Bantu expansion shows that habitat alters the route and pace of human dispersals
phys.org
phys.org
"Bantu expansion shows that habitat alters the route and pace of human dispersals" http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/09/09/1503793112
We've changed the title (from "Human innovation more trial-and-error than 'lightbulb' moments"), but have left the URL because the popular article, distorting as it is, provides more background. Also, the researchers themselves are pushing this interpretation, to judge by the quotes in the article, so it isn't just spin by a headline writer. Anyone who wants to read the paper can follow the link you've helpfully provided.
Isaac Asimov
But in an extreme minority of cases, when the "That's funny" remains ...
Everything else is incremental innovation (new tech enhancing products in a known market), this can be achieved in 1 to 3 years.
Why isn't Edison's Light bulb not considered a redesign as well? Edison himself called it "Improvement In Electric Lights" in the patent he filed in 1878.
In other words, the initial idea came from a quite basic fact about electricity, and Humphry Davy experimented with it already around 1800, but a lot of trial and failure had to be done before it could be used for practical lighting.
Edison did enough research to come up with a practical one. He was not the only one, and others, including Joseph Swan made practical light bulbs at about the same time. Even this seemingly revolutionary idea was really more trial and failure than anything else.
After that I'll still have a fair bit of experimentation as I tune. But that feels much less trial-and-error-ish to me; before I was wandering; after I have a direction.
About decade ago, I played engineering game written in Flash (I cannot remember it name), where player must solve various tasks, e.g lift ball or stop ball which is dropped from high altitude. Unique idea of that game was fixed amount of money for whole game, which player need to spend wisely to pass all levels, or redo some levels again but with better efficiency, to save money. My first implementations in this game were simple: I understood problem and implemented most obvious solution, to advance quickly. Second solutions were improvements or optimization, to save money, to advance further. I beat game, but then my brother started to play same game and beat my score, so we started competition. Third solutions, made during competition, were true innovations: they are non-obvious and highly efficient, but each of such innovative solution had "lightbulb" moment first, and then sometimes hours of tweaking to implement it. So my gradation is: understanding of problem leads to obvious non-optimal solution first, then understanding of problem with first solution leads to improved solution (local optimum), then "lightbulb" moment leads to non-obvious efficient solution (global optimum).