Learning about disuptive technology/innovation
We've been hearing a lot about "disruptive technology" lately, and I wanted to get a good handle on what this term actually means. So, of course I started with a Google search and Wikipedia. From there I found a nice definition from the text Disruptive Innovation by Clayton Christennson of Harvard Business School:
"A disruptive technology or disruptive innovation is an innovation that helps create a new market and value network, and eventually goes on to disrupt an existing market and value network. The term is used in business and technology literature to describe innovations that improve a product or service in ways that the market does not expect. Although the term disruptive technology is widely used, disruptive innovation seems a more appropriate term in many contexts since few technologies are intrinsically disruptive; rather, it is the business model that the technology enables that creates the disruptive impact."
One thing that struck me about this definition, switch from technology to innovation. A technology in and of itself is nothing until put into context or used to support something, in the above definition it is in the context of a business model. My interest of course is in education and therefore disruptive innovations in that arena, and not just technological ones. I am for any innovation whether disruptive or sustaining (slow, steady upward movement) as long as it helps improve education.
Here is another quote about disruptive innovation, this time from the President of Southwestern College (thanks to my friend for passing this article on). The bold is mine:
"So, ok, maybe disruptive innovation is amoral. That's ok. Most things are. I mean, you can use a bottle of Holy Communion wine to celebrate the mass, or you can hit somebody over the head with it and steal their wallet. The wine bottle is neutral. Disruptive innovation has changed the world in a million great ways, and probably some less great ways as well. So it goes. It is neutral"
That's right, disruptive innovation is neither inherently good, nor inherently bad, it is all in how one uses it in the context of your business, or in my case, education model. If the innovation improves education it is good, if the innovation is for innovation's sake and does not, it is bad, at least in my book.
"A disruptive technology or disruptive innovation is an innovation that helps create a new market and value network, and eventually goes on to disrupt an existing market and value network. The term is used in business and technology literature to describe innovations that improve a product or service in ways that the market does not expect. Although the term disruptive technology is widely used, disruptive innovation seems a more appropriate term in many contexts since few technologies are intrinsically disruptive; rather, it is the business model that the technology enables that creates the disruptive impact."
One thing that struck me about this definition, switch from technology to innovation. A technology in and of itself is nothing until put into context or used to support something, in the above definition it is in the context of a business model. My interest of course is in education and therefore disruptive innovations in that arena, and not just technological ones. I am for any innovation whether disruptive or sustaining (slow, steady upward movement) as long as it helps improve education.
Here is another quote about disruptive innovation, this time from the President of Southwestern College (thanks to my friend for passing this article on). The bold is mine:
"So, ok, maybe disruptive innovation is amoral. That's ok. Most things are. I mean, you can use a bottle of Holy Communion wine to celebrate the mass, or you can hit somebody over the head with it and steal their wallet. The wine bottle is neutral. Disruptive innovation has changed the world in a million great ways, and probably some less great ways as well. So it goes. It is neutral"
That's right, disruptive innovation is neither inherently good, nor inherently bad, it is all in how one uses it in the context of your business, or in my case, education model. If the innovation improves education it is good, if the innovation is for innovation's sake and does not, it is bad, at least in my book.
Comments