什么是颠覆性创新？

UNDERSTANDING DISRUPTIVE INNOVATIONDisruptive innovation starts in two footholds—in low-end markets or new markets. Incumbents focus on products for the high end of themarket, overshooting the mainstream and low end. This leaves an opening for disrupters tointroduce less-profitable products at the low end.HOW IT WORKSCOMMON MISCONCEPTIONSWhat is disruptive innovation?✗UBER IS NOT DISRUPTIVE INNOVATIONUBERWhat is not?MARRIOTT HOTELSAIRBNB✓AIRBNB IS DISRUPTIVE INNOVATIONWINNERS AND LOSERSDISRUPTERSWinnersLosersCONSUMERSINCUMBENTSCELL PHONESMOOCsPCs/LAPTOPSINTERNETSMARTPHONESDISRUPTERS VS. DISRUPTED1Small company (entrant)with fewer resourceschallenges big company(incumbent)2Product provides moresuitable functionalityat a lower priceLAPTOPS/PCS DISRUPT MAINFRAMES 3When mainstream customersadopt product in volume,disruption occurs METRO TAXIFIXED LANDLINESUNIVERSITIESMAINFRAMESNEWSPAPERSLAPTOPS HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW ANALYTIC SERVICESWHAT ISDISRUPTIVEINNOVATION?By Clayton Christensen, Michael E. Raynor,and Rory McDonaldThe theory of disruptive innovation, introduced inHarvard Business Reviewin 1995, has proved to be a powerful way of thinking about innovation-drivengrowth. Many leaders of small, entrepreneurial companies praise it as theirguiding star; so do many executives at large, well-established organizations,including Intel, Southern New Hampshire University, and Salesforce.com.Unfortunately, disruption theory is in danger of becoming a victim of its ownsuccess. Despite broad dissemination, the theory’s core concepts have beenwidely misunderstood and its basic tenets frequently misapplied. Furthermore,essential refinements in the theory over the past 20 years appear to have beenovershadowed by the popularity of the initial formulation. As a result, the theoryis sometimes criticized for shortcomings that have already been addressed.There’s another troubling concern: In our experience, too many people whospeak of “disruption” have not read a serious book or article on the subject.Too frequently, they use the term loosely to invoke the concept of innovationin support of whatever it is they wish to do. Many researchers, writers, andconsultants use “disruptive innovation” to describe any situation in whichan industry is shaken up and previously successful incumbents stumble. Butthat’s much too broad a usage.The problem with conflating a disruptive innovation with any breakthroughthat changes an industry’s competitive patterns is that different types of inno-vation require different strategic approaches. To put it another way, the lessonswe’ve learned about succeeding as a disruptive innovator (or defending againsta disruptive challenger) will not apply to every company in a shifting market.If we get sloppy with our labels or fail to integrate insights from subsequentresearch and experience into the original theory, then managers may end upusing the wrong tools for their context, reducing their chances of success. Overtime, the theory’s usefulness will be undermined. The problem withconflating a disruptiveinnovation with anybreakthrough thatchanges an industry’scompetitive patternsis that different typesof innovation requiredifferent strategicapproaches. 2This article is part of an effort to capture the state of theart. We begin by exploring the basic tenets of disruptiveinnovation and examining whether they apply to Uber.Then we point out some common pitfalls in the theory’sapplication, how these arise, and why correctly using thetheory matters. We go on to trace major turning points inthe evolution of our thinking and make the case that whatwe have learned allows us to more accurately predict whichbusinesses will grow.First, a quick recap of the idea: “Disruption” describes aprocess whereby a smaller company with fewer resourcesis able to successfully challenge established incumbentbusinesses. Specifically, as incumbents focus on improv-ing their products and services for their most demanding(and usually most profitable) customers, they exceed theneeds of some segments and ignore the needs of others.Entrants that prove disruptive begin by successfully tar-geting those overlooked segments, gaining a foothold bydelivering more-suitable functionality—frequently at alower price. Incumbents, chasing higher profitability inmore-demanding segments, tend not to respond vigorously.Entrants then move upmarket, delivering the performancethat incumbents’ mainstream customers require, whilepreserving the advantages that drove their early success.When mainstream customers start adopting the entrants’offerings in volume, disruption has occurred.IS UBER A DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION?Let’s consider Uber, the much-feted transportation com-pany whose mobile application connects consumers whoneed rides with drivers who are willing to provide them.Founded in 2009, the company has enjoyed fantasticgrowth (it operates in hundreds of cities in 60 countriesand is still expanding). It has reported tremendous finan-cial success (the mo