Search results

Disruptive technology and innovation represent complex conflicts in nature. This paper aims to present an analytical review of the heterogeneity and conflicts that exist in the disruptive technology/innovation between the eastern and western countries using Chinese high-speed railways to illustrate disruptive innovation.

The emerging economy brings about other theoretical and practical conflicts. Qualitative analysis is conducted on Chinese high-speed railways to assess the validity of innovation characteristics using Professor Clayton M. Christensen’s theories of disruptive technology/innovation and conflict. The authors explore the conflicts that can accompany the introduction of disruptive technologies in the current platform and how appropriately this specific context can lessen these conflicts.

The study revealed that Christensen’s theories could be applied 100per cent to the Chinese context if the western disruptive innovation theory can meet the practical requirements of Chinese disruptive technology/innovation. Qualitative analysis showed that Chinese high-speed railways had experienced greater success with disruptive innovation mechanism. The authors conclude that while the Chinese market is critical in shaping the kind of innovations that are emerging there, many disruptive technologies/innovations in China have their roots in the low-end market and new market. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

There exists a research gap in the literature on the Chinese context. Conflict of disruptive technology and innovation within China and the characteristics of the Chinese high-speed railway prompt further research for scholars and practitioners.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate visually the knowledge structure and evolution of disruptive innovation. The paper used CiteSpace III to analyze 1,570 disruptive innovation records from the Web of Science database between 1997 and 2016.

Initially, this paper offers a comprehensive overview of papers, countries, journals, scholars and application areas. Subsequently, a time zone view of high-frequency keywords is presented, emphasizing the course of evolution of the study hotspots. Finally, a visualization map of cited references and co-citation analysis are provided to detect the knowledge base at the forefront of disruptive innovation.

The findings are as follows: the number of papers shows exponential growth. The USA has the largest contribution and the strongest center. The Netherlands shows the largest burst, followed by Japan. Journal of Production Innovation Management and Research Policy is the most important journals. Hang CC has the largest number of articles. Walsh ST is identified as a high-yielding scholar. Christensen CM is the most authoritative scholar. Engineering electrical electronic is the most widely used research category, followed by management and business. The evolutionary course of the study hotspots is divided into five stages, namely, start, burst, aggregation, dispersion and not yet formed. Eight key streams in the literature are extracted to summarize the knowledge base at the forefront of disruptive innovation.

This paper explores the whole picture of disruptive innovation research and demonstrates a visual knowledge structure and the evolution of disruptive innovation. It provides an important reference for scholars to capture the current situation and influential trends in this field.

Disruptive innovations have the potential to fundamentally change how businesses operate. This study aims to propose a five-step framework to help firms develop disruptive innovations and to offer a scale for evaluating their disruptive potential. This scale can also be applied to identify the disruptive potential of innovations introduced to the market by competitors.

The framework was designed on the basis of criteria chosen to identify the disruptive potential of innovations at early stages of development based on a theoretical understanding of disruptive innovation, its challenges and holistic consideration of innovation as a dynamic process. It consists of steps that could serve as a reference model during the process of developing innovations with disruptive potential. A case study is discussed in detail to demonstrate the applicability of the framework.

A simple yet comprehensive assessment framework for disruptive innovation has been developed, which can help develop innovations with disruptive potential in existing settings of incumbent firm. A case study of the Wii demonstrates that Nintendo could have planned its disruptive product using the proposed framework.

Most research works in this area have focused on difficulties experienced by firms facing disruption and failed to highlight its opportunities; this study argues that firms can intentionally create disruptive innovations. The results of this study offer firms a tool that facilitates a proactive approach, helping develop new disruptive innovations and identify those from competitors.

The authors aim to examine the potential opportunities and challenges multinationals operating in Africa are likely to encounter when they seek to pioneer disruptive innovations at the base of the pyramid (BoP) in African emerging markets.

Drawing on the extant literature on the BoP, disruptive innovation and the African business context, the authors explore the pioneering of disruptive innovations in the African socio-economic context.

This study develops various hypotheses to extend our understanding of disruptive innovations at the BoP. The authors also delineate potential managerial and institutional challenges multinational corporations (MNCs) are likely to encounter in their efforts to pioneering disruptive innovations for BoP customers in African emerging markets.

The authors develop some recommendations for MNCs on how to create and capture value from disruptive innovations in African emerging markets

The authors delineate African context-specific managerial and institutional challenges that MNCs might encounter when seeking to develop disruptive innovation at the BoP.

The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on the Disruptive Innovation Theory and on the disruptive potential of real estate crowdfunding (RECF) in the real estate finance industry, assessing whether RECF constitutes a potentially disruptive innovation to the real estate finance industry. Based on a review and synthesis of the literature, the paper advances an initial conceptual framework of core characteristics of disruptive innovations. This framework is used to examine the disruptive potential of RECF in the real estate finance industry.

This paper is a systematic literature review that synthesizes and analyzes relevant extant research articles retrieved from online databases.

Findings suggest that according to the theory of disruptive innovations, and the core characteristics of disruptive innovations, RECF is a potentially disruptive innovation to the real estate finance industry. RECF seems to generally align with the classic characteristics of disruptive innovations. A more comprehensive and systematic analysis, supported by empirical data, is necessary to evaluate whether and to what extent RECF constitutes a disruptive innovation to the real estate finance industry.

This study has only captured and reviewed articles published and available in database searches. RECF is a nascent field that has recently begun receiving academic attention.

Real estate plays an integral part in the economy, and the way it is financed has become an increasingly important issue following the Global Financial Crisis. This paper provides useful insights for assessing whether and to what extent RECF may be disruptive to the real estate finance industry.

RECF may potentially improve accessibility and affordability of real estate finance, thereby helping to address the problem of shortage of real estate project finance.

While RECF is portrayed in the academic and gray literature as a disruptive innovation, its disruptive potential is yet to be determined. This paper advances an initial conceptual framework of defining characteristics of disruptive innovations. This framework is used to evaluate RECF as a potentially disruptive innovation in the real estate project finance industry. This study forms a basis for future empirical examination of the disruptive potential of RECF in the real estate finance industry.

This paper aims to address the link between the internationalization of the MNC and its location choices and the discovery of disruptive innovations among the dispersed network of subsidiaries.

A recent categorization of innovation suggests that not all innovations can be treated the same. Distinguishing between the various innovation typologies, this paper focuses on disruptive innovation within an international context. Many researchers have found that large incumbent firms tend to have issues with developing disruptive innovation, and are often disrupted by new entrants. However, there are cases of MNEs being successful with disruptive innovation and this paper sets out to theoretically explain where MNEs find ideas for disruption to aid in the incumbent's curse. Specifically, this paper asks, where do disruptive innovations originate in a MNE?

Using a transaction cost approach and resource-based view, along with other seminal pieces in international business, it is proposed that disruptive ideas start in subsidiaries. It further proposes the characteristics of these subsidiaries that should increase the likelihood of discovering disruption.

This paper not only expands the boundary conditions of disruptive innovation, but also expands on the “where” question for knowledge acquisition and long-term performance in MNEs.

This paper seeks to explore arguments for the importance of disruptive innovation to China's low‐carbon transition, while such innovation is generally overlooked and/or belittled.

The paper builds on the multi‐level perspective (MLP) of systems transitions being developed by interdisciplinary scholars regarding low‐carbon innovation to explore the multiple opportunities regarding disruptive innovation in the case of China.

This exploration details that at the levels of business strategy, national economic development and governance of a transition to ecological sustainability, there is a strong prima facie case that disruptive innovation offers singular opportunities in China regarding low‐carbon innovation, while a focus on hi‐tech innovation alone is unlikely to effect the radical systems transition needed.

Acknowledging and incorporating such opportunities is thus to be encouraged, both in China and elsewhere, including in the formulation of low‐carbon innovation policy. A concerted research programme for ongoing and iterative “second‐order” learning about concrete examples of disruptive low‐carbon innovation is advocated.

The increased opportunities for dispersed social involvement in a low‐carbon transition through disruptive innovation are discussed.

The paper offers a novel synthesis of diverse literatures to advocate a significantly different approach to low‐carbon innovation than is evidenced in current policy and policy discourse.

The purpose of this paper is to examine why large firms often fail to develop disruptive innovations. This study identifies several key inhibitors or barriers that hinder those developments. A conceptual model is presented that examines the interrelationship and interdependence of these inhibiting factors, in an effort to provide a better understanding of how companies can improve their disruptive innovation capabilities.

This paper focuses on disruptive innovation rather than incremental innovation and is limited to research findings on large corporations. Recently published works (1990‐2004) have examined success factors as the determinants of disruptive innovation capability. A complementary approach is to examine the inhibitors of disruptive innovation and investigate their interrelationship and interdependence. The study is based on an extensive review of literature available, and examines both internal and external inhibiting factors to develop a conceptual model of disruptive innovation capabilities.

Many large corporations fail to develop disruptive innovations. It is argued that the basic constraints to creating successful disruptive innovation stem in large part from several inhibiting factors, and we have identified different clusters of interrelated and partly‐interdependent inhibitors: the inability to unlearn obsolete mental models, a successful dominant design or business concept, a risk‐averse corporate climate, innovation process mismanagement, lack of adequate follow‐through competencies and the inability to develop mandatory internal or external infrastructure. The conceptual disruptive innovation capability model provides a better understanding of the interrelationship among these limiting factors. There is still a vast gap between intention and actual disruptive innovation capability. Developing distinctive capabilities to bridge this gap should be an integral part of a company's strategy for growth.

This paper is based on an extensive review of literature on disruptive innovation barriers. In it is proposed a conceptual interrelationship model of innovation inhibitors as a basis for determining and improving a company's disruptive innovation capability. It is suggested that, in addition to the theory presented in this paper, further empirical research studies be carried out to validate the key inhibitors of our conceptual model, their interrelationship and interdependence, and the impact on disruptive innovation development.

The study is intended to provide practical insight into clusters of inhibiting factors that prevent large organisations from improving their disruptive innovation capability. The conceptual model facilitates the development of distinctive competencies and mindsets to improve these capabilities.

This paper aims to present an assessment framework which captures the essential characteristics and holistic success factors for disruptive innovation based on the original theory of Christensen, a number of clarifications as reported in the literature and a study of known, successful cases in the literature.

The framework was designed based on the improved understanding of disruptive innovation challenges and on the holistic consideration of innovation as a dynamic process. It consists of structured questions which could be used to guide detailed data collection and analysis needed to answer the key questions which constitute the assessment framework. They are grouped under market positioning, technology and other favourable drivers.

A simple yet comprehensive assessment framework for disruptive innovation has been developed. Two of the known successful cases, namely the steel minimill of Nucor and the 3.5 inch disk drive of Conner/Seagate, were presented in more detail to illustrate the use of this systematic framework in assessing the success potential of these cases of disruptive innovations in either the low‐end or new markets. A third and fairly new example, that of the limited mobile phone system/product of UTStarcom, was then presented to illustrate a case where the framework revealed reasons for potential failure. A fourth example of Google's web‐based office applications then illustrated how the framework might be used to study the disruptive potential of a new product.

This paper enables a more accurate and systematic assessment of disruptive innovation. The framework also has the potential to be further developed into a systematic tool for answering the question of whether the disruptive innovation theory could indeed be used to provide ex ante prediction of the success of a new disruptive innovation.

The purpose of this study was to analyse institutional strategy documents relating to technology-enhanced learning.

In total, 84 documents were sampled from 71 leading higher education institutions (HEIs), identified through the Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings 2018. Qualitative content analysis with a directed approach was used to analyse the strategy documents. The specific theory used was disruptive innovation. The use of “innovation”, or variants thereof, was counted in each document. Ten case studies from the sample were used for content analysis.

Technology-enhanced learning-related strategy documents are conservative, advocating the more efficient use of existing technologies, or the incremental enhancement of existing technologies, but not transformation through technology.

By evaluating the extent to which selected institutional strategies engage with innovation in technology-enhanced learning, this study argues HEIs advocate sustaining innovation or efficiency innovation to a greater extent than disruptive innovation.