I have been on both sides of this. And both sides are often right. In defense of defenders of status quo, after some time, it becomes tedious to explain the re

I have been on both sides of this. And both sides are often right. In defense of defenders of status quo, after some time, it becomes tedious to explain the reasons why it didn't work, to people who didn't do basic homework. Sometimes the turnaround of people is just too high. And the defenders of status quo often have their own ideas of what are important problems to solve, and they are often right. On the other hand, the innovator shouldn't just quit. If you think your idea has merit, build a prototype! Prototype of almost anything can be built by a single person. Maybe it can be done after all. I think the solution to this problem is 20% time to work on whatever (improvement) you want. The youngsters can then work on new innovative things, which the older guys considered impossible. And the older guys can work on what they really think matters.