Necessary Disruptions

Last year the New Yorker published an article about how Disruptive
Innovations have failed and how the theory is bogus. Its one article among a
number that, to our thinking, completely underestimates the forward-thinking
and world-changing power of disruptive innovation in business.
The long piece went into great depth about the emerging Disruption industry
of consultants, the Disruption ethos prevalent in Silicon Valley, and the many
Disruption discussions in boardrooms across the globe.
As practitioners of innovation methodologies, we were asked our take on the
piece. The writer, Jill Lepore, takes the innovation author, professor, guru,
Clayton Christensen, to task. In short, the article is more of an abstruse
diatribe on theory, rather than a study of the application of disruptive
innovation. Ms. Lepore claims that aiming for disruption is ruining what is left
of civilization, that we are creating better gadgets, but not a better planet or
better quality of life.
The article is a dense, yet potent read. While she makes some good points
with flair rare for academics, the basis of her argument sits on shaky ground.
You must understand that disruptionrevolutions, not evolutions (think Skype
or Netflix as opposed to AT&T buying Direct TV, for example) are needed in
more sectors of the world more than ever. But, Ms. Lepore is correct that if
the outcome is merely a better gadget, then it may not be worth much
outside the bank.
This is the hard part, denial. If you think the world is not in crisis, you may
stop reading now. However, we live in an era of change when most of our
major systems have shown life-threatening stress. Look at the national debt,
climate change, mounting tensions in the Middle East. One glance shows that
all of the major systems the environment, the economy, the educational
system, the healthcare system, our coal-based energy system are in crisis.
Only brave, radical solutions can redeem them. Only alternative disruptions
can make the types of changes that point a way out of these vexing
predicaments. So, even if the methods first birthed a new gadget, then
disruptive innovations can now be used to save these systems, the planet,
our species, other speciesand improve our quality of life. But there is a
problem
The stranglehold that the Industrial Revolution mindset has put on
management has created an inflexible, linear choke on innovation. We use
methods such as six sigma to wrest results out of a process, which does not
allow for incremental (small) innovations to happen organically as part of the
oral tradition of a culture. Therefore, businesses and organizations get stuck
in a rigid rut and only a revolution can get them unstuck from this overmanaged, overly rational way of doing things. We live in an era where our
major systems are in crisisand there is a distrust in human creativity to lead
us out of these crises.

When orthodoxies and prejudices will not allow us to dynamically adapt,

disruptions are a natural occurrence of a rebirth after a long period of
stagnation. Because of the Industrial Era and its paradigm that has been
taught in B-school and its shadow over work culture and culture at large,
disruptions are the only way to improve the quality of life for the mass of
humanity. There are many stories that Ms. Lepore could have quoted about
disruptions in healthcare, in lending, in vertical tower farming to explore the
positive side of this applied theory, but she was too busy stepping on Dr.
Christensens mistakes to see the overall need for, and proof for the concept
of, necessary disruptions in a world where we overly manage things into a
state of paralysis.