It has been often said that a good implementing team can make even a bad idea succeed, and a bad team can ruin even a good idea, and so ideas by themselves have no value. Of course it is the implementer-types who say this, not the idea-people. But the former end up with all the wealth and the latter are unemployed, so guess whose opinion matters.
Matters!? to whom? 🙂
Some people are gifted at both, and implement their own idea, whether they are ‘inventors’ or ‘entrepreneurs’. However an idea-person (‘luft-mentch’) is inherently impractical, and when they have practical ideas, they do not know how to implement them, nor even ho to go about forming the right team to do so – they are what I call an ‘ideaventor’. And implementors generally implement the ideas of others, they themselves rarely have good ideas, and so are not prone to valuing them. Of course if there were more implementers than ideaventors, their ideas would have value, but it seems that good implementers are even more scarce than ideaventors.
So, the ideaventors’ creative output either needs a more effective vehicle to enable appropriate partnering with implementers, for which see ‘X’ on the menu-bar, or they are relegated to the menu-bar category “Free Ideas”.
Someone will get fabulously wealthy, and humanity will also greatly benefit, when some genius finds a way to harness the power of ideas. Matching idea people to implementors so that no good idea goes to waste or has to wait years or decades to be successfully implemented.
Are there really more good ideas than capable implementors so the latter are indeed rarer and therefore more valuable? Or is the problem in the inadequate matching, or untapped human potential. Or perhaps there is some aspect of implementing which idea-people can be taught to do, to bring their idea to the point where an implementor understands what can be done with it, and how.