The Great Man Myth
Really great piece here which critiques the abiding appeal of the Great Man story of technology change. As I argue in Copy Copy Copy and in I’ll Have What She’s Having, innovation is largely about taking stuff that already exists and making it better or at least different.It’s what humanity has done – deliberately or accidentally – for generation after generation.
Jobs is often cited as a Great Man of innovation, but as the piece discusses all of the technologies on which his story is built were created by (teams of) others mostly in the public sector. Elon Musk is today’s version – he alone apparently will save the Space thing. Or the automotive business. Or what ever else he puts his mind to. None of the rest of us have a chance.
It’s an easy story to tell and an easy one for listeners to embrace (our culture loves a good hero’s journey) but it’s really unhelpful to us all.
Why?
- it’s not true and very rarely has been (#copycopycopy has always been the rule)
- it distorts rewards: it encourages the self-styled Great Man who believe they to grab more status and more rewards than are his or her due and it downplays the contribution of the rest of other members of the society (the “shoulders” (NEWTON) on which the innovation is built)
- it degrades the shared space (like the lady argued) and often encourages a squeeze on publicly funded investment which created the environment from which such innovation borrows. Why bother funding such things, if the actions of the heroes are all that count?
Comments