2 ms·

disruption isn't a single thing, it can absolutely come from a more nimble competitor.

gwbas1c 3y ago
You're confusing disruption with ordinary competition. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_innovation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_innovation IE, if business A looses out to business B because it's "more nimble," that's not disruption. IE, if/when electric cars take off, gas stations will be "disrupted." Not because the competitors were more nimble, but because the fundamental rules of how people charge cars are different than how people buy gas. (Most charging happens at home or at a destination, therefore a gas station that simply swaps out pumps for chargers won't see the same kind of business.)
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
  and I think your language skills are lacking, words can have multiple meanings with subtleties. I doubt you would get most of the general population to agree that a competitor knocking someone out of the running or forcing them to fundamentally change how they do things is not a disruption. you can even see it in the wiki article you linked. They gave it a unique phrase (disruptive innovation) rather than just saying "disruption" followed by a mic drop.
  - Nevermark 3y ago
    > They gave it a unique phrase (disruptive innovation) rather than just saying "disruption" followed by a mic drop. Technically you are right. But other uses are right too. Audience context matters. So many people here are familiar with "disruptive innovation" vs. "non-disruptive innovation" and "sustaining innovation", and find those distinctions relevant, that "innovation" can often be dropped without much confusion here. I.e. "disruptive", "non-disruptive", and "sustaining" + <competition>, <technology>, <strategy>, <business model>, etc. It would be very cumbersome to include "innovation" in every one of those phrases. It would beat the word to death 1000 times over, if every business or technology discussion had to keep explicitly saying it, when it can almost always be assumed to be relevant. Language isn't just definitions, it is also context/culture/group sensitive. Which doesn't make you wrong - but it doesn't make the more specialized usage wrong or less useful, if you are sensitive to it. When in doubt, use the natives' interpretation.
    - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
      I find it amusing that I stepped into this conversation stating disruption can mean multiple things and you felt I was the one that needed to be lectured on the idea that disruption can mean many different things. go lecture someone else.

You're confusing disruption with ordinary competition. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_innovation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_innovation IE, if business A looses out to business B because it's "more nimble," that's not disruption. IE, if/when electric cars take off, gas stations will be "disrupted." Not because the competitors were more nimble, but because the fundamental rules of how people charge cars are different than how people buy gas. (Most charging happens at home or at a destination, therefore a gas station that simply swaps out pumps for chargers won't see the same kind of business.)

PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
and I think your language skills are lacking, words can have multiple meanings with subtleties. I doubt you would get most of the general population to agree that a competitor knocking someone out of the running or forcing them to fundamentally change how they do things is not a disruption. you can even see it in the wiki article you linked. They gave it a unique phrase (disruptive innovation) rather than just saying "disruption" followed by a mic drop.
- Nevermark 3y ago
  > They gave it a unique phrase (disruptive innovation) rather than just saying "disruption" followed by a mic drop. Technically you are right. But other uses are right too. Audience context matters. So many people here are familiar with "disruptive innovation" vs. "non-disruptive innovation" and "sustaining innovation", and find those distinctions relevant, that "innovation" can often be dropped without much confusion here. I.e. "disruptive", "non-disruptive", and "sustaining" + <competition>, <technology>, <strategy>, <business model>, etc. It would be very cumbersome to include "innovation" in every one of those phrases. It would beat the word to death 1000 times over, if every business or technology discussion had to keep explicitly saying it, when it can almost always be assumed to be relevant. Language isn't just definitions, it is also context/culture/group sensitive. Which doesn't make you wrong - but it doesn't make the more specialized usage wrong or less useful, if you are sensitive to it. When in doubt, use the natives' interpretation.
  - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
    I find it amusing that I stepped into this conversation stating disruption can mean multiple things and you felt I was the one that needed to be lectured on the idea that disruption can mean many different things. go lecture someone else.