Disruptive Innovation: The Most Abused Phrase in Business
Your new app feature isn't “disruptive.” Your slightly faster service isn't “disrupting” the market. That new shade of beige you’re offering? It’s not a “disruption.”
The phrase disruptive innovation has been tortured, beaten, and abused by marketing departments and clueless founders for so long that it’s lost all meaning. It’s become a hollow buzzword slapped onto anything new to make it sound important.
It’s not.
Most of what people call disruption is just improvement. And that's fine. But it's not the same thing. True disruption is rarer. It’s more strategic. And it’s far more brutal.
If you’re a small business owner or an entrepreneur, understanding the difference isn't just academic. It's the difference between a clever strategy and a business suicide mission.
- Disruptive innovation is often confused with mere improvements, losing its true meaning in business contexts.
- True disruption targets overlooked market segments rather than existing customers of incumbents.
- A solid business model and effective marketing are crucial for disruptive ideas to succeed.
- Disruptors should focus on building brands that resonate with overlooked customers, defining their unique value.
Let’s Be Clear: What “Disruptive Innovation” Actually Is
Forget the caffeine-fuelled images of twenty-somethings “breaking things” in a garage. That’s a romantic myth.
It’s Not About Breaking Things
Disruption isn’t chaos. It’s not about burning down the old guard with a revolutionary, world-changing invention out of nowhere.
It’s about precision.
It’s a specific, strategic process of targeting overlooked segments of a market and gaining a foothold. It’s a quiet infiltration, not a frontal assault. The “breaking” part only happens at the very end, long after the disruptor is already entrenched. By then, it’s too late for the incumbent.
The Gospel According to Christensen (The 1-Minute Version)
A Harvard professor named Clayton Christensen coined the term. You should know his name. He observed that great companies often fail not because they do something wrong, but because they do everything right.
They listen to their best customers, improve their products, and increase their prices. This creates a gap at the bottom of the market.
This gap is where disruption is born.
- Hardcover Book
- Christensen, Clayton M. (Author)
- English (Publication Language)
Christensen identified two footholds:
- Low-End Disruption: You offer a “good enough” product to the least profitable customers of the market leader.
- New-Market Disruption: You target people who aren't customers at all because the existing options are too expensive or too complicated.
That’s it. That’s the theory. It’s not about making a better product for the incumbent’s best customers. It’s about serving the people the incumbent doesn’t care about.
Why Your “Better” Product Isn’t Disruptive
Improving a product for your existing customers is called sustaining innovation. It’s vital. It’s what good businesses do. They add features, increase quality, and charge more for it.
Think of it this way:
- Sustaining: The first iPhone got a better camera.
- Disruptive: The first, very basic iPhone made computing accessible without a laptop.
One is a step up the same ladder. The other creates a whole new ladder.
Calling your sustaining innovation “disruptive” makes you look foolish. More importantly, it means you're using the wrong strategy. You're trying to fight a heavyweight champion in his own ring, by his own rules. It's a fight you will lose.
The Two Paths to Upending a Market
You have two ways in. You need to know which path you're on.
Path 1: Low-End Disruption (The “Good Enough” Attack)
This is about targeting the incumbent’s worst customers. The ones they’re over-serving.
Imagine a high-end accounting firm that offers incredibly detailed, bespoke financial reports to massive corporations for £50,000. Their customers love them. But they won’t touch a small business that just needs its taxes filed for £500.
That’s the opening.
The low-end disruptor comes in with a simple, no-frills software that does 80% of what a small business needs for £50 a month. It’s not as good as the expensive firm. It’s not supposed to be. It’s good enough for the customer who was being ignored.
| The Incumbent (Market Leader) | The Low-End Disruptor |
| Focuses on high-margin customers. | Targets low-margin, over-served customers. |
| Offers high-performance, feature-rich products. | Offers a “good enough” product. |
| The business model is built on high overheads. | The business model is lean and low-cost. |
| Runs away from small, annoying clients. | Runs towards them. |
The incumbent looks at the disruptor and sneers. “Their product is rubbish. Their customers are worthless.” They’re happy to lose that business. But the disruptor uses that low-end foothold to improve, slowly moving upmarket until it’s a genuine threat.
Path 2: New-Market Disruption (The “Nobody Else Wants Them” Attack)
Here, you’re not stealing bad customers. You’re creating new ones.
You’re targeting people who aren’t using anything at all because the current solutions are too complex, too expensive, or too inaccessible.
Think about personal computers. Before Apple and IBM, computers were mainframe behemoths owned by universities and giant corporations. The average person didn't “own” a computer. They were non-consumers.
The PC wasn't as powerful as a mainframe. It was a toy by comparison. But it created a new market by making computing accessible to individuals. It didn't fight the mainframe on its turf; it created a new one.
This is often where technology plays a bigger role, enabling simplicity or affordability that wasn't possible before. But the focus is always on the new customer, the person who was previously locked out of the market entirely.
The Graveyard of “Disruptors”: Why Most Fail
Every week, I see another startup obituary. Another “game-changer” that ran out of money. They almost always make the same fatal mistakes.
A “Disruptive” Idea is Worth Precisely Nothing
Ideas are cheap. They are a multiplier of execution. A brilliant idea multiplied by zero execution is still zero.
Founders fell in love with their clever concept for disruption. They get caught up in the story. They forget that the idea is the starting pistol, not the finish line. The race is won in the boring, gruelling work of execution.
A recent study suggests that around 90% of startups fail. It’s not for a lack of ideas. It’s for a lack of getting the hard parts right.
#1: You Ignored the Business Model
I once met with a team that had built a truly remarkable piece of software. It used AI to automate a complex logistics task that typically took hours. It was technically brilliant. They were convinced they were going to “disrupt” the whole industry.
I asked them how they were going to make money.
They looked at me blankly. They muttered something about “user acquisition” and “figuring out monetisation later.” Their business model was hope.
The company folded within 18 months. The incumbent they were targeting simply copied their core feature and bundled it for free into their existing enterprise package.
Your innovation isn't the product. It's the business model that delivers that product. How you make money, what your cost structure is, and how you reach customers—that's the engine. The product is just the chassis. If your engine doesn’t work, you’re just a fancy-looking box going nowhere.
#2: You Thought the Product Would Sell Itself
This is the most arrogant—and common—mistake. The engineer's fallacy. “Our product is so good, it doesn't need marketing.”
Wrong.
The world is a noisy place. A better mousetrap doesn't win. The mousetrap with the better story, the clearer message, and the stronger brand wins. Every time.
Believing your product is enough is a symptom of not respecting your customer. It assumes they have the time and energy to seek you out, analyse your features, and understand your genius. They don't.
You have to connect your innovation to the customer's problem with a powerful, compelling brand. If you fail at that, you fail. Full stop.
The Unspoken Weapon of Every True Disruptor: Brand
This is the part everyone gets wrong. They think brand is a fluffy, “soft” thing. A nice logo and some cool colours.
For a disruptor, brand isn't soft. It’s the sharpest weapon you have.
Why Incumbents Get This Wrong
Market leaders build their brands on sustaining innovation. Their branding screams “quality,” “heritage,” “features,” and “premium.” Think Mercedes-Benz or a top-tier law firm. Their brand is a promise of more. More performance, more prestige, more everything.
This makes them powerful, but also rigid. Their brand makes it almost impossible for them to launch a cheap, simple, “good enough” product because it would undermine their core promise. Can you imagine Porsche launching a £10,000 car made of cheap plastic? It would damage the main brand.
This is the innovator's dilemma in action, and it gives you a massive opening.
Your Brand Isn’t a Logo. It’s a Declaration of War.
A disruptor’s brand does the opposite of an incumbent’s. It shouldn't promise “more.” It should promise “different.”
It should declare war on the industry's complexity, high prices, and exclusivity.
- Incumbent Brand: “We are the best, most advanced option.”
- Disruptive Brand: “We are the simple, affordable, common-sense option.”
Your brand's job is to find the frustrated customer and say, “We see you. We built this for you.” It needs to be a signal of intent. It must instantly communicate your unique value proposition—the very thing that makes you a threat.
Building a Brand for the Overlooked
Forget trying to look like the market leader. You need to look like the antidote.
- Clarity: Your message must be brutally simple. No jargon. If you can't explain what you do and why it matters in one sentence, you've lost.
- Honesty: Don't pretend your product is something it's not. If it's a simple tool, sell its simplicity. Be upfront about what it doesn't do. This builds trust.
- Empathy: Your brand has to reflect a deep understanding of the customer you're serving. The one the big guys are ignoring. Your entire visual and verbal identity should speak their language.
This is not about surface-level design. This is about deep strategic work on your core message. Your brand identity is the vessel that carries your disruptive idea into the marketplace. If the vessel leaks, the idea sinks. This is the strategic thinking that underpins our work at Inkbot Design. We don’t just make things look good; we help you build a brand that communicates your specific, disruptive value.
An Observation on Brand Voice
Listen to how incumbents talk. Their language is often corporate, safe, and full of weasel words. “Excellence,” “solutions,” “synergy.”
Disruptors should talk like human beings. Direct. Confident. Maybe a little irreverent. They call out the industry's nonsense because they are the alternative to it. A strong brand voice is one of the fastest ways to signal you're different.
A Practical Blueprint for Engineering Disruption
This isn't a magic formula. But it’s a process. It forces you to think strategically, not just creatively.
Step 1: Stop Looking at the Top
Don’t study the market leader's best customers. That’s their fortress. Instead, become an anthropologist of the ignored.
- Who is priced out of the market entirely?
- Who is using a clunky, complicated “solution” they hate?
- Who is over-served with features they don't need and are paying for?
Find the pain. Find the frustration. That’s your starting point.
Step 2: Define the “Job to Be Done”
Customers don't “buy” products. They “hire” them to do a job. A milkshake isn't just a sweet drink; it’s hired to cure boredom on a long commute.
What is the fundamental job your target customer needs done? Strip away all the features and focus on the core outcome. Often, you’ll find the incumbent has lost sight of this. They're so busy adding bells and whistles, they've forgotten the basic job.
Step 3: Architect the Business Model First
Before you write a line of code or build a prototype, map out the business model. How can you deliver the “job to be done” in a way that is structurally different from the incumbent?
- Can you have a radically lower cost structure? (e.g., direct-to-consumer vs. retail)
- Can you use a different revenue model? (e.g., subscription vs. one-time purchase)
- Can you leverage technology to automate what they do manually?
Your competitive advantage isn't your product; it's your business model.
Step 4: Build the Minimum Viable Threat
I’m not a fan of the term “Minimum Viable Product” (MVP). It encourages lazy thinking. It suggests just getting something out there.
I prefer Minimum Viable Threat.
Your first product must be:
- Viable to your target customer. It has to solve their core problem effectively. It has to be a “wow” moment for them.
- A Threat to the incumbent's blind spot. It must look unappealing and insignificant to them. If the market leader looks at your product and wants to copy it immediately, you haven’t found a disruptive foothold. You’ve just started a direct fight.
Step 5: Don’t Pick a Fight You Can’t Win
The goal of a disruptor is to avoid competition for as long as possible. Stay in your niche. Serve your overlooked customers fanatically. Let the incumbent ignore you.
Grow in the shadows. Get strong. By the time they recognise you as a threat, you should already have the customer loyalty, the brand recognition, and the cash flow to fight back. According to CB Insights, running out of cash is the #1 reason startups die. Don't get dragged into an expensive war before you're ready.
Case Files: The Real, The Fake, and The Noisy
Theory is one thing. The real world is another.
The Textbook Case: Netflix vs. Blockbuster
Everyone gets this story wrong. They think Netflix disrupted Blockbuster with streaming. They didn’t.
Netflix’s first disruption was low-end. Their “DVDs by mail” service targeted Blockbuster’s most annoyed customers: the ones who hated driving to the store and, most of all, hated late fees. The business model—a subscription with no late fees—was the true innovation.
The product (DVDs) was the same. The model was the threat.
Blockbuster could have easily copied it. But their entire profit model depended on late fees. To kill late fees would be to kill their profits. The innovator's dilemma in its purest form. They were trapped. Streaming was just the second wave that finished the job; Netflix’s business model had already started.
The Low-Tech Disruptor: The Local Brewery
I know a town that was dominated by three big beer brands. You could find them in every pub. The market was “saturated.”
Then a small brewery opened. They didn't try to get their bottles into pubs or shops. They couldn't compete on price or distribution.
Instead, they opened a taproom. A simple, industrial space. They offered tastings, tours, and food trucks on weekends. They created a community. They weren't just selling beer; they were selling an experience. They were competing on a completely different axis.
They targeted people who weren't just “beer drinkers,” but people looking for a place to go, a thing to do. It was a new-market disruption on a local scale. They didn't steal the incumbent's customers; they created their own.
The Cautionary Tale: The “Better” Mousetrap That Died
Remember Segway?
It was a technological marvel. Everyone from Steve Jobs to Jeff Bezos hailed it as the future of transportation. It was going to “disrupt” cars and walking.
But who was it for?
It was too expensive for a casual user. It wasn't practical for a real commute. It didn’t solve a clear “job to be done” for a large, overlooked market. It was a sustaining innovation for a market that didn't exist. A brilliant solution to a problem few people had.
It wasn't disruptive. It was just a cool, expensive product. And it failed to gain any real traction.
So, You Think You Have a Disruptive Idea?
Be honest with yourself. Hubris is the great killer of startups. Ask these questions before you bet your life savings on it.
A Brutally Honest Checklist
- Who, specifically, are you targeting? If your answer is “everyone,” you've already failed.
- Are these customers currently ignored or overserved by the market leader?
- Is your solution genuinely simpler, cheaper, or more accessible?
- Is your business model fundamentally different and more efficient than the incumbent’s?
- Will the market leader look at your initial business and be happy to lose it?
- Is your brand built to attract the overlooked, or are you just a cheap copy of the leader?
- What is your “Minimum Viable Threat?”
The Innovator’s Dilemma Hits You, Too
Here's the final twist. If you succeed, you become the incumbent.
And one day, you’ll be listening to your best customers, improving your product, and ignoring some cheap, crappy-looking competitor at the bottom of the market.
The cycle begins again. The only defence is to never stop thinking like a disruptor. Never fall in love with your current success. Always be looking for the next group of overlooked customers. Even if it means disrupting yourself.
Conclusion: Stop Trying to “Disrupt”
Scrub the word from your vocabulary. It’s poisoned. It encourages vanity and bad strategy.
Instead, get obsessed.
Get obsessed with a customer nobody else cares about. Get obsessed with their frustration. Get obsessed with a business model that can serve them profitably. Build a brand that speaks their language with unnerving clarity.
Do that, and you won’t need to tell anyone you’re a disruptor. They’ll see it when the market leader starts bleeding customers and doesn't even know why. That’s the real work.
If this sort of direct thinking resonates and you’re ready to build a brand that is a weapon, not just wallpaper, then we should talk. See our other articles for more observations, or if you need a team that gets it, you can request a quote for our services. This is the strategic work we live for.
FAQs about Disruptive Innovation
Can a service business be truly disruptive?
Absolutely. Disruption is business model-led, not product-led. A law firm offering a subscription for basic legal documents disrupts the traditional billable-hour model. A consulting firm offering a low-cost, automated diagnostic tool disrupts high-cost manual analysis. The principle is the same: use a different model to serve an overlooked market.
Is disruptive innovation always about technology?
No. Technology is often an enabler of disruption because it can create new cost structures or new levels of accessibility (e.g., software replacing manual work). But the disruption itself is the business model change. The local brewery example shows a low-tech disruption based on a different customer experience model.
What’s the difference between disruptive innovation and a “Blue Ocean Strategy”?
They are very similar concepts. Blue Ocean Strategy talks about creating uncontested market space, which aligns perfectly with New-Market Disruption. Both focus on making the competition irrelevant by creating a new value curve. Disruption theory places a bit more emphasis on the specific low-end vs. new-market entry points and the subsequent process of moving upmarket.
How can I tell if my idea is disruptive or just a sustaining improvement?
Ask this: Who is my first customer? If your first customer is the market leader's best customer, and you're trying to win them with more features or better quality, you're making a sustaining innovation. If your first customer is someone the market leader doesn't want or can't serve profitably, you might be onto something disruptive.
How much money do I need to start a disruptive venture?
It's less than you think for the initial phase. True disruptive models are often leaner and more capital-efficient at the start because they are simpler. The goal is not to out-spend the incumbent but to find a profitable niche they are ignoring. High capital requirements are often a sign you're attempting a direct, sustaining battle, not a disruptive one.
What's the biggest mistake first-time “disruptors” make?
Falling in love with their product and assuming it will sell itself. They massively underestimate the need for a clear business model and a powerful, targeted brand strategy from day one. A brilliant product with a terrible go-to-market strategy is just a hobby.
Can an established small business use disruptive principles?
Yes. An established business can launch a new, separate brand or division to attack a low-end or new-market segment without damaging its core business. This is often called a “fighter brand.” It allows you to compete on a different axis and capture a market you might otherwise ignore.
How long does it take for a disruption to work?
Longer than you think. Disruption is a process, not an event. It takes time to gain a foothold, refine the model, and move upmarket. Netflix toiled with DVDs-by-mail for years before it was seen as a serious threat. Patience and a focus on long-term sustainability are key.
Is it better to be a low-end or a new-market disruptor?
It depends entirely on the industry. Low-end disruption works best in markets where the existing customers are clearly over-served and paying for features they don't need. New-market disruption is powerful where large populations are completely shut out of a market due to cost, skill, or access.
What if the incumbent decides to fight back immediately?
If they fight back immediately by copying you and dropping their prices, you may not have chosen a truly disruptive foothold. A proper disruptive strategy targets a market the incumbent is financially motivated to flee from, not fight for. Their initial reaction should be indifference or ridicule, not aggression.
Last update on 2025-07-15 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API
