The author also clearly stated that "disruptive" is indeed a powerful concept that needed a label. And he clearly stated that it should still be used in cases w

The author also clearly stated that "disruptive" is indeed a powerful concept that needed a label. And he clearly stated that it should still be used in cases where it actually fits the model that Christensen intended. The whole premise of the article is that most people are using the term in cases where the concept doesn't match up at all, and I don't see how you're refuting that.