Agh I wish people would either read some of Christensen's work, or even the basic Wikipedia article, or else stop using the word 'disruptive' in this context. It's diluting a concept which used to have a very specific meaning, and has rapidly changed to mean nothing, through misuse.
This article starts off by almost calling people out, saying that people use 'disruptive' in the wrong way, but then it proceeds to make the same basic errors.
There are a few key characteristics of a disruptive innovation. One is that incumbents don't notice the changes due to market myopia. Were competitors to the vacuum unaware of the technical leaps possible due to technology? I will bet not. Another key characteristic is that it causes competitor value-networks to change. What value network changed by vacuums being adopted? The hitting-rug-with-stick value network? How much value flows through this network? Did the sweeping brush value network change? No, everyone still has a sweeping brush even now. All that happened was that consumer demands changed and a new product was adopted. But wasn't it still an amazing leap in technology? Yes! It was a 'radical innovation'!
"Disruptive" does not mean "big change". It doesn't mean
"impressive". It doesn't mean "unexpected competition". In this case, it doesn't mean "society changed over the course of a century as a new industry was created due to ancillary technological improvements".
It certainly doesn't mean "normal dynamics of industry and competition", which is how most people seem to inexplicably use it.
This article starts off by almost calling people out, saying that people use 'disruptive' in the wrong way, but then it proceeds to make the same basic errors.
There are a few key characteristics of a disruptive innovation. One is that incumbents don't notice the changes due to market myopia. Were competitors to the vacuum unaware of the technical leaps possible due to technology? I will bet not. Another key characteristic is that it causes competitor value-networks to change. What value network changed by vacuums being adopted? The hitting-rug-with-stick value network? How much value flows through this network? Did the sweeping brush value network change? No, everyone still has a sweeping brush even now. All that happened was that consumer demands changed and a new product was adopted. But wasn't it still an amazing leap in technology? Yes! It was a 'radical innovation'!
"Disruptive" does not mean "big change". It doesn't mean "impressive". It doesn't mean "unexpected competition". In this case, it doesn't mean "society changed over the course of a century as a new industry was created due to ancillary technological improvements".
It certainly doesn't mean "normal dynamics of industry and competition", which is how most people seem to inexplicably use it.