Quote

I believe businesses don't grow or develop in terms of a blueprint. There is a huge element of opportunism involved.

The breakthrough innovations come when the tension is greatest and the resources are most limited. That's when people are actually a lot more open to rethinking the fundamental way they do business.

I've felt a little culpable that we entrepreneurs often invent businesses just to drive people to buy more things.

My view is that innovation has declined in the everyday processes that businesses tinker with incrementally as they try to become more productive over time.

Many entrepreneurs do not realize that many of the problems their businesses face today began yesterday, long before there was a business.

I hear entrepreneurs use the word 'disruption' on a daily basis and continuously hear the cliche change the world.

When someone takes their existing business and tries to transform it into something else - they fail. In technology that is often the case. Look at Kodak: it was the dominant imaging company in the world. They did fabulously during the great depression, but then wiped out the shareholders because of technological change.

In most parts of the world, starting a company that goes bust is dubbed a 'failure.' In Silicon Valley, we call this 'gaining experience.' We are willing to take the risks that are inherent for innovation.

The reason why it is so difficult for existing firms to capitalize on disruptive innovations is that their processes and their business model that make them good at the existing business actually make them bad at competing for the disruption.