DisruptiveInnovation.Org - Latest Discussions

How does Job’s theory maps on to New Market, Low End and Modularity vs Integrated Approach

Aroop Gupta, 9/28/2016


This appeared to me after two rounds of Jobs interviews and analysis and some of the theories started to fall in place. Please feel free to comment, disagree, point to anomalies etc.

The diagram on the left is the Job map (which is an outcome of any Job’s analysis). It is a two dimensional one but this does not mean that the Jobs analysis revealed only two dimensions. There are multiple dimensions that appear out of a Jobs analysis but the two that are most prominent are used for construction of the Job map. The four quadrants in the diagram represent different customer segments (numbered 1 to 4).

On the right side, we have the disruption diagram which defines the performance of the product on Y axis and time on the X axis. If we consider the performance of the product or the basis of competition as a function of the two prominent dimensions the bottom left is the least demanding and top right is the most demanding. The remaining two customer categories fall somewhere in between as mapped in the diagram.

So how does this map to the different theories.

Low end disruption – Start with the least demanding customers in the bottom left quadrant and improve the core technology to cater to consumers of other quadrants.

New market disruption – Competing on a different set of dimensions than the original dimensions in the Job map (or a combination of old and new).

Integration and Modularity – Integrate elements in the value network that help a product perform on the dimensions of the Job map that define a customer base. As you move up market, modularize and also start thinking of other dimensions of Job map that were not prominent (and did not figure in the Job map) but may become your future basis of competition.