DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION 4
their current business models, then they would feel left out when it comes to handling issues. It is
also advisable to create a special team which would gather ideas from the workers and applies
them. Future pieces of research can compare the special teams and front-line employees’ roles to
determine if they are complimentary or contradictory, and if their importance are based on
distinctive conditions like business nature and project stage.
Managers should react in a specific manner when responding to potential competitors,
given the proof that disruptive innovation has less predictive power. The leaders should first
compute the winning value before finding means of leveraging existing abilities and working
jointly with other firms (King and Baatartogtokh , 2015, pg. 87). The authors have managed to
talk about those aspects, making the work more reliable.
Negative Outcome
Organizational culture indeed limits the ability to promote the innovation process,
especially when an already established company intends to acquire a small and new one. When
startups and incumbents intend to collaborate, they should balance factors separately.
Furthermore; apart from acquisitions, joint ventures, and even stake ventures, there could be
analysis on other forms like licensing of intellectual property and their challenges. Some cultural
elements like risk-taking and entrepreneurship are conserved, although they may not contribute
to success in all situations. Many people tend to believe that entrepreneurship and taking risks
are guaranteed ways of performing well but it is not the case, since risks could lead to failure or
success. A business should, therefore, keep in mind that taking risks can still lead to failure and
does not necessarily mean high chances of a favorable outcome. There have been observations
with regards to big firms performing unlike small ones when it comes to disruptive innovations