Benefits & Rewards: The Innovation Race
A well-functioning technological society is built on and operates with a mutually advantageous system of benefit and reward; outreach is one of the “in”-terms these days, as are globalisation, internet service and its instantaneous communication facilities.
They have brought about massive shifts in many aspects. One of such shifts is in innovation.
The Competition
There are companies, let’s call them service providers (SPs) that sprung up to make use of the great new global communication potential. Their raison d’être is bringing together actual problems with potential solvers of such. Typically, they publish a “Seeker’s” problem and their registered “Solvers” can compete for the reward.
There is no limit to the type of problems or promised rewards. The problems can range from small improvements for existing materials or technologies to brainstorming of most complex problems and searching for novel ideas, processes, and so forth. Just to give you an example of what it is about, here is a screenshot of an actual and current problem, with a deadline of Feb. 12, 2016, as obtained from a screenshot: 
Accompanying this headline is a brief description of the desired idea or development and more details on the “Challenge” can be found once you open the link and log in. This particular challenge by the U.S. Coast Guard Research and Development Center is probably quite representative in its terms of advice, idea, or actual product desired by the seeker. Of course, the level of rewards is not set by the SPs that provide their dissemination but by the seekers.
With access to all kinds of government procurement modes, and hundreds or thousands of researchers with (presumably) first-hand experience and potential ideas in numerous government facilities, one might think that a solution (if it exists at all) to this challenge could be found in-house. Obviously, that does not seem to be the case here. If that is so, is the “reward” shown in the figure commensurate with the challenge?
Challenging the Challenge System
Companies and government institutions are looking for valuable ideas that can be developed into new and beneficial (e.g., cost-saving, revenue-producing, or less-intrusive) practical applications. That’s all fine and dandy, except for some observations that may or may not apply to any of the organisations that help to spread such news:
- The size of many rewards appears to be rather small in relation to the potential benefit of a solution to the seeker.
- There is no publicly accessible record of past “rewardees.” At best, a few of the successful solvers are ever publicly announced.
- Any attempt at direct communication between seeker and solver are – understandably – prohibited; therefore all communications are carefully screened for that.
- Even technical questions by a solver (normally anonymous to the seeker) to the seeker (anonymous to the solver) may be intercepted or may even be answered by SP staff rather than the seeker.
- Typically, solvers have no proof of any submission even reaching the seeker.
- Some challenges are closed before the deadline, with no explanation given and no recourse.
- There is a great potential for what I call “slippage” of various kinds.
Back to the specific example noted above. If this quest for a new type of mooring system is so important that it is even published in the Federal Register, one might think that the reward for a truly working idea ought to be substantially larger than indicated. If your (solver) proposal – at the sole discretion of the seeker—is considered to have potential, phase-II, may kick in, i.e. then “preparing and presenting Phase II competition package.” It will get you another five Grand; whoop-de-do!
If you can come up with such an innovation as desired in this challenge, I think a much better route to turn it into cash would be to patent it and to license or sell the patent, probably for many millions. After all, some really crazy ideashave recently been patented, without any proof of even the concept being realistic.
Obviously, that leads to another, quite different challenge, namely:
Challenging the Benefit-Reward System
The example and comments listed above are by no means unique in terms of innovation, seekers and solvers, or how modern communication methods enable global competition. Up until now, there is still little competition in the distribution and marketing of such innovation challenges.
The world’s progressive interdependence of labour and technologies can only succeed on a “level playing field,” when there is a reasonable balance of benefit to the seeker and reward to the solver. Sailors need their daily allowance of “rum,” soldiers need to be fed, legionnaires want their pay, and the post office doesn’t hand out stamps against IOUs, etc.
While some individuals and organisations may forgive loans and are willing to support those less fortunate, neither a society as a whole nor competing individuals can live on promises of future benefits alone. There is a point in time when the promissory notes and IOUs come due and need to be dealt with, one way or the other.
The current benefit-reward system is shifting that point further into future. Some people call that “kicking the can down the road.” The “can” here means the day of reckoning, when the books need to be balanced. Some people hope that that day will never arrive, at least not during their lifetime. So far, they look like the winners but will they do so forever? It’s good to be lucky but don’t count on your luck never running out.
A well-functioning society is built on and operates with a mutually advantageous system of benefit and reward.
Trackback from your site.