The Issue of "Innovation" within the Tech Industry.

"Innovation" is a word that gets thrown around quite frequently nowadays. As someone pursuing a career in STEM, I can't tell you just how many times I've been lectured about the importance of being "forward-thinking" and "innovative." But what is innovation really, and what does it truly mean to be innovative? Well, if you asked someone how they would define innovation, they'd likely tie it to originality or big tech somehow. This is not a surprise. Many people tend to conflate innovation with novelty, and novelty with the development of new, advanced technological applications. Here's why I have a problem with that.

Prior to attending UCLA, I came from a very small, liberal-arts, all girls high school. Both my parents attained degrees in the humanities, and neither knows much about the tech industry. So although I had long been fascinated by technology and the vast world it encompasses, subconsciously, I initially foreclosed myself of the possibility of pursuing any sort of career in tech because I honestly believed that I didn't have the qualifications for it. In a world where innovation has become somewhat synonymous with complex technological interfaces/ideas, its very concept has become a barrier for those lacking in technical experience from exploring and breaking into the industry. Nowadays, many people believe that unless they're some sort of CS genius, they could never hope to create or even be a major part of something society deems innovative. Of course, this couldn't be any further from the truth.

First of all, something I've been extremely relieved to learn over the course of the past year and a half is that the tech industry involves so much more than just software and hardware engineering. In fact, many big tech concepts aren't even heavily math-based, and often don't require any programming knowledge to understand because they're fairly theoretical. For a field which employs so many engineering and mathematical practices, I was surprised by just how conceptual, abstract, and even philosophical the realm of technology and computer science can actually be. I cannot stress this enough: You don't need to know how to code in order to pursue a career in tech.

Secondly, one of the main reasons why I dislike the word "innovation" is because in reality, the tech and startup industries aren't even about innovation; they're about implementation. In today's society, nothing is inherently original. Everything is essentially just a re-hashed presentation of a concept that already exists. What these industries actually revolve around is optimization. Whoever can take an idea and implement it in the most streamlined, intuitive, and effective way will profit.

Take Uber for example. Uber didn't invent the concept of ride-sharing. Ride-sharing has existed for decades in the form of taxis and other private ride hailing services. Clearly, there's nothing particularly innovative about Uber's base-concept. Their "innovation" lies not within their originality of idea, but rather within their implementation of it. What Uber did was identify pain points within the existing ride-sharking market, developed a model that would improve upon already existing services, marketed its platform as a solution to consumers' pains, and grew into a powerhouse company that way.

Let's go a step further and look at the successes of American entrepreneur Whitney Wolfe Herd, the former vice president of marketing at Tinder, and the current CEO and founder of Bumble. At only 31 years old, she's served as a driving force for success behind two of the biggest/fasting growing companies in the last decade, and yet admitted herself that not only did she have little to no technical expertise, but she also wasn't even particularly interested in technology upon her initial ventures with both companies. Similarly to Uber, what vaulted Wolfe Herd to success wasn't originality or a breakthrough discovery in technology, but rather her identification of a major user pain point and her determination to solve it. Her idea for Bumble stemmed from her disgust regarding the unchecked harassment of women online, inspiring her to create a platform where women would hold power over who they connected with, therefore reducing the amount of harassment they'd receive while using the app. Given that Bumble was developed after major dating app platforms like Tinder and OkCupid already existed, once again, its base concept is nothing inherently innovative. What separates it from its competition and allows it to thrive is -- you guessed it: it's implementation of concept.

What I'm trying to get at is this: what really matters isn't innovation, but implementation. You don't have to be a software engineer, know how to code, or be a genius inventor to develop something big. Honestly, as cliché as it sounds, all it really takes is curiosity, drive, research, and some strategic analysis -- all of which are skills that anyone is capable of possessing and honing over time. If you can think critically, identify problems, and propose efficient solutions to them, then you most definitely can break into technology or entrepreneurship. You don't have to do the most and you don't have to come up with some crazy, out of the box idea to create something worthwhile. New isn't better. Crazy isn't better. Only better is better. Innovation is less about originality, and more about one's creativity in improving upon what already exists. If you have an idea that could potentially solve a problem, even if it seems basic or trite, explore it. After all, it's only through experimenting and re-orienting our views of the seemingly mundane that breakthroughs can occur. Coming from a college student who came up with her current startup idea simply by observing people in grocery stores and talking to them, trust me: You really might just be surprised at what you'd find.