“Disruption” Should be a Point of Evolution

We took a look at how the topic of disruption is playing out today. There seems to be a running theme that people are exhausted by disruption.

In the Journal of Management Studies, scholars acknowledged that disruption is an overall process of “evolution of [the disruptive] product or service over time” (Christensen, et al., 2015, p. 6, Kumaraswamy et al, 2018). The key phrase we read in this is “an overall process of evolution.” Perhaps, that is the real dilemma.

Disruption is a point in the process of evolution.

If we never get beyond the marketing drivel of being disruptive, no wonder the general population is exhausted by concepts of disruption. It is human nature to want to land, to be calm. In 2022, the Washington Post ran an article discussing "The Noise Control Act of 1972" and its intent to give Americans the right to a reasonably quiet environment. The writers suggested that we need something similar for our digital world. They were not wrong.

When we (meaning us at scenarioDNA) are looking at disruption, we are seeing it at a point in time, at the beginning of its trajectory.  What we are seeking is an understanding of how disruption might play out moving forward.

Disruptive can’t stay disruptive forever.

But that is not how disruptive concepts are currently being discussed. The themes being searched on Google are tied to investment, AI, and gaming…and porn. Investopedia describes disruptive innovation as “the innovation that transforms expensive or highly sophisticated products or services—previously accessible to a high-end or more-skilled segment of consumers—to those that are more affordable and accessible to a broader population.” 

That sounds like democratization to us, and in some ways both are true. Good innovation tends to evolve from user/creators. In the same vein, disruption should also rise from threads of human behavior, getting in step with us before we are there, much like Amazon did beginning as an online bookstore. 

We see the disruption in hindsight because it changed the most mundane things – the mundane things we labor through without thought. It did not topple us in its process or unearth us along the way.

Disruption is not a game of pinball.

Disruption is a slow steady process of understanding the human behavior involved. It does not launch like a tsunami. Nor is it presented by the hottest influencer of the moment.

In our 2022 Decoding the Metaverse report, we highlighted the misnomers of the metaverse…the metaverse would not be a Utopian escape from a bleak world. It would evolve from current behaviors that we are already well-engaged with. We still stick to our word. 

This also rings true in discussions of spatial audio. We are not there yet, but discourse makes it sound like innovation has achieved the epitome of spatial audio. We’ll get there, but spatial audio does not live within current dialog. 

Circa 1850-1860 was the last time “disruption” popped up in our use of language. The use of the word “calm” rose to that point too. Cataclysmic events were happening in the decades prior.

Gold was discovered. Drilling began on the first commercial oil well. The sewing machine was patented and the first elevator was installed. It was also the time of the U.S. Supreme Court's March 6, 1857, "Dred Scott Decision." After that point, “disruption” slowly rose while “calm” lost its favor. 

1980 is the next inflection point. “Calm” flies upward, as “disruption” levels off. In 1980, the term “disruption” is associated with social costs, schools, and families. “Calm” conversely is associated with managing stress. Here we are forty-three years later, and the terms couldn’t be farther apart. We truly have missed the point of what people want.