Featured guest writer, Anders Hemre, explores the traits of "super innovators" in this month's inKNOWvations.

No doubt some firms are more innovative than others. They successfully exploit emerging technologies, create new markets and consistently turn good ideas into good business. It’s not a coincidence that Apple repeatedly rates as a top innovator in surveys. Nor is it surprising to find that firms operating in innovative national or regional economies or in highly competitive industries have developed a stronger capacity to innovate than others or that a deliberate effort to manage the innovation process pays off in performance.

Companies and organizations turn to governing boards for so many critical elements these days.

Boards of directors guide overall strategy and direction. Appointed audit committees pore over corporate financials and performance. HR/compensation committees ensure the organization's on track with hiring and benefits that keep it competitive. Each has been formed to inform, advise and support the CEO in his or her the ethical and policy-backed pursuit of protecting shareholder/stakeholder interests.

Yet in the Age of Sarbanes Oxley-like governance across the organization, why doesn't innovation have such oversight?

The model of emerging market innovation that most people have in mind is a multinational corporation pioneers a novel product or service in their sophisticated home market, drops some features and cuts the price, and then exports the stripped-down innovation into emerging markets.

Increasingly, however, innovation flows the other way. Companies develop a product that appeals to emerging market consumers who combine discerning tastes with low disposable income, then managers quickly recognize that these products would appeal to some segments within mature markets as well.