Adjacent Possible
Adjacent Possible: Innovations can only emerge when their prerequisite components already exist. The space of what's "possible right now" is the adjacent possible β one step from current reality. Moving into it creates a new adjacent possible. YouTube required cheap video cameras, broadband internet, and codec compression to exist simultaneously. Each innovation expands the next frontier of what's possible.
What Is the Adjacent Possible?β
Stuart Kauffman, a complexity theorist at the Santa Fe Institute, developed the adjacent possible concept to explain the evolution of biological systems: at any given moment, only certain evolutionary steps are possible, determined by what already exists. An organism can't evolve a feature that requires ten prior innovations that haven't occurred yet.
Steven Johnson brought the concept to cultural and technological innovation in his 2010 book Where Good Ideas Come From, demonstrating that the same logic applies to human creativity and invention. The adjacent possible is the set of innovations that are exactly one step away from the current state β they require combinations of existing components that already exist, just not assembled in this particular way.
The key insight: most innovations are not invented because someone is smarter or more creative than their predecessors. They arrive at a specific moment because the prerequisites β technologies, materials, social contexts, economic conditions, existing knowledge β finally exist simultaneously. The printing press required paper (from China), moveable type (from Korea), oil-based ink, and the screw press (from wine-making). Each component existed; Gutenberg's innovation was their combination.
This explains the "multiple discovery" phenomenon β the same invention made simultaneously by independent inventors. Darwin and Wallace both arrived at natural selection in the same decade because the adjacent possible had opened: the same biological data, Malthus's population theory, and the conceptual tools for systematic classification all existed and were accessible to any careful naturalist. The idea was "in the air."
How It Worksβ
Step 1: Map the current state
β What technologies, knowledge, behaviours, and infrastructure exist today?
β What has recently emerged that opens new combinations?
Step 2: Identify adjacent combinations
β What combinations of existing elements haven't been tried?
β What problem could be solved by assembling existing components differently?
Step 3: Assess prerequisite readiness
β Are all necessary components sufficiently developed?
β What's the "weakest link" that prevents the innovation from working?
Step 4: Evaluate timing
β Is the prerequisite that's lagging about to mature?
β What would move it from "not yet" to "now"?
Step 5: Move into the adjacent possible
β Every innovation you make expands the adjacent possible for others
β Map what your innovation enables next
Three Real-World Examplesβ
YouTube (2005) and Its Prerequisitesβ
YouTube's founders didn't invent video, the internet, or cameras. They assembled a specific combination of existing components that had all reached sufficient maturity by 2005: (1) affordable consumer digital video cameras (Sony, Canon reached sub-$500 price points); (2) broadband internet penetration above 50% in US households; (3) Flash video codec that enabled web-based playback without downloads; (4) cheap server storage costs falling below the threshold that made user-generated hosting economically viable.
Any earlier β 2000, 2002 β and one or more of these components wasn't ready. The adjacent possible opened in 2004β2005, and three separate groups (YouTube, Google Video, others) arrived at essentially the same solution simultaneously.
iPhone (2007) and the Adjacent Possible It Createdβ
The iPhone required: a multi-touch display (developed by Fingerworks, acquired by Apple), lithium-ion batteries with sufficient energy density, cellular data networks moving to 3G, and ARM processors fast enough for mobile browsing. These prerequisites converged around 2006β2007.
The iPhone's release immediately expanded the adjacent possible: it created the conditions for the App Store ecosystem (millions of touch-optimised screens), Instagram (camera always in pocket + social sharing + cellular data), Uber (GPS-equipped phones + always-on connectivity + payment processing), and thousands of other innovations that weren't possible before the iPhone existed. Each step into the adjacent possible creates new adjacencies.
Airbnb and Behavioural Prerequisitesβ
Airbnb (2008) required not just internet connectivity and photo sharing β it also required a specific behavioural shift: enough people comfortable transacting with strangers online. eBay had built that comfort from 1995 to 2005 by normalising online peer-to-peer commerce. Craigslist had normalised meeting strangers from the internet. Facebook had established that stranger-review systems (mutual friends, profiles) were trustworthy signals. Without these behavioural prerequisites, no amount of technology would have made Airbnb viable. The adjacent possible in hospitality opened when trust in online stranger transactions reached a threshold.
When to Use Itβ
β Adjacent Possible thinking helps when:
- Evaluating whether an innovation is "ready for its moment" or premature
- Identifying which emerging technologies will enable the next wave of products
- Understanding why a previously failed idea might now work
- Mapping innovation strategy around enabling technologies
β Less useful when:
- You need to generate ideas (other tools are better for generation)
- The timescales involved are very long (decades of prerequisite development)
- The prerequisite landscape is too complex to map usefully
| Pairs well with | Why |
|---|---|
| SCAMPER | SCAMPER's "Adapt" and "Combine" prompts explore the adjacent possible |
| Second-Order Thinking | Mapping the adjacent possible your innovation creates is second-order thinking |
| Moore's Law | Moore's Law predicts which prerequisites will mature, opening new adjacent possibilities |
| Tipping Points | Prerequisite maturity often operates through threshold dynamics |
Common Misuses and Limitationsβ
Using it to justify "too early" ideas indefinitely. "The world isn't ready for this yet" can be a genuine insight (the prerequisites aren't in place) or a rationalisation (the idea isn't good). The adjacent possible framework demands specificity: which prerequisite is missing? When will it mature? What evidence would indicate readiness?
Ignoring social and behavioural prerequisites. Most innovation failures in technically-ready markets fail because social, behavioural, or regulatory prerequisites weren't in place. Google Glass was technically functional; it failed because social norms around being filmed by strangers weren't ready.
Treating the framework as deterministic. The adjacent possible tells you what's reachable from the current state β not what will definitely be reached. Multiple possible adjacencies may open simultaneously; which one gets explored depends on entrepreneurial attention, capital allocation, and chance.
Related Modelsβ
| Model | Relationship |
|---|---|
| Moore's Law | Moore's Law predicts the expansion of the technical adjacent possible |
| SCAMPER | SCAMPER's Combine and Adapt prompts systematically explore adjacent combinations |
| Emergence | Adjacent possible is the mechanism through which complex emergent innovations arise |
| Tipping Points | Prerequisites crossing maturity thresholds are tipping points that open the adjacent possible |
Frequently Asked Questionsβ
Why do multiple inventors often discover the same thing simultaneously?
Because they're all operating in the same adjacent possible. When the prerequisites for an innovation converge, all researchers working in the relevant domain have access to the same components. The probability that multiple independent investigators will combine them similarly rises sharply. This "multiple discovery" phenomenon (also studied by Robert Merton) explains Newton and Leibniz co-inventing calculus, Darwin and Wallace co-discovering natural selection, and Bell and Elisha Gray filing telephone patents on the same day. The adjacent possible opened simultaneously for all of them.
How can you tell if you're "ahead of the adjacent possible"?
Signs of premature innovation: (1) you need to educate the market rather than capture existing demand; (2) key enabling technologies or behaviours require significant development before your product works well; (3) infrastructure doesn't exist at scale (Internet in 1993, smartphones in 2002); (4) regulatory frameworks aren't ready (drone delivery in most markets circa 2020). The challenge: adjacent-possible analysis is clearest in retrospect. Prospectively, look for analogous cases where the same prerequisite gap resolved and adoption followed.
How does the adjacent possible apply to personal creativity?
Your personal adjacent possible is the set of ideas reachable through combinations of your current knowledge, skills, relationships, and experiences. This is why cross-domain exposure expands creativity β each new domain you encounter adds components to your combinatorial space. De Bono's "conceptual blending" and the adjacent possible describe the same mechanism: innovations arise from combining existing mental structures in novel ways. Reading widely, working in multiple industries, and building diverse relationships all expand your personal adjacent possible.
Further Readingβ
- Johnson, S. (2010). Where Good Ideas Come From β the best accessible treatment of the adjacent possible in innovation
- Kauffman, S. (1995). At Home in the Universe β the original complexity science framework
- Ridley, M. (2010). The Rational Optimist β innovation as recombination of ideas
Apply with AIβ
π Map your adjacent possible with MindMax β
This page is part of the MindMax Mental Models Knowledge Base.