[PDF / Epub] ✅ The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (Collins Business Essentials) By Clayton M. Christensen – Saudionline.co.uk


The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (Collins Business Essentials) explained The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (Collins Business Essentials), review The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (Collins Business Essentials), trailer The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (Collins Business Essentials), box office The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (Collins Business Essentials), analysis The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (Collins Business Essentials), The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (Collins Business Essentials) ef97 Harvard Professor Clayton M Christensen Says Outstanding Companies Can Do Everything Right And Still Lose Their Market Leadership Or Worse, Disappear Completely And He Not Only Proves What He Says, He Tells Others How To Avoid A Similar FateFocusing On Disruptive Technology The Honda Super Cub, Intel S Processor, Or The Hydraulic Excavator, For Example Christensen Shows Why Most Companies Miss The Next Great Wave Whether In Electronics Or Retailing, A Successful Company With Established Products Will Get Pushed Aside Unless Managers Know When To Abandon Traditional Business Practices Using The Lessons Of Successes And Failures From Leading Companies, The Innovator S Dilemma Presents A Set Of Rules For Capitalizing On The Phenomenon Of Disruptive Innovation

  • Paperback
  • 286 pages
  • The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (Collins Business Essentials)
  • Clayton M. Christensen
  • English
  • 22 October 2019
  • 9780060521998

10 thoughts on “The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book that Will Change the Way You Do Business (Collins Business Essentials)

  1. says:

    Chances are, you re reading this review on an example of disruptive technology An iPhone or other smartphone An iPad or a notebook computer Or simply a laptop Every one of these devices turned its industry upside down when it was introduced, driving established companies to the brink of insolvency, or even into oblivion, and paving the way for new actors to enter the landscape.Today, almost instinctively, we understand the concept of disruptive technology But it wasn t until after the publication in 1995 of an article by Clayton Christensen in the Harvard Business Review entitled Disruptive technologies catching the wave that the term entered the language That seminal article was followed in 1997 by Christensen s pathfinding book, The Innovator s Dilemma one of the most influential business books of all time.Christensen, a long time professor of business administration at the Harvard Business School, had found an answer to a question that had long mystified the business community why had such iconic, well managed firms as Digital Equipment Corporation, Xerox, and dozens of others that had long led their industries fallen by the wayside The professor s answer was not that they had simply gotten behind technologically but that they had done everything right listening carefully to their best customers and catering to their needs by investing in sustaining technologies that offered customers added value The problem was that the dictates of prudent business practice prevented them from investing in the sort of innovation that could turn their own industries upside down disruptive technologies In fact, Christensen wrote, the only instances in which mainstream firms have successfully established a timely position in a disruptive technology were those in which the firms managers set up an autonomous organization charged with building a new and independent business around the disruptive technology There is something about the way decisions get made in successful organizations that sows the seeds of eventual failure A decade and a half ago this was a shattering insight and it explains the acclaim that Christensen s work has received throughout the world of business However, if you turn to his book, The Innovator s Dilemma, in search of deeper understanding of these concepts, you may be disappointed I was.Sadly, this book is organized and written in a style that reeks of old fashioned academia Chapter One, an introduction of sorts, sums up the book as a whole in 26 tedious pages, explaining in detail what the reader will find, chapter by chapter First, Chapter One briefly outlines what the book will reveal, then proceeds to repeat each point in detail Then, as though that isn t enough, each chapter repeats the same points, adding considerably detail The final chapter repeats each of the major points again The repetition is maddening And so is the overuse of the passive tense, which abounds throughout Compounding the problem are the long winded explanations of such things as how disk drives work and the distinction between thin film technology and ferrite oxide technology in disk drives read write heads All this material, no doubt necessary to prove Christensen s thesis to his academic peers some of whom are still not convinced , gives the book the charm and box office appeal of a PhD dissertation about the influence of the Greek concept of the soul in 13th Century French literature.If all you want is to get to the meat of this book and avoid slogging through endless detail about matters only an engineer could love, read the first chapter and the last one Forget the rest You ll thank me.

  2. says:

    This is a great book on innovation and how start up and entrepreneurs ought to fashion their company to go against entrenched incumbents.The gist of the book is an interesting trend the author found when analyzing the industry He found that certain innovations were disruptive meaning they changed the way a market worked, and some were sustaining meaning they were really just improvements on existing products.The author traces disruptive innovations through the steel industry, where it took 100M to build an integrated steel mill Someone one day discovered a way to make steel with a much cheaper furnace a mini mill This mini mill made steel that was ugly and weak, compared to the integrated steel mills but it was good enough for one type of steel rebar It could make rebar about 10x cheaper than the integrated steel mills, and it didn t matter that it was ugly.The integrated mills could not compete with the mini mill due to costs But, importantly, they did not want to compete Rebar was the lowest quality of steel, the most commoditized, and the customers were the least loyal and most price sensitive read difficult They were happy to walk away from that businessthey really made no money in that market anyway So the mini mills experienced almost no competition from the incumbant.After a few years the mini mills all experienced decreasing profits due to mini mills entering the market Soon, someone discovered how to make the next level of steel I forget what it was, elbow joints or something The same cycle happenedthe integrated mills walked away from a fight and the mini mills saw huge profits for a few years until they all caught up.Slowly, innovation after innovation ended up eating away all of the business from the integrated mills who never once tried to compete for the business they were losing Today there are no integrated mills in existence.This is the gist of the book if you are going to create a new company, you ought to learn from history and fashion a product that will have the existing leaders gladly walking away from the business you are fighting for.Anyway, this is a long review Great book, very thought provoking.

  3. says:

    This book was on my list of Books I should read for a long time Maybe this is why it was so disappointing, or maybe I ve just read too many modern case studies of business models to find this engaging It was interesting to read about the origins of many terms that I take for granted i.e disruptive technology , but I couldn t really relate any of the examples or theory beyond anything that s already been mentioned by other recent authors And its hard for a 20 something to relate to the modernity of disc drives.

  4. says:

    Sometimes, supply creates demand That s my summary of the book.

  5. says:

    Clayton M Christensen writes clearly and analytically, with lot s of examples and research, pleasure to read Thoughts so logical you wonder how the managers CXO s he talks about didn t figure this out by themselves already yesterday A thought provoking read no doubt, even for those not in executive positions.It s not a 100%, but gets some future predictions right fun to discover them 18 years later And it s also interesting to use the frameworks described to think about new technologies that constantly keep surfacing on this Information Age we live in It is unclear how long the marketers at Microsoft, Intel, and Seagate can succeed in creating demand for whatever functionality their technologists can supply Microsoft s Excel spreadsheet software, for example, required 1.2 MB of disk storage capacity in its version 1.2, released in 1987 Its version 5.0, released in 1995, required 32 MB of disk storage capacity Some industry observers believe that if a team of developerswere to watch typical users, they would find that functionality has substantially overshot mainstream market demands If true, this could create an opportunity for a disruptive technology applets picked off the internet and used in simple internet appliances rather than in full function computers, for example to invade this market from below So essentially Christensen predicted Google Docs, Zoho Docs and similar products in the year 1997 Or if we stretch a bit, cloud services not present on our own devices, but on far away server rooms.Tenth chapter of this book is basically the manual for approaching electric vechicles as a disruptive technology a manual for Elon Musk to build Tesla Although the conclusion the author arrives is not Tesla Model S a premium product , but rather a cheap and low range Mitsubishi iMiev or Nissan Leaf Well, that s why you don t predict, but explore and try To measure market needs, I would watch carefully what customers do, not simply listen to what they say Watching how customers actually use a product provides much reliable information than can be gleaned from a verbal interview or a focus group Thus, observations indicate that auto users today require a minimum cruising range that is, the distance that can be driven without refueling of about 125 to 150 miles most electric vehicles only offer a minimum cruising range of 50 to 80 miles Similarly, drivers seem to require cars that accelerate from 0 to 60 miles per hour in less than 10 seconds necessary primarily to merge safely into highspeed traffic from freeway entrance ramps most electric vehicles take nearly 20 seconds to get there And, finally, buyers in the mainstream market demand a wide array of options, but it would be impossible for electric vehicle manufacturers to offer a similar variety within the small initial unit volumes that will characterize that business According to almost any definition of functionality used for the vertical axis of our proposed chart, the electric vehicle will be deficient compared to a gasolinepowered car.This information is not sufficient to characterize electric vehicles as disruptive, however They will only be disruptive if we find that they are also on a trajectory of improvement that might someday make them competitive in parts of the mainstream market The trajectories of performance improvement demanded in the market whether measured in terms of required acceleration, cruising range, or top cruising speed are relatively flat This is because traffic laws impose a limit on the usefulness of ever powerful cars, and demographic, economic, and geographic considerations limit the increase in commuting miles for the average driver to less than 1 percent per year At the same time, the performance of electric vehicles is improving at a faster rate between 2 and 4 percent per year suggesting that sustaining technological advances might indeed carry electric vehicles from their position today, where they cannot compete in mainstream markets, to a position in the future where they might If present rates of improvement continue, however, we would expect the cruising range of electric cars, for example, to intersect with the average range demanded in the mainstream market by 2015, and electric vechicle acceleration to intersect with mainstream demands by 2020 To which one living in 2015 can chuckle Tesla Model S came out in 2012 and it definitely beats any average acceleration and range demands Actually any electric vehicle in production accelerates like a mad horse.And a last piece for my memo the parameters by which customers compare the products on the market from left to right FUNCTIONALITY RELIABILITY CONVENIENCE PRICE.In a young market, functionality is almost the same for all products, then they will start looking at reliability to differentiate the product If that becomes the same, they will look at convenience And if the products have become all three, the last thing basically will be a price war.

  6. says:

    This is one of the best books on innovation in the last 20 years I read it in 2000 and still refer to it Christensen s core insight argument is that businesses fight shy of developing innovations that will 1 produce limit profits initially 2 cannibalise core, high cashflow profit lines But that what look like niche technologies Winchester drives, hydraulic backhoes, etc improve in capability, reliability and reduce in price to the point that they entirely cannibalise the existing market, leaving the established players high and dry, with no new product lines In a way he is reposing the falling rate of profit thesis He suggests some rather less convincing solutions in the book, and expounded further in The Innovator s Solution Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth I would argue that Apple presents an interesting solution to this challenge, with its creation of new product lines that complement and build on but, largely, don t cannibalise its existing product lines.

  7. says:

    A good book, but a bit disappointing because totally centred upon business managing I would like to see the discussion occurring at a lower level, the creative moment, before management decisions Leave here the five principles stated by Clayton in the book I generally agree with all of them, being the fifth one the most subjective Principle 1 Companies Depend on Customers and Investors for ResourcesPrinciple 2 Small Markets Don t Solve the Growth Needs of Large CompaniesPrinciple 3 Markets that Don t Exist Can t Be AnalyzedPrinciple 4 An Organization s Capabilities Define Its DisabilitiesPrinciple 5 Technology Supply May Not Equal Market Demand

  8. says:

    This is one of those books that becomes an instant classic Everyone talks about it until you think you know most of what it has to say without reading it shortly after it comes out You can barely carry on a conversation about technology without someone using the term disruptive It deserves that reception and as with most cases, there is much to gain by reading the book than just the popular representation.The book defined disruptive technologies vs sustaining technologies and addresses why good, established companies usually dominate and prosper with new sustaining technologies and often fail or are even displaced because of disruptive technologies It shows how such companies can cope with the challenge to maximize their chances even though there are systemic biases against it given how an established company must approach resource allocation.In my own career, I m generally in the place of the smaller companies that effectively utilize disruptive technologies rather than with large, established firms with that problem It is equally valuable from that perspective because it sheds light on some of the advantages that are felt but perhaps not fully identified and guidance on how you might better exploit them.This book ought to be read by most people interested in business and certainly everyone occupied with computer technology.

  9. says:

    Well, this is a mixed bag, this interesting little book The observations are prescient but the presentation is abominable I m sure for those who demand an exhaustive regurgitation of every step in an analysis, it is useful, but I felt that most of the book could have been the research appendices On the other hand, the conclusions drawn were incisive and incredibly useful It would have worked well if it had been presented as a research paper with a 10 page abstract As a practitioner, I could be pretty hard on it because it s missing application, but I get that it was meant to be academic in its approach, and I m big enough to draw my own conclusions about implementation Very dry read Very good analysis.

  10. says:

    The subject of this classic is disruptive technology.With the help of many examples from industry disk drives being his main workhorse the author explains what technologies are likely to disrupt, who is likely to be disrupted, why they are likely to be disrupted and what the choices are that the established players have when presented with disruption The most important point is that disruption generally comes from the practice of repackaging and marketing already existing, straightforward technology at a lower price point to a new customer base that is not economically viable for the established players For example, QuickBooks was marketed to mom and pop stores who could not afford to pay an accountant and it was the el cheapo version of Quicken It is of no use to a proper corporation JC Bamford got started with hydraulic backhoes that were good enough for small contractors looking to dig a small ditch but wholly inadequate for the purposes of a miner 5.25 inch disk drives were marketed to the nascent market for personal computers and were of no use to minicomputer manufacturers.Disruptive technology is cheaper per unit, but its price performance ratio is much worse than that of the established technology It s not good enough for the clients of the established players Ergo it must be sold on its lower price alone, meaning that its purveyors must seek new markets Flash memory, for example, was first used in cameras, pacemakers etc Not in computers There is a large number of reasons that established players will frown upon the new technology 1 Good companies listen to their clients Their clients will tell them they don t want it They will demand performance and they will pay for performance.2 Profitability will be lower in the lower margin disruptive technology Profit margins will typically mirror cost structures and will thus be higher for the higher end product Established players will in the short term make money if they allocate their resources toward not falling behind their immediate competition for the higher end product i.e sustaining their competitive edge in the higher margin higher tech market 3 The processes used by the established players to sell and support the established technology may not be the right ones for the new tech.The main thing to realize is that the technology does not live by itself It is embedded in a value network A car serves a commuter, a digger serves a mine, a disk drive is screwed down somewhere in a computer etc The seeds of disruption lie in the fact that the technology itself and its value network may not necessarily be progressing at the same speed.If the technology is improving much faster than the trajectory of improvement of the value network for example, if the desktop PC users demand extra disk storage slower than the industry is capable of delivering extra disk storage , then1 The point comes when the value network of the established technology does not need the incremental improvements on which the established players are competing with one another to deliver 2 More importantly, a point comes when the performance of the disruptive technology becomes good enough to be embedded in the value network of the established technology So 3.5 inch disks developed for laptops can do good enough a job for a desktop, for example, without taking up the space required for a 5.25 inch disk.It gets worse sure, disruptive technology is deficient in terms of features performance, but the price sensitive customers who do not care so much about performance often care a lot about reliability A small contractor who buys a single backhoe digger cannot afford a maintenance team Similarly, the unsophisticated customers of the disruptive technology may care a lot about ease of use Mom and pop using Quickbooks have no idea what double entry book keeping is What this means is that when the performance of the disruptive technology has become good enough for it to be embedded into the value network of the established technology, it often brings with it an advantage in reliability and ease of use.So at that point the disruptive technology is cheaper, reliable and easier to use than the established technology, all while delivering adequate performance And that s how purveyors of the established technology who have been at war with one another to deliver on the ever increasing performance their customers have been demanding find themselves at a disadvantage versus the disruptors when it comes to reliability and ease of use right about when their customers tell them they won t pay for extra performance or features any .The disadvantage of the lower tech disruptor has created an advantage and it s game, set and match What s an established player to do If I m running a super successful company and I spot a new technology what am I to do One thing I should not do is listen to my underlings The dealers who sell my cars will not want a customer who just walked into the dealership to buy a V8 to drive out in a small electric car The salespeople will keep asking me for the most expensive product because they will be paid a commission on their margin and will keep pushing me north east on the price performance chart Resistance to disruptive technology often comes from the rank and file.I also should not listen to my shareholders Small markets and all disruptive technology starts small do not solve the growth problems of large companies.First and foremost, I must understand that the challenge I face is a MARKETING challenge The tech I ve got covered The resources too.If my company s processes and my company s values defined as the standards by which employees make choices involving prioritization are aligned with the marketing challenge, I m in luck chances are that for my company this new technology will eventually become a sustaining technology I can get my wallet out and buy EARLY a couple of the new entrants Early enough that my money is not buying process or values or culture, but merely assets resources and ideally walking and talking resources the founders who will adopt the processes and values of my organization.Alternatively, I can carve out some great people from my organization and 1 Give them responsibility for the new technology and assign to them the task of identifying the customers for this new technology2 Match the size of this new subdivision to the current size of the market.3 Allow them to discover the size of the opportunity, rather than burden them with having to forecast it the ultimate uses or applications for disruptive technologies are unknowable in advance 4 Let them fail small, as many times as necessaryThat s what IBM did when they ran their PC business out of Florida and what HP did when they realized ink jets would one day compete with laser printers If, on the other hand, my company s processes or my company s values are not aligned with the marketing challenge, then I need to buy a leader in the new technology, and have a finger in every pie And I need to protect my acquired company from my organization This is, obviously, a bigger challenge and one my shareholders may not embrace, as their dollars are as good as mine, but the author stays away from this discussion As the succession in technologies plays out, I will then eliminate large parts of my current organization The author cites an occasion on which this is exactly how things played out.And there you have it I think that s the author s answer to The Innovator s Dilemma Obviously, that s a very quick sketch You ll have to buy the book to see the complete story and to be convinced, I suppose Be warned that in the interest of keeping the various chapters self consistent you may find some repetition, but overall this is a very quick read.I m aware of people who really dislike Clayton Christensen I ve even come across a Twitter account that s dedicated to trashing him But I, for one, was convinced that he s describing a valid concept with many applications.Also, as a guy who established a disruptive business within an established player I totally experienced both the dismay of my superiors when they realized that small markets don t solve the problems of large organizations and the discomfort of trying to shoehorn my project into the rather baroque established processes So I have lived through many of the steps the book describes and I reckon they are rendered very accurately The research shows

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *