recentpopularlog in

jerryking : clayton_christensen   56

Opinion | Tech Loses a Prophet. Just When It Needs One.
Jan. 29, 2020 | The New York Times | By Kara Swisher, Ms. Swisher covers technology and is a contributing opinion writer.

* “How Will You Measure Your Life?” by Clay Christensen.
* The Intel founder and chief executive Andy Grove was a fan. So was the Apple legend Steve Jobs. Both men were doubtlessly attracted to the idea that start-ups made up of outsiders could find ways to create new markets and new value — and disrupt and overwhelm established companies.
* Professor Christensen’s formula was elegant: “First, disruptive products are simpler and cheaper; they generally promise lower margins, not greater profits. Second, disruptive technologies typically are first commercialized in emerging or insignificant markets. And third, leading firms’ most profitable customers generally don’t want, and indeed initially can’t use, products based on disruptive technologies.”
* though no fault of Professor Christensen’s, disruptive innovation took a turn for the worse in tech. Silicon Valley failed to marry disruption with a concept of corporate responsibility, and growth at all costs became its motto. The more measured approach that Professor Christensen taught was ignored.
* “It’s easier to hold your principles 100 percent of the time than it is to hold them 98 percent of the time.”
* “In fact, how you allocate your own resources can make your life turn out to be exactly as you hope or very different from what you intend.”
* “Decide what you stand for. And then stand for it all the time.”
advice  Andy_Grove  books  Clayton_Christensen  disruption  ideas  Kara_Swisher  principles  prophets  resource_allocation  self-help  Silicon_Valley  Steve_Jobs  technology  tributes 
23 days ago by jerryking
Rethinking McKinsey - Schumpeter
Nov 21st 2019

Six years ago, Clayton Christensen of Harvard Business School warned that it was an industry “on the cusp of disruption”. Now that disruption is in full swing. According to Tom Rodenhauser of alm Intelligence, which analyses the industry, clients no longer just want to hire legions of people, however brainy they are. They want consultants to provide and install products, including new technologies, that transform them from top to bottom and keep disrupters at bay. Advice on strategy, which used to be meat and potatoes for firms like McKinsey and its peers, Bain and the Boston Consulting Group (bcg), is now a side dish; it accounts for about a tenth of revenues.

Mr Sneader could keep things ticking over as they are, at least for a while. Clients have shrugged off the media attention. McKinsey’s revenue has grown in recent years, to roughly $10bn. And the firm still attracts armies of aspiring candidates—last year 800,000 applied for 8,000 jobs. But he is making changes. McKinsey says it is “addressing the changing panorama both internally and externally”. Partly in response to the South Africa debacle, its standards and processes for selecting clients have been beefed up. Partners are discouraged from doing work for undemocratic governments.

McKinsey has also made advising on technology more integral to its business. It worked with 1,200 companies on digital and analytics issues last year. It creates and sells tools for companies to use in their businesses, which generates new sources of recurring revenues. And it has bought a dozen companies since 2011, including QuantumBlack, a British startup that developed advanced data analytics for Formula One. Nonetheless, industry-watchers say McKinsey is often outspent by the technology offerings of the Big Four, as well as by firms like Accenture.

Downsizing consultants
Mr Sneader should go further: that means getting leaner by ditching activities, clients and teams that bring in more headaches than cash, and investing in technology.
analytics  Bain  BCG  Clayton_Christensen  digital_strategies  disruption  Formula_One  management_consulting  McKinsey  scandals  strategy  tools 
12 weeks ago by jerryking
Why big companies squander good ideas
August 6, 2018 | | Financial Times | Tim Harford

.....Organisations from newspapers to oil majors to computing giants have persistently struggled to embrace new technological opportunities, or recognise new technological threats, even when the threats are mortal or the opportunities are golden. Why do some ideas slip out of the grasp of incumbents, then thrive in the hands of upstarts?.....“Disruption describes what happens when firms fail because they keep making the kinds of choices that made them successful,” says Joshua Gans, an economist at the Rotman School of Management in Toronto and author of The Disruption Dilemma. Successful organisations stick to their once-triumphant strategies, even as the world changes around them. More horses! More forage!

Why does this happen? Easily the most famous explanation comes from Clayton Christensen of Harvard Business School. Christensen’s 1997 book, The Innovator’s Dilemma, told a compelling story about how new technologies creep up from below: they are flawed or under-developed at first, so do not appeal to existing customers. Holiday snappers do not want to buy digital cameras the size of a shoebox and the price of a car.

However, Christensen explains, these technologies do find customers: people with unusual needs previously unserved by the incumbent players. The new technology gets better and, one day, the incumbent wakes up to discover that an upstart challenger has several years’ head start — and once-loyal customers have jumped ship.
............Within academia, Rebecca Henderson’s ideas about architectural innovation are widely cited, and she is one of only two academics at Harvard Business School to hold the rank of university professor. The casual observer of business theories, however, is far more likely to have heard of Clayton Christensen, one of the most famous management gurus on the planet.

That may be because Christensen has a single clear theory of how disruption happens — and a solution, too: disrupt yourself before you are disrupted by someone else. That elegance is something we tend to find appealing.

The reality of disruption is less elegant — and harder to solve. Kodak’s position may well have been impossible, no matter what managers had done. If so, the most profitable response would have been to vanish gracefully.

“There are multiple points of failure,” says Henderson. “There’s the problem of reorganisation. There’s the question of whether the new idea will be profitable. There are cognitive filters. There is more than one kind of denial. To navigate successfully through, an incumbent organisation has to overcome every one of these obstacles.”

......Henderson added that the innovators — like Fuller — are often difficult people. “The people who bug large organisations to do new things are socially awkward, slightly fanatical and politically often hopelessly naive.” Another point of failure......The message of Henderson’s work with Kim Clark and others is that when companies or institutions are faced with an organisationally disruptive innovation, there is no simple solution. There may be no solution at all. “I’m sorry it’s not more management guru-ish,” she tells me, laughing. “But anybody who’s really any good at this will tell you that this is hard.”
Apple  blitzkrieg  disruption  ideas  IBM  innovation  iPod  missed_opportunities  hard_work  Rotman  Steve_Jobs  theory  Tim_Harford  upstarts  large_companies  WWI  Xerox  Walkman  Clayton_Christensen  organizational_change  organizational_structure  MPOF  militaries  digital_cameras 
september 2018 by jerryking
J.Crew’s Mickey Drexler Confesses: I Underestimated How Tech Would Upend Retail
By Khadeeja Safdar
Updated May 24, 2017

For decades, fashion was essentially a hit or miss business. Merchants like Mr. Drexler would make bets on what people would be wearing a year in advance, since that’s how long it took to design and produce items. Hits guaranteed handsome returns until the next season.

Now, competitors with high-tech, data-driven supply chains can copy styles faster and move them into stores in a matter of weeks. Online marketplaces drive down prices, and design details such as nicer buttons and richer colors are less apparent on the internet. Social media adds fuel to the style churn—consumers want a new outfit for every Instagram post. “The rules of the game have changed,” said Janet Kloppenburg, president of JJK Research, a retail-focused research firm. “It’s not just about product anymore. It’s also about speed and pricing.”

Mr. Drexler’s plan is to emphasize lower prices, pivot toward more digital marketing and adopt a more accessible image........Mr. Drexler didn’t appreciate how the quality of garments could easily get lost in a sea of options online, where prices drive decisions, or how social media would give rise to disposable fashion. Online, price has more impact than the sensory qualities of clothing. “You go into a store—I love this, I love this, I love this,” he said. “You go online and you just don’t get the same sense and feel of the goods because you’re looking at a picture.”.....Amazon.com and other algorithm-based websites can change prices by the hour based on demand, and the variety of options makes it easy to mix and match brands.

“The days of people wearing head-to-toe J.Crew are over,”......Today, with nearly two billion people using Facebook every month, he feels differently: “You cannot be successful without being obsessed with the product, obsessed with social media, and obsessed with digital,” he said. “Retail is now about all that.”

Mr. Drexler said he hasn’t given up on quality. Instead, he is now lowering prices on about 300 items and creating an analytics team dedicated to optimizing prices for each garment......TPG co-founder David Bonderman recently acknowledged J.Crew and its peers are struggling with declining mall traffic and the shift to online shopping. “The internet has proven much more resilient and much more important than most of us thought a decade ago,” he said at a conference earlier this month.
retailers  e-commerce  Mickey_Drexler  J.Crew  fashion  apparel  LBOs  private_equity  hits  copycats  social_media  Instagram  data_driven  supply_chains  Clayton_Christensen  disruption  brands  Old_Navy  Banana_Republic  Madewell  digital_influencers  TPG  fast-fashion  disposability 
may 2017 by jerryking
Capital Markets 'Impediment' to Innovation - The CFO Report - WSJ
June 20, 2011, 10:05 PM ET

By MICHAEL HICKINS

Glenn Hutchins, the co-founder and co-CEO of private equity firm Silver Lake, believes the expectations of shareholders and analysts often prevent companies from investing in new businesses or technologies. “One of the largest impediments to getting all of this done is in fact the capital markets,” he said during the opening panel discussion of The Wall Street Journal’s CFO Network Conference.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

CFOs often find it tough to make aggressive, long-term investments because explaining the reason for “making a short-term diminution for the purpose of a long-term gain [to the equity markets] is very difficult to do.”

Still, companies need to be willing to overhaul their entire businesses, if necessary, to avoid being overtaken by aggressive innovators...He lauded Apple for being willing to promote something like the iPad despite the fact that the tablet may in fact destroy the computer maker’s iMac franchise. “Business model innovation is underrated,”.....Also speaking on the panel, HBS professor Clayton Christensen blamed a corporate culture born, ironically, of business school formulas that separate strategy and finance. “The business schools decided to teach strategy and finance [separately] and this got carried over into companies. [But] a lot of things that make sense financially make no sense strategically.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
With the finance function certainly in mind, Christensen wrote that, “Managing innovation is the complexity of managing the resource allocation process.”
Silver_Lake  Clayton_Christensen  innovation  strategy  finance  CFOs  long-term  impediments  capital_markets  business_models  Glenn_Hutchins  resource_allocation  expectations  new_businesses  new_products  investors'_expectations  short-sightedness  short-term_thinking 
february 2015 by jerryking
Clay Christensen On What Your Business Can Learn From Divorce
April 12, 2013 | Fast Company | Business + Innovation | DRAKE BAER

Drake Baer was a contributing writer at Fast Company, where he covered work culture.

Bottom Line: In business, as in love, you must understand what the other person's needs are—whether they say it or not.
Clayton_Christensen  marriage  relationships  divorce  work_life_balance  motivations  takeaways 
february 2015 by jerryking
Business School, Disrupted - NYTimes.com
MAY 31, 2014 | NYT | By JERRY USEEM.

The question: Should Harvard Business School enter the business of online education, and, if so, how?

In the Porter model, all of a company’s activities should be mutually reinforcing. By integrating everything into one, cohesive fortification, “any competitor wishing to imitate a strategy must replicate a whole system,” Professor Porter wrote.

In the Christensen model, these very fortifications become a liability. In the steel industry, which was blindsided by new technology in smaller and cheaper minimills, heavily integrated companies couldn’t move quickly and ended up entombed inside their elaborately constructed defenses.
HBS  deanships  disruption  Michael_Porter  competitive_strategy  steel  competitive_advantage  Clayton_Christensen  Colleges_&_Universities  Ivy_League  MOOCs  business_schools  Nitin_Nohria  blindsided  blind_spots 
june 2014 by jerryking
The future of the Firm
September 21st 2013 | The Economist | Schumpeter.

Life is getting tougher for professional-services firms. Midsized consultancies are already suffering: Monitor Group went bankrupt last year—Deloitte later bought it for $120m—and Booz & Co and Roland Berger are agonising about their futures. If the legal profession is anything to go by, worse is to come: Dewey & LeBoeuf collapsed last year after borrowing heavily in a dash for growth, and other elite law firms are struggling to win business....Are McKinsey’s best days behind it? Two new publications offer some interesting answers. “The Firm”, by Duff McDonald, is a generally admiring book that nevertheless asks hard questions about the organisation’s future. “Consulting on the Cusp of Disruption”, by Clayton Christensen and two colleagues, is a penetrating article in the October Harvard Business Review, arguing that the comfortable world of the strategy consultancies is about to be turned upside down....Eden McCallum cuts costs by deploying freelancers, most of whom once worked for the big three. BeyondCore replaces overpriced junior analysts with Big Data, crunching vast amounts of information to identify trends.
McKinsey  capitalism  professional_service_firms  barbell_effect  HBR  Clayton_Christensen  books  BCG  Bain  alumni  management_consulting  mid-sized  law_firms  hard_questions 
november 2013 by jerryking
The Secret of iOS 7
September 19th, 2013| I, Cringely | By Robert X. Cringely|
Apple  future  desktop  mobile  Clayton_Christensen  innovation  Innovator’s_Dilemma 
october 2013 by jerryking
The Four Best (and Worst) Uses of Market Research| Page 2
April 9 2013 | | ChiefExecutive.net | Chief Executive Magazine | by Taddy Hall

Experience and research suggest that CEOs of many companies look for growth in the wrong places and in the wrong ways, thereby missing opportunities and leaving them for the newbies. In a sense, though, this is good news: success lies in doing things differently, not spending more.

Specifically, there are four approaches organizations often take, none of which reliably lead to the actionable insights business leaders need:

Seek and profile large, growing and profitable markets
Solicit feedback from current best customers
Segment markets based on customer attributes, such as demographics, or based on product characteristics like “high end” vs. “low end,” “regular” vs. “light,” etc.
Benchmark progress against competitors

In each case, it is easy to see why an industry leader might have interest in the findings; however, these outputs speak primarily to aspects of the existing business or to the franchises of other established players. In other words, mapping current demand reveals little to nothing of the less-visible latent demand that is essential fuel for transformational innovation. As Henry Ford mused a hundred years ago: if he’d asked folks what they wanted, they would have asked for faster horses. Echoing Ford, Steve Jobs noted that consumers can’t describe what they’ve never experienced.
market_research  disruption  Clayton_Christensen  high-end  latent  insights  growth  opportunities  transformational  customer_insights  innovation  large_markets  market_segmentation  customer_risk  actionable_information  hidden  Henry_Ford  Steve_Jobs  market_share  static  dynamic  segmentation  missed_opportunities  hiring-a-product-to-do-a-specific-job  unarticulated_desires 
april 2013 by jerryking
Clayton Christensen Wants to Transform Capitalism | Wired Business | Wired.com
By Jeff Howe
02.12.13

Howe: You’re working on a new book now, right? The Capitalist’s Dilemma. How is that related to the Innovator’s Dilemma?

Christensen: I wrote a piece for The New York Times just before the election. I was wrestling with a paradox. If you look at the financial measures of prosperity in the economy, things seem to be going just great, especially company balance sheets. They haven’t been so strong in decades.

Howe: High market caps all around.

Christensen: It looks like the economy is emerging from the recession in an exciting way, but we’re not creating more jobs or income for the average person. And in all humility, I think I articulated a simple model that explains why. The bad actors are business school professors like me who have been teaching people what I call the Doctrine of New Finance. We’ve encouraged managers to measure profitability based on a return on net assets, or return on capital employed. That encourages companies to liberate their capital, so they invest in efficiency innovations, which means they can make more money with fewer resources. But what the economy ultimately needs are empowering innovations—like the Model T, the transistor radio. Empowering innovations require long-term investments, which tie up capital for years and years. So companies are using capital to create more capital, and consequently the world is awash in capital but the innovations we need to advance aren’t there.

Howe: What’s the solution?

Christensen: I don’t know the solution, but I believe solutions exist. The government can’t dictate, “Oh, that’s an empowering innovation and that’s not.” But what government can do is create tax rates that transform what I call migratory capital into productive capital. Migratory capital flows to investments that will maximize the speed with which it can then be withdrawn, which plays to the doctrine of new finance. Productive capital wants to stay on the job and not go truant after 366 days.

Howe: Can we structure a tax code that encourages that?

Christensen: Absolutely. The idea would be to peg a tax rate to the length of time the capital is deployed. The longer the capital is invested, the lower rate it’s taxed at, until it gradually approaches zero and maybe goes negative
disruption  Clayton_Christensen  capitalism  innovation  books  ROCE  management  capital_flows  sweating_the_assets  moonshots  breakthroughs  tax_codes 
february 2013 by jerryking
A Capitalist’s Dilemma, Whoever Wins the Election - NYTimes.com
November 3, 2012 | NYT| By CLAYTON M. CHRISTENSEN.

cash hoards in the billions are sitting unused on the pristine balance sheets of Fortune 500 corporations. Billions in capital is also sitting inert and uninvested at private equity funds.

Capitalists seem almost uninterested in capitalism, even as entrepreneurs eager to start companies find that they can’t get financing. Businesses and investors sound like the Ancient Mariner, who complained of “Water, water everywhere — nor any drop to drink.”

It’s a paradox, and at its nexus is what I’ll call the Doctrine of New Finance, which is taught with increasingly religious zeal by economists, and at times even by business professors like me who have failed to challenge it. This doctrine embraces measures of profitability that guide capitalists away from investments that can create real economic growth.

Executives and investors might finance three types of innovations with their capital.
(1)“empowering” innovations. These transform complicated and costly products available to a few into simpler, cheaper products available to the many.

The Ford Model T was an empowering innovation, as was the Sony transistor radio. So were the personal computers of I.B.M. and Compaq and online trading at Schwab. A more recent example is cloud computing....Empowering innovations create jobs, because they require more and more people who can build, distribute, sell and service these products. Empowering investments also use capital — to expand capacity and to finance receivables and inventory.
(2) “sustaining” innovations. These replace old products with new models. For example, the Toyota Prius hybrid is a marvelous product. But it’s not as if every time Toyota sells a Prius, the same customer also buys a Camry. There is a zero-sum aspect to sustaining innovations: They replace yesterday’s products with today’s products and create few jobs. They keep our economy vibrant — and, in dollars, they account for the most innovation. But they have a neutral effect on economic activity and on capital.
(3) “efficiency” innovations. These reduce the cost of making and distributing existing products and services. Examples are minimills in steel and Geico in online insurance underwriting. Taken together in an industry, such innovations almost always reduce the net number of jobs, because they streamline processes. But they also preserve many of the remaining jobs — because without them entire companies and industries would disappear in competition against companies abroad that have innovated more efficiently.

Efficiency innovations also emancipate capital. Without them, much of an economy’s capital is held captive on balance sheets, with no way to redeploy it as fuel for new, empowering innovations....The economic machine is out of balance and losing its horsepower. But why?

The answer is that efficiency innovations are liberating capital, and in the United States this capital is being reinvested into still more efficiency innovations. In contrast, America is generating many fewer empowering innovations than in the past. We need to reset the balance between empowering and efficiency innovations.

The Doctrine of New Finance helped create this situation.. The Republican intellectual George F. Gilder taught us that we should husband resources that are scarce and costly, but can waste resources that are abundant and cheap. ...in the 1930s and the ‘50s, capital was relatively scarce in our economy. So we taught our students how to magnify every dollar put into a company, to get the most revenue and profit per dollar of capital deployed. To measure the efficiency of doing this, we redefined profit not as dollars, yen or renminbi, but as ratios like RONA (return on net assets), ROCE (return on capital employed) and I.R.R. (internal rate of return). ...

Three ideas to seed a productive discussion:
(A) CHANGE THE METRICS. We can use capital with abandon now, because it’s abundant and cheap. But we can no longer waste education, subsidizing it in fields that offer few jobs. Optimizing return on capital will generate less growth than optimizing return on education.
(B) CHANGE CAPITAL-GAINS TAX RATES
(C) CHANGE THE POLITICS
Clayton_Christensen  capitalism  metrics  George_Gilder  Gilder's_Law  taxation  tax_reform  innovation  idle_funds  taxonomy  Fortune_500  cash_reserves  abundance  ratios  ROCE 
november 2012 by jerryking
Top-Down Disruption
May 23, 2005 | Strategy + Business | by Nicholas G. Carr.
As Clayton Christensen warns, look out for the underdog — but also beware the leader of the pack.

A single-minded focus on bottom-up disruptions, the model is also potentially dangerous. It may lead managers to overlook a very different sort of disruption — one that emerges not at the bottom of the market but at the top.

In stark contrast to the bottom-up variety, top-down disruptive innovations actually outperform existing products when they’re introduced, and they sell for a premium price rather than at a discount. They’re initially purchased by the most discriminating and least price-sensitive buyers, and then they move steadily downward, into the mainstream, to recast the entire market in their own image. A top-down disruption is as revolutionary as a bottom-up one. But the good news for incumbents is that they have a much better chance of surviving, or even spearheading, the former than the latter.
Nicholas_Carr  Clayton_Christensen  outperformance  disruption  innovation  large_companies  top-down  bottom-up  dangers  dual-consciousness  overlooked  single-minded_focus 
july 2012 by jerryking
The Disruption Opportunity
Summer 2003 | MIT Sloan Management Review | By Clark Gilbert

Three Phases of Disruption
Finding new customers
Realizing New Growth

(1) Disruption creates new net growth
(2) New customers must be found outside the established market.
(3) Disruptive technology is never disruptive to the customers who buy it.
(4) The new customer will make the disruptive path clear.
(5) A disruptive new business should start small and not be forced to grow quickly.
disruption  HBS  Clayton_Christensen  IBM  growth  newspapers  cardiovascular  customer_acquisition  new_businesses 
april 2012 by jerryking
The Industrialized Revolution
December 19, 2007 | Fast Company | By Polly LaBarre.

1986
McKinsey & Co. partner Richard Foster invokes Schumpeter in Innovation: The Attacker’s Advantage, and elaborates on the concept of technology S-curves and the “discontinuities” that turn the cash cows of leading companies into dead meat.
books  cash_cows  Clayton_Christensen  discontinuities  disruption  Innosight  innovation  Joseph_Schumpeter  leadership  S-curves 
april 2012 by jerryking
The Empire Strikes Back - Technology Review
December 1, 2011
The Empire Strikes Back

How Xerox and other big corporations are harnessing the force of disruptive innovation.

By Scott D. Anthony and Clayton M. Christensen
disruption  large_companies  Xerox  innovation  Clayton_Christensen  Scott_Anthony  Innosight 
december 2011 by jerryking
Market Segmentation
Jim, I believe you can best help your sister in her market segmentation challenge by taking a hard look at the behavioural approach to market research popularized by folks like Clayton Christensen, and his disciples, Mike Raynor at Deloitte Research and Scott Anthony at Innosight. Here is the short introduction to the approach (http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2003/1013/082_print.html). The slightly longer, but more detailed version can easily be found online in the Spring 2007 MIT Sloan Management Review article, “ Finding the Right Job For Your Product”. Once you’re on top of it, you might share it with your sister as she thinks about the print market in Halifax.

The course you’re contemplating recommending, segmenting by target attributes (i.e. using D&B data and looking at size of company), seems straightforward and easy but that’s because that’s the data--the only data--to which you readily have access. The danger of recommending this traditional approach to segmentation is that if your sister pursues it, it will surely lead her into to zero-sum competition with other print & ad agencies in the Halifax. She will be hard-pressed to find sustainable new opportunities this way.
market_segmentation  market_research  marketing  Michael_Raynor  Clayton_Christensen  advice 
november 2011 by jerryking
How to Be Like Apple - WSJ.com
AUG. 29, 2011 | WSJ | RACHEL EMMA SILVERMAN. Driving
Innovation: Mgmt. experts say there are specific ways firms can generate
and execute new ideas. Solicit input. Great ideas come from all levels
of the organization, not just the top. Provide workers time for
"unofficial activity," set time to work on creative ideas. Executing
ideas is often tougher than generating them. Companies need a clear
process to prioritize, resource & test ideas quickly and cheaply, so
that they can afford to experiment...Observation can help companies
understand not just what people say they want, but what they really
need. Clay Christensen says P&G's new-product success rate in recent
yrs. came from observing that people were concerned about how their
clothes smell (Febreze) & were always looking for simpler ways to
clean the floor (Swiffer.). P&G overhauled its new-biz strategy
after realizing that just 15% of its ideas, developed in more of an
ad-hoc approach, were meeting revenue & profit targets.
Apple  innovation  execution  Vijay_Govindarajan  P&G  business_development  Clayton_Christensen  new_products  kill_rates  success_rates  systematic_approaches  ad_hoc  new_businesses  slack_time  companywide  observations  experimentation  primary_field_research  large_companies  Fortune_500  brands  unarticulated_desires  Michael_McDerment  ideas  idea_generation  process-orientation 
august 2011 by jerryking
Strategy & Innovation: Why Disruptive Businesses Are Worth So Much
March 4, 2011| Strategy & Innovation | by Clayton Christensen and Andrew Waldeck and Richard Alton, Curtis Rising
Clayton_Christensen  valuations  disruption  innovation  strategy  business_models 
march 2011 by jerryking
"The Best Advice I Ever Got" - March 21, 2005
March 21, 2005 | Fortune Magazine | By INTERVIEWERS Julia Boorstin.

Brian Grazer
"My whole career has been built on one piece of advice that came from two people: [MCA founder] Jules Stein and [former MCA chairman] Lew Wasserman. In 1975 I was a law clerk at Warner Bros. I'd spent about a year trying to get a meeting with these two men. Finally they let me in to see them. They both said, separately, 'In order for you to be in the entertainment business, you have to have leverage. Since you have none--no money, no pedigree, no valuable relationships--you must have creative leverage. That exists only in your mind. So you need to write--put what's in your mind on paper. Then you'll own a piece of paper. That's leverage.'

"With that advice, I wrote the story that became Splash, which was a fantasy that I had about meeting a mermaid. For years, I sent registered letters to myself--movie concepts and other ideas--so that I had my ideas officially on paper. I have about 1,000 letters in a vault. To this day, I feel that my real power is only that--ideas and the confidence to write them down."
advice  career  inspiration  entrepreneur  Managing_Your_Career  Clayton_Christensen  humility  MBAs  Siemens  Salesforce  Mickey_Drexler  JetBlue  Peter_Drucker  Jim_Collins  Rick_Warren  leverage  Xerox  Andy_Grove  conventional_wisdom  Richard_Parsons  negotiations  Jack_Welch  Vivek_Paul  thinking  Starbucks  Warren_Bennis  Richard_Branson  Warren_Buffett  Brian_Grazer  creating_valuable_content  Lew_Wasserman 
december 2010 by jerryking
To Get Paid What You're Worth, Know Your Disruptive Skills - Whitney Johnson -
September 14, 2010 | Harvard Business Review | Whitney Johnson.
To close the gap between what we're paid and what we're worth, there
is a lesson to be learned from the stock market. The stocks that trade
at fair value or even a premium to their peers are those that know what
kind of stock they are, and then deliver, whether "disruptive innovation
— emerging growth," "sustaining innovation — best-of-breed," or
"being-disrupted — but dividend-paying." Not surprisingly, the stocks
that lead with their unique or disruptive capabilities command the
highest absolute multiples...Translating this to our careers, when we
proffer to the marketplace a disruptive skill set, focusing on our
distinctive innate talents rather than 'me-too' skills, we are more
likely to achieve success and increase what we earn. Any hard-won,
'me-too' skills can follow as a kicker.
Clayton_Christensen  compensation  disruption  hbr  indispensable  JCK  Managing_Your_Career  non-routine  personal_growth  salaries  self-worth  skills  special_sauce  uncharted_problems 
september 2010 by jerryking
The End of Management - WSJ.com
AUGUST 21, 2010 | Wall Street Journal by Alan Murray.
Corporate bureaucracy is becoming obsolete. Why managers should act like
venture capitalists.
Alan_Murray  Clayton_Christensen  Peter_Drucker  21st._century  Coase's_Law  bureaucracies 
august 2010 by jerryking
Everybody’s Business - Netflix Stays One Step Ahead of Creative Destruction - NYTimes.com
August 7, 2010 | NYT | By DAMON DARLIN. "Established
companies’ historical inability to change is what makes Netflix’s
maneuvers so fascinating. It foresaw its possible demise at the moment
of its own creation. The company was formed in 1997 with the idea of
sending movie DVDs, then a new technology, through the mail. But Reed
Hastings, the founder and chief executive, and early employees,
recognized that delivery of movies over the Internet would replace the
mail carrier soon. They named the company Netflix, not Mailflix or DVDs
by Mail....Netflix says the mail train is likely to keep chugging for an
additional 20 years. But it has managed to do what few companies have
done by leaping to faster transportation. Harrowing, yes. But consumers
should enjoy the ride."
beforemath  creative_destruction  Netflix  Kodak  Clayton_Christensen  Reed_Hastings  dvds  movies  streaming  Amazon  Wal-Mart 
august 2010 by jerryking
Op-Ed Columnist - The Summoned Self - NYTimes.com
August 2, 2010 | New York Times | By DAVID BROOKS. the
Well-Planned Life: Find a clear purpose for your life. Once you have an
overall purpose, make decisions about allocating your time, energy and
talent. Qualifier: People with a high need for achievement commonly
misallocate their resources, favouring things that will yield tangible
and near-term accomplishments (often work-related) at the expense of
other things (e.g. the long term work of a parent raising a child) that
may be more important. Life appears as a well-designed project,
carefully conceived in the beginning, reviewed and adjusted along the
way and brought toward a well-rounded fruition. vs. the Summoned Life:
Life as an unknowable landscape to be explored. the most important
features of the human landscape are commitments that precede choice —
commitments to family, nation, faith or some cause. These commitments
defy the logic of cost and benefit, investment and return.
achievement-oriented  Clayton_Christensen  commitments  David_Brooks  life_skills  misallocations  purpose  resource_allocation  talent_allocation  time-management  unknowables  well-rounded 
august 2010 by jerryking
Innovation guru urges Ottawa on
Mar 29, 2004 | The Globe and Mail | by Simon Tuck.
Clayton Christensen, an innovation guru who teaches business
administration at Harvard University, told government officials that new
technologies and an open mind to the delivery of services can -- and
probably will -- help Canada reconcile its dilemma of escalating public
sector costs, combined with a determination to maintain services. too
many companies view their competitors as the other key players in their
sectors, instead of other products that compete to do the same job for
the customer. Research In Motion Ltd.'s BlackBerry, for example, may
compete more for the business traveller's spare time with newspapers,
magazines, and CNN's airport news than with other handheld device makers
such as Palm Inc. Poor market research contributes heavily to the fact
that about 75 per cent of new products fail, he said.
Clayton_Christensen  disruption  innovation  GoC  Canadian  government  market_research  ProQuest  Ottawa  open_mind  gurus 
january 2010 by jerryking
Toys 'R' History - WSJ.com
AUGUST 31, 2004 | Wall Street Journal | by CLAYTON M.
CHRISTENSEN and SCOTT D. ANTHONY. Today, Wal-Mart is going one better
than Toys "R" Us. With its mammoth stores, diverse array of products and
super-efficient supply chain, Wal-Mart can provide consumers good
quality, high levels of choice and convenience, and rock-bottom prices.
It has shifted the "basis of competition" from convenience to price.

So what can a company like Toys "R" Us do when signs emerge that the
basis of competition has shifted decisively in ways that make a
previously successful strategy ineffective? The truth is, if a company
facing this situation has not acted proactively before the signs become
conclusive, it is already too late. A company must sow the seeds of its
new growth business before the game palpably changes.
Clayton_Christensen  Scott_Anthony  Innosight  Toys_"R"_Us  Wal-Mart  growth  embryonic  emerging_markets  competitive_landscape 
january 2010 by jerryking
It's the Purpose Brand, Stupid - WSJ.com
NOVEMBER 29, 2005 | Wall Street Journal | by CLAYTON M.
CHRISTENSEN, SCOTT COOK and TADDY HALL. Carving up markets by product,
price point or customer type often causes marketers to deliver products
overloaded with unwanted features or designed to improve on a product or
appeal to a demographic profile -- but not necessarily real customers.
the marketer's fundamental task is not so much to understand the
customer as it is to understand what jobs customers need to do -- and
build products that serve those specific purposes.
Clayton_Christensen  disruption  product_innovation  product_launches  innovation  market_segmentation  Marriott  failure  Coca-Cola  customer_insights  feature_overload  purpose  contextual  hiring-a-product-to-do-a-specific-job  brand_purpose 
january 2010 by jerryking
Why a Product’s Job Matters
April 18, 2007 | - The Informed Reader - WSJ | by Robin
Moroney. A basic principle of business–knowing what consumers want from
a particular product–is often ignored by corporations. Many businesses
focus on qualities that are largely irrelevant to the consumers’ buying
decisions, such as product prices, or data on customer age, gender and
marital status. Some business-to-business companies slice their markets
by industry; others by size of business. The problem with such
segmentation schemes is that they are static. Customers’ buying
behaviors change far more often than their demographics, psychographics
or attitudes. This leads to situations in which, in the words of the
late business guru Peter Drucker, “the customer rarely buys what the
business thinks it sells him.”
Peter_Drucker  Clayton_Christensen  Scott_Anthony  segmentation  marketing  market_segmentation  static  dynamic  purchase_decisions  hiring-a-product-to-do-a-specific-job  B2B  demographics  psychographics  attitudes  demographic_information  relevance  consumer_behavior  behavioral_change  irrelevance 
january 2010 by jerryking
Unboxed - Who Says Innovation Belongs to the Small? - NYTimes.com
May 23, 2009 | New York Times | By STEVE LOHR. Technology
trends also contribute to the rising role of large companies. The lone
inventor will never be extinct, but W. Brian Arthur, an economist at the
Palo Alto Research Center, says that as digital technology evolves,
step-by-step innovations are less important than linking all the
sensors, software and data centers in systems.
innovation  size  Steve_Lohr  Clayton_Christensen  large_companies  W._Brian_Arthur  sensors  software  interconnections  Fortune_500  brands  back-office  data_centers  systematic_approaches  systems  systems_integration  Xerox 
october 2009 by jerryking
The Good Enough Revolution: When Cheap and Simple Is Just Fine
08.24.09 | WIRED | By Robert Capps. The world has sped up,
become more connected and a whole lot busier. As a result, what
consumers want from the products and services they buy is fundamentally
changing. We now favor flexibility over high fidelity, convenience over
features, quick and dirty over slow and polished. Having it here and now
is more important than having it perfect. These changes run so deep and
wide, they're actually altering what we mean when we describe a product
as "high-quality."

And it's happening everywhere. As more sectors connect to the digital
world, from medicine to the military, they too are seeing the rise of
Good Enough tools
cheap_revolution  Clayton_Christensen  disruption  business_models  good_enough  high-quality 
october 2009 by jerryking
Creating A Killer Product
10.13.03 | Forbes Magazine | by Clayton M. Christensen & Michael E. Raynor.

Three in five new-product-development efforts are scuttled before they ever reach the market. Of the ones that do see the light of day, 40% never become profitable and simply disappear.

Most of these failures are predictable--and avoidable. Why? Because most managers trying to come up with new products don't properly consider the circumstances in which customers find themselves when making purchasing decisions. Or as marketing expert Theodore Levitt once told his M.B.A. students at Harvard: "People don't want to buy a quarter-inch drill. They want a quarter-inch hole." ...Managers need to segment their markets to mirror the way their customers experience life--and not base decisions on irrelevant data that focus on customer attributes. Managers need to realize that customers, in effect, "hire" products to do specific "jobs."...Why not put in tiny chunks of real fruit to add a dimension of unpredictability and anticipation--attacking the boredom factor. A thicker shake would last longer. A self-service shake machine that could be operated with a prepaid card would get customers in and out fast.

Improvements like this would succeed in building sales--but not by capturing milk shake sales from competing quick-service chains or by cannibalizing other products on its menu. Rather, the growth would come by taking business from products in other categories that customers sometimes employed, with limited satisfaction, to get their particular jobs done. And perhaps more important, the products would find new growth among "nonconsumers." Competing with nonconsumption often offers the biggest source of growth in a world of one-size-fits-all products. ...One option would be for RIM to believe its market is structured by product categories, as in: "We compete in handheld wireless devices." WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!...But what if RIM structured the segments of this market according to the jobs that people are trying to get done? Just from watching people who pull out their BlackBerrys, it seems to us that most of them are hiring it to help them be productive in small snippets of time that otherwise would be wasted, like reading e-mails while waiting in line at airports....Features that do not help customers do the job that they hire the BlackBerry for wouldn't be viewed as improvements at all. ...Brands are, at the beginning, hollow words into which marketers stuff meaning. If a brand's meaning is positioned on a job to be done, then when the job arises in a customer's life, he or she will remember the brand and hire the product. Customers pay significant premiums for brands that do a job well.
Clayton_Christensen  Michael_Raynor  Innosight  prepaid  innovation  market_segmentation  customer_experience  arms_race  branding  product_development  education  Colleges_&_Universities  Theodore_Levitt  disruption  new_products  customer_segmentation  observations  nonconsumption  hiring-a-product-to-do-a-specific-job  one-size-fits-all  BlackBerry 
september 2009 by jerryking
Finding the Right Job For Your Product
Spring 2007 | MIT Sloan Management Review | by Clayton M.
Christensen, Scott D. Anthony, Gerald Berstell and Denise Nitterhouse.
What is the "job" the product is being hired to do? Segment according to
this.
market_segmentation  Clayton_Christensen  hiring-a-product-to-do-a-specific-job  Innosight  innovation  Scott_Anthony  ProQuest  customer_segmentation 
august 2009 by jerryking
Obama Ran a Capitalist Campaign - WSJ.com
NOVEMBER 7, 2008 | WSJ | by BRET SWANSON. Like every
entrepreneur, Mr. Obama's rise was improbable. An unusually-named,
African-American first-term senator defeated two of the most powerful
incumbent political brands, the Clintons and John McCain. Like many
upstarts, he won by changing the rules of the game."What ultimately
transformed the presidential race...was not the money that poured in
from Silicon Valley but the technology and the ethos."
Obama  rules_of_the_game  Clayton_Christensen  campaigns  John_McCain  Campaign_2008  political_campaigns 
may 2009 by jerryking
How Hard Times Can Drive Innovation - WSJ.com
Dec. 15, 2008 WSJ interview of Dr. Clayton Christensen by MIT/Sloan Management Review Senior editor Martha E. Mangelsdorf.
innovation  adversity  constraints  scarcity  tension  rethinking  disruption  Clayton_Christensen  hard_times 
february 2009 by jerryking
globeandmail.com - Corporate survival: Be ready to chart a new course when industry winds blow
Oct. 1, 2007 G&M column by Harvey Schachter on Anita
McGahan's suggestions on how to interpret the signals of industry
change.

Determine whether your core activities or core assets are threatened - or both. Core activities are those actions that have historically generated profits for the industry, such as owning dealerships in the auto industry, which is less significant in an Internet era. Core assets are the resources, knowledge, and brand capital that have made the organization unique, like blockbuster drugs in the pharmaceutical industry.

(1) Radical Change.our core activities and core assets are both threatened with obsolescence. This is similar to the concept of disruptive change outlined by Harvard's Clayton Christensen in his writings.

(2) Intermediating Change. Core activities are threatened while core assets retain their strength. Sotheby's, for example, remains top notch at assessing works of art but because of technology eBay can challenge on the matchmaking side of the business.

(3) Creative Change. Core assets are under threat but core activities remain stable, as in pharmaceuticals or oil and gas exploration, where relationships with customers and suppliers are fairly steady but assets turn over constantly. Innovation occurs in fits and starts.

(4) Progressive Change. Both core assets and core activities are stable, but significant change still threatens, as in discount retailing, long-haul trucking, and commercial airlines.
assets  Clayton_Christensen  Harvey_Schachter  strategy  industries  structural_change  preparation  readiness  warning_signs  howto  interpretation  core_businesses  obsolescence  taxonomy  change  pivots 
january 2009 by jerryking

Copy this bookmark:





to read