This was a very insightful video! I'm studying to get my BA in Business and this video really goes in depth with how to truly build a distruptive business. Clayton Christensen truly gives alll of us and especially me an insightful advice going through this study. I hope to one day be able to grow and network with him and other businesses.
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW - Said, we usually associate an industry's transformation with the adoption of a new technology. But although new technologies are often major factors, they have never transformed an industry on their own. What does achieve such a transformation is a business model that can link a new technology to an emerging market need. ( Ingenuity Mags Process)
I have a few but his example of the bank is the best. Inside the bank there is the actual financial management system. In front of it are let's say, ATMs. The relationship between them is interdependent meaning, no other ATMs can communicate with that banks financial system (except for the networks like STAR which is an abstraction and comes with a fee). The interface between the customer and the ATM is modular meaning, all ATMs pretty much work the same way. A bank customer comfortable using "an" ATM is probably comfortable using "any" ATM and would feel at ease moving their money to another bank and using their ATM (or teller, loan officer, etc.). What companies like Paypal have done, using them as representative of an online ATM, is flip the model around. In their world, the interface between customer and Paypal is interdependent (proprietary) and the interface between Paypal and the banks, representing the financial management system, is modular meaning Paypal can interact with many banks in the same way.
When Professor Christensen spoke about NY Times and about the bank, the same thing Microsoft did and that was the main reason to succeed as they had operating system in addition to browser, and word processor, photo edit program, and media player. in addition to that there is another example of creating the kind of printers which is all in one scanner, copier and fax, the other example is mobile phone that have phone caller, calendar, camera, voice recorder and so on, these are successful examples of the same all in one Idea.
The difference here is, that browser, photo edit, media player...are complementary products that you want to use when you are using an operating system. But selling something isnt a complementary service to getting informed, these two are not dependent
@@100000Andy How about something like Amazon then, sir? I'm looking at it from two fronts. 1) Ecommerce, the everything store - they sell everything from food to home appliances. It's not focused like iherb, costco, home depot. 2) Outside of ecommerce - AWS, twitch, zappos, Amazon Basics, Amazon Music, Prime Video, Kindle, Echo, etc. Do you see this following the Clayton Christensen model?
@@ChineseSe7en Good example, I think we should not mix up two different things: amazon has huge positive network effects, meaning, that the more users on the platform, the more utility it provides for each individual user. So amazon can pretty much provide any service they want to even banking, transportation,.... Thing is these network effects you only can achive when you are getting big fast (e.g. spotify, facebook), winner takes it all. NY Times didnt have the scale for this.
@@100000Andy I would like to debate part of your statement for my own education, but what constitutes fast? For a fast growing business, I would assume its harder - where would you get the capital and who would want to invest? Microsoft / Apple took a longer time, but still there network/business is more focused than Amazon. Windows/Office/Azure/Xbox and iphone/ipod/ipad/Apple store etc. are a lot more complimentary to each other. Fast like facebook - FB/Instagram/Whatsapp/Quest still follow the original mission - connecting the community. "Customer Obsession" and the "Everything Store" on the other hand is really open ended and I feel is much more prone to attacks from disruptive companies.
These videos by Professor Christensen are amazing. Please NEVER take these down :) I am binging on his videos instead of Netflix! wow.
For me, Clay was the most impressive person I have ever met.
Blew my mind. The value of this advice, if adhered to, could surely be in the $ billions across corporations.
My most respect for this professor. Amazing insight.
Amazing advice! We will miss you, Dr. Christensen
This was a very insightful video! I'm studying to get my BA in Business and this video really goes in depth with how to truly build a distruptive business. Clayton Christensen truly gives alll of us and especially me an insightful advice going through this study. I hope to one day be able to grow and network with him and other businesses.
Dude he died in 2020
Truly captured issues related with technology in a historical context within 20 min.
He is so awesome! I’ve never heard things explained quite this way.
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW - Said, we usually associate an industry's transformation with the adoption of a new technology. But although new technologies are often major factors, they have never transformed an industry on their own. What does achieve such a transformation is a business model that can link a new technology to an emerging market need. ( Ingenuity Mags Process)
RIP Clayton Christensen
I like this guy. Makes me think
Genius absolute genius
THE BEST. Extremely useful and thoughtful. Muy bueno.
Clayton has a lot to teach, definitely!
Glad I got a chance to listen and take notes. I'm still confused about the Law of Conservation.
I have a few but his example of the bank is the best. Inside the bank there is the actual financial management system. In front of it are let's say, ATMs. The relationship between them is interdependent meaning, no other ATMs can communicate with that banks financial system (except for the networks like STAR which is an abstraction and comes with a fee). The interface between the customer and the ATM is modular meaning, all ATMs pretty much work the same way. A bank customer comfortable using "an" ATM is probably comfortable using "any" ATM and would feel at ease moving their money to another bank and using their ATM (or teller, loan officer, etc.).
What companies like Paypal have done, using them as representative of an online ATM, is flip the model around. In their world, the interface between customer and Paypal is interdependent (proprietary) and the interface between Paypal and the banks, representing the financial management system, is modular meaning Paypal can interact with many banks in the same way.
Great explanation! Thanks!
Can someone explain to me about the interdependent interfaces and open/ modular interface that he mentions? What are they?
4:20 I like how Henry FORD made cars afFORDable
Simply brilliant stuff..
brilliant video....
Simply awesome!
I could listen to him all day. Business, Econ, Winnie the Pooh books...whatever
Search for and listen to his talk about how will you measure your life - beautiful talk
im just here because my professor told me to write an essay
sameee
lmao me too
It's Amazing thank you sir😊❤
When Professor Christensen spoke about NY Times and about the bank, the same thing Microsoft did and that was the main reason to succeed as they had operating system in addition to browser, and word processor, photo edit program, and media player. in addition to that there is another example of creating the kind of printers which is all in one scanner, copier and fax, the other example is mobile phone that have phone caller, calendar, camera, voice recorder and so on, these are successful examples of the same all in one Idea.
I'm still confused about the law of conservation. I'll do more research, but I'd be happy if you could share another example.
The difference here is, that browser, photo edit, media player...are complementary products that you want to use when you are using an operating system. But selling something isnt a complementary service to getting informed, these two are not dependent
@@100000Andy How about something like Amazon then, sir? I'm looking at it from two fronts. 1) Ecommerce, the everything store - they sell everything from food to home appliances. It's not focused like iherb, costco, home depot. 2) Outside of ecommerce - AWS, twitch, zappos, Amazon Basics, Amazon Music, Prime Video, Kindle, Echo, etc.
Do you see this following the Clayton Christensen model?
@@ChineseSe7en Good example, I think we should not mix up two different things: amazon has huge positive network effects, meaning, that the more users on the platform, the more utility it provides for each individual user. So amazon can pretty much provide any service they want to even banking, transportation,.... Thing is these network effects you only can achive when you are getting big fast (e.g. spotify, facebook), winner takes it all. NY Times didnt have the scale for this.
@@100000Andy I would like to debate part of your statement for my own education, but what constitutes fast? For a fast growing business, I would assume its harder - where would you get the capital and who would want to invest? Microsoft / Apple took a longer time, but still there network/business is more focused than Amazon. Windows/Office/Azure/Xbox and iphone/ipod/ipad/Apple store etc. are a lot more complimentary to each other.
Fast like facebook - FB/Instagram/Whatsapp/Quest still follow the original mission - connecting the community.
"Customer Obsession" and the "Everything Store" on the other hand is really open ended and I feel is much more prone to attacks from disruptive companies.
Same issue with Apple Right Now - Let's see how they get on 10 years from now! Facebook might just be the disrupter.
good morning
Ok
👍👍👍
Gonzalez Eric Lopez Dorothy Taylor Dorothy