The Innovator's Dilemma¶

Christensen, C. M. (1997). The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Harvard Business School Press.

Type: Book
Intellectual base: Review or monograph
Year: 1997
Link: https://archive.org/details/innovatorsdilemm0000chri
Cited from: art_aesthetics, biology_ecology, economics_finance, futurism_foresight, innovation_entrepreneurship, military_strategic_studies, organizational_management, psychology, sociology_anthropology, systems_cybernetics

Cited by¶

20 citations across 19 artifacts.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes¶

Absorptive Capacity
- This sourceArgues well-managed firms can lose leadership precisely by listening to existing customers and investing in sustaining technologies, leaving them exposed to disruptive innovation. Bibliography-only (Tier C); not cited in the body.
Adaptation
- Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.
Adaptive Capacity
- Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.
Ambidexterity (Exploit vs. Explore)
- Is there chronic pressure eroding exploration investment, and if so, is there structural counter-pressure?
  This sourceAnalyzes how incumbents trapped by serving their most profitable customers under-invest in disruptive innovation despite having the technical capability — the chronic exploitation pressure that erodes exploration investment.
Cognitive Entrenchment
- See The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and organizational-learning literature on institutional entrenchment
  This sourceIncumbent firms' expertise in existing models produces routines and investments that resist disruptive innovation. Cited inline (T6) as the organizational analog of entrenchment; support confirmed, link added.
Creative Destruction
- … destruction appears in growth and development economics (the driver of long-run growth in endogenous models), in industrial organization (firm entry, exit, productivity dynamics), in labor economics (job creation and destruction, worker reallocation), in business strategy ("innovator's dilemma" — Christensen 1997
  This sourceShows incumbents fail to adopt disruptive innovations that cannibalize existing rents despite having the capability; supports the innovator's-dilemma claim in Broad Use and tension T4.
Defeat In Detail
- In competitive strategy, a smaller competitor enters a fragmented market segment by segment, achieving local dominance in each before incumbents can mount a coordinated counter.
  This sourceEstablishes low-end / new-market disruption: a smaller entrant takes an under-served market segment incumbents have no profit incentive to defend, gaining a foothold and moving up-market before a coordinated incumbent counter — segment-by-segment local dominance against scattered incumbents.
Disruptive Innovation
- Because the entrant improves faster than mainstream customers' needs rise — incumbents tend to overshoot, adding performance past what mainstream users will pay for — the entrant's performance curve eventually crosses the incumbent's value curve, and the entrant moves up-market into the mainstream.
Diversity
- Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.
Institutional Lag
- The regulatory-lag model (technology adoption faster than regulatory adaptation) transfers directly to organizational-process lag: new software tools are adopted faster than business process redesign, creating inefficiencies until process and tool realign, as Christensen (1997) documents in his analysis of how incumbent firms fail to restructure around disruptive technologies.
  This sourceAnalyzes how incumbent firms fail to adopt disruptive innovations that cannibalize existing revenue streams despite having technological capability; formulates organizational-inertia explanation of creative destruction and incumbent vulnerability to displacement.
Minimalism
- Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.
Minimum Viable Product (MVP)
- Contemporary evidence from software (Ries 2011, Blank 2013) generalizes this: lean startups using MVP methodology out-survive and out-succeed traditional startups that attempt comprehensive upfront design
  This sourceAnalyzes how incumbent firms fail to adopt disruptive innovations that cannibalize existing revenue streams despite having technological capability; formulates organizational-inertia explanation of creative destruction and incumbent vulnerability to displacement.
System Slack
- Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.
Three Horizons Analysis
- H3 in product strategy is the transformative-platform question: what entirely new capability, market, or user need becomes addressable if the underlying technology shift completes — the move that Christensen (1997) shows is decisive when disruptive entrants redefine the basis of competition rather than improve along incumbent dimensions?
- Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.
Trade-offs
- T6: Frontier Shifting vs. Frontier Sliding and Disruption
Variation Strategies
- Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.

Mechanisms¶

Disruption Trajectory Map
- Its strength is shared clarity: it converts a vibes-based disruption debate into an explicit, falsifiable geometry, and it exposes the incumbent's overshoot
  This sourceShows how incumbent performance improvement can overshoot customer demand, leaving room for lower-performing disruptive entrants to gain a foothold.
Horizon Portfolio Review
- Banding by horizon is the standard defense against the incumbent's trap of over-investing in today's proven business while under-funding the future that will replace it.
  This sourceReading a portfolio by horizon is a direct guard against that pattern.
Incumbent Response Red Team
- The deepest assumption it interrogates is the asymmetry of motivation — the documented tendency of incumbents to flee up-market and cede low-end footholds — which the entrant must treat as a hypothesis to test, not a law to bank on.
  This sourceDocuments incumbents moving toward higher-performance established markets while entrants gain footholds in applications the incumbents neglect.

Verification¶

This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.

Links previously used in the corpus¶

Before the registry existed this work was also linked 4 other ways.

Registry ID ref:1ddc6a3de0c8 · see in the full table