What are Christensen’s economic views. If he is going to be in Romney’s cabinet he must at least be claiming to advocate “capitalism” but where can I find some real in-depth views?
I don’t know if he is going to be in Romney’s cabinet. But they know each other extremely well. Just the image of Clayton Christensen scrubbing the floor of his new house and Mitt Romney shows up saying, “Hey Clay, there is an easier way to do this” and he shows up with tools of his own I can’t get out of my head. I had no idea they were that close. But if so, that would explain Romney’s business ability.
Christensen is not an economist. He is a businessman and teaches management at the Harvard Business School. He is one of the most famous business analysts out there due to his ‘disruption’ model. Christensen became the posterboy for the computer and Internet revolution with his disruption idea. The concept is simple. There are different forms of technological innovation. Sustaining technology is doing the same job but better like a video game console with better graphics. Over time, this overshoots users’ needs. A disruptive technological innovation is doing a different job which attracts a market the industry had no idea existed. So instead of making a game console with even more beautiful graphics, how about changing the interface? Hence, the Nintendo Wii which attracted a market the Game Industry had no idea existed.
Christensen is responsible for the Celeron chip that Intel made. He’s responsible for many products out there. But keep in mind that this is all business management. Christensen focuses on turning businesses around. The best way to do that is with disruption. And the best way to have your company to avoid being destroyed is to disrupt before you are disrupted. Newspapers have been disrupted by the Internet, for example.
Christensen hates economists as I quoted because they have no world experience. Christensen also is not an ideologue but very much a pragmatist. In his books, I’ve seen him put aside the right wing ideas to business. Why? Because the people who say those things are ideologues, not businessmen. Like economists, pundits don’t have the real world advantage.
Christensen is also a very sick man. I don’t know if he would accept a position in the cabinet if even asked. I’ve seen someone become president up close (George W.), so if this goes the way I think then a President Romney would put in people he can trust. Being a family friend, Romney would trust Christensen. Christensen is also a symbol to the business community. Putting him in, itself, would strike optimism in the business community and have them think that this politician is serious about the economy.
Do not put Christensen in a ‘capitalism’ box or an ‘ideologue’ box. He’s much better than that. His disruption finally proved creative destruction has happened, is happening, can happen in the future, and businesses can shape their future. He has written books on education and health care. Perhaps we’ll be seeing them in reality soon.