The 11 Sources of Disruption Every Company Must Monitor

Think you’re aware of the forces that might disrupt your company? Your lens may be far too narrow.

Reading Time: 15 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.
See All Articles in This Series
Buy
Already a member?
Not a member?
Sign up today
Member
Free

3 Free Articles per month, $6.95/article thereafter. Free newsletter.

Subscriber
$75/Year

Unlimited digital content, quaterly magazine, free newsletter, entire archive.

Sign me up

Image courtesy of Michael Austin/theispot.com

Recently I advised a large telecommunications company on its long-term strategy for wireless communications. The company was understandably concerned about its future. A half-dozen new streaming TV services were in the process of being launched, and bandwidth-hungry online gaming platforms were quickly attracting scores of new players. Possible regulatory actions seemed to be lurking around the corner, too.

Changes like these meant disruptions to the company’s existing business models, which hadn’t materially evolved since the dawn of the internet age. As a result, the company worried that it might be facing an existential crisis. To get in front of the risk, its senior leaders wanted to dispatch a cross-functional team to produce a three-year outlook analyzing which disruptive forces would affect the company and to what degree. It was no simple effort. First, the leaders had to galvanize internal support. At this company, any change to standard operations required lots of meetings, presentation decks, and explanations of concrete deliverables. Once they had buy-in and the cross-functional team was in place, they spent months researching the company’s competitive set, building financial models, and diving deeper into consumer electronics trends.

Finally, the team delivered on its mandate. A detailed, comprehensive three-year plan projected that new streaming platforms and online gaming would cause a drastic increase in bandwidth consumption, while newer connected gadgets — smartphones, watches, home exercise equipment, security cameras — would see greater market penetration. It was a narrow vision that would take the company down a singular path focused only on streaming and consumer gadgets without considering other disruptive forces on the horizon.

The findings were hardly revelatory. Streaming platforms, gaming, and gadgets were a given. But what about all the other adjacent areas of innovation? In my experience, companies often focus on the familiar threats because they have systems in place to monitor and measure known risks. This adds very little value to long-term planning, and, worse, it can lead to organizations having to make quick decisions under duress. It’s rarer for companies to investigate unfamiliar disruptive forces in advance and to incorporate that research into strategy.

I was curious to know how the company had initially framed its project. The objective was to investigate all of the disruptive forces that could affect telecommunications in the future, yet it had really focused only on the usual known threats.

Read the Full Article

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.
See All Articles in This Series

Reprint #:

61309

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)
Diana Niculae
Hello, Amy
Though you observed, in the given example, that, between those two players monitoring weak signals, the successful difference was the culture (organizational culture, in their particular case)... I do not see it as a field "per se" worthy of being monitored for weak signals. Could this be the missing 12? I would monitor it for it has the power to permeate, influence or link to all the other fields. I speculate that a cultural shift could resemble
a lighthouse - one that we can actually see before the economic & political changes/ struggles actually appear. 
But maybe this point of view is too far stretched into the future and we might need to use our imagination too much - considering that the global average for a company's lifetime is 50 years, which is ironic compared to the fact that there are cultural artifacts out there that still influence humanity for thousands of years... Nevertheless, I believe that a culture of cooperation & diversity will nurture & ask for more IMAGINATION. :)