The_Innovators_Dilemma__Clayton

Recommendations

Info

What benefit, if any, did leadership in this technology give to the pioneers? There is no evidence thatthe leaders gained any significant competitive advantage over the followers; none of the firms thatpioneered thin-film technology gained significant market share on that account. In addition, pioneeringfirms appear not to have developed any sort of learning advantage enabling them to leverage their earlylead to attain higher levels of density than did followers. Evidence of this is displayed in Figure 6.2.The horizontal axis shows the order in which the firms adopted thin-film heads. Hence, IBM was thefirst, Memorex, the second, and Fujitsu the fifteenth. The vertical axis gives the rank ordering of therecording density of the most advanced model marketed by each firm in 1989. If the early adopters ofthin-film heads enjoyed some sort of experience-based advantage over the late adopters, then we wouldexpect the points in the chart to slope generally from the upper left toward the lower right. The chartshows instead that there is no relationship between leadership and followership in thin-film heads andany subsequent technological edge. 1Each of the other sustaining technologies in the industry’s history present a similar picture. There is noevidence that any of the leaders in developing and adopting sustaining technologies developed adiscernible competitive advantage over the followers. 2Leadership in Disruptive Technologies Creates Enormous ValueIn contrast to the evidence that leadership in sustaining technologies has historically conferred littleadvantage on the pioneering disk drive firms, there is strong evidence that leadership in disruptivetechnology has been very important. The companies that entered the new value networks enabled bydisruptive generations of disk drives within the first two years after those drives appeared were sixtimes more likely to succeed than those that entered later.Eighty-three companies entered the U.S. disk drive industry between 1976 and 1993. Thirty-five ofthese were diversified concerns, such as Memorex, Ampex, 3M, and Xerox, that made other computerperipheral equipment or other magnetic recording products. Forty-eight were independent startupcompanies, many being financed by venture capital and headed by people who previously had workedfor other firms in the industry. These numbers represent the complete census of all firms that ever wereincorporated and/or were known to have announced the design of a hard drive, whether or not theyactually sold any. It is not a statistical sample of firms that might be biased in favor or against any typeof firm.Figure 6.2 Relationship between Order of Adoption of Thin-Film Technology and Areal Density ofHighest-Performance 1989 Model104
Source: Clayton M. Christensen, “Exploring the Limits of the Technology S-Curve. Part I: ComponentTechnologies,” Production and Operations Management 1, no. 4 (Fall 1992): 347. Reprinted bypermission.The entry strategies employed by each of these firms can be characterized along the two axes in Table6.1. The vertical axis describes technology strategies, with firms at the bottom using only proventechnologies in their initial products and those at the top using one or more new componenttechnologies. 3 The horizontal axis charts market strategies, with firms at the left having entered alreadyestablished value networks and those at the right having entered emerging value networks. 4 Anotherway to characterize this matrix is to note that companies that were agressive at entry in developing andadopting sustaining innovations appear in the two top boxes, left and right, while companies that led atentry in creating new value networks appear in the two right-hand boxes, top and bottom. Thecompanies in the right boxes include all companies that attempted to create new value networks, eventhose networks that did not materialize into substantial markets (such as removable hard drives).Table 6.1 Disk Drive Companies Achieving $100 Million in Annual Revenues in at Least One YearBetween 1976 and 1984105
Page 1 and 2:
1
Page 3 and 4:
Copyright © 1997 by the President
Page 5 and 6:
In GratitudeAlthough this book list
Page 7 and 8:
IntroductionThis book is about the
Page 9 and 10:
There are two ways to resolve this
Page 11 and 12:
Most new technologies foster improv
Page 13 and 14:
Chapter 6 examines the emerging per
Page 15 and 16:
To maintain their share prices and
Page 17 and 18:
another—changes. When the perform
Page 19 and 20:
published has been the number of pe
Page 21 and 22:
HOW DISK DRIVES WORKDisk drives wri
Page 23 and 24:
Some have attributed the high morta
Page 25 and 26:
SUSTAINING TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGESIn
Page 27 and 28:
The same pattern was apparent in th
Page 29 and 30:
The trajectory map in Figure 1.7 sh
Page 31 and 32:
with increased capacity at a lower
Page 33 and 34:
commercially mature in its new appl
Page 35 and 36:
entrant firms to topple the incumbe
Page 37 and 38:
technology disk drives.11. This sta
Page 39 and 40:
In assessing blame for the failure
Page 41 and 42:
Source: Reprinted from Research Pol
Page 43 and 44:
with its own value chain, 10 is ass
Page 45 and 46:
Source: Data are from company annua
Page 47 and 48:
Figures 2.5 and 2.6 illustrate clea
Page 49 and 50:
analysts, therefore, joined their m
Page 51 and 52:
engineering workstation, and mainfr
Page 53 and 54: procure the component flash chips;
Page 55 and 56: Figure 2.8 Comparison of Disk Drive
Page 57 and 58: in commercializing such technologie
Page 59 and 60: products can be interactively devel
Page 61 and 62: Source: Osgood General photo in Her
Page 63 and 64: mechanical excavators by their reac
Page 65 and 66: Source: Brochure from Sherman Produ
Page 67 and 68: Bucyrus Erie was the only maker of
Page 69 and 70: equipment on which had longer reach
Page 71 and 72: 11. Makers of early hybrid ocean tr
Page 73 and 74: Source: Data are from various issue
Page 75 and 76: Source: Data are from various issue
Page 77 and 78: Compare that conversation to the ma
Page 79 and 80: employees, there was nothing about
Page 81 and 82: more than 93,000 in 1980 to fewer t
Page 83 and 84: Another analyst made similar observ
Page 85 and 86: 1970).3. The use of the term system
Page 87 and 88: Part Two of this book is built upon
Page 89 and 90: CHAPTER FIVEGive Responsibility for
Page 91 and 92: career trajectories within the comp
Page 93 and 94: its major customers and replace the
Page 95 and 96: DEC didn’t stumble for lack of tr
Page 97 and 98: Figure 5.2 Gains in Discount Retail
Page 99 and 100: Woolworth’s organizational strate
Page 101 and 102: (2), 1991, 239-262, as essentially
Page 103: fifteen year expense of developing
Page 107 and 108: was a start-up or a diversified fir
Page 109 and 110: A decade after the release of the A
Page 111 and 112: offering. By 1991, however, even th
Page 113 and 114: General Electric and Westinghouse h
Page 115 and 116: the competition were able to prospe
Page 117 and 118: CHAPTER SEVENDiscovering New andEme
Page 119 and 120: new architectures for which Disk/Tr
Page 121 and 122: to 2.5- and 1.8-inch drives. Only i
Page 123 and 124: advertising campaign. These serendi
Page 125 and 126: disruptive technologies are unpredi
Page 127 and 128: before making commitments that were
Page 129 and 130: CHAPTER EIGHTHow to Appraise YourOr
Page 131 and 132: meant not to change—or if they mu
Page 133 and 134: the companies that had led in the o
Page 135 and 136: reside in processes and values and
Page 137 and 138: for its historical success, a bette
Page 139 and 140: company would experimentally and in
Page 141 and 142: integrate components more effective
Page 143 and 144: research is being built.5. See Wick
Page 145 and 146: drives. By 1989, the measure was 1.
Page 147 and 148: dimension satisfied market needs, t
Page 149 and 150: Consider, for example, the product
Page 151 and 152: When performance oversupply has occ
Page 153 and 154: Meanwhile, Novo, a much smaller Dan
Page 155 and 156:
propositions centered on convenienc
Page 157 and 158:
supply. Understanding these traject
Page 159 and 160:
CHAPTER TENManaging DisruptiveTechn
Page 161 and 162:
Figure 10.1 The Electric CarSource:
Page 163 and 164:
nothing first-time bet, as Apple di
Page 165 and 166:
models, such as Camry, Previa, and
Page 167 and 168:
sets built with vacuum tubes) to vo
Page 169 and 170:
We need a strong motivation to acce
Page 171 and 172:
16. This list of smaller, simpler,
Page 173 and 174:
Third, just as there is a resource
Page 175 and 176:
The Innovator’s DilemmaBook Group
Page 177 and 178:
lead to success with sustaining tec
Page 179:
recognizing that different technolo
show all

The_Innovators_Dilemma__Clayton

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?