Topic: Companies aren't responsible for innovation, consumers are (Read 731 times)

But companies are responsible to the customers if only they want more customers. The world we live in has many companies in many business, even the biggest company in the world apple has to worry about microsoft being better on their computer parts and samsung being better on their mobile phone world. It means everyone needs to keep innovating in order to keep beating each other and making more profits.

If you stop innovating for a year or two than the other companies will become much better than you and you will have to find a way to innovate a lot faster and be better than them. So, as you can see yes the customers are responsible for innovating if it means purchasing the most improved product instead of the old product but the companies are responsible to innovate in order to be the best and get the customers.

They have both responsible of innovations. They so it hand and hand. Maybe your right consumer will have to buy what is needed and in course of time they will tend to find a new and better products. In this situations, the company would think a new and better products to satisfy the needs of their consumer. They are the one  who will promote this new innovations for the acknowledgement of their consumers. So this two factors are indeed important in balancing the market.

Why blame the consumers?
If you have the right features for a project then I am sure people will go for it. There is now social media who can help a lot if you want a project to be funded by the community.
Big investors will be next to it when it is seen as being hyped by most people.

I have seen a lot who does like that. They dont pay for ads but yet they have buyers.
Have fairh with people, they are getting wise now.

I agree, its not a cycle since we are not coming back from the old habit, we are continuously growing in terms of the technology. Companies innovate for us, and as a consumer we have no choice but to adopt it. Most especially in cellphone innovation, we don’t really need much of the features of every phone, and yet companies innovate for us and most people love to adopt it.

Cryptocurrency has a great ambition, and this is why it continues to innovate through altcoins and many more. This is a growing market now, its not responsible for any financial changes and yet cryptocurrency are doing its best to provide a quality service for us, and many investors loves to adopt that technology.

Noone is resopnible for anything. It is basic economics, the demand and competition is the dricing force behind innovation and technolgical advance which leads in fast depreciation of electonics since everyone is pushing to the next level , constantly.

Someone just gave a good reply to this, not every innovation had the consumers in mind. Even Satoshi never had in mind that Bitcoin will go this far cause what he wanted was something that can be used from peertopeer but later on a lot of people adopted the use of cryptocurrency. And now you can see how far the technology has achieved and even investors has taken over and invests millions of dollars on it.

Well for me, this theory works like these two things are compulsory for one another. There can’t be success and progressive race until innovation and consumers aren’t contributing towards one another stake. Companies are the models that provide services for consumers, they utilize it and then in turn, innovation progresses. For the time being, these three have to work in parallel.

I think innovation really comes from companies and the consumers supports it. I mean consumers didn't create a smart phone, companies did. Because consumers are dictated with what they want and what they need. We have become effective sheeps for these companies. I mean since when did we need filters for our pictures?

One of the biggest challenges of companies is to create things that people do not realize they actually need. We now live in a highly competitive world. If companies only create things that people ask for, that wouldn't result to much. Just look at VR devices. Nobody asked for them but someone thought of creating them. Now, there are already a lot of companies who if not in gaming are using it in education, training, and healthcare. Big companies CREATE a need. I used to work for a huge company that actually have a quarterly competition open to everyone to submit innovative ideas - and most of them are actually great, things that the normal consumer wouldn't even think of asking from a tech company.

I agree with you but not completely. Because even though customer's demand pushes the companies to go further but also companies need to think outside the box beforehand to stay alive in the market which helps in innovation.

I do not think there is a pasue button for technological innovations. Human beings are curious and will always demand more in life and that will force more innovation, as the cycle continues.

That's the power of marketing. For example girls buy iphone's latest models just to hold them lol, the only function they use is selfie camera, instagram and facebook, I highly believe 99% have never used NFC or really need A11 Bionic chip or have any imagination on jailbreaking and etc. For them it's main features are camera and wireless connection to upload photos.
On another hand you are true, for example two or three camera on one smartphone, those new, wide screens are invented for years but to make things innovative and give us a reason to buy, they implement everything very lately. This cyclr will never end, especially now when economics is everything.

This question is not objective enough. First of all, consumers are passive and most people accept it. The technology giant is not not innovative but it is very difficult to innovate. You must know that this is very ideal, but you don't have to worry about the breakthrough speed of technology.

As the quote goes "necessity is the mother of all inventions" and we as the consumer creates the demand for the necessity of our daily lives. Just like the necessity of our communication that's why telephone and any wireless messaging was created and the company continue to innovate to develop further the quality of communications. So in every products and technologies were created to address the needs of the consumer. Just like for energy demand, people want some cheap and high efficient power generation demand so that's why solar power plants and other renewable energies were reproduced. The bottom line is we, the consumer are the responsible for the innovation and inventions.

The consumers are the endusers of the products ,and they can suggest and demand what they want from the product suppliers , so it is the responsibility of the companies to accept the demand and likes of the customers or cunsumers , so they would have to adopt the new innovation in order that the endusers would patronized their products, it is the same with cryptocoins the management team would have  to response for some innovation in order for the customers to be satisfied and continuecto invest for this kind of altcoins.

I am agree with your opinion. Company have R&D division and funded well. Technology always improves and cryptocurrency is one of technology result. Consumerism sometimes good for technology because people always make innovation to fill consumerism need

I think both of them are responsible for creating innovative products, I agree that there won't be any supply without any demand, but even if there's demand there is no guarantee that the companies going to supply, companies work based on the demand volume and how big is the profit

in my opinion, blockchain technology and cryptocurrency can solve this problem, I think blockchain technology is very safe because so far no hackers have succeeded in hacking blockchain technology, that's why I believe in blockchain technology

And it will make our self less since we will not be responsible enough since we rely on robots now. It maybe good to some who are too busy, but it might be manipulated too much in a wrong ways. Though it's a thing now to adopt and get advance since were in tech era.

Technology will ruin many things as well as solve many things. Imagine that robot will do your job without sleeping, eating and relaxing. Then why does the world need you? Existing more intelligent robots than us will make us meaningless. This is actually a good thing, but it will become increasingly boring.

Based on your title that the consumers are responsible for innovation and not the tech companies I would say that it is 50% true. Why you may ask? Well let us see it from this perspective companies are the ones that make the product that the consumers buy and for the to stay at the top the company would need to make and release a better product, so both goes hand in hand as the consumers would want to have new technology at their hands companies will have to create them using the fund that they have collected from the consumers.

However for real innovation in technology to be created competition is also the key as if there is no competition in the market then the company that owns the product can monopolize the market space and just milk the consumers by giving small innovations. A great example here is Intel, because they have owned the greatest market share over the last decade since AMD cannot compete with the products they have until Ryzen they are milking the consumers for years with their I series that consumers are willing to pay for a price thus no great innovation was provided. And when innovation came to their competitor they are having a hard time releasing products that can compete to it.

It can be thought that way. The products are made to meet the demands of the consumers. So their needs are the reason behind the invention of new products. And on the demand of the products, vary the value of the coins.

Look at what hatshepsut93 is posting, its evolution and many other things
thrown into the mix. Tech companies are already trying to make their
flagship models the best they can be but its a constant competition.


Totally agree, we want the latest thing which is created by popular brands.
They make the latest versions and people respond.

Technology innovation is a necessity in modern life. Consumers have to learn about innovations related to their work and their field. Companies have almost no responsibility for innovation. Investing in electronic money also requires you to approach new changes.

I agree. I have this mental thinking tht bitcoin is created to satisfies the need of peopl in which we people are looking forore instant way of investing amd also doing transactions. That is why there is a huge possibility that bitcoin will be the new currency, worldwide currency, because of its characteristics.

Well, the companies are the one doing the implementation of the project while the customers are the one giving the idea to the company as to what they should be doing that's why there are surveys always and innovation doesn't stop because there is always a new idea popping up. Even those company giants who are in the top are always doing something new because they cannot sustain their position if they would make people be bored and if they don't offer something new that would make people excited.

They wouldn't have had the budgets to put into research and development and have the motivation to scale their products and make them cheaper if large amounts of people weren't able to purchase them. All major innovations start with raw ideas. But they still definitely take human nature into account or they would never succeed.

Off course the ideas actually comes from the people who are using the stuff around the world. I mean they are the practical user of it and thus they know it better and know very well what should be the modification within the products and services they use. Even when we are with our friends and speaking about any subject then everyone starts giving out their own opinion about it and over the time these are the opinion which becomes the core of new ideas. Soon someone who is into the innovation and techs will capture such ideas and will pass it onto real world desires. Surely this correlation is perfect one.

Why would you think the consumers are responsible for innovation. Innovation gets into a cycle in big companies and they basically spew out "new" looking old things that is basically not even considered innovation so companies and consumers are not doing anything on that part.

If you want to see innovation take a look at the new stuff coming out not the old companies, look at the companies that create new things, for example oculus rift and all the VR stuff in the world started out but moving along very slowly however they are making stuff that makes you "smell" and "feel" with a clothing that will make you get cold or feel hot depending on what you play.

Now, no consumer asked for this, it is of course amazing but we didn't really said "I will only buy if you create this" but they are innovating anyway, why ? Because, they know they can and it would be an improvement. True innovation lies in the creators mind that says "I can make this better".

Companies always create their product and develop them for the consumers. So, in a way, the consumers are completely responsible for all the innovations and newly invented methods that the companies are coming up with.

Some small things from my experience, if you work in a goods or service company they get more innovations to create because of what they see from consumers and UX. If you are discussing about smartphones, actually every big company already has very end technology in creating smartphones, here they only use technology that can be said to be in the middle and add features according to their target customers, the company focuses on value for consumers, that is why smartphones have several series.

Not really the case all the time. For example, in the smartphone industry, we have different phones with different features that some were not influenced by the consumer. We have the notch now in smartphones and apple was the one who started that and some people seem to like it. The bottom line, the responsibility of innovation is neither on the shoulders of consumer nor the company rather they are shared.

I agree to the assertion the assertion that consumers are the ones majorly responsible for innovations.
Companies can only executive the innovations after they must have collected feed backs regarding their products via questionaires.

I guess it works both ways. If the consumers didn't need it then why would the companies innovate new technologies. And sometimes the innovators invent something we didn't even know we needed.

Not necessarily. Take the latest iPhone versions as an example. Did the people demand for AR capability or the Face ID or even the stupid memoji? I don't think so. The company provides technology that they think the consumers need, not necessarily because there's a demand for it.

By introducing new technologies or products in the market you actually make an virtual need for things.m For example if you have the latest phone model there will be a need for apps, electric charger (car and DC), memory cards, software for the device, and i dont need the accessory that comes with it. The problem is that the tech giants try to make our life too comfortable and at some point it will become a problem reflected in our health.

The need creates for more need and it generates the idea. Yes, off course this is completely true that whenever new idea happens to get created in the market then  surely someone is always out there who makes it reality and this is where comes an innovation of something and with the time they make it into a technology or product which can be consumed by the consumers who always wanted to have it. The companies are just trying to set the businesses and make their customers happy and thats the goal will always see in any management learnings also.

They do innovation but the ideas for innovation came from the consumers in short. Therefore we can say that the companies only provide what the consume need in order to give satisfaction that is why they thend to do a lot of research and innovate things up.

You might think it wrong. They are doing that using the consumers money and by getting any suggestion from other people.

This might be the case of some. However, I do think that companies really are one step ahead of the game. That's why most tech giant has this so called "R&D" Department. Primary look for innovations,  and of course how they're going to satisfy their customers. And if they did discover new technology, then I'm sure that consumers are going to buy it because its the hottest trend. And it there's no demand, then they can easily created what we call "customer demand" and then the cycle continuous.

If the technology can solve some problems without denying, it can also create new ones.
It increased productivity but decreased employment and household income. Adding the inflation, I don't see how great it is for the average Joe.
In the medical industry, there is no doubt that technology is a must and we should be happy with the progress done still now.



Watch this video talk https://www.ted.com/talks/jason_pontin_can_technology_solve_our_big_problems

This is so far away from the truth.Just read some Steve Jobs interveiws or quotations.He says that consumers just don't know what they want and it's pointless to execute consumer research surveys.
The big corporations can create demand using marketing and advertising,so your point ins't valid.

There is no cycle like that but there is some correlation between the consumers and innovator for sure. This is not a cycle for two directional communication which leads to creation of bridge. In this bridge the tech stands at mid-point and consumer and innovator on the both end. Investors are making deals for the purpose of profiting and the end user tries to lead innovation by giving feedbacks and trying to increase their comfort level. Now this is sensed by innovator create the idea. So there does exist a portion of people called as investor who are the one you referring to as consumers but they are agin third parties here according to me. They never use the techs, they just profit themselves.

There are statistics relating to how economic productivity has roughly doubled from the 1950s leading up to the present. This implies a worker in 2018 is twice as productive as a worker in 1950 working the same number of hours at the same job. Rising productivity is correlated with technological advancement and improvement in various methodologies utilized across industry.

If wealth and wage inequality were equivalent to what it was in 1950 the average worker would likely have a much easier time affording healthcare, housing, higher education. Standard of living would be higher. The average work day could be shorter. I think everyone knows distribution is the most relevent stat when it comes to productivity, wealth, wages and their link to overall qualify of life. We've seen the distribution of wealth shift dramatically towards the most wealthy demographic over the past 70 years, a shift which has nullified any gains which otherwise might have trickled down.

"The aim of industry is not primarily to satisfy essential human needs with a minimal productive effort, but to multiply the number of needs, factitious and fictitioius, and accommodate them to the maximum mechanical capacity to produce profits. These are the sacred principle of the power complex. Not the least effort of this system is that of replacing selectivity and quantitative restriction by indiscriminate and incontinent consumption.  --Lewis Mumford"

One of the issues (as mentioned by Lewis Mumford above) is the artificially built in tendency to deliberately create inefficiency and waste in global supply chains, manufacturing processes and elsewhere to inflate profits. This trend runs contrary to technological progress advancing to a point where people might gain greater individual independence and not rely as much on corporations, jobs or governments as providers.

Suffice it to say there are a number of forces in opposition or support of each other and like some quasi form of feng shui how those energies align or interact is difficult to predict. Circumstances could easily develop one way, only to influence a strong counter movement which could have a net opposite effect. From a physics perspective we might project upper limits of energy generation, food production and similar stats to illustrate a portrait of what type of technology would be necessary for people to be self sufficient in a way which breaks the traditional producer -> consumer paradigm we have enjoyed throughout history.

Anyways I'm sure everyone got bored and didn't bother to read this so hopefully it was worth something.

Technology is coming not only from the demand, but also from the companies' motivation too when they are producing the goods. So I disagree if it is said that consumers the only one who is responsible for innovation, no. It's companies and consumers' responsibility since they are in the same circle that depends on each other to keep their existence.   

Part of it is true due to the nature of consumers: they tend to ask for more than what they should receive and in order to keep their peers coming back, companies deliver. Some companies, on the other hand think outside the box and deliver innovation that the consumers never asked, and after some time the consumer slowly accepted and praised the said innovation. With that being said, merchant-consumer relationship is, at most times symbiotic since the merchants provide what the consumer needs, and in turn, the consumers support the merchants' products.

Companies just provide what their customers need.
They innovate and make researches to provide better services and better products.
It is not a cycle, it is a continuous work and each invention leads to another.

If there is need for something then someone will try to find that but in the modern corporate world lot of products were found and we are convinced by them to use that but we don't have any useful from that product when we research about it carefully.

As far as I'm concerned, companies must focus on developing to meet the needs of the consumer. Therefore to change the trend of continuous development, we must rely on more money. So Bitcoin economy has changed your how you have to understand investing in Bitcoin for the development of its capital for future profitable growth.

They wouldn't have had the budgets to put into research and development and have the motivation to scale their products and make them cheaper if large amounts of people weren't able to purchase them. In this case, smartphone use wouldn't be possible unless internet connectivity and accessibility weren't widespread, which is also driven by consumer demand.

If a company made a be-all and end-all smartphone, they would go out of business. There always has to be room for more growth and more scalability. People have bills to pay and more things to buy.

I agree that all major innovations start with raw ideas, but they still definitely take human nature into account or they would never succeed. Satoshi had a genius idea because people hate being dependent on things they can't control.

That's not exactly how it works, technology evolves in many directions. Hardware not only becomes faster, but also more cost-efficient. A decade ago smartphones were for the middle class, today even very poor people in third world countries have them, and functionally there's really not that much difference between them. So, irrational consumerism is not the only reason behind innovation.

Next, if entrepreneurs were only taking existing demand into account, we'd still be living in stone age. All major innovations start with raw ideas without thinking too much about potential users. Satoshi created Bitcoin and showed it to a small group of crypto enthusiasts, he didn't bother spending time on marketing. He knew that if technology is good, people will come on their own, because the word will spread.

Tech giants are usually praised as holding complete responsibility for innovation, but you can' t have supply without demand.

People are programmed to compulsively desire the latest and greatest thing, which is why they are willing to justify working so hard in jobs most of them hate, or trade bitcoin lol.

If this scenario weren't happening, tech companies wouldn't have the budgets to create the incredible technology that we now have.

Where do you think this seemingly endless cycle will lead? Will the technology ever solve so many problems and carry so much value that it would destroy the cycle?