The Innovators Studio with Phil McKinney Podcast By Phil McKinney cover art

The Innovators Studio with Phil McKinney

The Innovators Studio with Phil McKinney

By: Phil McKinney
Listen for free

Prime Member Exclusive | $0.99/mo for 4 months

$8.99/mo thereafter—terms apply.
Forty years of billion-dollar innovation decisions. The real stories, the hard calls, and the patterns that repeat across every organization that's ever tried to build something new. Phil McKinney shares what those decisions actually look like. Phil was HP's CTO when Fast Company named it one of the most innovative companies in the world three years running. He co-founded a company and took it public. Now he runs CableLabs, the R&D engine behind the global broadband industry. This isn't theory. It's what happened. And what you can see coming if you know what to look for. Running since 2005, originally as The Killer Innovations Show, now The Innovators Studio. Tens of millions of downloads. Full archive at killerinnovations.com. New episodes at philmckinney.com.Copyright 2005-2026 Techtrend Group LLC. See philmckinney.com Economics Leadership Management & Leadership Personal Development Personal Success
Episodes
  • How to Recognize Failure Patterns: How HP Quit and Apple Won

    How to Recognize Failure Patterns: How HP Quit and Apple Won
    Aug 26 2026
    Recognizing failure patterns is the closest thing an innovator has to seeing the future. If you can recognize the patterns, you can change the future, because most failures are not original. They repeat, and that repetition is the pattern: the same handful of patterns reappearing in one organization after another, decade after decade. This one stings a little. In 2011, Bill Geiser told me, almost word for word, how the project we had spent the past two years building was going to fail. He saw the pattern before I did; I heard him say it, and I never forgot it. The failure still happened. This is not a pre-mortem. A pre-mortem imagines new ways your plan could fail. Recognizing failure patterns means learning from failures that have already happened elsewhere and spotting the early signals before you repeat them, while there is still time to act. By the end of this episode, you will have four patterns in your own library, a five-minute way to check any project against them, and the four steps to take when you find one. Let's get into it. The Smartwatch We Killed In 2004, Fossil hired a watch-technology executive named Bill Geiser to help build innovative technology for their watches. A few years later, he and I started spending real time together, me as HP's CTO, him running watch technology at Fossil. Between us, we had an idea we both believed in: a connected wearable, years before anyone used that phrase, co-innovated by HP and Fossil, with each bringing its expertise. Fossil named the resulting platform the MetaWatch. It ran an ultra-low-power processor with a 96 by 96 display, an accelerometer, and Bluetooth. It was designed to last a week on a charge, and it shipped with a full developer kit so anyone could build apps for it. We revealed the partnership in March 2011, at an HP event in China. And between us, we had the one thing Apple did not have in 2011: distribution. HP held roughly ten percent of consumer-electronics shelf space. Fossil sold through twenty thousand retail stores that carried its watches. Bill saw the ending before anyone. He told me in 2011: "Phil, I wouldn't be shocked if Apple evolved the Nano to take advantage of this space. They'll legitimize it in consumers' minds worldwide." So the man building the watch spotted the failure in advance, out loud. And naming it changed nothing. The signs kept arriving in plain sight. HP went through three CEOs in thirteen months. In August 2011, Leo Apotheker killed HP's consumer mobile strategy and WebOS, which removed the platform that made a smartwatch matter to HP at all. The battery lasted three to four hours against the original target of a week. We ran month-long approval cycles for changes that startups could implement in days. Then I went out on medical leave. When I came back six weeks later, HP had killed Palm, WebOS, and the connected wearable project. Here is what the ignored warning turned into. The Apple Watch shipped in April 2015. It sold 4.2 million units in its first quarter, and by that fall Apple was selling three out of every four smartwatches on the planet. The market we walked away from grew from three hundred thousand units in 2012 to forty-five million by 2018, and Apple held fifty-one percent of the market share. The idea was never the hard part. It never is. The hard part is committing. What Recognizing Failure Patterns Means Nothing that killed the MetaWatch was new, and none of the signals were faint. They were loud; they were ignored, and each one was a pattern that has killed projects for decades. Recognizing failure patterns has two halves. The first is building a library of how failures repeat. The second is matching the situation in front of you against that library, and forcing what you find into an actual decision while the fix is still cheap. Bill did the first half. Neither of our companies did the second, and the gap between those halves is where the Apple Watch came from. Here are four entries for your library, straight from this one failure. Each one ends with a test question. By the end, you will have a four-question checklist, and then I will show you what to do when a pattern shows up. Pattern 1: Success Protects Itself Fossil's traditional watch business grew from $950 million in 2004 to $3.25 billion by 2013. It was tripling while we were building the thing that might replace it, and that growth made cannibalizing it politically impossible. Fossil never had to kill the MetaWatch outright. Fossil positioned the watch as a two-hundred-dollar development platform, something no ordinary customer would ever be handed at a retail counter. When we constrain what we're innovating so it doesn't risk the present, we've lost the future. Test it: Is the new thing priced, staffed, or positioned so that it cannot hurt the current thing? If the answer is yes, this pattern is already running. Pattern 2: The Warning That Changes Nothing Bill's warning was ...
    Show more Show less
    17 mins
  • How to Improve Your Abductive Reasoning Skills

    How to Improve Your Abductive Reasoning Skills
    Aug 19 2026
    Sherlock Holmes never once used deduction. Open any of the stories and watch what he actually does. He notices a tan line on a wrist or mud dried on a boot and leaps to the best-fitting explanation. Then he went looking for evidence. Deduction guarantees its conclusions. What Holmes did was guess. He was better at it than everyone around him because he treated guessing as a discipline. The discipline of guessing is one of the most useful thinking skills nobody ever taught you. Let's get into it. What Is Abductive Reasoning? There are three kinds of reasoning. School taught you two of them. Deduction moves from a general rule to a specific conclusion. For example, all mammals have hearts. Dogs are mammals. So dogs have hearts. If the starting statements are true, the conclusion must be true. Induction goes the other way, from specific observations to a general pattern. For example, if you see a thousand white swans, you conclude all swans are white. Probably right, but never guaranteed. Europeans believed exactly that until they reached Australia and found black swans. I covered both in an earlier episode on logical reasoning skills. Abduction is the third kind, the one school skipped, and it runs reasoning backward. You start at the far end, with the result or fact in front of you, then you work back to whatever would explain it. For example, the lawn is wet at six in the morning. You didn't see it rain, and nothing rules out a broken sprinkler. But rain explains it best, so you accept it for now and get on with your day. Notice that you did that without deciding to. You are running abductive reasoning constantly, on faces and sales numbers and to explain the silence after you finish talking in a meeting. We all leap from evidence to an explanation and then treat the explanation as fact. You already know how to do this. What you don't have is the habit of catching yourself at it and doing it deliberately when it matters. Now go back to Holmes. In A Study in Scarlet, the first thing he ever does on the page is shake hands with a stranger and say, "You have been in Afghanistan, I perceive." Holmes explains it later. The man had a medical look but a soldier's bearing. His face was dark, but his wrists were fair, so the tan came from somewhere hot. His left arm hung stiffly, so it had been injured. None of those clues proves anything on its own. Holmes asked which single story would cover them all: an army doctor, wounded and sent home from the Afghan war. That is abduction, not deduction, and Conan Doyle used the wrong word for it his entire career. Why AI Can't Do Abductive Reasoning Abduction is the only one of the three that creates a new idea. Deduction draws out what was already inside the starting statements, and induction stretches a pattern you already saw. That difference used to be a philosopher's distinction. It matters now because AI has gotten very good at the other two. AI finds patterns in billions of examples and extends them, induction at a scale no human can match. What it cannot reliably do is face a fact that fits no pattern and come up with an explanation worth betting on. That leap is still uniquely human, and the people who make it well are getting more valuable every year. Meanwhile, abduction as a skill is getting harder to keep, because search engines and chatbots now answer most questions in under a minute, and abduction doesn't work that way. It asks you to live with "probably" for a while, holding an answer you know might be wrong and working anyway. How to Improve Your Abductive Reasoning Skills None of this is a talent you either have or don't have. Watch a good doctor or a talented designer at work, and you will see the same four moves. Each one can be practiced. 1. Notice What Doesn't Fit In 1847, a Hungarian doctor named Ignaz Semmelweis ran a maternity clinic in Vienna. It had two wards, one staffed by doctors and one by midwives, and in the doctors' ward new mothers were dying of fever at three times the rate. Some women gave birth in the street rather than be admitted, and the street births survived at a better rate. Everyone was ignoring the numbers. Semmelweis treated the numbers as the question. What could explain the best-trained people in the hospital losing the most patients? His answer came when a colleague cut his finger during an autopsy and died of the same fever. Doctors went from dissecting corpses straight to delivering babies. Midwives never touched corpses. He ordered handwashing in chlorine, and the deaths collapsed decades before anyone had heard of germ theory. Charles Sanders Peirce, the philosopher who gave the skill its name, built that noticing into his own definition of abduction. The surprising fact is observed, he wrote, and only then does the search for an explanation begin. When something fits what you already believe, we accept it without noticing. Surprise is the alarm that the automatic version has failed....
    Show more Show less
    18 mins
  • The Customers Who Walked Away

    The Customers Who Walked Away
    Aug 12 2026
    Think about the last thing you almost bought and did not. You picked it up, you looked at it, you put it back down. You had a reason for choosing one item over its competitors, and you know exactly what it was. Did anybody ever ask you why you didn't choose the loser? Of course not. And somebody did the same thing to you this week. Something you made, or wrote, or suggested. An idea you put into a meeting that got a polite nod and then went nowhere. They considered it, decided against it, and you never found out the real reason. Almost everything that comes back to you comes from the people who said yes. Inside a business, the machinery makes that official. Satisfaction surveys go to people who have bought. Reviews come from people who have bought. The customer list is a list of people who have bought. The one who put it back down is invisible to all of it, and that person is holding the answer. So, where do you point a question to reach somebody who is not there? Last week, we took a question apart and rebuilt it. But a well-made question aimed at the wrong thing comes back empty. Where you point a question is the other half of the skill. Forty-two cards of Killer Questions A killer question is one that has been tested and proven to spark ideas beyond the obvious. The name comes from the old phrase "killer app," where "killer" meant standout, not lethal. I built this collection of questions the slow way. I designed structured tests into my innovation workshops, which I was running: specific questions put to specific groups, and a record of what each produced. The rule for keeping a question was that it had to trigger something in that room. Did somebody walk out seeing their customer, their product, or the way they work differently than when they walked in? If nothing moved, the question was cut. If there was a good idea underneath one and I had simply worded it badly, I rewrote it and ran it again in another workshop. There were hundreds of questions, and most did not survive. Forty-two did. When I sorted the survivors, they fell into three groups. Not by subject. By where they aim your thinking. Three places to aim Every question in the deck points to one of three things. Who, what, and how. WHO is the person or organization who will benefit from what you make. Usually, your customer, though the gap between "usually" and "always" is where a lot of new business hides. WHAT is the product, the service, the solution that creates the value for the WHO. HOW is the way your organization builds, delivers, and supports the WHAT for the WHO. Three places an idea can come from, and the questions exist to send you into each one on purpose rather than by accident. The cards all say "product." Read that as whatever you make for somebody else. A service counts. So does a proposal you hand to your boss. Thirteen of my cards aim at WHO. Thirteen at WHAT. Sixteen at HOW. That split was never a plan. It is where the questions that kept surviving pointed, and eventually, I stopped arguing with it. WHO What are your unshakable beliefs about what your customers want? The phone companies believed their customers wanted reliability above all else, and they were right. For a century, they built toward 99.999 percent uptime. A dial tone that worked in a storm, in a power failure, always. Then somebody turned that belief over and looked at it with no assumptions about what the customer wanted. Where were there people who would give up call quality for something else? That is the question that led to voice over IP, a phone call carried over the internet. In the early days, it sounded terrible. Calls dropped. By the standard the old industry had spent a century perfecting, VoIP was not a serious product. But underneath it sat an idea nobody in that industry had allowed themselves to consider: that many people would trade call quality for price and mobility, and would do so happily. They did. That market opportunity existed before anyone built it, waiting for someone willing to challenge the old standard on its head. WHAT What is surprisingly inconvenient about my product? It does not ask whether the product is good. Your team will defend that all day, and they will be partly right, which will only make the conversation worse. Surprisingly inconvenient means some part of using your product that nobody inside your company has ever seen a real person struggle with. The fifteen minutes with the instructions. The step everyone on your team skips automatically because they built the thing. On the back of that card sits the shortest useful question I own: "Do you use your own product yourself?" Hold on to this one. In a few minutes, it turns up at a Best Buy, and the strange part is that I wasn't aiming at it when I found it. HOW What do people not like about the buying experience for my product? For the whole time I was CTO at HP, I spent nearly every Saturday in a Best Buy. While traveling, I found a local electronics store in ...
    Show more Show less
    24 mins
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
No reviews yet