Among the most critical assets one can possess, he says, is company-wide
recognition that disruptive innovation is actually important. In a company that's
already successful -- or one with layers of bureaucracy that hinder new ideas -- this can prove difficult.
The firm also must commit itself to research. "Disruptive research is absolutely critical, especially in the technology space."

Furthermore, it is not enough to simply have brilliant engineers. Without competent
management on the business side, the most elegant technology can wind up on the scrap
heap of business history, or even worse, usurped by a competitor: "Disruptive innovation is not
sufficient," says Kim. "You can [cite] numerous examples of companies that came up with [new]
technology but eventually were displaced by somebody else."

In the innovator's lingo, these "somebody elses" are known as "fast followers"
-- that is, companies with better funding or sharper management who were able
to exploit a technology more quickly and effectively in the marketplace than the
original creator. "You like to be the first to develop technologies," Kim says. "But the
more flexible, the more innovative in terms of business model that the company is, the
longer you can maintain advantage."

"Particularly in the pharmaceutical area, there has been a focus on how firms acquire innovation
that has been undertaken by small, privately funded firms such as biotech startups," Benner says.
"It may be that the locus of much really radical innovation is shifting outside of the large organizations to small start-ups."