I don't think Christensen claims that big companies can't generate disruptive innovation, only that there are immense organizational forces that gear it toward

I don't think Christensen claims that big companies can't generate disruptive innovation, only that there are immense organizational forces that gear it toward incremental improvements rather than disruptive improvements. The exceptions seem to occur with exceptionally headstrong CEOs who can see beyond who the existing customer is, and create products for markets that don't yet exist (or are at least immature). Jobs is an example of that. The problem is that headstrong CEOs with a fantastic ear for future markets are not a systemic business solution, or else there would be many more examples. And there's a more specific problem here. That Apple currently has a CEO like it does is due to a historical artifact. Had Jobs not been a co-founder of Apple, would he have been brought in as CEO? If not, would Apple's board have brought someone in similar to him? It's unlikely -- usually the top candidate is the "safe" hire who has demonstrated immense leadership in incremental business domination, not the rough radical. Eventually, Jobs will retire or pass away, and that historical artifact will no longer be relevant -- and the immense organizational forces Christensen describes will begin their work on Apple.