study of theories meaning, but less on innovation, or on about the meaning of things, such as life, context, and less on changes to product knowledge, and beliefs, and as the study of meaning. It seems that explicitly seeking general and fundamental problems, such as for meaning (such as the meaning of a those connected with existence, knowledge, product and service in the context of its use) values, reason, mind, and language). is absent from these studies. A valuable When talking of the “innovation of perception and can be expressed both by a meaning” we refer to “a user, the product company and its clients. and the surrounding context to interpret a product or service proposal in the way that 4. Methodological Approach the purpose changes”. This implies that we So far we have learnt about two robot refer more to the second part of the defini- products, the RoboCoaster by KUKA and tion, the philosophic perspective, rather the RobotStudio by ABB Robotics. They than the semantic. More specifically, we are both examples of innovations of mean- focus on the purpose of a product or a ing; one uses the help of existing technol- service, on the “why” rather than on the ogy in a new market, the other with the “what”. Our perspective of meaning, help of new technology in an existing therefore, is rooted in a tradition that looks market. One shows the change from raising at the meaning of life (such as in philoso- accuracy in the strive for control, to raising phy, sociology and psychology), applied to unpredictability in the quest to create emo- artifacts (as in design and in product se- tions. The other example shows the chang- mantics) and within the dynamics of busi- es in buying hardware and raising capacity nesses (as in organizational sensemaking (a robot) to buying software and and in the management of innovation). knowledge (an application system). We Therefore, by product meaning we re- will examine these cases closely further on. late to the purpose of a product or service However, before that, we describe the as perceived by the user. It is connected to methodological approach of this study. the user experience of the product and it The study started in 2010 with the aim comes from their interpretation of a prod- of explaining the dynamics within radical uct. It stems from both emotional and innovation. To this purpose, we organized symbolic values (such as in the product two workshops with 15 managers at ABB language and message sent out from the Robotics. These resulted in a map of revo- product) but also from the technology and lutionary cases within the robotic industry functions connected to the product, deliv- covering the last 30 years. When classify- ering a certain performance. The meaning, ing these cases according to traditional in the RoboCoaster case, comes both from innovation frameworks, we realized that the appearance of the unexpected move- not all of them would fit into the existing ments from the robot (creating emotions dimensions of technology and market. and representing different ideas to every Therefore, we moved to an exploratory spectator) and also from the physical expe- investigation in the search for an additional rience of the movements when using the dimension to explain the nature of these ride (related to the functionality of the innovations. Rather than being explanatory, robot). Meaning, therefore, is created when our methodology, therefore, is exploratory, moving from discussing the what (func- aimed at identifying the nature of a novel tions and messages) to the why (from effi- phenomenon (a new dimension of innova- ciency to emotion). tion) to be further explained through more Hence the innovation of meaning is a extensive, future studies. This exploratory change in the purpose of a product or ser- stage of the research consisted of in-depth, vice, coming from a user’s interpretation, semi-structured interviews with nine man- in a given context of use. From the per- agers within product and project develop- spective of a business, an innovation of ment both at ABB and KUKA, in Sweden, meaning is present when the company’s Germany and UK. The interviews aimed to message for a product changes and builds explore how executives involved in pro- on values that express a new reason, a new jects perceived these innovations different- meaning for why to buy and use this prod- ly to other traditional technology and mar- uct. These arguments stem from the user ket innovations. The material was tran- scribed, codified and analyzed in light of semi-hard shell technology and learn that the literature review, especially regarding the company works with biomimetics (the connections to the field of hermeneutics. science of adapting biological structures To increase the external validity, the study and functions to the purposes of engineer- also included case studies of innovations in ing). Visitors are also offered tips on mov- completely different industries, such as ies, competitions and links to the partners durable goods, fast-moving consumer of the company as well as a local talent goods and business-to-business settings, program, both within ski and bicycling. using the same interview protocol and This offer is not accidental. It is a result of analysis. Early insights were then presented careful listening to signals within skiing at conferences on innovation management technology, life style studies and fashion. and design management, and also at con- POC is clearly not offering just a product. ferences on hermeneutics and qualitative They propose a scenario of meaning in a research. The insights were then further market that did not ask for the use of hel- elaborated at universities both in Sweden mets (the meaning associated with ski and Italy and discussed by scholars from helmets was indeed that of a device for both management, design and product fearful, inexperienced skiers). The founder development as well as with editors of both of POC did not consult users to find out the books and academic journals. The scientific new proposal. Instead, he worked with approach would best be described as a sports medicine experts (back specialists), participatory research perspective, or as an brain scientists, neurologists, material spe- innovation action research perspective cialists, experts in social media and graphic (Kaplan, 1998) where companies and re- design, industrial designers, professional searchers, together, relate to and create new athletes and top gravity athletes to elabo- knowledge. rate on these signals and create a new scenario. The result is that POC have now 5. Meanings Are Everywhere altered the perception of what personal Now, we turn our attention to three protection is all about from being “a boring other examples of innovations of meaning must” to a fashionable and attractive fea- because innovations of meaning do not ture. only exist within the field of robotics. They The innovation of meanings can also can be found in any industry, shaping be found in service contexts (see for exam- competition and competitive advantage. ple Katarina Wetter Edman, discussing We considered the Swedish sports meaning in relation to a service design gear company POC, most famous for their perspective, (Wetter Edman, 2014)). Let us ski helmets that combine new technology look at one example within accountancy with a strong visual appearance. By re- services. In the 60s, the accountant was the flecting and understanding several signals, anchor of the finances in a company, keep- this company has developed a new meaning the overall picture in his head and not ing for downhill ski helmets. Instead of willing to release too much information. He offering supportive headgear to avoid inju- was the bookkeeper that kept things under ries, the company has added a playful, his wings. Similarly, with private clients, seductive touch to this life-saving equip- the accountant was a general consultant ment. When visiting the POC website, who provided advice on several financial the visitor can dive into a world of protec- schemes (pensions, savings, etc.). With the tion, where helmets can be personally de- increase in technology in the 70s, the ac- signed regarding color, size, connection to countant became an informatics-expert, ski goggles, body armor, gloves and clothes. delivering masses of numbers and statistics The visitor can meet the team of athletes to the company managers. With increasing and the special laboratory behind the new speed and more complexity, the accountant of today has gone from a local or country- encourages an “up-to date”, playful and specific focus to a global work environ- fashionable one. As a result, the meaning of ment. Analogously for private clients, the diapers has changed from a practical and accountant has become a very specialized necessary support, one that is bulky and role, focusing mainly on bookkeeping and less glamorous to buy, to a self-expressive tax consultation. Accountants have turned a and prioritized fashion item. This new piece in a puzzle of stocks, insurances and meaning is not to be seen as a shallow pension funds, derivatives and mortgages. superficial statement because children with Holistic analysis and control is an ex- “fashionable” diapers can move around and tremely tough exercise, if not impossible. play without the necessity of wearing Therefore, the accountant has to be spe- clothes (trousers) on top. This allows more cialized in certain areas. The meaning has freedom for the child. Additionally, it is a changed significantly, from a convenient situation for the parents. In fact, “whole-picture” Godfather delivering it is a more open, “no frills” attitude in peace and calm to the top managers and parent-child bonding. Due to the higher people, to becoming a well informed and engagement among parents, the value of detailed expert. the brand, hereafter, has come to incorpo- Another example is the development rate a more affective connection between of diapers by Kimberly Clark who, in 2007, customers and the product, similar to the released the “Huggies Little Mover Jeans engagement of a loved and attractive fash- Diapers”. The blue denim design was ion brand. This is an example where the launched as a fun and stylish fashion for meaning changes from being practi- babies during the summer months, allow- cal-oriented to also including feelings of ing children (and parents) to feel relaxed, affection and good spirit. even when strolling around without any trousers. The diaper has a printed pattern 6. Analyzing the Peculiar Nature of that resembles blue denim jeans, with the Radical Innovation of Meaning stitched seams and pockets on the back, From the analysis of our cases, it due to new technology that allowed a emerges that managers perceive innovation clearer and less transparent print than the of meaning, especially in its radical form, one normally visible on diapers. Still (but as considerably different in its nature than obviously), it kept the core value of leak- other forms of innovation, such as tech- age protection and great mobility for tod- nology or market driven ones. In this sec- dlers that crawl and scoot around their tion, we propose four identified dimensions surroundings. But, more than just a fun and for the nature of this type of innovation; it colorful way of dressing a child, this also being dependent, un-optimized, outlandish connected to the life-style and preferences and co-generated. We show how these of parents and their interests in fashion. dimensions differ compared to more classic The diaper was not developed for the child approaches to innovation and why these per se. Instead, the deep blue diapers have might fail when being applied in a mean- become a way of expressing personal style, ing-driven innovation search. These in- as a parent. Instead of using arguments, sights, which come from our exploratory such as “feeling safe”, giving your baby the case studies, are proposed as a basis for best” and allowing free movement and fun further extensive exploration in future (by taking assistance from famous Disney, studies. or other, commercial characters), this ap- pealed to the “needs” of parents, far away 6.1 Being Context Dependent from teddy bears and children’s toys. This Let us start by going back to KUKA product talked to parents in the search for and the case of the RoboCoaster. In the self-fulfillment as a not only caring parent, robotics industry, most innovation projects imply a search for solutions that can (almost exclusively) be technically described. ing redefines the purpose of this product. In other words, most innovation (typically As suggested by hermeneutics, the novel driven by technology or new market appli- interpretations come when a company has cations), consists of solving problems. the capability to see both parts (the indi- Research studies have typically focused on vidual events, one of which is the product this type of cases where innovation is per- at hand) and the whole (the overall user ceived as the result of problem solving experience, which is the envisioned course processes. See for example, the design of action). hierarchy model (Clark, 1985), the prob- A consequence, and very central to the lem-solving cycles (Clark & Fujimoto, interpretive process, is the role of external 1991), and the frameworks of system en- networks. However, differently to classic gineering design (Pahl & Beitz, 1988). As models of innovation where actors in a an innovation strategy with reference to, network are considered to be providers of for example, the resource-based view of the ideas or solutions to a specific problem corporations (Wernerfelt, 1984) and their (Chesbrough, 2003), these networks pro- dynamic capabilities (Teece, 1997), inno- vide new, different understandings of the vation, in this sense, is dominantly directed context. For KUKA, for example, this first to finding a solution. included the request of an entrepreneur in Is the innovation of meaning con- the entertainment industry, later included cerned with problem solving? In other interactions with clients and theme parks. words, is an innovation of meaning defined For POC, it included interactions with by the technical problem it addresses, in- doctors, fashion trends and lifestyle experts. dependently from the cultural context it is The network is not only providing answers used in? but brings about possible interpretations of The managers at KUKA assert that, no, what could be meaningful to users. the aim of the RoboCoaster project was not To conclude, both the KUKA and the to solve a technical problem (indeed, the POC cases show that radical innovations of technology of the product already existed), meaning are context dependent. It is not but rather to reframe the interpretation of just about designing a product, but about what a robot may be. This robot delivers designing a scenario of meaning. In our amusement and human emotions rather cases, this scenario took the shape of a than precision and speed. They designed a report, of mood boards (POC) or a story- new context around it, a new scenario, a board (ABB). It can also be a physical new experience, before moving on to tech- realization, such as a concept project, nical problems. shown in public by a company to indicate Similar findings emerge in the POC future aspirations (this is a strategy typi- case, where a traditional product meant to cally adopted by KUKA). provide safety (a ski helmet) is reinterpret- ed in the socio-cultural framework of fash- 6.2 Being Not Optimized ion and style. Another major characteristic of domi- Innovation of meaning, therefore, nant innovation theories is that prob- works on a higher level and with a broader lem-solving is seen as a process of the scope than when solving a technical prob- progressive reduction of uncertainty (the lem. It implies to step back from a close earlier in the process the better, see for focus on the problem at hand, and instead example Clark & Fujimoto, 1991 ) and that, consider the overall user experience, assuming there is an optimal solution out beyond the specific interaction with a there, it is just necessary to find it product. By reinterpreting the relation- (Terwiesch & Ulrich, 2009). ship between the product and the sur- Is innovation of meanings concerned rounding context, an innovation of mean- with uncertainty reduction and optimization? Again, the managers at KUKA assert doning others. Or, as Gadamer would have that no, they were not aiming to find an put it, by a “fusion of horizons”. optimal solution to a problem, nor had they aimed to skim uncertainty off early in the 6.3 Being Outlandish project. Conversely, they started their work So far, we have elaborated the two with the RoboCoaster by listening to a themes of context dependency and proposal from an entrepreneur related to non-optimization. These two themes are the amusement park business. The first giving new implications to the theories of tentative product presented to the market innovation as a consequence of our focus was a standard product, adapted for the use on meanings and interpretation. Our dis- of a private person with the help of suitable cussion, however, considers a specific type software. Over the years, the company had of innovation of meaning: a radical change. carefully listened to what the network The next two sections will illustrate char- looked for and had constantly refined their acteristics that provide a useful lens to offer. Among other things, the seat was capture the nature of this radicalism. extended to include a top cover, equipment Recent studies on innovation have for laser guns (to fire at themed targets) and deeply analyzed the dynamics of radical other special effects. Recently, the Ro- change, with a focus on a major challenge: boCoaster has been further developed to the need to develop the new capabilities also include a virtual rollercoaster, experi- required to achieve a breakthrough (see for ence of avalanches, and the concept has example Christensen and Bower 1996, been incorporated to be a part of interactive Teece at al. 1997). External networks, in exhibits that combine math and science particular, are considered crucial to with sport activities for children. providing access to new competencies Starting from an adapted assembly (Christensen 1997, Chesbrough, 2003). The robot, the RoboCoaster has ended up of- perspective is that innovation comes from fering a total experience. Through an itera- the additive process of accessing, absorb- tive development process, different actors ing and retaining new knowledge (Cohen have added new knowledge and proposals and Levinthal 1990). along the way, and this has helped KUKA Is the innovation of meanings con- to reinterpret the meaning of the product. cerned with the development of new capa- The strategy has been to listen and adapt bilities deemed to be useful in the new the product continuously. In short, this scenario? Is this an additive knowledge second characteristic suggests a new theory generation and absorption process? of innovation, where focusing on conver- Our cases indicate a two-sided answer gence towards an optimal solution is based of both yes and no. Yes, because all cases on continuous and iterative debates, which implied the development of new firms take an active part in. knowledge (not on technical issues but To conclude, innovations of meanings especially on what makes sense to users). cannot be optimized. They belong to an No, because radical new meanings are ever-shifting sphere of knowledge, opin- coupled with a criticism of the existing ions, and proposals and, therefore, can dominant socio-cultural paradigm, not never be constant. In the process of infor- alignment with it. mation gathering and processing, external Considering ABB Robotics and the actors may be considered as an important development of the RobotStudio, when source of new arguments. They express some employees suggested they should different ideas, use different voices and start to work on software (instead of hard- create different perspectives. Interpreta- ware) this was not the most popular move tions, therefore, are combined and can lead within the organization. This is because it to new ones by stressing some and aban- meant that some of the competence of how to design robots and their movements would be handed over to clients through same frame of making sense of things). this new service. Still, a group of believers, Rather, the most effective interpreters are who were not just internal staff, persisted alien to a firm’s environment. Software and continued working with the new soft- experts looked indeed strange to robotic ware application. And they were not only experts in the 80s, as did experts in enter- internal – instead great competence joined tainment for KUKA or fashion experts for from other external partners belonging to POC. The development of the RobotStudio totally other fields than robotics, as the application by ABB and of the RoboCoast- software industry. When the product was er by KUKA have also been benefited by launched, it was so radical that even clients the contribution of executives who origi- were not explicitly asking for it. When it nally came from other industries than in- came out they were actually felt threatened dustrial robotics (indeed, the entrance of instead of being thrilled! For example, car KUKA in new markets has been anticipat- manufacturers have internal experts whose ed by the significant influx of an entire expertise is to understand how to use robots. team of new young executives who were These experts within the client organization not experts in the industry). These execu- interpreted the simulator as a threat to their tives could, to use the words of Ricouer, expertise and, therefore, to their organiza- take a critical stance on the shared assump- tional power. The whole idea looked bi- tions in the industry and pave the way to zarre, strange and different, almost out- the development of breakthrough meanings landish. To conclude, a radical innovation of A similar pattern, where a radical in- meaning is not additive, but is rather “out- novation of meaning is treated with arro- landish”. It requires the development of gance by incumbents in the industry, critical capabilities thanks to outsiders who emerges in the RoboCoaster case. This was enable a firm to make “detours” from the not considered to be serious robotics by current dominant interpretation, to lose traditional players, but rather as a market- themselves to find themselves another, with ing exercise. Managers at competing com- a new perspective, as explained by Ricouer panies laughed at this innovation instead of (Ricoeur, 2010, Kristensson Uggla, 2002). jumping at its imitation. Developing a radical change in mean- 6.4 Being Co-generated ing implies, therefore, it is necessary to Most theories of innovation advocate overcome dominant assumptions about a closer look on users in order to realize what a product is meant for. It implies the innovation. This perspective is supported, necessity to question the existing so- especially within the realm of studies on cio-cultural paradigm. The importance of user-centered innovation (Von Hippel, questioning the current picture, therefore, 1988), design thinking (Brown, 2009; Mar- links to the ability to build critical capabili- tin, 2009) and crowdsourcing (Chesbrough, ties, not only complementary ones. This 2003 ). leads to the peculiar role of outsiders in this Is innovation of meaning user-driven? type of innovation: rather than being a Does innovation of meaning emerge by source of complementary capabilities (that getting closer to users? have been identified and that are currently Our cases show that no, innovation of missing), outsiders are used as a source of meaning does not come from users but is as questioning, even criticizing the current a result of an interactive process that starts situation. In particular, as we have seen, the from a vision proposed by a firm. interpreters who enable to develop these The RoboCoaster, for example, is not outlandish interpretations are not customers the result of market analysis (no one in the or suppliers (who belong to the same eco- amusement park market was asking for this system of a company and often share the kind of product). Rather, it is the outcome of a clear and forward-looking strategy by KUKA, searching for new applications by with studies on entrepreneurship and strat- redefining what a robot is, by taking robots egy that assert that new visions come from outside of the industrial (automotive) in- the co-construction of understanding terpretation of efficiency and productivity, (Santos & Eisenhardt, 2009) in a network and taking them closer to humans. Perhaps where both entrepreneurs and stakeholders the most evident proof of the strategy of take an active part (Sarasvathy & Dew, KUKA is given by the visual and experien- 2005). tial language of their website In conclusion: a radical change in (www.kuka-robotics.com/en/), especially meaning hardly ever emerges as an answer as far as new applications in the field of to a clear market need. Rather, it implies a entertainment are concerned step back from current needs and proposes (www.kuka-entertainment.com). The web- a new vision that still does not exist in the sites show catalogues of ideas for new market. This vision comes from a com- applications; the images are playful combined effort to see and interpret new things, binations of products creating complex involving both internal, external and “out- shapes in the style of Arcimboldo’s vegeta- landish” networks. Therefore, an innova- ble portraits. In addition, KUKA collabo- tion of meaning is co-generated. rated with digital designers Clemens Weisshaar and Reed Kram to create an 7. Conclusions artistic installation in Trafalgar Square In this article we have shown that during the 2010 London Design Festival, there are innovations that cannot be classi- where the festival visitors and the global fied according to traditional frameworks Internet community could take control over focused on the innovation of technologies eight robots via a website by sending short and markets. Therefore, we propose a third text messages that were then “painted” in type of innovation dimension: innovation the air by the robots using LED lights. of meanings. On the basis of the analysis of KUKA’s robots have also appeared in Hol- studies in different industries (with a major lywood movies, such as James Bond’s “Die focus on industrial robotics) we have ex- Another Day” and “Tomb Raider” and the plored the peculiar nature of this innova- company has been honored with a number tion. In particular, we have identified four of design awards. There is a new and en- interesting characteristics that make the tirely radical strategic vision behind the radical innovation of meanings different to idea of the Robocoaster. It does not come technological or market innovations. Inno- from the users of amusement parks. vation of meanings is context-dependent, Whereas recent theories of innovation not optimized, outlandish or co-generated. place the major focus on the role of users, The purpose of this article has been innovation of meaning places the focus on exploratory, i.e. to identify and define the the visionary role of a firm’s executive nature of this type of innovation. This now team. Our research shows that radical in- enables us to set an agenda for future re- novation of meaning, being a proposal of a search. new radical purpose, implies the direct The first direction of research is con- involvement of these top executives in the firmatory: are the four characteristics of the team of interpreters. Indeed, interpretations, nature of innovation of meaning constantly eventually, cannot be outsourced. Execu- present? Do they also characterize innova- tives cannot ask others to listen to outside tion of meanings in industries other than interpreters. They have to be in the design robotics, ski helmets, consulting services team themselves to internalize the new and diapers? interpretation. A vision is something that is The second direction of research is never brought on a golden tray: it requires exploratory: what is the process of innova- interior action. This perspective is coherent tion of meanings? How do firms success- Technology and Innovation. New York, fully create and launch new meanings? NY: Mc-Graw-Hill. Both these directions require a new Calantone R. J., Harmancioglu N. & Dröge research design and data set, which goes C. (2010). Inconclusive Innovation beyond the purpose of this exploratory ‘‘Returns’’: A Meta-Analysis of Re- article. search on Innovation in New Product The aim here has been to give a pic- Development. Journal of Product In- ture of what an innovation of meaning can novation management, 27(7), 1065– be and what its nature looks like. We hope 1081. now to expand and give further depth to Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innova- this peculiar type of innovation in our fu- tion: The new imperative for creating ture work. But, this can only be done by a and profiting from technology. Boston, vivid and constantly ongoing discussion MA: Harvard Business School Press. among peers and outlandish, in known and Christensen, C. M., & Bower, J. L., (1996). unknown waters, among visionaries and Customer power, strategic investment, critics, embracing open minds as well as and the failure of leading firms. Stra- closed ones. For this reason, we hope that tegic Management Journal, 17(3), this article may inspire other outlanders to 197–218. join us in this exciting research journey. Christensen, C. M. (1997). The Innovator’s Dilemma. When New Technologies References Cause Great Firms to Fail. Boston, Abell, D. F. (1980). Defining the Business: MA: Harvard Business School Press. The starting point of Strategic Plan- Clark, K. B. (1985). The interaction of ning (pp.3 -26). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: design hierarchies and market con- Prentice-Hall International. cepts in technological evolution. Re- Abernathy, W. J. & Clark K. B., (1985). search Policy, 14(5), 235-251. Innovation: Mapping the winds of Clark, K. B., & Fujimoto, T. (1991). Prod- creative destruction. Research Policy, uct Development Performance. Cam- 14(1), 3–22. bridge, MA: Harvard Business School Alvesson, M. and K. Sköldberg (2008). Press. Tolkning och Reflektion. Veten- Cohen, W.M. & Levinthal, D.A. (1990). skapsfilosofi och kvalitativ metod, Absorptive capacity: a new perspec- Studentlitteratur. tive on learning and innovation. Ad- Ansoff, H. I. (1965). Corporate Strategy. ministrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. 128-152 Bijker, W. E. & Law, J. eds. (1994). Sha Frankl, V.E. (1988), The Will to Meaning: ing Technology / Building Society: Foundations and Applications of Studies in Sociotechnical Change. Logotherapy. Meridian, Plume; Rei Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Exp edition. Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How Frankl, V.E. (1995). Viljan till mening. design thinking transforms organiza- Borås, Bokförlaget Natur och Kultur, tions and inspires innovation. New Stockholm. York, NY: Harper Collins. Gadamer, H.G. (1975), Truth and Method. Buchanan, R. (2001). Children of the Transl. W.Glen-Doepel. London: Moving Present: The Ecology of Sheed & Ward. Culture and the Search for Causes in Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. (2002). A crit- Design. Design Issues, 17(1), 67-84. ical look at technological innovation Burgelman, R., Maidique, M. A. et al. typology and innovativeness termi- (2004). Strategic Management of nology: a literature review. Journal of Product Innovation management, - tolkning. Stockholm/Stehag, Brutus 19(2), 110-132. Östlings bokförag Symposium. Gioia, D. A. & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How Sensemaking and sensegiving in stra- to Follow Scientists and Engineers tegic change initiation. Strategic Through Society. Cambridge, MA: Management Journal, 12(6), 433-448. Harvard University Press. Heskett, J. (1985). Industrial Design. Lon- Martin, R. (2009). The design of business: don, UK: Thames and Hudson. why design thinking is the next com- Hesmondhalgh, D. (2007). The Cultural petitiveadvantage. Boston, MA: Har- Industries, SAGE Publications. vard Business School Publishing. Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. McGrath, R., & J. MacMillan, J. (2009). (1982). Hedonic consumption: Discovery Driven Innovation. Boston, emerging concepts, methods and MA: Harvard Business School Press. propositions. The Journal of Market- Moon, Y. (2010). Different: Escaping the ing, 46(3), 92-101. Competitive Herd. New York, NY: Holt, D. B. (2003). Brands and Branding. Crown Business. Harvard Business School, Internal Ocasio, W. (1997). Towards an atten- publication, 9-503-045, March. tion-based view of the firm. Strategic Jahnke, M. (2012, spring). Revisiting de- Management Science, 18(S1), 187– sign as a hermeneutic practice: An in- 206. vestigation of Paul Ricoeur's critical Ocasio, W. (2011). Attention to Attention, hermeneutics. Design Issues, 28(2), Journal of Organizational Science, 22 30–40. (5), 1-11. Jahnke, M. (2013) Meaning in the Making Pahl, G., & Beitz, W. (1988). Engineering – Introducing a Hermeneutic Perspec- Design: A systematic approach, Berlin: tive on the Contribution of Design Springer. Practice to Innovation, Doctoral The- Ricoeur, P. (2010). The rule of metaphor. sis, University of Gothenburg. Cornwall, Great Britain: Routledge. Kaplan, R. S. (1998). Innovation Action Santos, F. M., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2009). Research. New Management Theory Constructing markets and shaping and Practice. Journal of Management boundaries: entrepreneurial power in Accounting Research, 10(1), 89-118. nascent fields. Academy of Manage- Karjalainen, T.M. (2004). Semantic Trans- ment Journal, 52(4), 643-671. formation in Design, Jyväskylä, Sarasvathy, S., D., & N. Dew, N. (2005). Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy. New market creation through trans- Kelley, T. (2007). The Art of Innovation: formation. Journal of Evolutionary Lessons in Creativity from IDEO. Economics, 15(5), 533-565. America's Leading Design Firm. New Schmookler, J. (1962). Economic Sources York, NY: Random House LLC. of Inventive Activity. Journal of Eco- Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2005). Blue nomic History, XXII(1), 1-20. Ocean Strategy. Boston, MA: Harvard Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practi- Business School Press. tioner: How Professionals Think in Krippendorff, K. (1989). On the Essential Action, Basic Books. Contexts of Artifacts or on the Propo- Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The Theory of sition that “design is Making Sense Economic Development. Cambridge, (of Things)”. Design Issues, 5(2), MA: Harvard College. 9-38. Teece, D., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Kristensson Uggla, B. (2002). Slaget om Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Verkligheten. Filosofi - omvärldsanals Management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. Terwiesch, C., & Ulrich, K. (2009). Inno- Doctoral Dissertations and Licentiate vation Tournaments: Creating and Theses. Selecting Exceptional Opportunities. Öberg, Å. (2012) Innovation driven by Boston, MA: Harvard Business meaning, School of Innovation, De- School Press. sign and Engineering Eskilstuna, Mä- Tuomi, I. (2006). Networks of innovation. lardalen University. Licenciate of In- Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press. novation and Design. Utterback, James M., (1994). Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation. Boston, MA: About Authors Harvard Business School Press. Åsa Öberg is a researcher at the Infor- Verganti, R. (2009). Design-Driven Inno- mation Design Department at Mälardalen vation – Changing the Rules of Com- University, Sweden and a visiting scholar petition by Radically Innovating what at the School of Management of Politec- Things Mean. Boston, MA, Harvard nico di Milano. She is a Marie Curie re- Business Press. searcher at DESMA, the first network of Von Hippel, E. (1988). The Sources of research education within design and man- Innovation. New York, NY: Oxford agement. Åsa has been awarded the Best University Press. paper Award at The International Confer- Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organi- ence on Innovation and Management, zations. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage. Honululu, 2014. Weick, K. E. & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2006). Roberto Verganti is Professor of Leader- Mindfulness and the Quality of Or- ship and Innovation at Politecnico di Mi- ganiza-tional Attention. Organization lano, where he directs MaDe In Lab, the Science, 17(4), 514-524. laboratory on the MAnagement of DE- Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based sign and INnovation. Roberto serves on the view of the firm. Strategic Manage- European Design Leadership Board of the ment Journal, 5(2), 171-180. European Commission and is the author of Wetter Edman, K. (2014). Design for Ser- “Design-Driven Innovation: Changing the vice: A Framework for Exploring De- Rules of Competition by Radically Inno- signers' Contribution as Interpreters of vating what Things Mean” published by Users' Experience. Gothenburg, Uni- Harvard Business Press in 2009, nominated versity of Gothenburg, ArtMonitor by the Academy of Management for the George R. Terry Book Award.