theory

Challenging the Assumption: Reconsidering Christensen’s Theory of Disruption

Gettyimages 972581744
Clayton Christensen was an amazing observer of business, and his work on disruption is seminal. But has he been proven wrong in the last 10 years on many major disruptions? What if the bottom-up cheaper product disrupting the market is a phenomenon limited to commoditized old product categories (think tires and clothes)? The Christensen theory of disruption could be called “inferior disruption theory” — inferior, cheaper, good enough products that disrupt incumbents over time. While this clearly happens, there’s a more powerful model for disruption.

“Tomasz Tunguz of Theory Venture Predicts AI’s Dominance, the Revival of Web3, and the Future of Tech Investment in 2024”

Gettyimages 1705828371 1
At the end of 2022, like many, I made some predictions about what 2023 would bring to the technology investing ecosystem. AI and data continue to dominate the funding landscape. U.S. VC deals fall from $275 billion in 2022 to $200 billion in 2023, and sustain at about $200-$220 billion next year. Valuations will remain relatively steady, except for AI businesses, which will command a premium of about 10-15% to the market. While VC deals fell dramatically between 2022 and 2023, 2024 won’t see as sharp of a decline.