Lance Scranton: Innovation in eye of beholder
They present themselves with palpable zeal when we are excited by them and can stand as roadblocks when we find them lacking.
Worse than disagreeing with an idea is to disregard it, especially when it involves the potential for solving an issue or reminding us of what’s important.
Ideas are made up of words and take on a personality, which is why we become so attracted to giving our concepts such earnest-sounding descriptions.
Most of the books I read these days have cool-sounding titles to help support the fact that the idea is truly revolutionary. I read books on education that guarantee to be “innovative” but simply reaffirm the basic fundamental law of teaching: know your stuff, explain it to the kids, figure out what they are struggling with and explain it again so they understand.
I know ... innovative, isn’t it?
I read books that promise to be on the “leading edge” of management trends but turn out to reiterate the fundamental law of leadership: act decently and don’t lie to people because they always seem to find out eventually.
I know … leading edge stuff!
I pore over books that assure a “paradigm shift” in my thinking as it relates to matters of faith, only to confirm that the fundamental law of most belief systems has more to do with making sure I have my own act together and has less to do with critiquing others.
Maybe I could write a book that is an innovative, proven pathway to leading edge, visionary significance and radical transformation. I would title it something like “Practice What You Preach: Substance in a Shallow World — A Model for the Power of Genuine Living.”
It might not be innovative, but it could be a good old-fashioned reminder.
Anyway, that’s what I think.