BOOK REVIEW A how-to argument for stoking the creative firesby Tom Ehrenfeld  Innovation has become the holy grail of the new economy, a secret, shiny, and far-off ingredient that CEOs seek with the same faith that King Arthur brought to the quest. Unfortunately, most efforts to teach innovation come across like academics trying to explain humor: There's a world of difference between citing a funny joke and teaching someone how to be funny.

''Why Not?'' stands above most books in this field by practicing what it preaches. Authors Barry Nalebuff and Ian Ayres have produced an engaging -- dare we say innovative? -- guide to stoking creativity. ''Innovation is a skill that can be taught,'' they assert. ''The problem is that the sense of innovation as everyday ingenuity often gets lost in our high-tech world. That is a problem we aim to fix with this book.''

The authors cite Thomas Edison's quip that genius is 1 percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration, and then trace the perspiration needed for inspiration to take place.

They offer examples. Why not release to the public the child-friendly versions of R-rated movies that are shown on airplanes? Why not turn the tables on telemarketers by creating a reverse 900 number that charges them for your minutes?

Nalebuff and Ayres suggest four methods for approaching problems differently. People can break out of the box by removing limitations -- conceiving an answer to a problem irrespective of cost or other considerations, and then making it work. Or they can find new solutions by pressing the real costs of pain to consumers on those companies or organizations that create them. Turning around an idea (like the 900 number) serves as another useful exercise, while learning to reframe an idea to succeed in a surprising new context is another.

The examples are both the book's greatest asset and its biggest liability. Many of the problems that ''Why Not?'' solves are, as promised in the subtitle, small ones.

How many of us have lost sleep thinking about the problem of random phone calls that come in the middle of the night (other than answering the calls, of course)?

They make a case that cars could use a black box like those in airplanes, apparently ignoring the fact that such a black box is already in place in many vehicles.

The big problems that are addressed don't always feel so real; they feel like challenges devised by an economics professor (indeed, one of the authors teaches the dismal science). Many of their solutions essentially address market inefficiencies. They come up with incentives to allocate costs to activities in hopes of driving behavior. They deal with the annoying problem of having to rewind videocassettes by having stores provide incentives for customers to rewind the tapes.

A bigger problem that could benefit from such an outlook concerns homeownership. The authors propose self-adjusting mortgage rates to automatically refinance in line with prevailing rates. While innovative, this solution enjoys what might be called the ''economist's luxury'' of succeeding in theory while falling short in the face of perspiration and human nature.

Ultimately, ''Why Not?'' is an engaging read whose failings have more to do with context than content. It can certainly help individuals and companies be more creative, but it doesn't address the real question of why most organizations reject innovation just as naturally as many bodies reject an organ transplant. Without a powerful method of incorporating these ideas and thoughts into a company's products and processes, the question of ''Why Not?'' will always be trumped by the more powerful query, ''So what?'''

...
Tom Ehrenfeld is a Cambridge-based journalist and author of ''The Startup Garden: How Growing a Business Grows You.''

This story ran on page D2 of the Boston Globe on 10/19/2003.