Multi-disciplinary innovation leadership
A victorian era merging of art and science
Ada Lovelace who is credited with developing the first computer program in the 1800s was the daughter of Lord Byron and therefore fond of poetry (1).
She saw the beauty of the analytical engine that Charles Babbage was developing which led her to think of ways it could be used beyond just making calculations.
The problem was most people could not understand Babbage's lectures.
Ada did.
So, she translated Babbage’s lectures into notes.
As part of her thinking about ways Babbage’s analytic engine, which was one of the first computers, could be applied beyond calculations she included an algorithm in her notes.
That algorithm is considered to be the first computer program.
It was thus transdisciplinary thinking that led to the idea that a calculating machine could be programmed to do more.
A modern merging of art and science
A similar merging of art and science would lead to another set of step changes in computers when Steve Jobs married the concepts of user-centered design with the engineering of computers. Jobs considered the interface between art and technology his focus (2).
How can the examples of Lovelace and Jobs help deal with the complexity of life science and healthcare? By blending disciplines of poetry/math, and design/technology engineering they both were able to drive stakeholder-centered innovation. There is so much complexity that one could easily argue it is best to focus on what you know. Focus on your discipline.
Yet Lovelace and Jobs are excellent examples.
As innovation leaders, they resisted the tendency to stay in the 'silo' of a given discipline.
They both kicked off periods of advancement characterized by an exponential rate of innovation in computing. The latter of which is continuing even extending beyond computing.
In fact, it is the rapid evolution of computing and digital innovation which is at least in part driving the expectation that there will be a ‘convergence’ of life science and healthcare with other domains in the near future
Innovation is a team sport
Innovation has been called a 'team sport' that amplifies individual effort (3) which is fitting for both the Jobs and Lovelace examples. So, it is important to embrace and at least understand other disciplines than your own.
Innovation leaders don’t push other disciplines off in a corner saying: “I don’t understand this, go deal with it and bring me back the solution.”
Instead, they engage in the process of integration. They develop a level of literacy about other disciplines that enables them to contribute to problem-solving and idea generation across disciplines (3).
This is why the New England Journal of Medicine touted academic, industry, and disease foundations collaborations as the new way to develop therapies (4).
What if you choose to remain in your silo? You risk that your efforts become less relevant. Or at least as Harald Schmidt (5) points out you will just be contributing to a self-sustaining bubble of publications that have no meaningful clinical impact.
How do you develop your multi-disciplinary innovation leadership skills? There is no better way to learn how to become a multidisciplinary leader than getting involved in a multi-stakeholder collaborative project where you work with other disciplines and different types of stakeholders to solve difficult problems.
Where do you find multi-stakeholder collaborative projects?
We have developed the BioPharma X translational ecosystem concept to make it straightforward for industry, disease foundations, and academics to begin to work together immediately. Learn more.
We will also be launching a podcast, Beyond Publications, where we discuss what it is to be a multi-disciplinary innovation leader in life science and healthcare. If you comment or like this post on Linked In we’ll add you to the list of people we will give advanced notice and some ready-made social media material.
____________________________
(1) The Innovators, Walter Issacson, Simon and Schuster
