As the story goes, when NASA first began sending astronauts into space, they discovered that ball-point pens did not work in zero gravity, since ink would not flow down onto the writing surface.
To solve this problem, NASA spent over 10 years and $12 million funding the development of a pressurized pen that could write in zero gravity, upside down, underwater, on almost any surface including glass and at temperatures ranging from below freezing to over 300 degrees Celsius.
The Russians, on the other hand, simply chose to use pencils.
This story is often told as a joke about the excesses of government bureaucracy and is, in fact, nothing more than an urban legend. However, legend or not, it does raise some questions about the value of invention and innovation.
The moral of the space pen story seems to be that the simple, obvious, mundane solution is the better choice. Why spend millions developing a space pen when you could simply pack a few pencils instead? This seems to resonate with those of us that value simplicity and frugality.
On the other hand, it’s difficult to argue that the invention of the space pen was wholly worthless. After all, a pen that writes underwater and in extreme conditions carries some value. Furthermore, during the development process of such a pen, discoveries and innovations were undoubtedly made that could pave the way for even more advanced creations.
Value is a tricky proposition. How much is something worth? A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, and one man’s trash is another man’s treasure. Innovation is good because it moves us forward – to what end? Would you say that a space pen is worth $12 million and 10 years of work?
My question to you: excluding absurd Japanese inventions, how do we determine the value of an innovation? How do we take into account the long-term effects of an invention? Is it possible to determine and judge the cost of progress?
***
Curiously enough, the space pen does, in fact exist. It was not funded by NASA, nor did it cost $12 million to invent. The pen is, however, used by both NASA and Russian astronauts.
4 Comments on “The Value of Innovation”
says:
Hi Jeffrey,
the question isn't new but it's an important one as discussing and thinking about innovation also makes it possible and adds to its value.
Not sure that there is an answer though. At a given moment it's possible to count the money it did cost and it did bring – but that's only one side of the medal. There are also the aspects of how it changed the life of all the individuals connected and not connected. And then change being a constant in life – the value of whatever innovation we thought about at the beginning – it has already changed since starting writing this comment.
thanks for the invitation to reflect!
says:
This is like asking, what should we risk? That's why they call it risk. We can't know. We can estimate. We can forge ahead and learn as we go. Most of all, we can try to do what we love so that if our estimate is wrong, we haven't wasted our lives.
says:
I think a lot of web and iPhone apps have the space pen problem – mine included! People build technical solutions to problems that are so much more easily solved by old-school offline solutions. I've got into the habit of asking iPhone owners which of their apps they really need, which are so useful they can't live without – I'm yet to find someone who really needs an app for that. They're cool but they are not essential.
says:
I read somewhere that the vast majority of iPhone apps are downloaded, used once, and then never touched again. I guess it speaks to the challenge facing innovators and developers alike – not only creating something new and shiny, but something that will also have enduring usefulness.