The Era of Open Innovation

Cumulative Invention: Good or Bad

Of all the TED videos we watched during Monday's class, I related to Charles Leadbeater's the most. His stance and perspective on cumulative innovation resonated strongly with another class I am currently taking; Economics of Innovation. Like Leadbeater's video, the class stresses how the majority of innovations in today's world are not singular advancements. Instead they are continual advancements off of previous inventors before them. From what I have learned in the class, this new form of cumulative invention is very difficult to maintain incentive for. Although the first invention is critical to the second, it is difficult to reward both the first and second inventor equally for their contribution, as the 2nd inventor normally retains most of the credit. Usually such problem is remedied through running royalties or forward grants, but they are often very difficult to implement.

The video does accurately describe the problem, much more efficiently than my class I might add. It also calls into a question on how to address the problem in the future. Back paying royalties are still a very viable for of incentive for the initial inventor, as they will be receiving some funds. However they do run the risks that their invention must be useful too some future advancement that will create some economic value. The major downside I see of this system, is that most inventors who are exploring into a new industry will have to be more selective with their research, and acknowledge there is a slight chance of no return on their investment.  Overall I don't believe our system has a large of a problem as portrayed in the video, but there is still a problem that needs to be addressed.