The Prosperity Paradox
Summary
Clayton Christensen, Efosa Ojomo and Karen Dillon apply the disruptive innovation framework to economic development, arguing that most development effort fails because it pushes resources into countries rather than creating markets within them.
Their central concept is market-creating innovation, which they distinguish from sustaining innovation, improving existing products for existing customers, and efficiency innovation, doing the same with fewer resources. Market-creating innovation makes a product affordable and accessible to people who previously could not consume it at all, and in doing so it builds the distribution, financing, training and regulatory infrastructure that the new market requires. They argue that this pulls institutions into existence rather than waiting for them.
The cases include Mo Ibrahim's Celtel building mobile networks across African countries that investors considered impossible, Tolaram's noodle business in Nigeria, which built its own electricity, water treatment and logistics, and historical cases including Singer sewing machines, Ford and Kodak, which the authors argue created the American market rather than serving it. Their argument against the standard development approach is that infrastructure and institutions built without a market to use them decay, and that the sequence must run the other way. The framework is genuinely useful for thinking about frontier markets. Critics note that the case selection is favourable, that the argument understates the cases where institutions did precede growth, and that market-creating innovation is easier to identify after it succeeds.
Key takeaways 7
- Market-creating innovation makes a product accessible to people who previously could not consume it at all, which is different from improving existing products.
- Creating a market pulls the infrastructure, financing and institutions it needs into existence rather than waiting for them.
- Infrastructure built without a market to use it decays, which is why the standard development sequence fails.
- Nonconsumption, meaning people who need a job done and cannot afford any existing solution, is the largest and least contested opportunity.
- Firms entering frontier markets frequently must build electricity, water and logistics themselves, and this cost is part of the opportunity.
- The authors argue that corruption is a symptom of the absence of legitimate opportunity rather than an independent obstacle to it.
- Case selection favours successes, and market-creating innovation is easier to identify after the fact than in prospect.
Who should read it
Founders and investors entering frontier markets who want a framework for building where infrastructure and institutions do not yet exist.
About Clayton Christensen
Kim B. Clark Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School 1992-2020; co-founder of Innosight, Rose Park Advisors and the Clayton Christensen Institute; died 23 January 2020
The Innovator's Dilemma turned disruption into a primary framework that the rest of the strategy and innovation literature argues with rather than around.
Harvard Business School, Innosight, Rose Park Advisors, Clayton Christensen Institute
Similar books 6
Chosen by shared topics, the entries that hold them, and the people who recommended both.
How companies can serve the world's poor profitably and reduce poverty in doing so.
Recommended by: Mohnish Pabrai
How $27 lent to 42 villagers grew into Grameen Bank and microcredit.
Recommended by: Mohnish Pabrai, The Barefoot Investor
Rich countries urge poor ones to adopt the opposite of the policies they once used.
Why emerging economies will not all keep converging, and tests for which can grow.
Recommended by: Mohnish Pabrai
Living standards rise through learning, and how policy can make economies learn.
“For a wonderful book that builds on Arrow's research, see Joseph E. Stiglitz and Bruce C. Greenwald, Creating A Learning Society” — Michael Mauboussin
Recommended by: Michael Mauboussin
Polemical, but the case for bond-market financing over aid is argued in investor terms.
Where it sits in the reference 2
Topics