A thread on innovation theory pointing out some connections that have been clear in my head for years, but I’m realizing are not even visible to many people interested in the topic. I’m always surprised when I have to point these things out and pass along these references.
-
-
Invariably I find they’ve been doing shallow, dull work aimed at racking up institutional merit points (number of papers/patents, awards etc). They are the Paris Hiltons of innovation. Famous for being famous. A resume stuffed with everything except blue-collar innovation.
Show this thread -
Blue-collar innovators are “new medium pilot plant” producers. Their workspaces/tooling are inbetween basic research labs and scaled production. They produce in small batches not because they have artisan sensibilities but because they’re pushing the scaling limits of new media.
Show this thread -
BCIMINs are the most stimulating and energizing place for most smart, creative, imaginative, and growth-oriented people to participate in. It’s not the rare lightning-strike regime that creates pioneers, nor is it the predictable world of institutions built around stable tools.
Show this thread -
I’d guess 1% of the population will end up as pioneers, 9% as blue-collar innovators, and 90% as mature-institution normies. Of that 90%, a third to half (so 30-45% of total) will be bullshit workers, predators and parasites at maturity. Free riders of one sort or the other.
Show this thread -
This is fine. I approve of non-producing free riders right up to the point that kills the host process of wealth creation. It’s only good wealth if it produces a surplus, and somebody has to consume it. Somebody has to eat all that cake.
Show this thread -
Modern startup ecosystems and open-source communities before large-scale financialization are of course the most familiar example of BCIMINs, but it’s a more general phenomenon. See for example steam engines after James Watt’s patents expired: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23603566?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents …
Show this thread -
Robert Allen called BCIMINs “collective invention settings” (his concept is the basis for the paper above). A more contemporary model is settler phase of Cringley’s pioneer-settler-town planner model which
@swardley incorporated into his mapping model. https://blog.gardeviance.org/2015/03/on-pioneers-settlers-town-planners-and.html …Show this thread -
The model applies to cultural production too. See the idea of scene-hacking from
@sebpaquethttps://www.slideshare.net/mobile/vgururao/scene-hacking …Show this thread -
And to general intellectual production. See Fred Turner on “network celebrity” https://fredturner.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/Turner-Larson-Network-Celebrity-PC-2015.pdf …
Show this thread -
See also
@Meaningness on the underlying social evolution process.https://meaningness.com/geeks-mops-sociopaths …Show this thread -
BCIMINs are a *natural* expression of human motivations. When they are repressed, potential blue-collar innovators turn to crime and other pathological activities. You can’t get rid of the 9%. See this Baumol paper. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2937617?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents …
Show this thread -
For fun fictional portraits of a BCIMIN era, try Terry Pratchett’s Raising Steam or HBO’s Deadwood. Let’s finish with some subtle takeaways.
Show this thread -
1. Innovation watchers often uncritically fetishize either credentialed expertise or unqualified blue-collar doerism. Nope. BCIMINs run on expertise (credentialed or not) *slumming at blue-collar levels*. Get this wrong and you’ll end up either academic posturing or JohnHenryism.
Show this thread -
2. The 90% normies often assume the 1% pioneers are the only ones who matter and form “scenes” of personality cults around them. The 9% BCIMIN types are often viewed with suspicion and become targets of societal policing. This never works. They just turn to crime etc.
Show this thread -
3. Unlike the 1%, who have a love-hate tortured relationship with fame and the attention of the 90%, the 9% neither attract, nor crave the spotlight. But they will not toe the lines or conform to societal norms or social proof either. They’ll tolerate some spotlight as a burden.
Show this thread -
4. They aren’t a community. They are a network of competing/cooperating individuals stealing tricks from each other. Ideas diffuse slowly through the BCIMIN, as each skeptically tests tricks before adopting. It’s not viral meme floods. It’s a slow network with fad defenses.
Show this thread -
All this is fairly well-known and uncontroversial to students of innovation history. But people who enter BCIMINs attracted by 1% personality cults or with an uncritical fetish for either credentials or blue-collarism invariably don’t last. They crash and burn as scenesters.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.