DownSouth, RE: These insightful books were not written based on last year's market. They were written based on many years of observation in the market. Last year nor this year in no way invalidate the conclusions of Christensen's discontinuous innovation model nor of Moore's Gorilla Game. The performance of CSCO, INTC, MSFT, et al, do validate both Christensen and Moore's ideas over a very long period of time. These concepts are Darwinian.
Very insightful post, thanks. I would disagree with one point, the abovementioned point, though, because I believe it contains a serious contradiction.
Christensen's concept of disruption is mutually exclusive to a certain extent to the ideas of the Gorilla Game. Eventually, the Gorillas of the corporate world inevitably face a disruptive technology which more often than not brings them down. That is why IBM is no longer the dominant technology company, why DEC nearly died, why the largest software companies in the 80's (ex IBM they were Lotus and Borland) no longer exist.
For a Gorilla to stay on top, they must recognize a disruptive technology that challenges their status and then implement that technology, most probably through a purchase. The odds of a company continually succeeding through this practice is low. Cisco has succeeded over the short term with this philosophy, but it has been a very short time and will make a mistake eventually, IMO.
I think of the Darwinian process in corporate America to be more like a forest fire. The tall trees get taken down to make room for the undergrowth. It is why the only original company of the Dow remaining is GE. The tall trees continually have gotten taken down. |
