Like It or Not, Trump is a Textbook Disruptor

Originally published by Whitney Johnson on LinkedIn: Like It or Not, Trump is a Textbook Disruptor


It's just a silly little thing. Nothing to worry about.

That's what General Motors said about Toyota, Borders about Amazon, Yellow Cab about Uber, and the Republican Party about Donald Trump.

Today, Toyota has three times the market cap of GM, Borders has closed the book on its business, Uber is driving down the price of a Yellow Cab, and Donald Trump is the presumptive Republican nominee for President of the United States.

A lot of ink has been spilled concerning Donald’s disruption of the Republican Party, but focused on a traditional definition of disruption—Donald as a disturber, an irritant, a naughty schoolboy that the Republican establishment wants to send to the Principal's office for discipline, but can’t.

Frustrating, but not the definition of disruption under consideration here.

If we apply the term-of-art 'disruptive innovation' as a low-end or new market innovation that eventually upends an industry, does Donald Trump fit the paradigm of a disruptor? A Presidential election is an industry: the money involved in the 2016 iteration will eclipse the 2.6 billion dollars spent just four years ago for the general election alone. Big business indeed.

Let's see what the framework says:

Assume market risk. A disruptor plays where no one else is playing, or wants to play. Disruptors accept the risk of having to create a market for their offering by courting customers who aren’t currently consuming. Initially, they fly under-the-radar, easily dismissed as ‘a silly-little-thing’ while gaining a foothold on the low-rung of the market ladder that no competitor bothers to challenge—until it’s too late.

Trump hit on this. Early in the election primary cycle the press, the pundits, and the Party leaders were all saying the same things. Trump didn't try to win these people over; he took his offering, his message, directly to the people who weren’t buying the conventional product. No one else was talking to this market, or satisfying their perceived needs. When we invest, we often make choices emotionally and then refine an intellectual argument justifying our decision. This is certainly true with a Presidential election.

We think we hire a president for functional, rational reasons, but national politics are as fraught with strong emotions as any other enterprise, perhaps more so.

Play to distinctive strengths. Disruptors are likely to be those who act on their distinctive strengths, owning them, and concentrating effort where they have acumen that others in their sphere do not. Many of us tackle big projects, analyzing our weaknesses and improvements needed to succeed. Not Trump. There’s a hefty catalog of his weaknesses as a politician and candidate for the nation’s highest office. He is uninhibited by these shortcomings, choosing instead to do what he does better than anyone: firing off the bon mot, shooting from the hip—charismatic, and always ready with a strong and confident opinion, no matter how ill-considered it may be. He looms larger-than-life a character in a movie. The devil-may-care, thumb his nose cowboy. Then he morphs into the dictatorial bully, promising a safe playground to his supporters. His greatest gift may be to endlessly evade those who would hold his feet to the fire.