Sorry, this entry is only available in European Spanish.
Woahhh. like me, you probably missed this due to the Summer Vacations and/or the World Cup. Let me bring you up to speed on the biggest spat at Harvard Yard since Facebook vs. the Winklevoss twins.
In the red corner Clayton Christensen, Strategist and Disruptor in Chief and the blue corner Jill Lepore, Renown Professor of American History. It started out with an article in the New Yorker and was followed by a swift riposte in Business Week. Read on…
- Lepore’s article suggests the word “disruption” is over-hyped to the point of an empty rallying cry. Yes most people throw disruption around loosely, misstating, misunderstanding and misapplying it at the same time.
- Lepore also demands more predictive proof from business theories. Right again here.
- Lepore uses the Apple iPhone as an example of where Christensen’s Disruption from below completely missed the target.
What do we think and what does it mean for you?
- Ask the workers of Blackberry vs. Apple, any LD Telco vs. Skype, any Detroit Motor Company vs. Japan and German OEMs, any US Airline vs. Southwest, Borders vs. Amazon… and you know that disruption is very real and the consumers getting a better deal love it.
- Christensen has clearly stated that he agrees with this idea and he and other researchers are continually looking to Strategy Science to improve predictability.
- While most of Christensen’s case studies look at Disruption from below (un-met needs, simpler solution, and lower cost structure), the Blackberry vs iPhone was adequately covered in our blog http://biq.com.mx/innovacion-disruptiva/#more-58 where the Feature Phones and the PC ecosystem categories were disrupted simultaneously with the creation of a completely new Smart Phone category. Christensen agreed that he miss placed the new category.
Don’t pander to the use fashionable buzz words. If a true Innovate Disrupter has you in their sights, ignore it at your own peril.