Hank [BS/MSEE,
MSM $$$, Ph.D. Mgmt] teaches On Being Disruptive
A disruptive technology or disruptive innovation is a technological innovation, product, or service that eventually overturns the existing dominant technology or status quo product in the market.
The term disruptive technology was coined by Clayton M. Christensen and introduced in his 1995 article Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave, which he coauthored with Joseph Bower. He describes the term further in his 1997 book The Innovator’s Dilemma. In his sequel, The Innovator’s Solution, Christensen replaced disruptive technology with the term disruptive innovation because he recognized that few technologies are intrinsically disruptive or sustaining in character. It is the strategy or business model that the technology enables that creates the disruptive impact. The concept of disruptive technology continues a long tradition of the identification of radical technical change in the study of innovation by economists, and the development of tools for its management at a firm or policy level.
Examples from most student’s lifetime include:
| Syndication (RSS) | Web pages | Allows for information to be gathered by a user in a central location rather than a user hunting for the information everyday. Information can be categorized/tagged to make finding it easier. Teachers/students can set up RSS feeds for unit/project topics in order to stay abreast of the overflow of information. |
| Stand-alone PCs | Google, through aquisitions, and other companies are furthering the use of networked applications which can be used by computer users without concern for computer operating systems or browser choice. These networked applications allow for users to colloborate and share. | |
| Wikis | Static Web Pages | The wiki model is disruptive because it is a low-cost alternative that brings key editing features into the hands of users. The approach increases the collaborative productivity of an organization or its extended network. The wiki allows a disconnected group to develop a coherent online culture. |
| Blogs | Journals, Diaries | Blogs or weblogs are a type of website that is easily created and easily and frequently updateable |
| Podcasts | Face to face lecture/training | Podcasts allow teachers to archive presented information for instant playback by students whenever necessary. Podcasts have the ability of being used by students to present information to others without having to be there face to face. |
| Handhelds | Data Organizers/Planners | Originally known as a PDA or Personal Digital Assistant, this device allows people to electronically store data to take with them in the palm of their hand. With people wanting more connectivity, the handheld has become more sophisticated with being able to connect to the Internet and to online resources. In an educational setting, they are more affordable than computers and have computer-like capabilities, allowing a one-to-one possibility for students. |
| IM/Chat | Face to face conversation | Allows for real-time conversation between two people regardless of geographical location. |
| Internet Telephony | Analog Telephony | A software product which provides telephone service through VoIP (Voice over IP), allowing your personal computer to act like a telephone. |
| Social Networks (i.e. Moodle, Elgg, MySpace, and Facebook) | Face to Face Interaction | Teachers and students can now communicate and collaborate with others who are passionate about an idea or topic without regard to time or geography |
| Creative Commons | Copyright | Allows for more expansive use of material and information by others who are not the original creators. |
The challenge for Purdue entrepreneurs is to take advantage of emerging disruptors before they reach mainstream.
Disruptive technologies or should I say disruptive innovation is in evitable in a world like today advancing so fast with so little time. Every day the standard microprocessor chip is being developed to be smaller and smaller, this is just an example of how fast technological advances are nowadays. Therefore, I think disruptive innovation is more of a problem than it would have been a decade ago. Businesses not only have to worry about the marketing of the product, but whether or not they are likely to see a competitive product in the next year or two. Although it may be strenuous on companies, it is because of new technologies our world is able to advance.
Not to pick on Alex, but I don’t quite agree with his examples of disruptive innovation. Quoting the original post:
“A disruptive technology or disruptive innovation is a technological innovation, product, or service that eventually overturns the existing dominant technology or status quo product in the market.”
I agree that the standard microprocessor chip is getting smaller and faster, however in my opinion I do not think think this is a disruptive innovation that overturns the existing dominant technology. The dominant technoogy is still a microprocessor chip. A disruptive innovation would be an innovation that makes a microprocessor chip obsolete and forces the Intel’s and AMD’s to follow the market and stop making the standard microprocessor and adapt to the new innovation to stay profitable (if they legally can).
Furthermore, processor speed and especially number of processors on a given chip is very over-hyped. You need software to take advantage of, for instance, a quad-chip, and in general it ain’t there. Software developers have to step up to the plate and write code that is in fact, multithreading (runs in parallel on multiple processors) before any meaningful results are to be realized. This is especially true in the Windoz World, and to a LOT lessor extent in the Linux et al realm, which is why we should all be using Fiesty Fox!
Here is an interesting link I found about a man who believes the concept of disruptive technology is one of the biggest crocks of the new millennium.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1628049,00.asp
My first experience with a disruptive technology where I actually could predict the impact the product would have on the marketplace was my first generation Ipod. When I heard about it, I had to have one as soon as possible. I ditched my cd player for a minidisc before that, and that technology was cool but more frivolous and novel than practical (based on how expensive it was, and how time consuming dubbing music from cd to md was). Ipod was everything I expected to be, and I proclaimed “this product will change the world.” If I only knew how right I was. Apple stock has taken off from ~$5/share to an excess of $100/share over the 4 years since the Ipod was released. I considered putting a couple thousand into apple stock at the end of high school, but instead I bought a dell computer. Biggest mistake of my life.
The article Jason posted is pretty interesting, but is it me or are most of the inventions he uses as examples of disruptive technology are clearly not disruptive technology, but used to prove his point and stay away from some of the harder innovations such as the ones you just read on this page.
I agree with what Jason said regarding Alex’s examples of disruptive innovation. I also am wondering why businesses need to be so worried about competition a year down the road. So far the Wiki readings have been discussing how today’s entrepreneurs are risk takers and have immense confidence in their ideas. This confidence should be evident in the product they are marketing and they should not fear competition but respect it. I doubt that many entrepreneurs, due to their confidence and pride, are scared of another business creating something better than what they have done themselves.
No matter how innovative a product is, it is always important to be aware of competition. It most definately shouldn’t be the focus, but in a time where businesses will do just about anything to make a product cheaper and better(such as outsourcing manufacturing to underdeveloped countries, etc.), it would be foolish to disregard how the competition might try to imitate or improve upon your product.
Adding on to what John said, I would think that entrepreneurs should not be scared, but embrace the fact that there are so many other innovative thinkers out there constantly striving to solve problems and improve on those solutions. It offers incentive, drives competition, and validates the existence of the product/solution to the original problem in the first place.
Isn’t that why we are getting an education in the first place? We learn to learn, take that knowledge and do research, find a hole in the market, and fix it with OUR solution. If someone else is doing the same thing, we market our differences and hopefully improve on the technology/innovation to ultimately eliminate any potential future problems.
I know that I brought up some vague opinions here, but I feel it is looking at the “big picture”, and let’s face it; if you don’t look at that, then how are you going to relate and focus on the specifics of your solution?
I really enjoyed reading the article you posted, Jason, but it seems that the author is not addressing the concept of disruptive technologies as much as the definition and the examples given by the Harvard newsletter. Clearly many of the technologies listed in the original post of this blog were disruptive and HAVE changed the shape of not just internet use, but I would argue the lifestyle of the many users of these technologies. For that reason, I don’t think it is possible to argue that they are a “crock.” They are clearly technologies and clearly disruptive, and although that article may have listed some not-so-disruptive technologies (i.e. the motorcycle taking over the dirt bike) that the Harvard newsletter claimed were disruptive, the article seems to focus on attacking the newsletter rather than the concept of disruptive technologies. I’d like to see how that person would respond to the examples Hank posted above. Surely IM/chat changed the nature of conversation for many people and I don’t think it is possible to underestimate the impact blogs have had on the processes of politics, crime solving, college admissions.