Documents / Official release

AAWSAP DIRD, Maverick Inventor Versus Corporate Inventor: Where Will the Next Major Innovations Arise, March 2010

U.S. Department of War · 2010-03-30 · 19 pages · text from the file's own layer

This Defense Intelligence Agency reference document is dated 30 March 2010. The Defense Warning Office prepared it under the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program. It compares lone maverick inventors with corporate inventors who work in think tanks and other large organizations, focusing on unconventional energy and propulsion, including antigravity. It sorts inventors into five types. It concludes that formally trained mavericks (Types 3 and 4) are the most likely source of the next innovations. Untrained inventors are expected to contribute nothing substantial.

From the source: Release of 2026-09-18 Incident: 3/30/10, Las Vegas, Nevada. Released with redactions. This document is a Defense Intelligence Reference Document (DIRD), a technical reference format used by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) to capture baseline knowledge on a specific topic for later analytic use. DIRDs are best understood as reference and synthesis products rather than as original research. It is one of 38 DIRDs produced under the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP) between 2009 and 2011. Because AAWSAP’s scope permitted a broad range of supporting topics, not every DIRD in the series directly concerns aerospace systems or future threat assessment. The following summary reflects the DIRD’s scope and framing at the time of writing and should not be read as implying current validation of the concepts discussed. This DIRD compares lone “maverick” inventors with researchers working inside larger organizations in order to ask where major future breakthroughs are most likely to come from, especially in unconventional energy and propulsion. It concludes that the strongest candidates are technically trained, relatively independent, and flexible researchers working with some freedom from institutional constraint. Because that preferred profile closely resembles the kind of researcher who appears to have authored or shaped much of the broader AAWSAP DIRD effort, the document reflects a notable methodological circularity, validating the program’s operational model rather than neutrally assessing the innovation ecosystem.

UNCLASSIFIED/ I FOR 8FFI@IAL ~SE er•t'i'
These innovators have a high degree of motivation for near-term commercial projects
but less motivation for exotic long -term projects and typically have specific educational
qualifications in the relevant fields. They generally work on improvements to the
technological status quo (Reference 31). These improvements are expected to be
commercial products in the near-to-medium term, compared with the energy and
propulsion technology discussed here, which have a long time horizon.
What can be learned from the Type 5 inventor? He is significantly less interested than
the lone maverick inventor in pursuing exotic inventions . As part of a commercial
enterprise, a Type 5 inventor's motivation to investigate long -term possibilities with a
low likelihood of success is small. This is not to say that the individ ual inventor within
the group might not be the most suitable candidate for considering exotic inventions if
he can operate with considerable freedom and enjoy the support and intellectual milieu
of the small group.
Comparisons
Table 2 below compares the essential elements that characterize the types of inventors
discussed in the previous sections. The various attributes shown can be used as criteria
for determi ning the inventor type most likely to produce the necessary innovations in
the areas of advanced primary energy and exotic propulsion.
Table 2. Essential Elements That Characterize the Types of Inventor
I Attribute I Type 1 (& 2) Type 3 and 4 Type 5 Corporate
Aqe Younqer Older Younqer Various
Motivation Hiqh Hiqh Medium Various
Rea lism Low Medium High High
Bureaucracy Low Low Medium Hiqh
Capitalization Low (&
Medium)
Low (&
Medium) Medium High
Education Low Hiqh Mixed Hiqh
Business
Sense Low Various High Medium
Measurement Low Medium Medium - High Hiqh
Lab Skills Low High High High
Externals Low Hiqh Medium Hiqh
Flexibility Hiqh Hiqh Medium Medium
Media Interest Hioh Low Mixed Low
For clarity and compactness, Types 1 and 2 and Types 3 and 4 are combined, since in
general the only meaningf ul difference is the capitalization. As discussed above,
unfortunately, merely having more funding does not lead to substantially greater
capabilities in other areas.
Motivation: degree of commitment to initiating and completing the task and belief that
it is possible a priori.
Realism: degree of realization of the difficulties to be faced.
UNCLASSIFIED/ /EAR OFFICI0L Wi& 9,.LY
11

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

Official release, from the pursue collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 19 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.