Isolation or Conflict…The Innovator’s Dilemma

Human beings are creatures of inertia. If you are a well-paid and generally comfortable corporate executive, you may tolerate evolutionary change but revolutionary and disruptive change will generally......freak you out. So the innovator has a dilemma. If you want to innovate in a corporate setting (really any institutional setting where large numbers of people have come together under an established operation), you will be the one fish swimming upstream. And the other fish will NOT be happy. Innovators in large organizations have to count on facing resistance and outright conflict. And this isn't just an intellectual exercise. Conflict is unpleasant for most people. It's draining. It makes people sad and frustrated. Being the one fish means you don't get much positive reinforcement since the change you're driving won't generally yield fruit for years.

The innovator’s other choice is to go it alone. Be a maverick and often an entrepreneur. But building your own enterprise from the ground up comes with its own personal challenges. Unless you find a true partner(s) it can be a lonely endeavor. You also have to build everything from scratch. Not just the kitchen you hoped to innovate but the whole house - floors, walls, and bathrooms. This forces you to spend time on things that don't interest you. Starting from scratch also exposes you to a lot of extra risks. The whims of the capital market. The circular argument that the customer will buy it once it's well established, which requires the customer to buy it. You're still swimming upstream but the other fish are not your colleagues but the market. But unlike the corporate fish, they don't fight you - they just ignore you.

So one way or the other, being an innovator requires a strong psyche. Isolated or in conflict, the innovator’s path is not an easy one and requires a certain character to persevere.

Which one is tougher? The insider innovator or the entrepreneur innovator?