I think creativity is indeed thinking about new concepts/things. Innovation is causeing this to be new concept/thing practical inside a novel way. Creativity is dreaming up a brand new invention and prototype InventHelp is rendering it real in ones own unique way. Once you bring something new into existence you are able to say you created it. You can not say you innovated it. And again when you improve something which already exists you can not say you created it however, you know you innovated it.
Henry Ford came up with assembly line for car production. The Japanese perfected this concept by introducing their own unique innovations/changes/improvements. Lots of people are creative but they're not innovate enough to make their creations practical. Innovation makes creativity practical and efficient. Most inventors fail because they're not innovative enough. Most painters are creative however when they introduce innovation within their creation/art they become artists. Without creativity there is no product/concept that needs implementation as soon as new things is believed up it needs innovation. Research and development is all about innovation. Sometimes innovation can lead to a realization of the creation being impractical therefore this new creative idea could be abandoned along with a new creative idea may be born thus innovation can lead to creativity. Innovation is giving a new direction for an existing idea.
There is confusion and fuzziness between creativity and innovation because indeed innovation is approximately creating new ways to implement the existing/created concept. Thus both have creativity in them. Innovation also involves components of creativity.
All PhD courses are for researching innovative methods for doing the old stuff in better and much more efficient ways. Innovation is approximately solving existing problems. In a deeper level innovation is research. On the research institutes they are creating better innovations for existing solutions. You don't need to require a PhD for creativity however for innovation at the leading edge highest level a PhD is practically an essential requirement. Actually in the university level innovation is preferred over creativity. For almost any newly created ideas are doubted till they may be scientifically defined, measured and tested and also this involves complex and time consuming investigations as well as finances. However something that has already been in use and it has proved its utility then any improvement through innovation is accepted whole heartedly. My very own invention, 'Vacuum power generators' is founded on a sound principle that, 'nature abhors a vacuum'; however it was rejected at the highest levels of the US government because of another sound principle 'The law of conservation of energy'. Regulations of conservation of energy says that the energy you put in can give back less because of friction. In nature you can find exceptions to this law! Hydrolic pressure, fulcrum power all hand back more energy chances are they take in. And vacuum power may be the fulcrum of wind power. However it is an unproven and too radical an idea as well as requires a small fortune to produce a proto type. On the other hand my little innovation of tweaking just a little improvement within the baby milk bottle I used to be in a position to sell straight away.
Creativity is vital for innovation to get a product must exist no less than in a concept stage for you cannot innovate anything that does not exist. Thus innovation depends upon creativity while creativity doesn't rely on innovation. Although the better success of creativity is dependent upon innovation.