3 ms·
Yeah, and I think something that is often missing in the colloquial understanding of innovator's dilemma is that the organization with the dilemma isn't doing a
by sanderjd 3y ago
Yeah, and I think something that is often missing in the colloquial understanding of innovator's dilemma is that the organization with the dilemma isn't doing anything wrong; they end up in a losing game despite making the right decisions.
I feel like a better name for it would be "disruptor's advantage", because that focuses on the more active side of the game, the side with more agency, rather than the more passive side.
- voisin 3y agoI think you are misinterpreting it. The entire point of the book is that innovators at one point need to disrupt their own innovation at a later point or be disrupted by others. I.e. they cannot rest on their laurels forever. So they clear did do something wrong and didn’t make the right decision. Google is the epitome of a company that rested on its laurels, became the very evil they ostensibly didn’t want to become, forgot how to innovate, and treated their customers with hostility. Good riddance.