Something Really New: Three Simple Steps to Creating Truly Innovative Products


CEO Refresher The Best Books of 2007

Product innovation is the key to business growth. But many books deal with innovation from the business process view alone, or confuse innovation with creativity. Written by an innovation expert whose products generate more than one billion dollars in annual revenue, Something Really New introduces a straightforward but powerful framework for creating exciting new product and service concepts ... simply by ...

See more details below
Available through our Marketplace sellers.
Other sellers (Hardcover)
  • All (10) from $1.99   
  • New (3) from $5.95   
  • Used (7) from $1.99   
Sort by
Page 1 of 1
Showing 1 – 2 of 3
Note: Marketplace items are not eligible for any coupons and promotions
Seller since 2015

Feedback rating:



New — never opened or used in original packaging.

Like New — packaging may have been opened. A "Like New" item is suitable to give as a gift.

Very Good — may have minor signs of wear on packaging but item works perfectly and has no damage.

Good — item is in good condition but packaging may have signs of shelf wear/aging or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Acceptable — item is in working order but may show signs of wear such as scratches or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Used — An item that has been opened and may show signs of wear. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Refurbished — A used item that has been renewed or updated and verified to be in proper working condition. Not necessarily completed by the original manufacturer.

0814400329 Brand new, Unopened, may have very slight shelf wear. Excellent Customer Service. Ships Quickly.

Ships from: Venice, FL

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
  • Express (AK, HI)
Seller since 2015

Feedback rating:


Condition: New

Ships from: Ronkonkoma, NY

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Canadian
  • International
  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
Page 1 of 1
Showing 1 – 2 of 3
Sort by
Sending request ...


CEO Refresher The Best Books of 2007

Product innovation is the key to business growth. But many books deal with innovation from the business process view alone, or confuse innovation with creativity. Written by an innovation expert whose products generate more than one billion dollars in annual revenue, Something Really New introduces a straightforward but powerful framework for creating exciting new product and service concepts ... simply by asking three essential questions.

From an electronic hotel kiosk that provides return airline boarding passes for guests, to something as mundane as the evolution of the toaster, the book provides entertaining, illuminating examples that show how to determine what customer needs aren’t being met, using simple methods to arrive at revolutionary conclusions. For example, “What is a product really used for?” The question may seem elementary, but the right answer is far from obvious. This and other key questions demonstrate how readers can move beyond mere market research to get to the root of real innovation. Practical and eye-opening, this book shows companies how to take the kind of startling leaps that will leave their competition in the dust.

Read More Show Less

Editorial Reviews

From the Publisher

"The book contains valuable insights for managing innovators." --Fort Worth Star-Telegram

Publishers Weekly

Hauptly, an executive in new product development for Westlaw, the online legal research company, examines the process of identifying product innovation potential. In the world of product and service innovation, he asserts, utility is the driving force, and the key to successful product innovation is to enhance usefulness. Hauptly identifies three questions aimed at finding where customers are expending resources unnecessarily, allowing a manufacturer or service provider to help reduce those inefficiencies. These questions-"what tasks is the product really used for"; "when I know what a product is really used for, are there any steps that I can remove from the task"; and "what tasks are the very next tasks that the customer will want to perform after using my product"-get to the heart of driving innovation. In addition, he details how to navigate potential detours, such as finding the task beneath the function, putting everything together and dealing with the people challenges inherent in any organization. Hauptly's simple and straightforward approach will enable organizations to quickly and inexpensively create new products and services that have real value. (Nov.)

Copyright 2007 Reed Business Information
Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780814400326
  • Publisher: AMACOM Books
  • Publication date: 11/7/2007
  • Pages: 256
  • Product dimensions: 6.60 (w) x 9.30 (h) x 1.02 (d)

Meet the Author

Denis J. Hauptly (Minneapolis, MN) is the Vice President of New Product Development for Westlaw, and has held product innovation positions for Westlaw or its parent company, The Thomson Corporation, for the past 12 years.

Read More Show Less

Read an Excerpt

Chapter 3

But First You Have

to Ask the Right



offered the following clue for a five-letter word: ‘‘Son of

Henry and father of Henry II.’’ I passed by the clue until I

had a letter entered from another clue. The word began with

‘‘E.’’Well, that made no sense. King Henry of England surely

had a son with a common English name, and I could think

of none that began with E and was five letters long.

Aha, I thought, I’ve been fooled. It’s not English monarchs

we are talking about here, but French or Portuguese

(think Prince Henry the Navigator) monarchs. I am not an

expert on common names or monarchical names in either nation,

so I waited until I had another letter. The word ended

with ‘‘L.’’ Huh? What kind of name is this? I hadn’t a clue.

Actually, I did have a clue. But I was reading it wrong.

One more letter added: ED L.

Now I knew, but only because I grew up in the 1950s and

recalled that the Ford Motor Company’s disastrous car, the

Edsel, was named after a member of the Ford family, Edsel

Ford—the son of Henry Ford and the father of Henry Ford II.

Faced with a problem on which I had an incomplete set

of facts (as we almost always are), I asked the wrong question.

Because I asked the wrong question, I could not come up

with the right answer. Innovators have to do better than that.

They are doing their job right when they ask the right question


But that’s hindsight, you say. ‘‘You knew it was the wrong

question once you had the right answer. I want to ask the

right question first and not waste my time and my company’s

resources chasing after the answer to the wrong question.’’

Fair enough. And there is a method that will help you

achieve that goal, but let us be sure that we understand the

concept first.

All of us start from the comfortable. I am familiar with

English history, so when I was faced with a question about

two persons named Henry and Henry II, I went to where I

was comfortable: England.1 That’s a natural reaction, and

very often it will lead us to a right result. But not always.

Getting to the Right Question

To get to the right question more certainly, we have to get

outside our own skins and take a detached view of the question.

That is actually very hard to do. Here’s why.

When faced with a question like the crossword clue, people

tend to break down into three different types.

People of the first type take the question literally, go into

their comfort area, and come up with a single possible answer

(e.g., it must be the father of King Henry II of England).

Once they reach that answer, all other options are precluded.

This type of person, upon learning that Henry II was actually

the son of Geoffrey of Anjou, assumes that the crossword editor

has made a mistake and puts down the puzzle in selfrighteous

annoyance. She may even write a letter to the


People of the second type acknowledge at some level that

there may be several ways of approaching the problem, but

believe that the odds heavily favor the one that they (coincidentally)

are most comfortable with. However, upon being

faced with an impossible answer (Geoffrey does not fit in five

spaces on the puzzle and does not begin with E), these people

will realize that there is a trick involved and will start methodically

pursuing the other options in the order that is most

comfortable. Eventually they will sort out the result.

People of the third type make no assumptions at all about

the question. These people look at the question and say,

‘‘Henry? Which Henry? Hmmm. They are trying to pull a

fast one on me here. They are trying to make me jump to a

conclusion that it is the comfortable Henry. I won’t do that.

What are the other options?’’

The first group of people will never innovate. They never

ask the right question except by blind luck. We will call them

Linear People. They move methodically from step to step,

but they are unconcerned about the possibility that their

reasoning path started with a false assumption and are unlikely

to reexamine that assumption. Such people are often

very good at math.

People in the second group may innovate, but they will

get there later than the competition. Let us label them Eventual

Innovators. This is not a put-down. These people are the

heart and soul of any innovation activity because there are so

few people in the third category. Eventual Innovators start

with assumptions but, when faced with empirical weaknesses

in those assumptions, will start over. Many scientists fall into

this group.

People in the third group, whom I will call Unassuming

Persons, can innovate constantly. They really have no strong

assumptions. That makes them curious about everything, and

they have a sense of endless wonder. There are not many Unassuming

Persons out there because very few people are actually

able to be that detached from the assumptions that help

us all get through life. It is not surprising to discover that

these people often have backgrounds in the arts.

So most innovators will fall into the second category.

These people need to develop a regular habit of challenging

the conventional wisdom. This takes energy and courage, but

it takes a process as well.

This book gives three ‘‘right’’ questions, and the Eventual

Innovators should put these questions on a wall in their office

because they must constantly remind themselves of the need

to get back to basics and confront these questions, just as was

necessary in the crossword problem. Getting into the habit of

asking these ‘‘right’’ questions will save time and effort and

dollars. But that is not the end of the story.

Asking the right question is not enough. It is necessary,

but not sufficient. To get things right, we have to have the

right answers.

Finding the Right Answers

Let us take the question from Step 1: What tasks is the product

really used for? It is entirely possible to answer that question

incorrectly. Someone could still look at a faucet and answer

it by saying, ‘‘Customers use this to get water.’’ We know

from Chapter 2 that they actually use kitchen faucets to:

• Wash hands.

• Wash dishes.

• Wash food.

• Obtain specific amounts of water for cooking.

But getting to those options required some work on our

part. We had to look at a kitchen faucet and try to make the

distinction between functions and tasks. We had to step back

from our own biases and assumptions and look at something

we had seen a million times in a brand new light. We might

have done that work well, or we might have done it poorly.

How can we know we have gotten to the right answer?

Actually, there are two ways we can know: obviousness

and observation. Let us take a look at each.


If you want to innovate, obvious answers to the questions

asked in this book are never true. Let me repeat that. If you

want to innovate, obvious answers to the questions asked in

this book are never true. Not once. Under no circumstances.

Here’s why.

The obvious answer will always reflect the existing paradigm.

If it is obvious, it is obvious because it fits neatly into

the way we view the world. It may extend the product in

some way. It may make water flow faster or make it shut off

automatically after a certain period of time. Those changes

would be positive and would add slightly to the product’s

value, but again, these are more mutations than innovations.

You, as an innovator, want to move beyond these types of

changes into a complete rethinking of the product so that it

serves its tasks with maximum efficiency, not just with marginal

improvement. Why describe your product as ‘‘better’’

when you can describe it as ‘‘best’’?

Let us look at an example. Assume that the year is 1960

or so and you are running the Subway Token Department

for the New York City Transit Authority. You are conscientious

about your work, and you decide to ask customers for

their opinions on your subway tokens. Well, it turns out that

they do not like your dime-sized tokens. It is worse than that:

They hate your tokens. Your tokens are so small that they get

lost in pockets and purses. You have to keep them separate

from your coins or else you will be sorting through dimes and

pennies to pull out a token. They slip from your hand when

you are getting ready to put them in the slot. You have to

wait in line to buy them. There is really nothing good to be

said about these tokens.

What can you do? The quick fix (and the one that was

actually used starting in 1970) is to change the size of the

token. Make it big enough to stick out in a pocket full of

change and easier to grasp at the same time. This is the obvious

solution, and it suffers from all the characteristics of obvious

solutions. It is not an innovation; it is merely a design

change along the path of the existing paradigm. Customers

will be somewhat happier because the change will reduce

some of their problems. But unless you give a token a twoinch

diameter, the larger tokens will still be somewhat difficult

to distinguish, and you will still have to wait in line to

buy them. They make the task of entering the subway somewhat

more efficient, but there is still a lot of room for improvement.

The innovative answer is to say that the problem is with

tokens themselves. They are inherently like coins, and so they

will always be confusing. They are good for only one trip,

and so you will frequently need to buy more. Moreover, they

limit your pricing structure to ‘‘one token fits all.’’

When we look at the task involved and reject the obvious

solution, we are forced to ask ourselves, ‘‘How would I do

this in a world without tokens? How can I avoid coinlike

objects, allow multiple trips with the same entry device, and,

ideally, give myself more pricing flexibility?’’ The innovative

answer (implemented in 1976 in theWashington, D.C., Metro

and, finally, in 2003 in New York) is a debit card. It is easy to

buy and provides for many trips. It is not going to be confused

with a coin, and it allows an infinite variety of pricing

options. Users save time and effort. The subway system does

so as well: It employs fewer people since it does not have to

sell and collect tokens anymore.2

But this answer, this innovation, did not take place and

could not take place until the paradigm was shifted, until the

underlying assumption was abandoned. With subway tokens,

the underlying assumption was that the problem was in the

design of the tokens. In fact, the problem was with the use of

tokens as a means of gaining entry to the subway. The user

wanted to complete the task of getting on a train, but the

product owners were focused on something entirely different—

optimizing the design of subway tokens.

So the obvious is not the innovative. But it should not be

totally discarded. As we will see later on in Chapter 10, ‘‘The

Human Factor,’’ you can draw a distinction between BIG innovations

and small innovations. If enough small innovations

are added to a product, they may make a significant change

in the value proposition, so these innovations are not to be

ignored. But we get further, faster with touchdowns than

with field goals, so when you see an obvious improvement,

do not settle for it. The obvious should be the fallback position,

not the starting position.


So much of innovation has to do with observation. If we see

someone filling a pot with water from a kitchen faucet and

our observation is, ‘‘Faucets supply water,’’ we have no place

to go. But if we stop and say, ‘‘What is really going on here?

What is this person trying to accomplish? How can I help

him accomplish that?’’ then we have a genuine chance of

breaking through to new ground.

Just as observation is a key element of innovative ideas, so

too is it the best testing ground for those ideas because reality

is the best testing ground for almost anything. Does your answer

to the question fit with what people actually do? Can

you observe the behavior of people using your product and

see if your answer is correct? Does your innovation solve old

problems, but create new ones?

Let us go back to our kitchen faucet. One of the proposed

innovations was premeasured water. Push a button once for

one cup, twice for two cups, and so on. That sounds right,

but its correctness depends on whether people actually do

things the way they are supposed to do them.

The recipe calls for three cups of water. Does the cook

actually measure three cups, or does she simply put roughly

three cups of water into the pot? If the measurement for one

recipe is rough, is that true of all or most recipes?

I make bread by hand. I make rough measurements of

my flour and water because as I knead the bread by hand, I

know from a touch trained through making hundreds of

loaves of bread whether more water or more flour is needed.

In that case, rough measurements are fine. If, on the other

hand, I made bread by machine, I would measure quite precisely

because the ratio is important and I would have no

chance to adjust it once the machine starts kneading.

So if one is making bread by machine or cooking rice

(which does require precise measurement), the exact amount

of water may matter. But if one is making pasta, a little extra

water probably will not hurt anything. And if a little extra

water won’t hurt anything, the value of our innovation is low.

If we observe enough cooks preparing enough recipes, we

will begin to get a sense of whether our proposed innovation

makes sense. Does it add value because it would be used all

the time by a good percentage of the potential users? Or is it

just a ‘‘feature’’ that may help to sell the product but won’t

actually be used (or valued) much in the end?

This latter situation arises quite often. An innovation is

made that is undeniably superior to the old way of doing

things. But the old behavior is deeply ingrained and well understood,

so the motivation to change one’s behavior has to

be very high for change to actually take place.

Some years ago, a software product that I was managing

moved from green dots on a black screen to a graphical user

interface (GUI). Over the next few years, all new development

was done in the GUI, but some customers still stuck to

the earlier version. Eventually the day came when we had to

pull the plug on that old product. It would strain your credulity

if I described the outpouring of anger and anguish we

received over that decision—even though we were offering

the users something that was enormously superior at absolutely

no cost to them. People who have gotten used to doing

things a certain way are often uninterested in investing in

change, and a change that may seem easy for the innovator

may in fact be quite difficult for the user who is a linear


Observation will tell you whether you have a problem

here or not. And observation does not have to be expensive.

Prototyping can usually be done inexpensively. Even describing

an innovation or using good drawings can evoke a reaction

from users. That reaction may tell you whether it is wise

to invest more funds in the innovation or not. If you do invest

more and can create a working model or prototype, then you

can engage in more objective observations. The users will tell

you whether they like the innovation or not and whether they

would actually use it or not. That observed information is a

lot more valuable than what comes out of most focus groups

or surveys. It allows the product developer to see at once what

is good and what is bad about an idea. It can be the springboard

for many other ideas as well.

Of course, what is being described here is the scientific

method. You develop a thesis. Then you create an experiment

to test the thesis. You observe the results of the experiment

and compare them to the thesis. You publish the details of

your experiment and its results. Then you gather criticism of

your experiment from others. Finally, you see whether the

experiment can be duplicated by others with the same result.

The great virtue of the scientific method is its objectivity.

If the experiment proves the thesis to be false, the scientist

moves on. Would that this were so in the world of product


If you have done product development work for any period

of time, you will have seen developers who were so taken

by their own idea that they:

1. Did not test at all.

2. Tested in such a way as to ensure that the results

matched the thesis.

3. Ignored the negative results and latched on firmly to

some isolated positive statements.

4. Transferred learnings from another market to a new

one without validating them in the new one.

5. Did all of the above and created a great press release

as well.

Such shenanigans are entirely understandable. They are

usually defended by statements like, ‘‘I have been in this market

for 10 years, and I know this market’’ or some other form

of self-validation.

But they can lead to ridiculous results. I have a colleague

who is legally blind. He performs a highly technical job

through the use of special equipment. For instance, he has a

computer screen that enlarges letters many times. He recently

informed me that there was a new cell phone available for

people in his situation. It had large keys and a larger screen,

and it magnified the characters on the screen.

This was great. Some product developer somewhere had

recognized that there was a market that was not being served

and moved in to serve it. Just one thing: It came equipped

with a camera. Even the briefest of test periods would have

shown that there are not a lot of blind photographers, so the

camera was superfluous, and leaving it out would have saved

the manufacturer and the buyer a few bucks.

This is a serious problem, and it is a cultural problem.

Cultural problems are particularly intractable, but these problems

must be confronted. It is very rare that the financial decision

to create a new product is based on deep knowledge of

the market research. It is more often based on a summary

prepared by the product advocate. The fox not only guards

the henhouse, but is the only source that management has for

what is going on in it.

Read More Show Less

Table of Contents


Acknowledgments xi

Let’s Get Started 1

Part One: Three Simple Steps to Innovation


Money Is the Root of All Innovation 13


Step 1: Fixing the Faucet 19


But First You Have to Ask the Right Question 37


Mutation or Innovation? 53


Step 2: Making Life Simpler 69


Making Innovation Happen 89


Step 3: Taking It to the Next Level 99


Spotlight on Services 117


Putting All the Pieces Together 137

Part Two: The Context of Innovation: People,

Management, and Organization


The Human Factor 153


Beating the Bureaucrats 165


Straightening Out the Rest of the Company 177


Sample Answers to InnovationWorkout 3 191


More InnovationWorkouts 195

Suggested Reading 221

Notes 225

About the Author 229

Index 231

Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Be the first to write a review
( 0 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously
Sort by: Showing 1 Customer Reviews
  • Anonymous

    Posted July 11, 2008

    A reviewer

    Too many books on innovation get bogged down in theory or assume that coming up with new ideas is both the point of innovation and its most important step. In contrast, Denis J. Hauptly cuts through the nonsense with a focus on the customer. Originality, in and of itself, isn¿t enough, Hauptly says. He encourages innovation that results in useful, beautiful, interesting and profitable products, providing ideas and procedures you can use right away. He also provides ¿innovation workouts¿ that ask you to come up with products that solve common problems, and a list of readings. His book could be better organized, but getAbstract recommends it to product developers, for whom it will provide useful tools, and marketers, who must deal with a culture intoxicated by the next big thing.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
Sort by: Showing 1 Customer Reviews

If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
Why is this product inappropriate?
Comments (optional)