No, this is not physics class. But how many times have you been asked to do something new, something innovative, cutting edge, only to find that your client's want projected or predicted results? I always love having that conversation, "&#8230; but, but, it's never been done before, we don't know how it is going to work." This is the uncertainty principle.Sure we create proxies and best guesses, but I'd be the first to tell you that if given the chance, I will walk away from those projections the moment they are published in a presentation. Why? Because with that conversation, it is plainly obvious that the collective have lost the focus on what innovation really is: It's risk-taking, it's paddling against the current and that will have mixed results. Now don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that we don't try to calculate those risks, but really we should be trying to limit our liability, while not sacrificing our potential. The ultimate goal of being bold and taking risks is to locate those tactical executions that a) resonate with our audiences b) build the perception of the brand and c) (and perhaps most important) create a foundation for learning that might only bear itself out in the years to come when the current "new execution" becomes more mainstream.To accomplish this for my clients I have historically sought discretionary budgets for learning. From 10-20% of total to try new things that aren't held to an immediate ROI so that my clients continue to move deeper and deeper into the digital age with real-life learnings under their belt. This has proven to be the most difficult sell. And just the other day, an industry colleague reiterated that same sentiment. Why, in this age where advertisers can't keep up with the advertising and consumer-media technology innovation, aren't more advertisers asking for that type of ongoing learning and understanding? Those real-world cases that they can point to and say, we tried that. To me this limits the liability of the future of our client's companies, as they can clearly articulate what works and what doesn't.But this isn't the case, at least not for my version of history. Rather most clients are happy living by the uncertainty principle, rather than truly understanding how their brands, and their audiences, are affected by technology, and their communications.I have been noodleing this premise for a short while now. Ever since seeing some case studies on how brands are approaching innovation in communications. It is great to see such initiatives as Pepsi 10. Whereby a company, Pepsi, isn't line-iteming testing and innovation, they are funding their learning. I think of all the bold advertisers that we interact with everyday, such as Apple, Mini, Nike, etc., and wonder how their success can be coveted, but their approach isn't mirrored. And whoever decided that B2B advertising has to be dull and boring. It's like saying the personalities of individuals are turned off form 9 to 5.In fact, the non-obvious inspiration for this article was a direct mail piece sent to me by Yume. Addressed to me with very little fan-fare, written (not typed), with one white sheet of paper that displayed a stamped "confidential" and a quick hook-line "You'll need these to see, Chris." Where the "these" were a pair of red-tinted 3D-type glasses. Did I mention it was personalized to me? Very curious at this point, not knowing it was a Yume piece, I went to where they directed me and sat through their presentation. This to me was a bold piece of marketing. No logos, no residual factor for the audience if for some reason they didn't open the piece, and/or go to the website&#8230;that doesn't seem like a high-percentage marketing shot. But&#8230; it was the first direct mail piece that I responded to in years.Now in their execution there were a lot of mitigating-liability factors: such as the personalized URL. If I am the marketer I can quickly determine 1) who received the piece and 2) if they went to the site and 3) how long they stayed, this all helps me determine the ROI. Now if we did a small drop to a handful of users got the immediate feedback of results I, as the marketer, could then predict with some level of certainty the success of the execution. Again, a bold piece, but a measured approach to execution (limit the liability) can help fulfill the potential of innovation or better yet, of risk-taking.I don't believe these are extraordinarily unique concepts, but I have learned recently that sometimes what I think is obvious isn't shared by the world. Odd, I know!So I'll leave you with this. Be bold; don't live by the Uncertainty Principle. Try new things, but make sure you understand what you want to learn. Seek truth through execution. So what if syndicated research doesn't show you the path, take the path less traveled. Don't worry about the lack of scale; get your client's brand on the iPad or mobile. Because when scale does come, playing catch-up is deadly to you and your clients.Chris Arens is a Partner and Head of Client Services at Catalyst S+F. He can be reached at email@example.comRead all Chris' MediaBizBloggers commentaries at The Marketing Capital Report.Check us out on Facebook at MediaBizBloggers.comFollow our Twitter updates @MediaBizBlogger.