What it is
Clayton Christensen noticed that great companies often fail not because they’re badly run, but because they’re well run. They listen to their best customers and keep improving their products for them. Meanwhile, a newcomer starts at the bottom with something cheaper, simpler and “worse,” for customers the leaders don’t care about. It improves, moves up, and by the time it’s good enough for everyone, the leader can’t follow without undermining its own business.
That’s disruption in Christensen’s sense. Ben Thompson adds a useful caution: the framework is powerful, but it doesn’t explain everything. Some companies win by integrating everything for a premium experience, and disruption theory has repeatedly predicted their downfall wrongly.
How it shows up for me
I see a small version of it in my own habits. The way I’ve always done something is optimized for the old version of me, and the better way often looks worse at first.