Continuous Improvement vs. Disruptive Innovation

One of the key pillars of the Toyota Way is Continuous Improvement.  The idea is that we are always relentlessly looking for ways to either eliminate problems, or to challenge the current standards.  In practice, the process of Continuous Improvement most often involves small, practical changes that are easy to implement with minimal costs.  In fact, improvements of this nature are often what senior management encourage.  I believe this is a very good strategy, since it lowers the barrier so that everyone in the company are involved to improve, regardless of the amount of improvement.

I recently have the opportunity to re-examine the patent process.  It strikes me that it is quite different than the Continuous Improvement nature of the Toyota Way.  Even though it is also a process developed to foster improvements to human lives, but the way the patent process encourages is novelty.  In other words, the concept has to be unique, and big.  This is very different than the practical, small incremental improvements encouraged by the Toyota Way.

Would it be useful for the Toyota Way to incorporate the "Patent Way"?  What kind of results would it spark?