From The Authors

“Technological change is a bit-by-bit, cumulative process until it is punctuated by a major advance. Such discontinuities offer sharp price-performance improvements over exiting technologies” (Tushman and Anderson 1). Discontinuous innovation “involves the development of competencies and network linkages with other firms that take it away from its existing trajectory of development. . . [and it] assumes some form of abrupt change in the business environment that makes it necessary or possible for the firm to break out of its exiting trajectory of development” (Bessant, Birkinshaw, and Delbridge 1).

The Invention

• Element Change - 5
• A discontinuous innovation represents a major technical advance. Although the authors do not specifically state whether or not the advance takes within the elements or the system, they do give examples such as the automobile, plain paper copier, transistors, and turbojets.
• Systems Change - 5
• A discontinuous innovation represents a major technical advance. Although the authors do not specifically state whether or not the advance takes within the elements or the system, they do give examples such as the automobile, plain paper copier, transistors, and turbojets.
• Performance - 5
• The authors (Tushman & Anderson) classify discontinuous innovations into two classes. The first is Competence Enhancing discontinuity and the second is Competence destroying discontinuity. In the case of Competence Enhancing discontinuity the invention dramatically outperforms the current invention as it dramatically alters previously obtainable price/perform ratios.
• Benefit - 5
• In the case of Competence Destroying innovations the invention introduces some benefit that was previously unobtainable. A benefit that gives new entrants competitive advantage.

Commercialization

• Target Customers - 0
• The authors do not address this dimension.
• Need Creation - 0
• Not addressed.
• Value Network/Industry Shakeup - 5
• Competence Destroying innovations disrupt industry structure (Tushman & Anderson). “Skills that brought product class leaders to preeminence are rendered largely obsolete; new firms founded to exploit the new technology will gain market share at the expense of organizations that, bound by traditions, sunk costs, and internal political constraints, remain committed to outmoded technology” (Tushman & Anderson 1).
• “Competence destroying discontinuities are so fundamentally different from previously dominant technologies that the skills and knowledge base required to operate the core technology shift. Such major changes in skills, distinctive competence, and production processes are associated with major changes in the distribution of power and control within firms and industries.” This redistribution of power and control within industries results in new players, new relationships and thus a dramatically new value network.
• In competence enhancing discontinuities the opposite is true. The invention builds on the industry’s know how and relationships are strengthening as the incumbents consolidate leadership and the industry sees an increase in barriers to entry.
• Tushman and Anderson break up each class of discontinuity into either product or process. “Competence destroying process discontinuities represent a new way of making a given product. . . Competence destroying process breakthroughs may involve combining previously discrete steps into a more continuous flow (eg. float glass) or may involve a completely different process” (Tushman & Anderson 1).
• Market Size & Growth - 4

Sales variability decreases in the case of competence enhancing innovations as small firms drop out of the industry and entry barriers are raised(Tushman & Anderson 1). Sales variability increases in the case of competence destroying innovations as incumbents experience drop in sales and new entrants experience dramatic growth.

1 Tushman and Anderson. Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments. ASQ Quarterly. 1986
2 Bessant, Birkinshaw, and Delbridge, Managing the Challenge of Discontinuous Innovation. AIM Research. 2004.

TOP ^