I’m currently reading Jon Gertner’s book about Bell Labs, The Idea Factory (and you should too), and this quote popped out at me. I leave it here for reference.
To those with an open mind, of course, the transistor could be considered a breakthrough of both science and engineering–in effect both a discovery and an invention. What seemed fair to say, though, wast that the transition was not yet an innovation.
The term “innovation” dated back to sixteenth-century England. Originally it described the introduction into society of a novelty or new idea, usually relating to philosophy or religion. By the middle of the twentieth century, the words “innovate” and “innovation” were just beginning to be applied to technology and industry. And they began to fill a descriptive gap. If an idea begat a discovery, and if a discovery begat an invention, then an innovation defined the lengthy and wholesale transformation of an idea into a technological product (or process) meant for widespread practical use. Almost by definition, a single person, or even a single group, could not alone create an innovation. The task was too variegated and involved.
Right now, I know folks struggling with the concept of “translation,” as in translational medicine, the process of taking a scientific biomedical concept and turning it into a practical drug or therapy.
Everyone, from researchers to academic administration to pharma to the National Institutes of Health, are calling for translation. What they mean is innovation, I think.