How Leaders Delude Themselves About Disruption

We’ve known for decades what causes disruption. So why are companies still allowing themselves to be vulnerable? The answer starts at the top.

Reading Time: 20 min 

Topics

Disruption 2020

What will it take to innovate and compete over the next decade? These articles examine some of the biggest challenges companies will face, such as building the future workforce and identifying tomorrow’s disrupters. Included are contributions to MIT SMR’s special issue on disruption, published in memory of Clayton Christensen.
More in this series
Permissions and PDF

Image courtesy of Brian Stauffer/theispot.com

Ever since the 1997 publication of The Innovator’s Dilemma, researchers, management experts, and businesspeople have discussed, dissected, and debated Clayton Christensen’s Theory of Disruptive Innovation. By now, the arc of disruption is well established: We know how disrupters enter the market, and we know how incumbents typically bungle their responses to such seemingly insignificant competition. Numerous books and articles have offered to solve the dilemma of disruption, including Christensen’s own The Innovator’s Solution (a 2003 book coauthored with Michael Raynor), which suggests that leaders who understand how disruption transpires can inoculate themselves against the threats and seize the opportunities.

Yet, despite so much insight and advice, the dilemma persists: 63% of companies are currently experiencing disruption, and 44% are highly susceptible to it, according to research by Accenture.1 And in a thorough analysis of more than 1,500 publicly listed companies, growth strategy consultancy Innosight found that only 52 of them, about 3% of the sample set, had made material progress in strategically transforming their organizations.2 The default positions, it seems, are to squeeze extra points from profit margins, search for companies to acquire, or simply pay lip service to innovation by setting up token incubators or having executives wear jeans and the occasional hoodie.

Why are companies still so vulnerable to disruptive threats? Our view is that it isn’t about not having the right playbook. The problem is that well-intentioned leaders often delude themselves by downplaying disruptive threats or overestimating the difficulty of response. In simple terms, leaders lie to themselves. This means that dealing with disruption is not just an innovation challenge; it is a leadership challenge. This article explains these delusions about disruption and offers ways to help leaders avoid self-sabotage.

Cautionary Tales Persist

“Christensen and Raynor have done a superb job of creating a framework for helping to understand industry dynamics and for planning your own growth alternatives.” This quote appeared on the back jacket of The Innovator’s Solution, attributed to Pekka Ala-Pietilä, then president of Nokia. The Finnish company had much to be proud of back then. It was on the brink of taking over the booming cellphone market. Over the next few years, the company would grow into a seemingly unstoppable force. Its stock price surged.

Topics

Disruption 2020

What will it take to innovate and compete over the next decade? These articles examine some of the biggest challenges companies will face, such as building the future workforce and identifying tomorrow’s disrupters. Included are contributions to MIT SMR’s special issue on disruption, published in memory of Clayton Christensen.
More in this series

References (19)

1. O. Abbosh, M. Moore, B. Moussavi, et al.,“Disruption Need Not Be an Enigma,” Accenture, Feb. 26, 2018, www.accenture.com.

2. S.D. Anthony, A. Trotter, R.D. Bell, et al., “The Transformation 20: The Top Global Companies Leading Strategic Transformations,” Innosight, September 2019, www.innosight.com.

Show All References

Reprint #:

61310

More Like This

Add a comment

You must to post a comment.

First time here? Sign up for a free account: Comment on articles and get access to many more articles.

Comment (1)
Nathan Christiansen
Great Article. I believe for the majority of the lies that executives deceive themselves with (or perhaps what they just say to others) elude to their desire to "execute yesterday's strategy for five years and ride off into the sunset" as it was suggested. In a recent Strategy& (PWC) study, the average tenure of a CEO was... you guessed it. 5 years. I am assuming that most executives know this and are possibly banking on making their next move before the effects of disruption are clear to others. The fear of falling on your face is strong when your values lie in public opinion. Pride becomes their downfall. Just an idea.
undefined