What would disruption change for your organisation?
Move from broad claims about disruption to the customers, assumptions and capabilities that could be affected.
“AI will disrupt our industry” can start a conversation, but it does not yet tell a leadership team what to do. A useful discussion identifies what could change, who would be affected and which assumptions in the current strategy might no longer hold.
Use the term carefully. Broad disruption can include major changes in regulation, technology or customer behaviour. Christensen's disruptive innovation theory describes a more specific process: an offering gains a foothold among underserved lower-end customers or people previously unable to participate, then improves and moves into established markets. A breakthrough that improves performance for existing demanding customers can instead be sustaining innovation.
The distinction helps frame the investigation. It does not make one type of change more important, or tell you that a particular entrant will succeed.
Name the mechanism of change.
Ask what is becoming cheaper, easier, faster or accessible to different users. Then examine the effects on buying decisions, distribution, revenue and the capabilities required to compete. A technology can affect several organisations in different ways.
An established engineering-services business uses AI to accelerate its existing analysis. A new provider offers a simpler self-service option for small firms that previously could not afford specialist support.
The incumbent's productivity gain and the entrant's attempt to reach new customers raise different strategic questions. Neither an AI label nor an early product launch proves a disruptive trajectory. Examine adoption, economics, service limitations and whether the offering can improve enough to serve other customers.
In this example, a useful response might include testing the needs of smaller customers, experimenting with a different service model or monitoring how the entrant's offer develops. The choice depends on evidence and strategic intent.
Connect the possibility to a decision.
Separate the observation from the scenario: “a provider has launched” is different from “customers may stop buying our current service”. Name the assumptions between those statements and look for evidence that could support or weaken them.
Use several plausible responses to test the strategy. Some steps may be useful across scenarios, such as understanding an emerging customer need. Other commitments should wait for a defined signal. Assign an owner to watch that signal and a decision-maker to respond.
Replace the headline with four questions.
- What specific assumption about our customers or business model could change?
- What evidence would show that change is occurring?
- What can we learn or prepare now at a manageable commitment?
- Which signal would trigger a larger strategic review?
Record the uncertainty and review date. Revisit the reasoning as evidence changes, rather than treating the initial scenario as a prediction.