Dvorak Claims Disruptive Technologies Don't Exist
Grok Headline matches for Dvorak Claims Disruptive Technologies Don't Exist
Disruptive Technologies Are Boring And
That's Their Secret
Disruptive Technologies Are Boring And
That's Their Secret
05/19/2004 07:17 PMWhile most of this article focuses on other elements of conversations
between two of my favorite strategic thinks, Clayton Christensen and
Andy Grove, there is a great quote where Grove points out the
Christensen the problem with talking about how "disruptive
technologies" come out of nowhere to surprise established companies:
"Clay, I see
what's wrong with your idea. You shouldn't call them disruptive
technologies, you should call them straight, boring technologies."
That sentence alone explains why so many companies still fail to see
the threats of disruptive technologies. Christensen's work is now
quite famous, and it's difficult to find a tech exec who hasn't (said
they've) read it. You also hear execs all the time talk about how
they now know to pay attention to disruptive technologies - but you
still see them missing the boat, often while exclaiming how vigilant
they are in spotting disruptive technologies. Grove's point goes a
long way towards explaining that (even if half-jokingly). Most execs
ignore disruptive technologies because they don't think they're
actually disruptive. They're "straight, boring" technologies that
don't seem likely to create a profit. That also corrects that fallacy
the disruptive technologies "come out of nowhere." That's rarely
true. The reason they seem to come out of nowhere is that established
companies ignore them for so long, that by the time they do realize
they're a threat, it's too late.
Mosaid drops one of 10 claims in patent
dispute against Infineon Technologies
Mosaid drops one of 10 claims in patent
dispute against Infineon Technologies
05/21/2004 12:52 PMNational Post May 21 2004 4:27PM GMT
Tessera Technologies Amends Filing of
Patent Infringement Suit to Include
Anti-Trust Claims
Tessera Technologies Amends Filing of
Patent Infringement Suit to Include
Anti-Trust Claims
04/16/2005 02:13 AMECN Apr 16 2005 4:46AM GMT
Disruptive insight
Disruptive insight
04/09/2004 04:06 PMIdeas that were once fresh and innovative eventually become stale and
hackneyed. A simple insight, convincingly ...
Disruptive Innovation: The Need for a
Better Methodology
Disruptive Innovation: The Need for a
Better Methodology
06/05/2005 11:12 PM
The
Innovator's Solution tells you what you need to do to cannibalize the
markets of incumbents and create entirely new markets, by focusing on
the needs of over-served customers and non-customers. But it's a lot
harder in practice than in theory, and it needs some unique skills and
hard-to-obtain knowledge.
[Posted from Orlando]
In
previous articles, I've summarized Clay Christensen's approach
to innovation (established companies focus on what he calls
'sustaining' innovations while new entrants focus on 'disruptive'
ones), and about the research approach that he suggests for
identifying and assessing innovation opportunities.
His second book, The
Innovator's Solution, looks
in greater detail at
disruptive innovation,
which he breaks into two types:
- Low End Disruptive
Innovation: This entails offering a
lower-cost product to existing
over-served customers, which incumbents don't care
about because they're at the low-margin end of their customer base;
then as
technology improves, the disruptor gradually eats into the incumbents'
primary markets from
below.
The classic example
of this is steel minimills, which initially focused on the low-end,
low-margin rebar market (which the integrated steel makers were
pleased to vacate), but then used new technology to move upscale to
the
point they have now stolen even the high-end market (sheet steel) from
the giants. To achieve this, it's essential that the innovation not be
suitable to or
adaptable by the incumbents -- that they don't find the disruptor's
initial business model attractive; otherwise, the incumbents will
bring
their considerable resources and strong customer relationships to bear
to make the innovation a 'sustaining' one for them, and ward off and defeat the
disruption attempt.
- New Market Disruptive
Innovation: This entails developing and offering a
product with benefits previously not
available at all or which are very inconvenient to customers, and
hence creating entirely new markets for entirely new groups of
customers. The
personal computer and personal copier are examples of this. In some
cases a New Market Disruptive Innovation can later be applied to
become
a Low End Disruptive Innovation as well.
The part of Innovator's
Solution that most intrigued me was the section on how
to identify potential disruptions and how to identify customers for
them. To identify potential disruptions, he suggests, you should
'segment' the market by
the circumstances
of use of the product or potential product
(i.e. what the product gets 'hired to do' or
what 'job it does' that needs to be done), rather than by customer
identity
(demographics) or product attributes (category). The focus is
therefore on when/why/how
it would it be used, not what
it would feature or who would
use it. This is a needs-driven
strategy, requiring a lot of
research & cultural anthropology. It means discovering who needs
'coolth', and when and how they need it, not who needs an air
conditioner.
This is hard for established, risk-averse, inflexible companies to do
because:
- they have a fear of too
much focus (putting all their eggs in one basket, in case it's the
wrong basket);
- their shareholders and existing line managers insist
on being able to quantify outcomes in
advance;
- their existing channels are organized by product
or customer demographic, not circumstances of use; and
- their
advertising and branding are
also done
by product or customer demographic.
Hence it is often best
to have the innovation in established companies done by a
new, autonomous division or group, free from the constraints,
prejudices, risk-aversion and 'why rock the boat' thinking of the
existing operations.
To identify customers for disruptive innovations, Christensen says you
need to look for:
- People and companies who have a need
but lack the money or skill to meet
it with existing products;
- People and companies who have no alternative way
today to do the job your product or service could help them do; and,
of course,
- People and companies who are over-served,
interested in a
lower-cost, simpler product without all the extraneous and rarely-used
bells and whistles of current products.
It's important that these potential customers perceive the product to
be 'foolproof': easy to use, easy to learn, easy to buy (though if the
product is for recreational use, customers may buy a product with a
steeper learning curve if the learning is fun).
Equally important is that there be available, and hungry, channel
partners (sources of supply, distributors,
retailers, marketers etc.) to help you get it to market -- if these
partners and their materials and skills are scarce, or disinterested
in
you, customers may give up on you before you're able to deliver
reliably.
The rest of the book provides suggestions on the right
roles for your company in developing the
innovation, how to partner with other appropriate companies to
optimize
competencies and synergy, how to find the
non-commodity, high profit points in the customer
value chain, the importance of setting up the right
people, process, values, alliances and
organizational structure for innovation, how to align your strategy to
support innovation (using an emergent,
complex system-friendly
strategy), and how to address financing and risk issues in innovation
ventures.
The final section addresses the role of senior management in
disruptive
innovation. Leaders, he says, must exercise three key
responsibilities:
(a) allocate appropriate,
patient resources; (b) establish a process to continuously generate
disruptive innovations; and (c) detect and adapt to changes in markets
and
other elements of the system. The four elements of a 'disruptive
growth
engine' therefore are:
- start before you need to
(don't wait for a crisis);
- put a senior manager in charge
(executive sponsorship is essential);
- create an expert
team of movers and shapers (and allow them to 'self-manage' the
people,
processes, and values to keep them in sync with the commercialization
process for disruptive innovations); and
- train the troops
(i.e. customer-facing people to discover and tap into emerging and
potential needs)
In these areas, Christensen is on comfortable and solid ground.
But I keep coming back in my thinking to how an organization can
actually apply his earlier
advice
on how to identify potential disruptive innovations and how to
identify
customers for them (and which comes first anyway?) It's a lot easier
in theory than it is in practice, as I can tell you from personal
experience.
Let's take the example of a company that has expertise in the textile
industry, for example. They have an established market in specialized
blankets, and some scientific expertise in weaving and in thermal
properties of materials. If they're threatened by new low-cost Asian
competitors in this mature market space, how would they go about
becoming a disruptive innovator? They wouldn't talk to existing
customers -- that's for sustaining
innovation not disruptive innovation. They wouldn't do competitive
analysis -- except perhaps if they could identify some over-served
customers. Other than raw imagination and a lot of serendipitous
reading and lateral thinking, it's hard to imagine how such a company,
even with a separate, empowered innovation team, could begin to
identify either the unmet needs within their competency to deliver, or
the customers that have these needs.
What Christensen needs to add is a whole process to surface these
needs
and customers. Who, other than established buyers of blankets, might
be
interested in textiles with thermal properties? Hospitals and doctors
dealing with hypothermia? Insulation companies? Gardeners and farmers
seeking to protect crops from frost? Swimming pool cover
manufacturers?
Expedition outfitters? And since good thermal properties also insulate
against heat, should we also consider cooler manufacturers,
refrigerators, umbrella makers, UV-ray protectors etc.? The
possibilities are endless. How do we effectively brainstorm and then
filter the potential customers and potential opportunities?
The answer, I think, is a discovery process, but one somewhat
different
and more dependent on brainstorming, creativity, very broad
environmental scanning, research, cultural anthropology and
exploratory
conversations than the one I have suggested<
/a> for achieving understanding in complex situations.
How, do you think, should such a discovery process be structured? If
it
were your job to develop the process to find new customers for new
products meeting new untapped needs, that are within your company's
competency to provide, how would you go about it?
This process just might be the holy grail of entrepreneurship.
|
Microsoft: Windows XP SP2 Will be
Disruptive
Microsoft: Windows XP SP2 Will be
Disruptive
03/06/2004 02:02 AMThe software giant has created an online training course for
developers to explain the implications of the security-centric OS
service pack.
Virtualisation 'most disruptive PC
technology'
Virtualisation 'most disruptive PC
technology'
08/10/2004 12:28 PMInfomatics Aug 10 2004 4:07PM GMT
BitTorrent and RSS Create Disruptive
Revolution.
BitTorrent and RSS Create Disruptive
Revolution.
12/15/2003 11:34 PMSteve Gillmor:
BitTorrent
and RSS Create Disruptive Revolution. BitTorrent as it is today is
not suitable for distributing RSS feeds, because the centralized
tracker uses just as much bandwidth as a modern Web server. P2P news
delivery is a great concept, but to make BitTorrent suitable for RSS
you'd have to make enough changes that you might as well start from
scratch. I'm still holding out for
Newswire as the solution.
BitTorrent and RSS Create Disruptive
Revolution
BitTorrent and RSS Create Disruptive
Revolution
12/16/2003 12:29 PMBitTorrent and RSS Create Disruptive Revolution .. syndication
requires full posts, not headlines .. Steve Gillmor ..
opportunity
eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1413403,00.asp
track this
site | 5 links
New technique can help tame disruptive
kids
New technique can help tame disruptive
kids
03/23/2005 08:01 AMChicago Tribune Mar 23 2005 12:02PM GMT
VON Highlights Disruptive Tendencies of
VOIP
VON Highlights Disruptive Tendencies of
VOIP
06/09/2004 02:11 PMCurrent business models for voice no longer work, says an analyst at
the VON Europe show.
I think, therefore I Dvorak
I think, therefore I Dvorak
09/04/2004 03:58 PM While my capacity as a journalist on Spymac.com can certainly be
questioned, I am, in real life, an editor at a fairly well-respected
daily newspaper in Rhode Island. Since I signed on to this online gig,
I’ve done my best to walk the fine line between fact and opinion,
while still providing the faithful readers of this site with a fresh
thought or a different perspective (or at least something to rile
against on Sunday morning).
The Internet is a place where everyone can have an opinion, but once
one reaches the capacity of paid correspondent, there are certain
rules that need to be followed. Granted, they are less strict than
print journalism, but — even when writing pure commentary — a certain
degree of fact should be printed somewhere therein, lest the piece
joins the ranks of the juvenile, all-too-common posts that litter the
Web. The Internet is a valuable resource, but all is not to be
trusted.
That being said, when I surf to CBS MarketWatch, I expect to receive
one of two things: an intelligent piece of news, or a well-presented
opinion that puts something into an original, thoughtful perspective.
What I don’t expect to read is an unadulterated bashing of a product
with little regard for any integrity whatsoever.
While I’ve never been a fan of John C. Dvorak’s work, his weekly
columns rarely present much more than a slightly-skewed take on a hot
tech topic. It’s clear that he’s no Mac fan, but I’ve often been able
to see his side of things and, while I usually disagree, I can give
him him benefit of the doubt.
Not this time, though.
From Phil Schiller to the iMac, the silhouette ads to Spotlight,
everything that came out of the keynote yesterday is summarily slammed
by Dvorak, and for no good reason other than a deadline. It seems as
though this article was conceived weeks ago, and whatever came out of
yesterday’s presentation would have somehow crammed itself into its
frame, much like the way he describes the iMac’s design:
<I>The architecture is risky. First of all, they jammed the
entire computer into the screen, making the idea of changing
"monitors" or screens impractical.</I>
Yeah, because I’m always switching screens on my Cinema Display.
<I>Apple seems to have lost track of time… the design is hardly
inspirational. In fact, if you put two headlamps on it and a metal sun
visor over its "windshield," it would be reminiscent of a
1954 DeSoto.</I>
Let’s be <A
HREF=”http://www.desoto.org/modules/ContentExpress/img_repository/1954
desoto.jpg">serious</A>.
<I>Observers on the Net are seeing this design as a precursor to
an Apple notepad computer. To date, the notepad revolution, as
predicted by Bill Gates, has been as successful as Blue
Pepsi.</I>
Is it really fair to tell someone what they’re thinking and then poke
fun at them for thinking it?
<I>The machine comes in one old-fashioned color: 1988 platinum
white… This unit is so white that when you visit the Apple Web site,
you can barely see the computer as it disappears into the background
of the site itself.</I>
Oh, so that’s why they had to use that blue background…
<I>Schiller spent a lot of time bragging about Apple's 59
percent market share in the MP3 player market. Is this something to be
proud of? Where does this market head? Almost anything with a small
amount of memory can be turned into an MP3 player nowadays; you just
need a headphone jack.</I>
And he goes on like this, until he ultimately concludes that the iMac
will ruin Apple. Granted, we tech writers are entitled to our
opinions, and in the battle between Macs and Wintel boxes, the lines
are drawn fairly deep. Try as we may, we tech writers can’t hide our
true feelings, but we do have an obligation of some sort to at least
<I>try</I> to be objective.
Well, compared to Mr. Dvorac anyway, I should win a Pulitzer.
More Crap From Dvorak
More Crap From Dvorak
12/29/2004 03:30 AMI thought about doing a detailed rebuttal about John Dvorak's latest
turd, Grim Macintosh Market Share Forebodes Crisis, but I couldn't get
past the second sentence before I realized that a thorough debunking
would take more time than I have....
even dvorak liked nextfest
even dvorak liked nextfest
05/18/2004 12:05 PMcongrats to the wired team for putting on an event that actually gets
people excited
Other News: Dvorak
Other News: Dvorak
09/02/2004 10:30 AM"Pricey and faddish"? That's what John Dvorak calls the new iMac.
dvorak dumps on socsoft
dvorak dumps on socsoft
02/16/2004 05:30 PMhis complaints are getting within a few weeks of being timely these
days... he must be reading blogs
Dvorak Channels Markoff
Dvorak Channels Markoff
01/05/2005 03:11 AMZDNet Jan 5 2005 6:32AM GMT
Dvorak: I'm smoking crack
Dvorak: I'm smoking crack
03/21/2003 01:36 PM Apple to
switch to Intel processors, at least according to John Dvorak in a
brief article over at PC Magazine. No mention in the article of the
massive amount of effort required to re-write every piece of
mac-compatible software for x86 architecture, or the unlikeliness of
developers to be willing to do so having just optimized for OSX, but
then, this piece seems to be mostly just bold, unsupported
predictions.
dvorak revels in misanthropy
dvorak revels in misanthropy
04/20/2004 02:00 PMThe World's Best Troll uses his hatred of humans to justify demonizing
chat
does not exist
does not exist
04/07/2005 03:07 PMverdictslaska.com/malpractice/jackpot.pdf
track this
site | 2 links
802.16e positioned to compete against
mobile broadband wireless technologies
such as cellular, the proposed 802.20,
and proprietary technologies
802.16e positioned to compete against
mobile broadband wireless technologies
such as cellular, the proposed 802.20,
and proprietary technologies
08/29/2004 03:57 AM [PRWEB Aug 29, 2004]
TransAct Technologies Responds to
Questions Related to Its Patent
Allowance Covering Technologies in Its
Epic
TransAct Technologies Responds to
Questions Related to Its Patent
Allowance Covering Technologies in Its
Epic
04/07/2005 07:33 AMdBusinessNews.com Apr 7 2005 10:26AM GMT
Disruptive Innovations Wins Contracts to
Provide Mozila-Based Solutions to Two
Major European Firms
Disruptive Innovations Wins Contracts to
Provide Mozila-Based Solutions to Two
Major European Firms
04/16/2004 11:43 PMEnpar Technologies raises stake in Green
Environmental Technologies to 19.7%
Enpar Technologies raises stake in Green
Environmental Technologies to 19.7%
02/14/2004 10:52 AMCanadian Press Feb 14 2004 2:11PM GMT
dvorak on history's worst laptops
dvorak on history's worst laptops
08/03/2004 11:01 AMi remember some of these stinkers
Newton II in January? Dvorak thinks
so...
Newton II in January? Dvorak thinks
so...
11/10/2003 10:59 PMIn an article on PC Magazine's Web site, John C...
Ten Worst Laptops of All Time According
to Dvorak
Ten Worst Laptops of All Time According
to Dvorak
08/03/2004 02:32 PM
Dvorak gets all
bloggy about the '10 Worst Laptops of All Time,' asking for readers to
chime in with more information about the products he thinks he might
of once seen (if he could only remember the name or model number). And
for as fuzzy as his memory is about which product he's actually
talking about is, he sure does remember when Salon magazine made fun
of him five years ago just fine. Article highlight: Saying that the
Number One Worst Laptop "could also easily appear on the ten-best
list." Wouldn't that make it, I dunno, more like a Number Five, or
maybe Number One Thousand?
Read - Bottom Ten List: Worst of the Laptops
[PCMag]
Dvorak: Apple will go Intel within 18
months
Dvorak: Apple will go Intel within 18
months
03/20/2003 08:33 AMDvorak: Apple will go Intel in 12-18
months
Dvorak: Apple will go Intel in 12-18
months
03/20/2003 09:37 AMPC Magazine's John Dvorak is predicting that Apple will switch to
Intel processors within the next 12 to 18 months...
Dvorak international keyboard layout for
xkb 1.1
Dvorak international keyboard layout for
xkb 1.1
07/09/2004 04:43 PMA Dvorak international keyboard layout for use with the xkb keyboard
mapper.
Notes and Tips: Dvorak Thoughts
Notes and Tips: Dvorak Thoughts
01/05/2005 02:00 PMReaders offer a few final thoughts about "shock jock" John and his
slimy statistics.
Information Does Not Exist?
Information Does Not Exist?
04/01/2005 07:45 PMUnderstanding and Reading a Blog -- John
C. Dvorak
Understanding and Reading a Blog -- John
C. Dvorak
12/22/2004 01:06 AMUnderstanding and Reading a Blog (for Newcomers) .. John Dvorak has
your answers .. How to read a
weblog
dvorak.org/blog/primer/blogprimer1.htm
track this
site | 3 links
Dvorak predicts Apple will move to Intel
Dvorak predicts Apple will move to Intel
03/20/2003 03:15 PMSelf-proclaimed Apple "expert" John Dvorak, who loves to predict
Apple's death every few months, now
predicts
that Apple will switch to Intel within 18 months.
At least he isn't predicting Apple's death, for a change.
Dvorak: New Commentary betrays aging
vision
Dvorak: New Commentary betrays aging
vision
09/02/2004 11:16 PMYou can always depend on John C. Dvorak to miss the point.
His latest anti-Apple
tirade begins with unwarranted attacks on Philip Schiller, moves
on to display impatience with the keynote time spent lauding the iPod
and finishes up with uninspired criticisms of the new iMac.
"The machine comes in one old-fashioned color: 1988 platinum
white," he whines.
"[The design is] hardly jazzy or interesting," he complains.
It all sounds more like the grumbling of that angry old man that used
to shoo my friends and I off his lawn when I was younger and not the
insightful writings of a technology commentator.
Dvorak: iMac G5 'reminiscent of 1954
DeSoto'
Dvorak: iMac G5 'reminiscent of 1954
DeSoto'
09/02/2004 05:55 PMAfter taking several jabs at Phil Schiller, Apple's senior vice
president for worldwide product marketing, John C...
What If Dark Matter Really Doesn't
Exist?
What If Dark Matter Really Doesn't
Exist?
02/10/2004 02:52 AMSlashdot Feb 9 2004 10:14PM GMT
Do black holes really exist?
Do black holes really exist?
04/04/2005 12:24 AMDo black holes really exist? One physicist is challenging
conventional wisdom with his view that what we call black holes are
actually stars made of dark energy, formed by the collapse of some
stars. If true, there goes a staple of science fiction writers.
In addition, there's news on a "cyberman" who can control a robotic
arm with his mind. This week's Science.Ars also covers a rather
alarming report on the impact humankind is having on our home
planet.
The most comprehensive global study on humankind’s
impact on the planet has just been published, and it’s anything but
good news. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, con-ducted over 4
years by 1,300 scientists from 95 countries was released on Wednesday,
and makes grim reading.
Read on for a summary of the report as well as other bits of news
from the world of science.
"black holes cannot and do not exist"
"black holes cannot and do not exist"
04/05/2005 06:37 AMGrok Description matches for Dvorak Claims Disruptive Technologies Don't Exist
GrokA matches for Dvorak Claims Disruptive Technologies Don't Exist
Dvorak Claims Disruptive Technologies Don't Exist
