Clayton M. Christensen: Customer

Clayton M. Christensen was Mormon academic. Explore interesting quotes on customer.

Clayton M. Christensen: 46 quotes1 like

“The concept of the value network — the context within which a firm identifies and responds to customers' needs, solves problems, procures input, reacts to competitors, and strives for profit — is central to this synthesis.”

Clayton M. Christensen

Source: 1990s, The Innovator's Dilemma (1997), p. 31

“[There is a distinguishes between] low-end disruption which targets customers who do not need the full performance valued by customers at the high end of the market and "new-market disruption" that targets customers that could previously not be served profitably by the incumbent.”

Clayton M. Christensen

Christensen (2003) The Innovator's Solution. p. 22-23
2000s

“Adrian Slywotzky believes the Internet will overturn the inefficient push model of supplier-customer interaction. He predicts that in all sorts of markets, customers will use choiceboards—interactive, on-line systems that let people design their own products by choosing from a menu of attributes, prices, and delivery options. And he explores how the shifting role of the customer—from passive recipient to active designer—will change the way companies compete.”

Clayton M. Christensen

Adrian J. Slywotzky, Clayton M. Christensen, Richard S. Tedlow, Nicholas G. Carr (2000) "The future of commerce." Harvard Business Review Vol 78.1. p. 39-53. ( abstract http://hbr.org/product/future-of-commerce-hbr-onpoint-enhanced-edition/an/4681-PDF-ENG) <br class="br">2000s

“Low-end disruption occurs when the rate at which products improve exceeds the rate at which customers can adopt the new performance.”

Clayton M. Christensen

Christensen cited in: Philip Kotler, John A. Caslione (2009) Chaotics: The Business of Managing and Marketing in the Age of Turbulence. p. 23
2000s

“We contest the conclusions of scholars such as Tushman and Anderson (1986), who have argued that incumbent firms are most threatened by attacking entrants when the innovation in question destroys, or does not build upon, the competence of the firm. We observe that established firms, though often at great cost, have led their industries in developing critical competence-destroying technologies, when the new technology was needed to meet existing customers’ demands.”

Clayton M. Christensen

Clayton Christensen and Joseph L. Bower. (1996) "Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17(3), pp. 199 as cited in: C.G. Sandström (2010) A revised perspective on Disruptive Innovation p. 8
1990s

“Generally, disruptive innovations were technologically straightforward, consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that was often simpler than prior approaches. They offered less of what customers in established markets wanted and so could rarely be initially employed there. They offered a different package of attributes valued only in emerging markets remote from, and unimportant to, the mainstream”

Clayton M. Christensen

Source: 1990s, The Innovator's Dilemma (1997), p. 15

“The technological changes that damage established companies are usually not radically new or difficult from a technological point of view. They do, however, have two important characteristics: First, they typically present a different package of performance attributes—ones that, at least at the outset, are not valued by existing customers. Second, the performance attributes that existing customers do value improve at such a rapid rate that the new technology can later invade those established markets.”

Clayton M. Christensen

Clayton M. Christensen, (January 1995). "Disruptive Technologies Catching the Wave". Harvard Business Review: P 3.
1990s

“During the early stages of an industry, when the functionality and reliability of a product isn't yet adequate to meet customer's needs, a proprietary solution is almost always the right solution -- because it allows you to knit all the pieces together in an optimized way.
But once the technology matures and becomes good enough, industry standards emerge. That leads to the standardization of interfaces, which lets companies specialize on pieces of the overall system, and the product becomes modular. At that point, the competitive advantage of the early leader dissipates, and the ability to make money migrates to whoever controls the performance-defining subsystem.
In the modular PC world, that meant Microsoft and Intel (NASDAQ:INTC), and the same thing will happen in the iPod world as well. Apple may think the proprietary iPod is their competitive advantage, but it's temporary. In the future, what will matter will be the software inside that lets users find exactly the kind of music they want to listen to, when and where they want to, with minimal effort.”

Clayton M. Christensen

2006 interview in Business Week, cited in: Rebutting Clayton Christensen on Apple's 'Troubled' Future http://seekingalpha.com/article/5633-rebutting-clayton-christensen-on-apples-troubled-future-aapl-msft-dell in Seeking Alpha (11 January 2006) <br class="br">2000s

“Our findings support many of the conclusions of the resource dependence theorists, who contend that a firm's scope for strategic change is strongly bounded by the interests of external entities (customers, in this study) who provide the resources the firm needs to survive.”

Clayton M. Christensen

Clayton Christensen and Joseph L. Bower. (1996) "Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms", Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17(3), p. 212)
1990s