Innovation, two perspectives + RadioLab = Evolution Rules Us All

Eric Ries has developed a science for making startups more efficient and calls it the "Lean Startup".  His whole mantra is to make startups more efficient and likely to succeed.  He developed a framework, called the Lean Startup, as a methodology for making startups more efficient.  This is modeled after ideas from lean manufacturing including: 1) reducing cycling time, 2) eliminating waste, and 3) driving down back size and applying it to the process of innovation itself.  He says that if we can use feedback loops that follow a build, measure, learn cycle, we can then change direction in small increments and eventually realize whether or not you need to make a pivotal change to your idea.

At the beginning of this video, Eric talks about the birth of white collar work.  He says that it was born out of our ability to make tacit knowledge (that which must be learned, like that of a craftsman) more efficient.  

John Seely Brown also talked about how the world of innovation has shifted from that of going in a predictable world of equilibrium, to that of an exponential world of constant flux and dis-equilibrium.  The infrastructures over the past 300-400 yrs that we use to function are driven by punctuated evolution - at those punctuations we reinvent social, work, organization and political practices.  We are now experiencing that punctuated evolution every 2-3 years.  He says that the half-life of any particular skill is shrinking, skills learned in college have a half life of just 5 years.  

We used to protect those skill stocks till now - we are embracing change by learning how to participate on the edge of flows.  We are learning to make ideation more efficient by creating new knowledge (strongly tacit and scalable).  In learning, we now are 'creating the new' as opposed to 'learning the old'.  This creating is tacit, it is not explicit.  We're used to passing around the explicit knowledge, but it takes time to code the tacit.

RadioLab: What Does Technology Want?

In this conversation recorded as part of the New York Public Library series LIVE from the NYPL, Steven Johnson (author of Where Good Ideas Come From) and Kevin Kelly (author of What Technology Wants) try to convince Robert that the things we make—from spoons to microwaves to computers—are an extension of the same evolutionary processes that made us. And we may need to adapt to the idea that our technology could someday truly have a mind of its own.

Ode to the Biomimicry Institute (answers to the Specialty Program Application)

When/how did I learn about Biomimicry, what was my first responsive action?

I observed the biomimicry movement at a distance for several years (read the newsletter, joined AskNature, and read Janine Benyus's book).  It wasn't until late 2009 after attending a talk by Dr. David Hammond at the Palo Alto Research Center that I became connected to the Bay Area Swarm.  I soon after connected with Diana Lee and became a TBI barnacle. Through the 2010 SF Education Summit, the 2011 SF Educators Workshop, the 2011 International Bionic Engineering Conference in Boston, and numerous speaking events and swarm networking events, I've met a majority of the TBI board, staff and other networkers worldwide. I also began sprinkling biomimicry into my biology classes, published an article through our local PBS-affiliate, KQED, and created a twitter account devoted to biomimicry (733 and counting). I am currently helping organize the San Francisco Bay Area Regional Network.

Though I have always been enraptured with biology, it was winter quarter of 2003 in undergraduate school I remember consciously recognizing my admiration for the nature's balance and genius – homeostasis reminded me of the way nature balances itself through positive and negative feedback loops. Having studied all the human physiological systems, I later began exploring other animal systems. The more I studied, the more amazed I became at how incredible animals are adapted to their environments, and how those animals shape their environment over time.

At the time, however, I didn't realize how I could use my love for nature's designs (besides for conservation work) and pursued a pre-med degree and eventually my masters in molecular, cellular, and integrative physiology. It wasn't until discovering biomimicry in 2007 that I realized a way for me to transfer my knowledge of biological concepts in a deeply profound way that was both inspiring, practical, and in demand.

Personal goals in completing the program?

My five goals for completing the program are:

1) Be able to speak biology through an engineering and design language

2) Deeply reflect in nature and use my creativity to see a guide of applications to industry challenges (primarily engineering and industrial design)

3) Become more disciplined and practiced using the biomimicry process and life's principles

4) Utilize my resource handbook to greatly enhance and build the San Francisco Bay Area Regional Network

5) Extend my relationships with the Northwest Regional Network to expand our collaborative capacities

How do I envision the program enhancing or advancing my Career?

1) The Specialty Program will provide a practicing knowledge, built relationships, and accreditation with which to build the San Francisco Regional Network. Our regional network aims to provide a biomimicry incubator for Bay Area companies through workshops, partnerships with universities, and connections to venture capital. We would like to eventually serve as a resource bank of biomimicry and interdisciplinary industry experts, as well as market biomimicry to our large, diverse, and intelligent Bay Area audience.   Overcoming innovation challenges in the Virtual Lab will enable me to design workshops which address potential roadblocks for emerging biomimicry technologies.   I will also be more aware of ways in which we can collaborate with others in Northwest Regional Network.

2) The Specialty Program will enhance my effectiveness as a community science liaison because I will gain a form-funciton perspective of biology with a language that is accessible to engineers and designers.  The program will provide resources and ideas for helping others practice the biomimicry process (primarily through formal and informal education).  Having stumbled through biomimicry innovation challenges myself through the program, I will better understand the challenges of developing an emerging biomimicry technology into a product. This Specialty Program will also set me up for future training if I decide to become a biologist at the design table.
 I envision several pathways for my career as a community science liaison.  These pathways my follow one after the other or merge:

1. Inspire lifelong learners about nature's designs and the promise of biomimicry
2. Help train others to use the biomimicry process to solve problems (for education and for business)
3. Make scientific/biologic/biomimetic research more accessible to different disciplines through language translation
4. Help connect emergent technologies in bionics and biomimicry to funding sources for product development
5. Future: Become a B@DT consultant