Innovation is not magic; it's technique

"Maybe this stake is more prominent in start-up environments, where new ideas surface every day and the opportunity for growth is potentially wider. Philosophies like "Build fast, fail fast" are at the core of an agile mindset, helping us determine whether an idea is viable in the early stages or whether a pivot is necessary to achieve the desired numbers and experience."

"But what happens when an "innovation promised cycle" is built on unsteady ground? Maybe some of you think that's the whole point of innovating (building under uncertainty), but for someone with many years in the industry, I don't think that formula is always effective. I know I'm maybe being very pessimistic, but, truth be told, behind some great product ideas is a lot of mess that eventually generates long-term stress (I'll explain in a few paragraphs ahead)."

"When thinking about innovation, most product teams associate this term with ideas and justifications like: "We're obsessed with users", "this is what the market needs," "we need to launch as fast as possible, and then we'll figure out..." From my perspective, this approach is OK, but somehow incomplete because itneglects everything that might happen within the teams before putting something into the market, and failing to account for this variable will lea"

Technology teams frequently promise transformative products and adopt ideas from successful companies, with many projects behaving like innovation labs. Start-up contexts amplify idea generation and potential growth, supported by agile mantras such as "Build fast, fail fast" to test viability and decide pivots. Innovation cycles founded on shaky internal conditions can be ineffective. Behind compelling product ideas often exists internal mess that produces long-term stress. Many product teams prioritize market and user justifications while neglecting what happens within teams before launch, and failing to account for internal dynamics risks harmful operational outcomes.

Read at Medium