Innovation and Evidence as Partners
The narration between entries paraphrases; it never reads an entry aloud before the entry plays. Every entry in this lecture plays exactly as it does on its own page — same file, same speed, nothing laid over it.
What you can do after this
- Say what gap this unit addresses, and how it differs from the research-practice gap
- Name the three activities in the innovation triad and say why they are simultaneous
- Name the three properties of a wicked problem
- Say what it means to challenge the evidence without ignoring it
- Say why complexity does not mean anything might work
What it covers
25 entries in 7 topics. Each number links to that entry on its own.
-
1. Evidence and innovation together
-
2. Complex adaptive systems
-
3. Wicked problems
-
4. Complexity leadership
-
5. The innovator role
-
6. The three canonical errors
-
7. A wicked problem, worked
Check yourself
How does the gap in this unit differ from the research-practice gap?
The research-practice gap sits between what is known and what is done. This one sits between what the evidence supports and what has not yet been invented. They call for different responses — the first for implementation, the second for innovation.
What are the three activities in the triad, and why do they run at once?
Innovation creates what is new, renovation improves what exists, exnovation removes what should stop. They run simultaneously rather than in sequence, which is what makes them hard to manage — an organisation is always doing all three at different points.
What are the three properties of a wicked problem?
It is unclear in aims as well as in solutions, so you cannot say precisely what success looks like. It admits no risk-free attempts, because every attempt changes the situation and there is no returning to the start. And it has no final solution — only better and worse states.
What does challenging the evidence mean, as distinct from ignoring it?
Questioning the evidence with reasons, openly, and remaining answerable for the questioning. Ignoring it is proceeding as though it were not there. The two look identical from outside and are opposite in kind, which is why the course states the difference rather than assuming it.
Why does complexity not mean anything might work?
Because unpredictability is not permission. Complexity means you cannot reliably predict an action's outcome from the action; it does not mean all actions are equally reasonable. It constrains what is worth trying rather than removing the constraint.
Lecture transcript
The narration as recorded, in order. Where an entry plays, the transcript links to it rather than reprinting it — the entry plays from its own file, unaltered, and says the same thing on its own page.
This is the shortest unit in Part 2 and the most conceptually awkward, because it asks you to hold two things the rest of the course has kept apart: evidence, and doing something nobody has evidence for yet. The gap here is not the research-practice gap. It is the space between what the evidence supports and what has not been invented — and the claim is that innovation is what happens at the edge of the evidence rather than in its absence. That distinction carries the whole unit. By the end you can say what gap this addresses; name the three activities in the innovation triad and why they run at once; name the three properties of a wicked problem; say what challenging the evidence means as distinct from ignoring it; and say why complexity does not license trying anything.
Five videos. The gap this unit addresses is not the research-practice gap — it is the space between what evidence supports and what has not yet been invented.
The unit's thesis.
EBP 1801 Evidence and Innovation Are Partners
Evidence and innovation are presented as partners rather than as opposites.
The problem it addresses.
EBP 1802 The Gap This Addresses
A gap between what evidence supports and what has not yet been invented, which is not the research-practice gap.
The named dynamic.
EBP 1803 The Cybernetic Evidence-Innovation Dynamic
A feedback relationship in which evidence and innovation each shape the other continuously.
A triad of three activities.
EBP 1804 Innovation, Renovation, and Exnovation
Creating what is new, improving what exists, and removing what should stop. The chapter's own definitions are not legible here, so the course names them without defining them.
How the three relate in time.
EBP 1805 All the Time, Not in Turn
The three happen at once rather than in sequence, which is what makes managing them difficult.
Two videos on the frame. The property that matters is that an intervention changes the thing it acts on, so the system you measured is not the system you are now in.
The frame the chapter uses.
EBP 1806 The Complex Adaptive System
Healthcare treated as a system whose parts adapt to each other, so an intervention changes what it acts on.
What acts on it from outside.
EBP 1807 Environmental Forces
Forces from outside the organisation that shape what is possible inside it.
Four videos on a technical term. Watch the second property — every attempt changes the situation, so there is no trying something and returning to the starting position.
A named class of problem.
EBP 1808 Wicked Problems
Problems with no settled definition and no final solution, which most healthcare problems turn out to be.
Their first property.
EBP 1809 Unclear in Aims and in Solutions
Wicked problems are unclear about what success would look like as well as how to reach it.
The second.
EBP 1810 No Risk-Free Attempts
Every attempt changes the situation, so you cannot try something and return to the starting position.
The third.
EBP 1811 No Final Solution
There is no point at which a wicked problem is solved. There are only better and worse states.
Six videos. The last is the uncomfortable one: courage to challenge the evidence, which is not the same as ignoring it and is very easily mistaken for it.
The leadership this calls for.
EBP 1812 Complexity Leadership
Leading in conditions where the outcome of an action cannot be predicted from the action.
Its first requirement.
EBP 1813 Reflection and Ego Management
Reflecting on your own part in the situation, and managing the ego that resists doing so.
The second.
EBP 1814 Appreciative Inquiry and Emotional Competence
Starting from what is working rather than from what is broken, with the emotional competence that requires.
The third.
EBP 1815 Creativity and Open Dialogue
Conditions in which people will say what they actually think about a problem nobody has solved.
The fourth.
EBP 1816 Mindful of the Gaps
Attending to what is missing from the picture rather than only to what is in it.
The requirement that unsettles people.
EBP 1817 Courage to Challenge the Evidence
Willingness to question the evidence itself, which is not the same as ignoring it and is easily mistaken for it.
Four videos. The role is named rather than described as a personality, which means it can be occupied deliberately and by anyone.
The role named.
EBP 1818 The Innovator Role
A named role rather than a personality type, which means it can be occupied deliberately.
Who can hold it.
EBP 1819 Any Point on the Continuum
The role can be held at any level of an organisation, not only at the top.
Its character.
EBP 1820 Fluid, Flexible, and Mobile
The role moves between people and situations rather than being assigned permanently.
The structure that supports it.
EBP 1821 Shared Governance
A governance structure distributing decision authority, so the people closest to the work can act.
Three videos, and all three are misreadings of the same thing — treating uncertainty as permission.
The first error.
EBP 1822 Misconception: Innovation Is What You Do Without Evidence
Innovation is not the absence of evidence. It is what you do at the edge of it, which is a different position entirely.
The second.
EBP 1823 Misconception: Wicked Means Difficult
Wicked is a technical term about the structure of a problem, not a description of how hard it is.
The third.
EBP 1824 Misconception: Complexity Means Anything Might Work
Unpredictability is not permission. Complexity constrains what is reasonable to try; it does not remove the constraint.
One procedure approaching a problem without pretending it can be closed.
The unit assembled.
EBP 1825 Working an Unclosable Problem
One wicked problem approached without pretending it can be solved, using appreciative inquiry and distributed authority.
That is innovation and evidence as partners. Against the outcomes. The gap here is between what evidence supports and what has not yet been invented. It is not the research-practice gap, and confusing the two produces a plan for the wrong problem. Innovation, renovation and exnovation — creating, improving, removing — happen simultaneously rather than in sequence, which is exactly what makes them hard to manage together. A wicked problem is unclear in its aims as well as its solutions, admits no risk-free attempts because every attempt changes the situation, and has no final solution — only better and worse states. Challenging the evidence means questioning it, with reasons, in the open. It is not ignoring it, and the distinction matters because the two look identical from the outside and are opposite in kind. And complexity does not mean anything might work. Unpredictability is not permission — it constrains what is reasonable to try rather than removing the constraint. Unit 14 turns to the models that guide implementation and sustainability.
This is free, and stays free. If it helped, here is what keeps it running.