Insights about product innovation need to confirm not contradict some form of existing knowledge. This may stem from the fact that existing knowledge is essentially the source of the innovation.
There are certain categories in communications that require constant innovation, not in point of creative strategies but rather of "product improvement" - low involvement, FMCG, hygiene. I cannot bet my job that these exist, but we have enzyme Q10, proteins, Bifidus Essensis, oxygen, fruit extracts, bark extracts, cream in soap etc etc all of which are, allegedly, included in the original recipes of our yogurts, soaps, creams, shampoos etc to give an extra and differentiating RTB. These so-called innovations, however, only make their mark when they hit on some sort of pre-existing knowledge.
Garnier has been pushing their fruit enhanced creams for a while now but only the one with extract of Canadian maple hit the right spot - my assumption is that making a cream for extra dry hands with something that comes from a place we assume is cold and dry all the time made sense.
CIF has just introduced it's spray-cleaner with fizzy action - it also made more sense to everyone, than cleaners with citrus and all that, because we do seem to remember that things that dissolve go "fizzzzz" - incidentally it does go fizz but does not clean at all.
Window makers sell windows with several "chambers" stating they insulate better - we buy it because we assume more chambers equals more air and air is insulating. truth is one chamber is as good as 6, what insulates is how well the joinery is attached to the glass and the glass itself.
Would I buy a cream that is enhanced with tar extracts?
communication is essential to business making and it involves more than the ability to name your product, write a tag line or a press release. It's an intricate, rational and scalable effort and, let's face it, not anyone can do it.