Proof of Innovation

The Inner Workings of the Collaboration Process

@Barefoot_Traveller via Twenty20

This is an outline forming the basis to a theory of what defines innovation in a collaborative model.

I originally wrote this model in 27th January 2018 when we were forming our early concepts that would eventually build into Polynize.

I’m publishing it now as a reference for future work building on this concept.

Foundation for a Theoretical Model

This Proof of Innovation model is broken into several stages.

The first stage being Validation of Innovation within a collaborative system which works on the following assumptions.

• For Person A’s idea to be valued as ‘innovative’ or at least the basis of a novel idea, it needs to first be validated by at least one other person (Person B)
• For the idea to be collaborative, Person B needs to further edit and add value to the initial idea of Person A.
• That ‘added value’ created by Person B then needs to be accepted by Person A to close the Circuit of Validation.

Understanding collaborative Innovation is very difficult, but one important aspect of the process can be intrinsically understood.

In the model below I define this aspect as a ‘Spark’.

A spark is an intangible brain process that occurs when one individual hears an idea which activates a ‘Spark’ in their own imagination, an internal process which generates further ideas to build on the initial one.

Its this back and forth, this trading of sparks, which is the core abstract function of collaborative innovation, intangible yet understandable.

Basic unit of distributed micro-innovation = a Spark

Note that a Spark is co-authored between two (or more) nodes in the system. A spark has no extrinsic value unless validated by an external node.

Note also that a SPARK is a “loop” — fundamental unit. (Not a “block”).

This process is explained in further detail in the following Validation of Innovation Model (Starts from bottom left)

• Person A has an idea (Inception)
• He communicates that idea (I) via a particular communication Medium (M) to Person B

Person B has 2 possible reactions:

• Either the idea generates no Spark in their imagination (-S) which results in invalidation (-V1) of the idea causing a first order fail (IF)
• Or the idea generates a positive Spark in Person B’s imagination (+S) resulting in a first order Validation(+V1)of the Idea
• From here the Spark (+S) motivates Person B to take Action (A1) towards adding value to the initial idea, generating further value in the idea (IAB)
• Person B then sends his amendments (IAB) back to Person A for review
• Person A has two possible reactions:
• Either the amendments (IAB) to their original idea (I) generates no Spark in their imagination (-S) which results in a second order invalidation (-V2) causing a second order fail(IF2)
• Or the amendments (IAB)generate a positive Spark in Person A’s imagination (+S) resulting in a second order Validation(+Vs)of the Idea

If a second order Validation (+Vs) is generated, then Person A takes second order Action (A2) to further add value to the amended idea (IAB) creating (IAB2)

Person A then returns (IAB2) back to Person B which closes the validation loop between the two parties.

Purpose and Focus

By understanding this simple loop of innovation centred around the ‘spark’, we can build more complex models which generate and value micro-innovations.

Micro-Innovations that can generate micro-payments for their creators and form part of larger innovation marketplace, focused on generating innovations not just for profit, but for the global common good.