Reconciliation of Want Versus Should
I used to be passionate about exploring environmental issues in my current role, but then was subjected to too many brochures, sales pitches and offerings that I was green-washed and am now somewhat disinclined to engage in lengthy conversations about green IT initiatives.
Please don’t misunderstand. I am convinced that IT has a huge environmental responsibility and that IT can singularly reduce carbon reductions more than any other functional area. I am actually a little disappointed by the lack of truly innovative ideas coming out of the industry, since it seems to me that there are almost limitless ways that technology could reduce your/my carbon footprint. Yes, consolidating data centres is important. Using video-conferencing instead of travelling for meetings can be hugely beneficial. But we’ve known that for a while. So what else can we think of?
Understanding how we behave can lend itself to some interesting environmental innovations since we can look at what then might have the greatest benefit. For example, although we recycle paper and toner cartridges, the fact of the matter is that we print unnecessarily and this wastes energy, consumables not to mention all of the associated manufacturing and production effort. Research suggests that 45% of print jobs are one-offs (such as agendas for a meeting), and that 20% of all print jobs are forgotten once the “print” button is hit. This is then the driver behind innovations such as the re-printable paper that Xerox is researching, which will enable paper to be re-used over and over on the fly.
This is what I think of when I think of innovation. It doesn’t have to be a brand new product/channel/service that no one has ever thought of before. We’ve had paper for millennia. We have ink for just as long. But what Xerox is looking at doing with these is very new.
What about an example on a *much* simpler scale? We’ve had the wheel for millennia. We’ve had suitcases for centuries. But a suitcase with wheels? So simple, but so impactful. I can’t imagine travelling with anything else. (And actually I probably couldn’t considering the amount of stuff that I take with me and my admittedly pitiful power-to weight-ratio!)
I understand that innovation is a hot topic right now. We are all experiencing market pressures from traditional and non-traditional competitors, and the Internet has changed consumer behaviour and expectations beyond that which most of us can realistically meet. We need innovation in order to respond, compete and differentiate. But please, please don’t label something as innovative if it’s not. I would hate to see the emergence of “innovation-washing”.
I know that large organisations can be difficult to engage with, and I wish that innovation could be the cure-all or the fast track through procurement for projects that are struggling to get momentum. But it can’t and shouldn’t be, and we need to work together to explore ideas that are both innovative and feasible.
I’m sure that this challenge is made still more difficult by the fact that everyone has their own definition of what innovation is. For me and my organisation, we define innovation not by the scale of the idea, but rather by its exposure. If the business is already considering it, or would have got to it as business-as-usual, it’s not innovation.
There are so many wonderful ideas floating around, and I would love to implement even 5% of the ideas that come across my desk. But unfortunately, many ideas aren’t innovative as we define it, and even those that are innovative aren’t necessarily feasible for me to tackle considering: the current financial landscape, complexity of our environment, risk appetite, competing or changing business priorities, our customers and so forth.
We will do what we can, which will always be less than we want to do. But that’s what keeps me hungry.
follow me on Twitter
