Friday, April 29, 2005
Adventures in Sustaining Technology
A technology does not have to be "disruptive" to destroy major players in its field.
For example, my Toyota Camry is definitely a better mousetrap. (Note that when GM reported losing over US$1 billion the other day, while most of the mainstream press parroted GMs whining about health care costs and pension obligations, the Financial Times observed, "Rotten cars, not high costs, are driving GM to ruin.")
Another favorite of mine: 3M's NexCare waterproof bandages. They're a complete rethinking of the Band-Aid concept. I don't think I'll willingly buy another Band-Aid again. (J&J'd better do more than put a Band-Aid on their product line if they want to stay in this game.)
For example, my Toyota Camry is definitely a better mousetrap. (Note that when GM reported losing over US$1 billion the other day, while most of the mainstream press parroted GMs whining about health care costs and pension obligations, the Financial Times observed, "Rotten cars, not high costs, are driving GM to ruin.")
Another favorite of mine: 3M's NexCare waterproof bandages. They're a complete rethinking of the Band-Aid concept. I don't think I'll willingly buy another Band-Aid again. (J&J'd better do more than put a Band-Aid on their product line if they want to stay in this game.)
Technorati Tags: DisruptiveTechnology, SustainingTechnology
Comments:
Precisely! Much as I love Christensen's work on disruptive technology, his point that disruptive technologies are relatively far between tends to get lost in press releases screaming about the next big little thing.
As for GM, it would not surprise me if most of their buyers were older people buying out of habit. That is certainly the case in Norway.
Post a Comment
As for GM, it would not surprise me if most of their buyers were older people buying out of habit. That is certainly the case in Norway.
