Creative People Must Be Stopped Read Online Free Page A

constraints are not all created equal. Instead, any given innovation is likely to satisfy several constraints (including the ones we intuitively see as important, and therefore pay attention to) but fail on one or more critical constraints (often ones we have failed to take into account). Identifying those showstopping constraints will further sharpen our understanding of why a particular innovation succeeds or fails.
    One example of using the framework in this way concerns the early development of a product called Sow-N-Gro. The product comes in the form of a spongy black round mat about a half-inch thick and available in a variety of diameters ranging from about six to about twelve inches. This mat is made of organic materials and is intended for the inside bottom of pots that contain potted plants. According to the product packaging, the Sow-N-Gro material “retains moisture, promotes root growth, [and] releases nitrogen.” The individually packaged mats were to be offered at a very economical price in the home and urban gardening enthusiast market.
    At first glance, this innovative product, assuming it does what the packaging claims, would seem destined for immediate success, particularly in a segment of society that harbors increasing concerns about synthetic chemicals and excessive fertilizer use. Unfortunately, early success was elusive. A simple pass through the constraint analysis will show why.
    At the individual level, someone had come up with a promising idea and recognized it as a good one, so it seems that individual constraints were met. Inasmuch as the innovation made it all the way from the “aha!” moment to production, we have to assume that it survived group constraints and won backing from people who helped fund and develop the idea. The Sow-N-Gro organization was created to commercialize the concept, and it possessed the skills and resources necessary to manufacture the material and get it in front of the retailers and distributors who would facilitate retail sale and adoption. This suggests that organizational constraints were met. The material was abundant, and the processes for matting and packaging it were relatively inexpensive. Because it had never been used in this industry before, it had no direct competitor in the “no chemicals” home gardener market, thus satisfying the industry constraints. The fiber was easily sterilized and therefore met all health code requirements that might impede importing it into the United States, thereby meeting a key societal constraint.
    Despite all this, Sow-N-Gro didn’t fly off the shelves. The product exists, meets a real need, is priced right, and can’t be faulted for failing to do what it promised. The problem is with the last step—adoption by the intended users. But where exactly had the innovator and the organization gone wrong?
    Clues to the answer may lie in the negative reaction Sow-N-Gro elicits from people when I pass samples around in seminars and workshops. At first, when I pass the disk around the room and people look at it, sniff it, and feel it, they are mostly sold. Where can they buy some of these organic plant disks? they ask. Then I show them the product packaging. As that gets passed around, there is invariably a gasp as someone reads the statement of what the product contains. It proudly states, “Sow-N-Gro is 100% Recycled Human Hair.” Suddenly the enthusiasm for the product vaporizes. The poor person holding the material at the moment involuntarily flings the mat onto the floor in disgust. No one seems to want anything more to do with it after that (except to make jokes about one of the bald men in attendance).
    These admittedly unscientific samplings of potential customers’ reactions point to the showstopping constraint that the makers of Sow-N-Gro failed to anticipate. We clearly have a problem when an innovation’s intended customers say “Yuck!” and fling the product to