I am not in technologies that change so never fast and always. But I see technology trends, in which rotates in the development of scientific applications.
And all the trends, disruptive technologies are perhaps the defining path of consequences for the industrial, a linear passage that follows almost invariably advances technological. Although the concept of "disruptive technologies" only popular in 1997 by Harvard Business School professor Clayton Christensen in his best-selling book "from the innovative dilemma", the phenomenon already manifested in 1663, when Edward Somerset had published designs for and might have installed, a steam engine.
As put forward by Clayton Christensen, disruptive technologies are initially targeting only one minute market low margins, poor performers. However, often develop much faster than the industry headlines and eventually surpassing the Giants to capture significant market as its cheaper and more efficient technologies shares could better meet the demands of current consumers.
In this case, effectively displaced steam engines power horses. Steam engines demand was not initially high, due to familiarity, then the invention and ease of use and the availability of horses. However, as soon as intensified economic activities, and societies prosper, a niche market for engines of steam quickly developed as people sought modernity and fastest transport.
An epitome of modern disruptive technologies is Napster, a free and easy to share the program that allows users to distribute any part of línea.El disruptee here recording music conventional music producers. Napster rightly identified non-the "market", the few who wanted to share his own recordings of music for a commercial purpose and therefore provide them with what they wanted most. Napster soon flourished and even transformed the way in which was used on the internet.
However, there are concerns over in an attempt to define disruptive technologies that simply the definition itself.
A more commonly mistaken for disruptive technologies is the maintenance of the tecnologías.Mientras ex brings new technological innovation, the latter refers to "successive incremental improvements to performance" embedded in existing holders of market products.Sustain the technologies could be radical, too; new improvements could announce the demise of the current States of production, such as how music editor software convenience Napster users in music personalization and sharing, commercializing this most traditional of large file transfers. Music editors are part of a sustaining technological Napster, not a disruptor nuevo.Por therefore disruptive technologies and livelihood could thrive together, until it reaches the next wave of disruption.
See how music editors are linked to steam engines?Not too close, but each represents one of the twin engines that drive progressive technologies; endocrine breed sustainers and sustainers feed endocrine.
This character of supporting technologies brings us to another point of view of disruptive technologies: they not only change the way people do business, but also to start a fresh wave of tracking that propel the disruptive technology for the éxito.A times technologies, livelihood technology managed to create a niche market for their own even when it has already closed the disruptive initiator.Software editor and creator of music are still healthy thrive, in spite of Napster breakdown (although many other file sharing services are functioning at that time), with products such as AV Music Morpher Gold and Sound Forge 8.
A disruptive technology is also different from a change of paradigm, as Thomas Kuhn used to describe "the process and the result of a change in the underlying assumptions of the judgment of science theory".in disruptive technologies, there is no any hypothesis, but only the rules of the game which change is the result of market and new participants holders behaviors.Increase the different markets that will eventually merge.In the words of Clayton Christensen, newcomers to the industry almost invariably "crush holders".
While research on disruptive technologies, I came on this a simple line that could adequately capture what these technologies are, "a technology than anyone in the business wants but becomes an industry billions of dollars."Interesting how a new technology that apparently has little value could shake up an entire industry, right?
You probably wonder why then that nobody wants? O how real is the claim money to these disruptive technologies? and if it is true, what are the implications for the practice of business? how owners market and new participants behave?
The scope of this article may only take the first pregunta.Bueno, not is dominant companies are not visionary to view outage is llegando.No is pueden.Inicialmente a disruptive technology is inherently attractive; no one could see how Napster could boom and lead to the burgeoning market of audio softwares such as mixers, except endocrine them and music publishers mismos.Incluso if one manages to anticipate it, "the innovator's dilemma" is there to keep them act.
And as shown by the books, technology has always evolved in the waves break.
Comments :
Post a Comment