Neu:
22,47€22,47€
Nur noch 1 auf Lager
Gebraucht kaufen 13,13 €
Lade die kostenlose Kindle-App herunter und lese deine Kindle-Bücher sofort auf deinem Smartphone, Tablet oder Computer – kein Kindle-Gerät erforderlich.
Mit Kindle für Web kannst du sofort in deinem Browser lesen.
Scanne den folgenden Code mit deiner Mobiltelefonkamera und lade die Kindle-App herunter.
Bild nicht verfügbar
Farbe:
-
-
-
- Herunterladen, um dieses Videos wiederzugeben Flash Player
Dem Autor folgen
OK
How Innovation Works Taschenbuch – 25. Juni 2020
| Preis | Neu ab | Gebraucht ab |
|
Audible Hörbuch, Ungekürzte Ausgabe
"Bitte wiederholen" |
0,00 €
| Gratis im Audible-Probemonat | |
|
Gebundenes Buch
"Bitte wiederholen" | 21,68 € | 18,64 € |
|
Taschenbuch
"Bitte wiederholen" | 9,99 € | 12,07 € |
|
Audio-CD, Hörbuch, Ungekürzte Ausgabe
"Bitte wiederholen" |
—
| — | — |
Kaufoptionen und Plus-Produkte
- Länge
416
Seiten
- Originalsprache
EN
Englisch
- HerausgeberFourth Estate Ltd
- Erscheinungstermin
2020
Juni 25
- Abmessungen
15.3 x 3.2 x 23.4
cm
- ISBN-100008339074
- ISBN-13978-0008339074
Wird oft zusammen gekauft

Kunden, die diesen Artikel angesehen haben, haben auch angesehen
Produktbeschreibungen
Pressestimmen
Über den Autor und weitere Mitwirkende
Produktinformation
- Herausgeber : Fourth Estate Ltd (25. Juni 2020)
- Sprache : Englisch
- Taschenbuch : 416 Seiten
- ISBN-10 : 0008339074
- ISBN-13 : 978-0008339074
- Abmessungen : 15.3 x 3.2 x 23.4 cm
- Amazon Bestseller-Rang: Nr. 764,637 in Bücher (Siehe Top 100 in Bücher)
- Nr. 1,039 in Wirtschaftliches Wachstum (Bücher)
- Nr. 3,828 in Verschiedenes
- Nr. 31,466 in Ingenieurwissenschaft & Technik (Bücher)
- Kundenrezensionen:
Informationen zum Autor

Entdecke mehr Bücher des Autors, sieh dir ähnliche Autoren an, lies Autorenblogs und mehr
Kundenrezensionen
Kundenbewertungen, einschließlich Produkt-Sternebewertungen, helfen Kunden, mehr über das Produkt zu erfahren und zu entscheiden, ob es das richtige Produkt für sie ist.
Um die Gesamtbewertung der Sterne und die prozentuale Aufschlüsselung nach Sternen zu berechnen, verwenden wir keinen einfachen Durchschnitt. Stattdessen berücksichtigt unser System beispielsweise, wie aktuell eine Bewertung ist und ob der Prüfer den Artikel bei Amazon gekauft hat. Es wurden auch Bewertungen analysiert, um die Vertrauenswürdigkeit zu überprüfen.
Erfahren Sie mehr darüber, wie Kundenbewertungen bei Amazon funktionieren.-
Spitzenrezensionen
Spitzenbewertungen aus Deutschland
Derzeit tritt ein Problem beim Filtern der Rezensionen auf. Bitte versuche es später erneut.
Diese, und anknüpfende, Fragen versucht Matt Ridley in seinem neuen Buch zu beantworten. Er unternimmt dies in Form eines Streifzuges durch die Geschichte, und einer Analyse der jeweiligen Umstände, die zu besonders innovationsreichen Phasen in unterschiedlichen Zeiten und Regionen beigetragen haben. Dabei werden auch die Ursachen, welche zu einer Verminderung, oder gar dem Ausbleiben, von Innovationsschüben geführt haben näher beleuchtet.
Wenig überraschend zeigt sich, dass die Freiheit zum Experimentieren eine wichtige Voraussetzung darstellt um vielversprechende Entwicklungen nicht zu behindern, oder gar im Keim zu ersticken. Von dieser Einsicht ist der Autor beseelt, und daher zieht er gegen paternalistische Institutionen, schwerfällige Platzhirsche und nervige Patenttrolle ins Feld.
Es wird eindringlich darauf hingewiesen was auf dem Spiel steht, wenn wir uns von fortschrittsfeindlichen Bewegungen, aufgrund von übertriebenen Sicherheitsbedenken und der ständigen Angst vor Veränderung, eine bessere Zukunft verbauen lassen. Dabei wird keineswegs bestritten, dass es Einschränkungen und Regeln braucht um Risiken abzumildern. Nur leider wird beim Aufstellen solcher Regeln viel zu oft, und nicht selten unter dem Einfluss von Lobbyisten, übers Ziel hinausgeschossen.
Wie auch in seinen letzten Werken verweist Matt Ridley auf die quasi-evolutionären Prozesse die den Fortschritt vorantreiben. Diese sind jedoch kein Selbstläufer, sondern bedürfen den erläuterten Voraussetzungen.
Deshalb ist dieses Buch ein flammendes Plädoyer für die Freiheit zum Ausprobieren und dabei auch Fehler machen zu dürfen. Sehr wahrscheinlich wird es uns nur so gelingen, essentielle Innovationsziele zeitnah zu erreichen, um den anstehenden globalen Herausforderungen angemessen zu begegnen.
Das neue Buch “How Innovation Works” schreibt vom Tenor her den “The Rational Optimist” fort. Der Autor durchkämmt die letzten Jahrhunderte auf Innovationen und wird in allen Lebensbereichen, in der Gesellschaft und Industrie fündig. Er zeigt, dass nur Innovationen zu dem hohen und verbesserten Lebensstandard führen, der vielen Menschen auf der Erde zur Verfügung steht.
Innovation wandeln Erfindungen in nutzbare Dinge. Meist sind Innovationen keine Einzelleistungen, sondern das Ergebnis von Teamwork. Innovationen entstehen bottum-up, können nur schwer geplant und vorhergesagt werden; sie unterliegen stark dem Prinzip von Versuch und Irrtum (Trial and error). Innovationen können politisch ausgebremst, aber nicht verhindert werden. Wenn die Zeit reif ist, entstehen sie irgendwo auf der Welt. Und wenn sie gut sind, setzen sie sich irgendwann durch (durch so etwas Ähnliches wie die Natürliche Selektion“). Ridley argumentier wie im „Rational Optimist“, dass die Menschheit alle großen aktuellen und zukünftigen Probleme durch Innovation lösen wird. Dazu benötigen wir eine offene, nicht dogmatische und ideologisierte Gesellschaft.
Dieses neue Buch von Matt Ridley ist aus einer optimistischen Grundhaltung heraus sachkundig, unterhaltsam und informativ geschrieben. Es regt zum Nachdenken an.
Trotz einiger Bedenken an den Erkenntnissen ein kluges Buch, welches durch viele Beispiele (nicht die üblichen!) begeistert und damit das Thema neu beleuchtet.
Spitzenrezensionen aus anderen Ländern
Much of the narrative is laid down under the umbrella of human innovation and of course the author clarifies that he is not talking of invention and illustrates this with numerous examples of how sometimes independent and at times collaborative efforts came up with the same results as others and steadily and incrementally improved upon what had come before. It’s also true that in talking of human innovation we are in reality also talking of many and varied human facets all of which contribute to the central thesis of innovation. Thus, if we took as an example of penicillin mold growing on a petri dish. First, we would have to see it. Then we’d have to recognise exactly what we’ve seen, then we’d have to guess or postulate why we are seeing what we see and then we’d have to find a way or an experiment to clarify whether our assumptions fit this picture. This in turn relies on so many human qualities: the restless spirit, the enquiring mind, the ability to see behind a given problem, to try and to test and ultimately to devise a way of proving what we’ve hitherto guessed at.
I was a bit unsure about the author’s assertion that we must be free to speculate and experiment and that war or hardship is not a particularly great driver of innovation. Though I’d fully agree that one is more likely to be innovative if looking at financial or social success than have Stalin threatening to send you to the gulag if you don’t reverse engineer that Rolls-Royce jet engine in double-quick time! Although the author deconstructs arguments such as wartime driving the development of radar for instance, there are many other examples where humans under pressure delivered admirably such as the creation of the first Dreadnought in just about a year, the Hedgehog (mortar), squid, the longbow and of course the Firefly (tank) all made in a hurry when Britain’s back was to the wall. Furthermore, so many prime movers in the innovation stakes were themselves touched by personal difficulty, adversity which perhaps in turn made them more receptive to the forces of innovation.
I’m also delighted that the author came down firmly with the assertion that poverty is falling, as it is, not just in the UK but across the world and I’m sure that innovation has a great role to play in this continuing at a rapid and ever-increasing rate.
I also liked the discussion of some older disruptive beliefs; for instance that potatoes were ungodly and sadly such preconceptions abound today in all societies whether we talk of ground rhino horn as being good for us or the latest crackpot to call out some vaccination or other as giving all our kids autism which then takes years and years for us to turn round while the poor kids become badly damaged by whooping cough and measles, and still does!, all of which could have been prevented by such charlatans in keeping their mouths shut.
Other quick thoughts before I leave you to enjoy this fabulous book:
I wonder if blockchain shows more promise with warehousing and logistics than in finance.
Coffee has been proven to extend one’s lifespan- at least 2 cups a day.
The Duke of Wellington opened Eccles Station.
I would have thought Tim Berners-Lee should have had a bit more of a mention.
The first are indeed not always the best. Zantac and Lipitor became the world’s most profitable drugs though neither were first.
When I qualified, heart failure was regarded as a terminal condition. Then came some fabulous drugs such as Ace Inhibitors and more which turned this condition around.
I’ll believe in self-driving cars when I have seen one get through the Worsley Interchange at 8am.
French ships were generally regarded as being of a superior innovative design to the slower British efforts, but rapid rate of fire, bravery, daring and an acceptance of staring into the barrel of a gun literally - brought success.
Never dismiss pure luck and chance, Viagra was initially developed in Sandwich in Kent as a blood pressure pill !
At one lecture I was lucky to be present, the cardiologist said that we all have two jobs. One is our normal day job and the other is the job that we all have - a duty and responsibility to improve the way and how we work.
A nice discussion about the tendency of some areas to over-regulation and unfair assessments of one country's vacuum cleaners over another. Also, towards the end, the author seeks some of the reasons that stifle innovation. Lack of entrepreneurial veuve, willingness to take risks and a blame game culture are high up there. The airline industry has a no blame culture, ‘let’s move on’ whilst I have seen so many medical professionals be destroyed by mistakes that are there for all of us but for the grace of God. Humans need to make mistakes to move on.
Lastly, although the book is rich with what I shall call ‘human content’ remember that there are higher levels of human magnificence that we can all aspire to, that extend above and beyond our ability to innovate or otherwise – though of course few of us are about to change the world! I’m not even talking of the obvious ones like love or faith either. Some years ago, a lady came to see me who had a responsible job at our local hospital. She told me that she was sorry to trouble me but her friend had just died of pancreatic cancer and since that time her tummy did not feel right. I put her up on the couch and organised blood tests all of which were normal. She returned saying that she could still feel that something wasn’t right. I sent her off for an ultrasound scan of her pancreas and other abdominal organs. This too was normal and she returned once again apologising but saying that she felt no better. I told her that I was happy to keep going until I ran out of ideas and sent her off for a gastroscopy. There on the lesser curve of her stomach was the tiniest gastric cancer. This was at a very early stage and meant that she had an excellent chance of a full recovery. The female surgeon thanked me for referring her so early and so promptly. In reality, however, I had nothing to do with saving her. It was a particularly powerful and wonderful human trait that we all have and can cultivate and which, in my view, rises above our ability to innovate. The stomach cancer was so small there was no way that she could have felt it. Ultimately instinct had brought her to me and this is what had saved her. I just listened to her and put the tools in her hands. She saved herself by her own instinct. Learn its ways and use it wisely – this book is a good start. Enjoy.
How innovation works is quite a mixture of topics. The author starts by introducing some core topics where he wants to highlight notable innovation or areas which are not innovating for particular reasons. He starts with energy and the lightbulb and discusses how it was relentless tinkering that led to the lightbulb rather than a eureka moment. In fact the engineering blueprint for a lightbulb was not even unique, what made the difference was the right filament which could not be deduced but instead experiment led to discovery. This idea the author brings up numerous times throughout the book. He also highlights how nuclear energy no longer innovates as tolerance for experimentation has evaporated due to political backlash founded in ignorance. Furthermore absent experimentation innovation will not occur leaving much on the table for cleaner energy solutions. Topics like shale gas and the experimentation associated with its success is discussed and how fracking was a relentless tinkering experiment that eventually managed to through luck find a combination of fluids that somehow led to success. The first chapters are filled with the stories of how innovation occurred. The author discusses healthcare solutions, an area where often people think the science precedes the innovation but the author shows this is incorrect. Our theories of antibiotics followed our successful us of them and cleaning agents like chlorine were used prior to the understanding of how the reactive agents operated. The author also discusses how regulatory oversight gets in the way of solutions all the time by highlighting vape pens for cigarettes with their clear health benefits were prevented from entering the market by the cigarette lobby and its impact on regulation. In so many instances the author highlights how corporate association with regulatory bodies impedes progress through implicit collusion.
The author goes through how the automobile industry started and the rivalries with flight. He also gives the real history of funding of these ventures and makes it hard to dispute that government funding was never as effective as entrepreneurial capitalism. The author discusses food and how selective farming and cross breeding was an experimental endeavor at its core, but such experimenting led to vast improvements in yield that prevented starvation. Such improvements required perspiration not divine prediction. The author also discusses how certain basic ideas are not nearly as trivial as you think and how innovation is required at all levels. In particular things like the suitcase wheel though so clearly useful was not introduced until several preconditions were met which all needed an innovator to solve. Things like container shipping were all novel ideas driven by innovators fighting a system which was resistant to change despite the enormous benefits. This theme again is littered throughout the book. The author inevitably discusses the computer and highlights how there is no inventor of the computer and it is an engineering project that could go as far back as Babbage and Lovelace, thus reinforcing how innovation can also occur in collective form by lots of people independently tinkering.
The author moves on to how innovation occurs and repeats himself explicitly but reminding the reader that tinkering was always a core part of innovation. He refutes the idea that government is at the core of innovation and that basic sciences catalyze innovation. Certainly they can but government mandated innovation is riddled with failure for anyone who bothers to look. The author describes how innovation is combinatorial and fragmented, which leads to the argument that regulation impedes innovation. The arguments are quite convincing at their core but the reader shouldn't get too caught up in the libertarian perspective of how society should operate as the author ignores cases where experimenting could be obviously dangerous, in medicine and weapons. Nonetheless the author concludes by making his points explicit, with the direction of the planet in such a worrisome trajectory we need more innovation and the conditions of innovation require the government to be more hands off and respect the individual. He cautions us as to the overly litigious nature of western capitalism protecting its monopolies rather than innovating will not be conducive to innovation and that Europe's perspectives are completely archaic and obtuse. The focus on fears of what could go wrong rather than on trying to come up with solutions to things which with almost certainty could be better is a foolish calculus to follow. This lesson is what the book tries to leave the reader with.
Overall the book is enjoyable and certainly informative. My only criticisms are the book leans too far on the lack of spillovers in innovation of any form and certain things are described as innovation which is quite tangential to the core of the book. In particular the discussions of domestication seem out of place. Despite the small issues here and there i think the main lesson of the book is one that should be considered deeply and the author argues his case well. There is much to ponder as the topic of how innovation occurs is rarely written about.
Ridley deserves five stars for writing an engaging and important book. This does not mean that all of his analysis is completely balanced. The book is well researched but also polemical; it makes a case that demands attention. He claims that many inventions are almost inevitable because they are brought on by other developments in science and technology that draw attention to applications. This leads to multiple efforts to develop much the same product. Thus, if A had not invented it, B or C would have come forward with the same idea. He advances this for Edison’s invention of the incandescent electric light bulb and shows that many others were on the same track. Other examples follow but it is easy to pick the examples that support the argument. My view is that some inventions demand insight and insights are scarce. Consider, for example the pulley. This would have greatly benefited the ancient Egyptians when they were building the first Pyramids but this simple piece of technology arrived 700 years later. And what about the bicycle? The Chinese were manufacturing steel on a large scale by the third century AD and this made a primitive bicycle possible but it did not arrive until 1817. It was only then that the innovators moved in with trial and error improvements in design. Why did it take so long? Well, there is nothing in nature to suggest that a two-wheeled transport could remain in balance. Now, it seems pretty obvious but we have the benefit of hindsight. For flight, the birds presented us with aerofoils but, even here, it was some time before we understood how they worked. How do insights come about? Sometimes, people put existing knowledge together to reach a novel solution but, often, new ideas occur when experience supplies new information. They may acquire experience by trial and error, deliberate investigation, consultation with others or serendipitously. Whatever the source, insights are often needed. This means that, upstream of innovation, we need to work out how to promote new ideas.
Ridley spends some time excoriating the various agencies that impede progress: large businesses defending their existing investments, regulators taking their time, pressure groups advancing a sectional interest and political institutions all collect a share of the blame. I was particularly interested in his account of the somewhat chequered evolution of developments in plant breeding and pest control. Here, resistance to innovations has served Europeans badly, as he demonstrates. The Americans are not suffering from their gene edited varieties and these innovations confer great advantages. By making plants bug-killing, you can avoid using pesticides so that the natural world is less contaminated and by using more productive varieties you can feed the world using less land so that areas can be re-wilded and species preserved. On regulators, Ridley points out the absurdly long time it takes them to assess a new invention. I would add that it takes them just as long to modify a regulation when new developments provide a better alternative. My example is the car mirror system. What is needed here is an integrated display showing rear and side views on one screen inside the car. This can be done with cameras but regulations, at least in the USA, require that all cars should have side view mirrors and this does not help.
Ridley does not deal with psychological evidence on human receptivity and resistance to ideas. There is a substantial literature here including Kahneman’s (2012) Thinking Fast and Slow, Thaler and Sunstein’s (2008) Nudge, and Klein’s (1013) Seeing What Others Don’t. That’s ok; better to leave it to others than to deal with the topic inadequately. I mention this because an understanding of human resistance to ideas is important if we are going to promote innovation. Getting more innovation is what Ridley wants yet he is quite limited on solutions to the problem. He rightly criticises regulators for their slowness and sometimes mistaken judgments but these agencies can also bring about useful change. In Britain, the Right and the Left argue about privatization and nationalization whilst failing to see the important role that regulators have played in enforcing improvement in investment, service punctuality and waste reduction. If these pressures had been applied more rigorously to the previously nationalized industries, they might have performed better. We need to identify the reasons for regulators’ slowness and error and change their remit. My guess is that, currently, the regulator role is overly based on economics. A further matter is the promotion of innovation in Government, I would like to know what changes Ridley would like to see. Representation of business interests through existing ministries may simply support the status quo. What structures would promote the interests of innovators who are yet to be? I hope that Ridley’s book has started this debate. It is one we need.
Ridley argues persuasively progress is driven by innovators, incrementally improving products by trial and error, often working in parallel.
In many cases the science underlying momentous innovations wasn’t understood until years later. The Ottomans took pus from small-pox survivors and mixed in with the blood in scratches on healthy people thereby inoculating them against the deadly disease. Lady Mary Pierrepoint and Zabdiel Boylston brought the practice to the UK and Boston respectively. Initially they were vilified for doing so. They didn’t know why it worked.
Ridley debunks the romanticized notion of the heroic lone ranger making the big breakthrough. While Alexander Graham Bell’s widely hailed as inventing the telephone, Antonio Meucci beat him to the punch and Elisha Gray applied for a telephone patent at the same office Bell did 2 hours later. Thomas Edison is popularly lauded as the father of the light bulb. Ridley notes at least 21 people can lay claim to having independently designed or critically improved incandescent light bulbs by the end of the 1870s. Similarly, many people drawing on an ever-accumulating body of knowledge were involved in developing the steam engine, automobile, and airplane.
Some environments are conducive to innovation, some not.
Freedom is the mother’s milk of innovation, “freedom to exchange, experiment, imagine, invest and fail; freedom from expropriation or restriction by chiefs, priests, and thieves; freedom on the part of consumers to reward innovations they like and reject the ones they do not.”
More interaction between individuals, firms, and markets, begets more innovation. Ridley deliciously characterizes inventions as “ideas having sex.” The possibilities are ever-expanding, building on increasing human knowledge and intercourse.
While in the modern era we tend to take relentless innovation for granted, for most of history there was a dearth of innovation. Homo Erectus walked the Earth 1.9 million years ago. Home Sapiens have been around for 300 thousand years. For more than 99% of history men led short, brutish, and isolated lives. Isolation prevents innovation.
Vested interests in the status quo, the risk averse, and those uncomfortable with novelty, resist innovation.
Heartier and more productive crops have been resisted.
Coffee and coffee shops were initially vigorously resisted in the Middle East and Europe.
Heartier, more productive crops have often struggled to win favor.
While I found it counterintuitive, Ridley makes a strong case tough patents suppress innovation. They curb other innovators’ ability to build on the idea(s). And, patent holders invest inordinate effort defending their patent rights rather than innovating.
Concentrated government and corporate power stifle innovation. Larger states with larger controlling bureaucracies - think the China’s Ming Dynasty, the Soviet Union, and the EU, with less opportunity for innovators to shop for more liberal jurisdictions, and tend, therefore, to stymie innovation. Dominant firms are rarely hotbeds of innovation.
PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel argues the West’s increasing risk aversion stymies big innovation, and that outside the lightly-regulated Internet and software space, we’ve stagnated.
Ridley calls out the EU as embodying risk aversion and systemically suppressing innovation. The EU adheres to “the precautionary principle holding new inventions and innovations are dangerous until proven otherwise. The EU has blocked genetically-enhanced agricultural products.
He observes none of the EU’s 100 most-valuable companies was started in the last 40 years. While becoming less innovation-friendly, during the last 4 decades the US produced PayPal, Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, and Google.
Rigid regulation in the nuclear-power industry has prevented virtually all experimentation by practitioners, the kind of experimentation that’s been the lifeblood of innovation and fueled relentless incremental improvement in other sectors.
“Innovation is the child of freedom and the parent of prosperity.” It matters.
For optimists Ridley is catnip. For those obsessed with man’s limits, Ridley is medicine. Hopefully, policymakers looking to foster innovation have dog-eared copies of How Innovation Works on their nightstands.







