Innovation is not automatically a virtue. It’s not a strategy. It's not a goal.
Ignoring for a moment that about 35% of startups fail directly because there was no market need for their ostensibly innovative product, every professional conversation I've ever been in where innovation has been discussed ultimately just came down to innovation for the sake of innovation. It was just about doing something new, regardless of whether it delivered value or addressed unmet needs.
There was no unsolvable problem that needed an innovative approach. There was no emerging need that required an innovative solution. There was no evolution of the target customer that exposed a marketing gap that could only be filled by innovation.
It was, "Wouldn't it be cool if we did something cool?”
Worse yet, work focused on innovation does nothing more than divert resources, disrupt process, and erode trust — among employees and, occasionally, with customers.
This problem isn’t new. A 2006 article in the Harvard Business Review shared the story of the AlliedSignal (now Honeywell) CEO who, in 2000, "asked the divisions to bring their best ideas for Internet-related innovations to the quarterly budget reviews. Although designated as a priority, these innovation projects were subjected to the same financial metrics the established businesses were. Budgets contained no additional funds for investment; managers working on innovations had to find their own sources of funding through savings or internal transfers. What emerged were often retrofitted versions of ideas that had been in the pipeline anyway."
Decades ago people were already realizing that that mandated innovations produced half-baked or preexisting ideas that weren’t truly novel or valuable.
The article goes on to say, “If new ideas take the form not of distinctive innovations but of modest product variations, the resulting proliferation can dilute the brand, confuse customers, and increase internal complexity—such as offering a dozen sizes and flavors of crackers rather than a new and different snack food.”
I’ve seen this play out firsthand. Companies will spend days workshopping “bold ideas,” only to land on safe, incremental concepts — or nothing at all.
Even though innovation isn’t necessary, companies chase it. And when it might actually matter, they can’t execute it.
I'm not against new ideas; I’m just hoping for a little more discernment. Innovation can be a legitimate tool when it's not treated as an idol to be pursued at the expense of everything else. Marketing especially doesn't need to be innovative. Sometimes the best thing you can do is what everyone else is doing — just better and aligned to actual business goals. You don't need to reinvent the wheel. Just execute the basics. A marketing team with that approach will outperform the scatterbrained innovators they're up against ten times out of ten.
That said, if you are facing some sort of innovation mandate, answering these questions will help make it a more useful exercise:
Does it solve a real customer problem or improve a key metric?
Do we have fundamentals in place so we can afford to experiment?
Is there executive alignment and a plan to operationalize this idea if it actually works?
The next time you're pressured to be more innovative, don't hesitate to ask why. If you don't get satisfactory answers, have the courage to say good enough is good enough. In doing so, you'll be saving time, money, and perhaps your own sanity.
True innovation, the kind that addresses a real need, is great. But it’s rare and it can’t be forced as a top-down mandate. Most of the time, focusing on doing the basics better will yield more benefit than whatever the next big thing is.
If this resonates with you, consider subscribing. Each week I’ll share essays and commentary drawn from today’s marketing trends and my upcoming book Marketing Isn’t Special — all focused on improving how marketing is understood, measured, and valued.
If this doesn’t resonate with you, I would never begrudge someone wanting a less cluttered inbox.
