http://katzenfabrik.cat/blog/renommierschmiss

found in this critic of Christensen disruption by Gosset

https://mondaynote.com/clayton-christensen-becomes-his-own-devil-s-advocate-c6511e3fac44

also strateachery on what Christenesen got wrong https://stratechery.com/2013/clayton-christensen-got-wrong/

disruption works on cost-minded business but not on consumers that value “the ineffable”

ideas: Gosset make epistemic remarks, Christensen claims scientificity and uses a rigourous framework of “dimensionality reduction” of complexity (world to tech trajectories, 2-dimensional and value networks maybe 3-d.

Strateachery correctly point to rigorous counter-argument, C. theory works B2B not B2C.

Staying epistemic, we could say scientific in business can’t be like physics because of complexity, byt complexity is a weak definition of the business world where among the many loops of complexity we have a concience/explicitation (hermeneutic) loop whereas a theory like Disruption and innovator dilemma gets mainstream changes perception, postures and eventually negates itself. of averages and outliers, suprises, a biology-like dynamic of population for example. Of course, just intuition, better stay rigorous like C.

Harvard. Reading list and final exam for course “Conflict, Coalition and Strategy”. Schelling, 1970

from Schelling author of The Strategy of Conflict

Carl Barks “Letter to Santa” the steam shovel battle Paperino & Paperone well donald duck and uncle scrooge

Christensen “The Innovator’s Dilemma” has a nice analysis of disruption in the mechanical excavator industry from steam to diesel, from cable to hydraulic

the zoo of consulting frameworks 🙂