Glad you uploaded this interview. It helped me a lot in understanding where i was stuck and not sure about my idea and strategy. But Now i am crystal clear :)
After watching this, does anybody feel Google took a similar strategy as what IBM did in terms of launching parallel business units, i.e. introducing Alphabet and it's subsidiaries?
Jim Gemmell wow. NEVs are their answer for disruption? I don’t know where to start with where this article is wrong and how history played out the last 3 years. If you don’t think Tesla is disruptive and changed the industry forever, I suggest you ask Audi, BMW, and Mercedes. I’d make the bold prediction that a major OEM will go under because they don’t adapt to this electrified (and autonomous) change. The Japanese especially and their bets in fuel cells. The industry is already forever changed and the transition was accelerated by Tesla.
@@jimgemmell9384 Thank you for sharing the HBR article. I appreciate it. 📈 …It seems Clayton Christensen underestimated how much growth and disruption can actually come out of $TSLA. This sometimes happens with disruptive companies, as Christensen himself has pointed this out before: "Just as the established companies systematically underestimate how big [the] disruptive companies will become - Wall Street’s methods of financial analysis systematically undervalue disruptive companies and how big they will become - and so it’s disruptive companies that are the ones that keep surprising the market on the upside: oh my gosh there’s even more growth here than we thought." - Clayton Christensen
Glad you uploaded this interview. It helped me a lot in understanding where i was stuck and not sure about my idea and strategy. But Now i am crystal clear :)
After watching this, does anybody feel Google took a similar strategy as what IBM did in terms of launching parallel business units, i.e. introducing Alphabet and it's subsidiaries?
cool, andrew. it is rare to see clay talking.
Tesla is a perfect example of this.
hbr.org/2015/05/teslas-not-as-disruptive-as-you-might-think
Jim Gemmell wow. NEVs are their answer for disruption? I don’t know where to start with where this article is wrong and how history played out the last 3 years.
If you don’t think Tesla is disruptive and changed the industry forever, I suggest you ask Audi, BMW, and Mercedes. I’d make the bold prediction that a major OEM will go under because they don’t adapt to this electrified (and autonomous) change. The Japanese especially and their bets in fuel cells. The industry is already forever changed and the transition was accelerated by Tesla.
Tesla is a perfect example of this.
@@jimgemmell9384 Thank you for sharing the HBR article. I appreciate it.
📈 …It seems Clayton Christensen underestimated how much growth and disruption can actually come out of $TSLA. This sometimes happens with disruptive companies, as Christensen himself has pointed this out before:
"Just as the established companies systematically underestimate how big [the] disruptive companies will become - Wall Street’s methods of financial analysis systematically undervalue disruptive companies and how big they will become - and so it’s disruptive companies that are the ones that keep surprising the market on the upside: oh my gosh there’s even more growth here than we thought."
- Clayton Christensen
👍 @@bluezcluez315, I agree with your assessment.
Tesla is a perfect example of this.