jim G. Digital_Vortex_06182015

An IMD and Cisco Initiative
Joseph Bradley
Jeff Loucks
James Macaulay
Andy Noronha
Michael Wade
June 2015
Digital Vortex
How Digital Disruption Is Redefining Industries

Key Insights
• Digital disruption has the potential to overturn incumbents and reshape markets faster than perhaps any
force in history.
• The Global Center for Digital Business Transformation (DBT Center), an IMD and Cisco initiative, is
dedicated to original research and to creating opportunities for executives to innovate new business
models for the digital age. To learn more about the current state of digital disruption and the outlook for
industries, the Center surveyed 941 business leaders around the world in 12 industries.
• The results of our survey surfaced several troubling findings about the potential for disruption, and
incumbents’ readiness to adapt. Survey respondents believe an average of roughly four of today’s top 10
incumbents (in terms of market share) in each industry will be displaced by digital disruption in the next
five years.
• Despite these dire ramifications, digital disruption is not seen as worthy of board-level attention in about
45 percent of companies (on average across industries). In addition, 43 percent of companies either do
not acknowledge the risk of digital disruption, or have not addressed it sufficiently. Nearly a third are taking
a “wait and see” approach, in hopes of emulating successful competitors. Only 25 percent describe their
approach to digital disruption as proactive—willing to disrupt themselves in order to compete.
• The impact of digital disruption can best be understood through the construct of a vortex. A vortex exerts
a rotational force that draws everything that surrounds it into its center. The Digital Vortex is the inevitable
movement of industries toward a “digital center” in which business models, offerings, and value chains
are digitized to the maximum extent possible.
• As industries move toward the center of the Digital Vortex, physical components that inhibit competitive
advantage (such as manual, paper-based processes) are shed. Whatever can be digitized is digitized. The
components of digital value can then be readily combined as disruptive business models. These models
knit together different types of capabilities and deliver customer value in new ways. The most successful
disruptors employ “combinatorial disruption,” in which multiple sources of value—cost, experience, and
platform—are fused to create disruptive new business models and exponential gains.
• We asked executives in each of the 12 industries we studied to estimate the likelihood of disruption based
upon four variables: 1) investment in disruption, 2) timing of disruption, 3) means of disruption, and 4) impact
of disruption. The industry that will experience the most digital disruption between now and 2020 is
technology products and services. Pharmaceuticals, meanwhile, is likely to experience the least amount of
digital disruption. However, all industries will see competitive upheavals as innovations become increasingly
exponential.
• Based on their ranking and placement within the Digital Vortex, firms can evaluate the speed at which their
industry will experience disruption. They then can choose to “disrupt themselves” or potentially be displaced
by a new business model. This does not mean discarding what has made them successful or emulating in-
vogue digital tactics. Rather, they must challenge the assumptions that have underpinned prior success,
and stress-test the ways in which they deliver value to customers. It means changing the organization
itself, including its operations, culture, revenue model, and more—in fundamental ways, and perpetually.
© 2015 Global Center for Digital Business Transformation. All rights reserved. p. i

© 2015 Global Center for Digital Business Transformation. All rights reserved. p. 1
Digital Vortex
Introduction
Digital business transformation is a journey to adopt and deploy digital
technologies and business models to improve performance quantifiably.
The first step of this journey is to grasp the need for change—an impera-
tive driven by the inevitability of digital disruption. Digital disruption now
has the potential to overturn incumbents and reshape markets faster
than perhaps any force in history. Simply put, digital disruption is the ef-
fect of digital technologies and business models on a company’s current
value proposition, and its resulting market position.
The difference between digital disruption and traditional competitive
dynamics comes down to two main factors: the velocity of change and
the high stakes involved. Digital disruptors innovate rapidly, and then use
their innovations to gain market share and scale far faster than challeng-
ers still clinging to predominantly physical business models. One particu-
larly striking case is that of WhatsApp, bought by Facebook in 2014 for
a whopping $22 billion.1
WhatsApp’s overwhelming impact on the $100
billion global text messaging market2
delivers a powerful lesson in digital
disruption (see Figure 1).
Digital disruptors are particularly dangerous because they grow enor-
mous user bases seemingly overnight, and then are agile enough to
convert those users into business models that threaten incumbents in
multiple markets. In addition to free text messaging, WhatsApp now al-
lows users to make free mobile voice calls.
However, Facebook is not only looking to disrupt the telecommunica-
tions industry. Having introduced person-to-person (P2P) payments via
Facebook Messenger, the company is now poised to extend this service
to WhatsApp’s 800 million users. WhatsApp is also testing a business
model that would help Facebook challenge Google’s domination of the
mobile advertising market by charging businesses for the right to contact
its users directly. All this disruption comes from one innovative platform
that has the seemingly simple function of allowing consumers to send
messages to each other via smartphones for “free.”
20151996 2000 2005 2010
5
10
15
20
25
30
Messages sent per day (billions)
SMS
WhatsApp
F’cast
Figure 1
How One App Disrupted an Industry
Sources: Portio Research, a16z,
The Economist, 2015

Digital Vortex
In a way, WhatsApp’s success (or potential failure) in these ventures is
beside the point.3
As ever, some strategies bear fruit, and others do
not. But there is no question that the stakes are incredibly high—not
only for Facebook’s potential revenue, but also for the many companies
WhatsApp disrupts. WhatsApp and other over-the-top (OTT) services
are projected to drain global telecommunications companies of $386
billion in revenue between 2012 and 2018 from the use of OTT mobile
voice calling alone.4
Could most telecommunications service providers
survive a decline like this in a core business?
Digital disruption is not just an issue for firms in high-technology sectors.
As we will demonstrate in this report, the impact of digital disruption is
being felt across industries. The relatively traditional high-end fashion
sector, for example, has been disrupted by digitally savvy incumbents
such as Burberry, as well as new entrants such as Net-A-Porter and Gilt.
Similarly, the hospitality and travel business has been disrupted in many
markets by upstarts like Airbnb, LiquidSpace, and trivago.
When confronted with the specter of such disruption, companies must
understand the nature of the competitive change it represents, which
technologies and business models will be most disruptive, and how
they themselves can address the disruption. The Global Center for Digi-
tal Business Transformation, an IMD and Cisco initiative (see below),
seeks to understand the state of digital disruption today and the outlook
for industries. To this end, we surveyed 941 business leaders around
the world in 12 industries (see appendix). Their responses, presented
throughout this report, show that digital disruption has thrown many in-
dustries into flux, and that the magnitude of change is rapidly increasing.
The Global Center for
Digital Business Transformation
The Global Center for Digital Business
Transformation (DBT Center) is an IMD and Cisco
initiative that brings together innovation and
learning to create disruptive business models
for the digital era. The DBT Center is a global
research hub at the forefront of digital business
transformation, where executives engage to
solve the challenges created by massive market
transitions.
The DBT Center seeks out diverse viewpoints
from a wide range of organizations—start-ups,
incumbents, and disruptors—to bring new ideas,
best practices, and disruptive thinking into the
process. The collaboration combines Cisco’s
leadership in the Internet of Everything—the
networked connection of people, process, data,
and things—with IMD’s expertise in applied
research and developing global leaders, focusing
on the organizational change required for digital
transformation.

Digital Vortex
Disruptive Dynamics
The number of digital disruptors that have
amassed millions of users—and billions of dol-
lars in value—has grown tremendously over the
past three years. In venture capital vernacular,
a “unicorn” is a start-up that has a valuation
of at least $1 billion. Unicorns received their
name because they have been historically rare,
although they are becoming more common as
venture funding seeks disruptive companies
with the potential to become the next Alibaba,
the Chinese e-commerce portal that in 2014
raised $25 billion in capital—the largest IPO in
history.5
According to CB Insights, there are
now more than 100 unicorns6
—nine with valua-
tions over $10 billion, and two (Chinese smart-
phone maker Xiaomi, and Uber, an alternative
to traditional taxis) at $40 billion-plus. Other
examples include drone manufacturer DJI,
employment benefits provider Zenefits, P2P
lender Lufax, home design platform Houzz, Big
Data firm Mu Sigma, and health insurer Oscar
Health.
The results of our survey surfaced several trou-
bling findings about the potential for disruption,
and incumbents’ readiness to adapt. As Figure
2 illustrates, executives believe an average of
roughly four of today’s top 10 incumbents (in
terms of market share) in each industry will be
displaced by digital disruption in the next five
years.[ ]
As disruptive as this is, the threat extends not
only to displacement of big companies, but
also to the very existence of entire industries.
Executives in the industries we studied believe
digital disruption has materially increased the
risk of being put out of business altogether (see
Figure 3).
Perhaps most disquieting, despite these poten-
tially dire ramifications, digital disruption is not
Hospitality / Travel
41%average
Respondents who say the risk of
being put out of business increases
“somewhat” or “significantly” as a
result of digital disruption.
Oil & Gas
Pharmaceuticals
Financial Services
Retail
Media & Entertainment
Technology Products & Services
Utilities
Education
Telecommunications
Healthcare
Less risk
Greater risk
17%
49%
CPG & Manufacturing
survey
reponse
Figure 3
Existential Crisis
Source: Global Center for Digital Business Transformation, 2015
3.7average
In your industry, how
many companies will lose
their place in the top 10
due to digital disruption
(over next five years)?
Oil & Gas
Pharmaceuticals
Technology Products & Services
Retail
Education
Financial Services
CPG & Manufacturing
Utilities
Healthcare
Fewer companies at risk
More companies at risk
2.5
4.3
Telecommunications
survey
question
Figure 2
The Mighty Will Fall

Digital Vortex
seen as worthy of board-level attention in about 45 percent of compa-
nies (on average across industries; see Figure 4). [ ] This indifference
extends even to industries such as hospitality/travel and telecommunica-
tions, which have been rocked by disruption for over a decade.
This lack of attention in the executive ranks is matched by inadequate
strategies for coping with digital disruption. Forty-three percent of com-
panies either do not acknowledge the risk of digital disruption, or have
not addressed it sufficiently (again, see Figure 4). Nearly a third are taking
a “wait and see” ap-
proach, in hopes of
emulating successful
competitors. The ve-
locity and high stakes
of digital disruption,
however, may make it
unlikely that even 32
percent of companies
will succeed in tak-
ing a “fast follower”
approach. Only 25
percent describe their
approach to digital
disruption as proac-
tive—willing to disrupt
themselves in order to
compete.
A Digital Vortex
Given the chaos and complexity of digital disruption, it can be difficult
to discern patterns or “laws of nature” in this rapidly evolving competi-
tive landscape—or a prescription for what to do. Yet, a fundamental
understanding of how digital disruption works is vital if companies are to
devise effective strategies to exploit it (or counter it).
The construct of a vortex helps to conceptualize the way digital disrup-
tion impacts firms and industries. A vortex exerts a rotational force that
draws everything that surrounds it into its center. There are many exam-
ples of vortices in nature, such as when fluids or gases are stirred. These
include whirlpools, the wake of an aircraft, and so forth. While vortices
are very complex, they have three main features that are relevant to digi-
tal disruption:
survey
question
43%
32%
25%
Does not
recognize
or is not
responding
appropriately
Taking
“follower”
approach
Actively
responding
by disrupting
our own
business
of respondents say
digital disruption
is NOT
a board-level
concern
45%
In general, what is the attitude of
your company’s leadership toward
digital disruption?
Responses to Digital Disruption
survey
question
Figure 4
What, Me Worry?
Source: Global Center for Digital Business
Transformation, 2015

Digital Vortex
1. A vortex pulls objects relentlessly toward its center. As objects
approach the center of the vortex, their velocity increases
exponentially.7
2. Within the basic rule of movement toward the center, vortices are
highly chaotic. An object can be on the periphery of a vortex one
moment, and then drawn directly into the center the next. Objects
do not travel a uniform or predictable path from the outside to the
center.
3. Objects within a vortex may break apart and recombine as they
collide with one another and converge toward the center.
The Digital Vortex is the inevitable movement of industries toward a
“digital center” in which business models, offerings, and value chains
are digitized to the maximum extent possible.[ ] Physical and digital
sources are separated by the force of the vortex, creating “components”
that can be readily combined to create new disruptions, and blurring the
lines between industries.
We initially began to conceive of digital disruption as a vortex when we
used our survey data to determine which industries were at greatest
risk of digital disruption within the next five years. We asked executives
in each of the 12 industries we studied to estimate the likelihood of dis-
ruption based upon four variables (see sidebar). Their responses were
Vulnerability Assessment
The DBT Center’s ranking of industries by potential for digital disruption is based on quantitative
analysis of market data and responses from 941 business leaders across 13 countries. The
industries were scored and ranked based on the following indicators of potential for digital
disruption:
Investment: The level of investment in
companies that are focused on using digital
technologies to disrupt.
Timing: The length of time until digital disruption
is expected to have a meaningful impact in an
industry, and the rate of change expected to
occur.
Means: The barriers to entry that digital
disruptors face in an industry, and the extent
of digital business models they have at their
disposal to surmount these barriers.
Impact: The extent of disruption, such as
impact on the market share of—and the level of
existential threat to—incumbents in an industry.
See Appendix for details.

Digital Vortex
translated into a ranking that shows the extent of digital disruption by
industry.
An industry’s ranking (and its position in the Digital Vortex) represents the
extent of potential competitive disruption within five years as a result of
digital technologies and business models. Industries poised for greatest
disruption are those in which the most digitization is taking place; those
on the periphery of the Digital Vortex are less vulnerable to disruption
and may enjoy greater relative insularity. However, all industries—includ-
ing those that have been more stable in recent years—will see competi-
tive upheavals as innovations become increasingly exponential.
As we can see in Figure 5, the industry that will experience the most
digital disruption between now and 2020 is technology products and
services—a sector that is unique because it supplies the technological
foundations of all dis-
ruptions. Its proximity
to the center reflects
the extent of digital
disruption occurring.
Pharmaceuticals,
meanwhile, is likely
to experience the
least amount of digital
disruption.
The center of the
Digital Vortex symbol-
izes a “new normal”
characterized by rapid
and constant change
as industries become
increasingly digital.
An industry’s position
relative to the center
of the Digital Vortex
reflects the state of
competition a firm in
that industry will face,
rather than its own
digital capabilities per
se. The center of the
vortex does not rep-
resent an end state in
#1
Technology
#4
Financial
Services
#6
Education
#9
Healthcare
#11
Oil & Gas
#10
Utilities
#2
Media &
Entertainment
#7
Hospitality
& Travel
#8
CPG /
Manufacturing#5
Telecommunications
#12
Pharmaceuticals
#3
Retail
Figure 5
Digital Disruption by Industry

Digital Vortex
which markets stabilize around new competi-
tive leadership for an extended period of time.
Finally, in no way does the center imply “going
down the drain.”
Combinatorial Disruption
It is important to understand the inner work-
ings of the Digital Vortex that give rise to digital
disruption. To begin, we asked the 941 execu-
tives which technologies have the most disrup-
tive potential for their industries in the next five
years. The results are shown in Figure 6, a
word cloud of verbatim responses they shared.
These technologies are not emerging in isola-
tion from one another. In fact, digital enablers
such as these are converging to create an en-
vironment of connect-
edness, linking peo-
ple, processes, data,
and things in new
ways—what Cisco
and others refer to as
the “Internet of Every-
thing” (see sidebar).
This connectedness,
in turn, supports the
creation of new digital
business models that
can be highly disrup-
tive for incumbents.8
Moore’s Law, open
source software, and
the advent of cloud
computing provide
access to applica-
tions, platforms, and
skills that enable firms
of all sizes, from all
geographies, to com-
pete against multina-
tional enterprises.
Figure 6
What Does Digital Disruption Mean to You?
Source: Global Center for Digital Business Transformation, 2015; Image copyright Tagxedo.com
The Internet of Everything
The source of much of today’s digital disruption is the Internet
of Everything (IoE). IoE is the networked connection of
people, process, data, and things, and Cisco projects these
connections to surge from 15 billion today to some 50 billion
by the end of the decade. With a total Value at Stake of $19
trillion from 2013 to 2022, IoE represents a profound market
transition. Cisco defines Value at Stake as the potential
bottom-line value that can be created, or that will migrate
among companies and industries, based on their ability to
harness IoE over the next decade.

Digital Vortex
Digital business mod-
els can be grouped
into three categories:
cost value, experience
value, and platform
value (see Figure 7).
As industries move
toward the center
of the Digital Vortex,
physical components
(to the extent that
they inhibit competi-
tive advantage) are
shed. Whatever can be digitized is digitized. The components of digital
value can then be readily combined as disruptive business models that
knit together different types of capabilities and deliver customer value in
new ways. The most successful disruptors of recent years—Amazon,
Apple, Facebook, Google, Netflix, and others—employ what we refer to
as “combinatorial disruption,” in which multiple sources of value—cost,
experience, and platform—are fused to create disruptive new business
models and exponential gains.
The term “combinatorial innovation” is most often associated with Hal
Varian, chief economist at Google and emeritus professor at the Uni-
versity of California, Berkeley. In his work, Varian develops this idea by
citing examples of how technology standardization and convergence
throughout history have supported the combination and recombination
of technologies, which in turn produces new inventions.9
Combinatorial
disruption builds on this principle—the decomposition of value sources
into constituent digital parts that are then recombined—enabling the
invention of not only the next generation of technologies, but also differ-
ent types of breakthroughs in the form of new business models. This in
turn gives rise to digital disruption, competitive change, and the need for
incumbents, in particular, to transform.
The Encumbered Incumbent?
Our survey asked when—if ever—executives expected digital disrup-
tion to impact their industry. The average time to disruption (meaning a
“substantial change” in market share among incumbents) was 3.1 years,
a dramatic escalation in the rate of competitive change versus historical
levels.[ ]
Figure 7
Business Models
Experience Value
• Customer choice
• Personalization
• Automation
• Lower latency
• Any device, anytime
The Three Categories of Digital Business Models
Platform Value
• Marketplaces
• Crowdsourcing
• Peer-to-peer
• Sharing economy
• Data monetization
Cost Value
• Price transparency
• Consumption-based pricing
• Reverse auctions
• Buyer aggregation
• Rebates and rewards
Source: Global Center for Digital
Business Transformation, 2015
The most successful disruptors
of recent years employ
“combinatorial disruption,” in
which multiple sources of value—
cost, experience, and platform—
are fused to create disruptive new
business models and exponential
gains.
$

Digital Vortex
Incumbents now face the “innovator’s dilem-
ma.” As Clayton Christensen of Harvard Busi-
ness School has observed, “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.”10
Incum-
bents do have cards to play, despite being con-
strained by, among other things, a predilection
for doing things the way they have always been
done, shareholder expectations, and unwieldy
cost structures, as we’ll see later.
A majority of executives in all 12 of the indus-
tries surveyed believe that “insiders” will be the
most likely disruptors, meaning both incum-
bents and start-ups from their own industry
[ ] (see Figure 8). Executives from several
industries with long histories of producing in-
novative start-ups—media and entertainment,
telecommunications, and retail—believe that
start-ups will continue to drive disruption. Inter-
estingly, in several industries, including pharma-
ceuticals, healthcare, and utilities, incumbents
Campus Bullies
While a majority of education
leaders point to incumbents
as the primary source of
disruption, 41 percent of
education leaders also fear
the rise of “ed-tech” start-
ups. So-called massive open
online courses (MOOCs), for
example, such as Coursera
and Udacity, are proving
that online university-
level education can thrive
in a low-cost model by
combining highly scalable
expert knowledge with a
community of learners,
merging new sources of cost
value, experience value, and
platform value. Degreed’s
mission is to break the
stranglehold universities
have on issuing credentials.
Pluralsight, the only education
unicorn, has used a number
of acquisitions to increase
its capabilities while seeking
to dominate the growing
market for “hard” computer
science and IT skills. Given
the stratospheric costs of
higher education in many
countries, the value traditional
institutions of higher learning
provide is being questioned
in important new ways.
Scores of universities,
including some of the world’s
most prestigious, are now
compelled to offer competing
services, at low or no cost.
Who is most likely to disrupt your industry?
Start-up
from inside the industry
from outside the industry
Incumbent
from inside the industry
from outside the industry
survey
question
25%
50%
75%
100%
Media &
Entertainment
TelecomRetailCPG &
Manufacturing
TechHospitality
/Travel
EduFinancial
Services
PharmaOil &
Gas
UtilitiesHealthcare
Figure 8
Inside Job vs. Break-in

Digital Vortex
Digital Disruption: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
What makes the Digital Vortex “spin”?
In other words, why is this disruption
occurring, and who is it for? The answer,
on all counts, is that unmet needs in
the market and in our societies can be
addressed through digital means. While
maximizing profits, delivering conve-
nience, and furnishing users with new
sources of amusement play a big role
in attracting private equity and venture
capital, these drivers are not the full rea-
son we are experiencing an emergence
of digital disruptors.
The dynamics are much more complex.
Many of the forces driving this change
are fundamental—for consumers, getting
more value on less income; or for institu-
tions, finding ways to make public goods
like healthcare, energy, or education
more affordable and effective. Human
ingenuity and a pervasive desire to
make life better are powering the Digital
Vortex.
While clearly not without its down-
sides, digital has “delivered” thus far
in many ways.
Economists may
debate the pro-
ductivity gains
associated with
digital technol-
ogy,24
but this
debate obscures
the fact that
customers (both
individuals and
businesses) are
undeniably real-
izing enormous
amounts of
value—lower
costs, better
experiences, and
new sources of connection (for learning,
for selling or buying, and so forth). This
is perhaps why executives in our survey
believe that the effects of disruption are,
by and large, positive (see Figure): 75
percent said digital disruption is a form
of progress—that it is moving us in the
right direction; nearly as many say the
customer ultimately benefits; and two-
thirds believe the individual is empow-
ered—not merely as a consumer, but as
a human being.
This is a paradox: While bad for some
companies, and perhaps entire indus-
tries as they are now constituted, digital
disruption may be good for the whole,
in a utilitarian sense. This view on digital
disruption among executives surveyed
may simply be a contemporary vindica-
tion of economist Joseph Schumpeter’s
well-worn observation that capitalism is
“creative destruction,” in which the old
economic order is perpetually cast off
to make room for new sources of wealth
creation.25
It is also worth noting that re-
spondents to our survey are executives
in large and midsized private sector
companies—not government officials,
labor leaders, or the unemployed.
It would be naïve to assert that digital
disruption does not result in some eco-
nomic dislocations. Stalwarts of industry
are being displaced, put out of busi-
ness, or limp along, consigned to the
dustbin of history. Entire professions are
sideswiped by forces like automation, ar-
tificial intelligence, and disintermediation.
The stature of countries on the global
stage waxes and wanes as their fortunes
correspond to digital change. It is up to
governments, businesses, and civil so-
ciety together to mitigate these negative
impacts, and to support and empower
those who are affected.
These dislocations must be considered
from a balanced viewpoint, accounting
for the unprecedented new sources of
cost value, experience value, and plat-
form value in the digital age. Pocketbook
savings, convenience, more opportuni-
ties to learn and share ideas—these are
just a few of the
sources of value
we are collectively
realizing. When
combined, these
sources can yield
outsized benefits.
This likely explains
why business
leaders gener-
ally view digital
disruption in a
positive light, de-
spite a recognition
that their own firm
may end up on
the short end of
the stick.
75% 72%
66%
63% 63%
55% 54%
…is a
form of
progress”
“Digital disruption...
…improves
value for
customers” …empowers
individuals”
…is good
for society”
…improves
quality
of life”
…makes the
world more
sustainable”
…improves
information
security”
Respondents who “somewhat” or “strongly”
agree with each of these statements:
were seen as the most likely source of digital disruption. If this is so, it
would serve as a corrective to much of the hype surrounding unicorns,
and give credence to the notion of a dot-com-style, venture-backed
bubble that is artificially propelling disruptive players. This does not mean

Digital Vortex
that companies from other industries do not constitute a threat. As we
shall see, they can use “combinatorial disruption” to strike incumbents
seemingly out of nowhere. Whether disruption comes from within or out-
side an industry, the momentum toward the center of the Digital Vortex
will continue.
According to the executives we surveyed, start-ups have a clear set of
advantages as they attempt to grow their businesses and unseat incum-
bents. Although leaders such as Elon Musk are rightly praised for their
vision, executives in our survey believe that the real advantage of smaller
digital players comes not from a grand plan, but from the following capa-
bilities [ ] (see Figure 9):
• Fast innovation
• Agility
• Culture of experimentation and risk-taking
Clearly, the ability to develop new innovations, and to change quickly as
conditions dictate, is a critical advantage—indeed bigger in general than
any specific innovations that start-ups bring to market.
In contrast, the incumbent advantages executives cited come directly
from having an established market position:
• Access to capital
• Strong brand
• Large customer base
To be sure, large
companies can issue
new shares, access
corporate debt at
historically low rates,
or leverage their sub-
stantial cash flows
in the face of com-
petitive turmoil. Many
incumbents have also
spent decades pro-
moting and burnishing
their brands, many of
which are themselves
worth billions (ac-
cording to Interbrand,
Apple’s is valued at
45%
24%
37%
35%
17%
14%
Innovation Agility Experimentation
& Risk
Capital Brand Customers
What advantages does each type of company have
in its ability to capitalize on digital disruption?
14%
33%
16%
11%
32%
29%
IncumbentStart-up Vs.
survey
question
Figure 9
Fortune Favors the Bold (and Innovative)

Digital Vortex
The center of the Digital Vortex
symbolizes a “new normal”
characterized by rapid and
constant change as industries
become increasingly digital.
$119 billion).11
And, of course, incumbents by definition have large cus-
tomer bases.
But many of these incumbent advantages hinge on scale, which is be-
coming an increasingly fleeting and commoditized asset. Take, for ex-
ample, Wells Fargo, the second-largest bank by deposits in the United
States.12
Wells Fargo first offered online banking services in 199513
and
now boasts about 25 million14
active online banking users and 14.1 mil-
lion15
mobile banking users. Compared to Wells Fargo’s painstaking ef-
forts, MyFitnessPal, a mobile app used with wearable devices (such as
Fitbit) for diet and exercise tracking, has amassed more than 80 million
users.16
Under Armour, an innovative fitness apparel maker, acquired My-
FitnessPal as part of a digital strategy that could include sensor-based
clothing in the future that will track movement and biorhythms.17
Snapchat, a unicorn in the mobile video messaging space, is rumored to
have upwards of 200 million active monthly users,18
a group roughly the
size of the total population of Brazil, the fifth most populous country on
earth. In May 2015, Snapchat raised $537 million in capital, valuing the
company in excess of $16 billion.19
These examples demonstrate that the first lines of defense—access
to capital and large customers bases—that insulated incumbents from
upstarts of the past can be surmounted with growing ease. This is be-
cause, to use terms from the organizational theorist Geoffrey Moore, the
“late majority” has now “crossed the chasm” and exhibits digital behav-
iors—such as a comfort level with smart mobile devices and apps—that
were the preserve of innovators and early adopters only a couple of
years ago. As we have seen with WhatsApp, a large customer base is
now a sufficient condition for creating disruptive business models that
can cross another kind of chasm—the one that once defined one indus-
try from another, and is now narrowing.
It’s the Value, Not the Value Chain
As noted, the trajectory of an object circling in a vortex is highly un-
predictable—it can be close to the periphery one moment, and drawn
directly into the center the next. Executives in industries on the outer
edges of the Digital Vortex today, such as utilities, may be tempted to
take comfort in the idea that their sector is among those judged to be
least prone to disruption. While true, this notion should be considered in
juxtaposition with the cautionary tale of another industry: the taxi busi-
ness. Five years ago, who appeared less vulnerable to digital disruption
than taxi companies? Nonetheless, today their value is under siege. They

Digital Vortex
have been rapidly and forcefully pulled into the digital center, obliged to
compete with digital competitors such as Uber and Lyft that blend cost
value, experience value, and platform value in a potent business model.
Let’s take a closer look at the utilities industry, recalling that our analysis
ranked the sector No. 10 out of 12, and on a relative basis among the
least susceptible to disruption. Utilities require major capital investment
to generate and distribute electricity. However, the value utilities ulti-
mately provide to their customers is power. We’ve already seen signifi-
cant disruption in the area of renewable energy generation. For its part,
Germany gets 26 percent of its electricity from renewable resources (22
percent from solar power).20
The fluctuations and logistical challenges
inherent in producing energy from solar, in addition to the flexibility re-
quired to integrate power from user-generated solar panels, requires a
“smart” grid—that is to say, an enabling digital technology.
Tesla has emerged as a household name and a veritable poster child for
industry disruption. Until recently, the primary industry Tesla disrupted
was the automotive sector. The company’s ability to upgrade the capa-
bilities of electric vehicles via software downloads makes its cars more
valuable to their owners over time.
In May 2015, however, Tesla unveiled inexpensive batteries for the home
and business markets that can store energy generated by solar panels
and pull power from the energy grid during cheaper off-peak hours.21
The technology that has made Tesla such a formidable competitive
threat to automakers—its batteries and software—is highly transferable
to power generation and storage. Examples of “combinatorial disrup-
tions,” such as those presented by Tesla, and their applicability to mul-
tiple industries and business models, should strike fear in the hearts
of incumbents: a single innovation or platform can be used to redefine
Sowing the Seeds of Disruption
Fruitful is a crowd-funded financial services start-
up looking to disrupt savings deposits as well as
commercial mortgages. It allows savers to deposit
funds and get a guaranteed 6 percent interest rate,
with no “lock in” period. Fruitful takes deposits and
lends them to businesses that need mortgages. It
vets the creditworthiness of borrowers (reducing
the risk for the saver) and divides the money
automatically among multiple mortgages, making
it seamless for both the saver and Fruitful when
deposits are withdrawn. Fruitful gives depositors
a high rate of interest, while offering those who
need business mortgages a fast and “frictionless”
alternative to lengthy, paper-based bank processes.
While banks are inhibited by regulations and high
capital requirements, “fintechs” find it easier to offer
attractive alternatives to their customers.

Digital Vortex
markets that seemingly have little in common. For this reason, it can be
difficult for executives to know who their most fearsome opponents will
be, and from which industry they will emerge. Executives who feel insu-
lated from attack by outsiders may fall victim to their own lack of imagi-
nation.[ ] In fact, combinatorial disruption such as that being driven by
Tesla may one day extend to other industries such as oil and gas, finan-
cial services, and consumer goods.
Digitization of products, services, and business processes allows disrup-
tive players to deliver the same value a traditional competitor provides—
and even augment it—without having to reproduce the conventional
value chain. In fact, that is the objective of digital disruption: to provide
superior value to the end customer—either a consumer or another busi-
ness—while avoiding the capital investments, regulatory requirements,
and other impediments of “encumbered incumbents.”
We also see this dynamic in the way “fintech” startups are disrupting
banks by unbundling their products and services—seizing a share of
their most profitable business, while avoiding the barriers to entry that
come with being a full-service bank (see Figure 10). These start-ups use
a combination of technologies and business models, including analyt-
ics and automation, to digitize their offerings. These new offerings can
disrupt more than one profitable business at a time, while fulfilling unmet
needs in the market (see “Sowing the Seeds of Disruption,” previous
page).
Figure 10
Digitizing, Not Duplicating
Source: CB Insights, 201522

Digital Vortex
The perceived protection we detected among
executives largely depends upon the built-in
defenses they feel their industries possess.
Twenty-five percent of executives believe there
are “high” barriers to digital disruption in their
industries, with oil and gas (37 percent) and
financial services (36 percent) at the top of the
list.[ ] These barriers include capital costs,
regulatory roadblocks, and complexity of busi-
ness processes. Most disruptive players, how-
ever, have little interest in competing on these
terms (see Figure 11).
The perception of relative immunity is partly
fueled by the knowledge that, to date, fewer
disruptive competitors have made inroads into
industries like oil and gas. Industries such as
technology products and services (cloud com-
puting), retail (e-commerce), and media and
entertainment (peer-to-peer file sharing) have
all been through multiple waves of digital disruption since the inception of
the Internet. However, business models with the potential to disrupt the
energy sector, for example, are only in their infancy, or dependent upon
early-stage technologies.
The Road Ahead
Digital disruption is impacting most sectors of the economy and many
facets of our lives. With the Internet of Everything, we see the conver-
gence of multiple technology transitions (cloud, mobile, social, Big Data),
each having an exponential aspect to it. What happens when one expo-
nential force collides with another? Is there a doubling of their effects? Or
an order of magnitude increase? Do they change direction? Or become
something completely new? As the level of digitization increases in the
vortex, industries are unbundling and recombining—so much so that the
notion of “industries” may become extinct. Competing on the basis of
membership in a club of companies that identify themselves as “banks”
or “utilities” may seem quaint in the decades ahead. Which industry is
Apple in? Which industry is Tesla in? As they move toward the center of
the Digital Vortex, industries come into frequent collisions with one an-
other, decoupling sources of value, and then merging and creating new
competitive forms.
Oil & Gas
24%average
Respondents who say barriers
to digital disruption are “high,”
“very high,” or “insurmountable.”
Healthcare
Financial Services
CPG & Manufacturing
Utilities
Education
Retail
Telecommunications
Technology
Pharmaceuticals
Lower barriers
Higher barriers
13%
37%
survey
response
Figure 11
Safety Not Guaranteed
Source: Global Center for Digital Business
Transformation, 2015

Digital Vortex
The 44 percent of executives in our study who dismiss digital disrup-
tion or question the need to transform would do well to ask themselves,
“Why will we be spared such a change? When does security become
complacency?” Exponential change looks remarkably like linear change
until it reaches what futurist Ray Kurzweil calls the “knee of the curve”—
by which time it is too late to prepare.26
Disruptive innovators are digitizing ever more granular pieces of the value
chain, in virtually all industries. As a result, value is atomizing, and many
of the traditional profit pools upon which market incumbents depend
have sprung leaks.27
Our research reveals that a significant number—as
much as 40 percent—of incumbents may be left wounded, perhaps
mortally, by digital disruption in the next five years. Business leaders also
believe that a large percentage of incumbents will win. Those that can
harness digital technologies and business models will prevail.
However, our survey highlighted factors that bring into question incum-
bents’ readiness to battle their new digital rivals. What is sometimes
referred to as “premature abandonment of the core”28
(meaning when
successful companies unwisely chase growth in new markets, thereby
undermining their principal sources of revenue and profit) has been the
road to ruin for many market leaders. Many mature organizations still
have considerable value they can and should extract from digitizing
operations and key internal processes. With corporate profits at record
highs, moreover, defensive strategies for incumbents actually may seem
perfectly appropriate, and often are.
However, the competitive dynamics associated with the Digital Vortex—
unpredictability, turbulence, rapid acceleration, recombination—place
a premium on greater foresight, experimentation, and fast execution,
particularly as an industry moves toward the center. While moving to-
ward the center of the Digital Vortex is neither good nor bad inherently,
it is inevitable (i.e., digitization is certain to increase, yielding new dis-
ruptions). Many companies will benefit enormously from digitization of
value sources, while others will not. In this environment, winners will be
organizations agile enough to innovate rapidly and unbridle their capacity
to create cost value, experience value, or platform value for their custom-
ers. The real question for organizations considering the need for change
is how to make the required transformation.
“Disrupting yourself” does not mean discarding what has made you
successful or mimicking in-vogue digital tactics. Rather, it involves chal-
lenging the assumptions that have underpinned that success, and
stress-testing the ways in which you deliver value to customers. It means
Winners will be organizations
agile enough to innovate rapidly
and unbridle their capacity to
create cost value, experience
value, or platform value for their
customers.

Digital Vortex
changing the organization itself, including its operations, culture, revenue
model, and more—in fundamental ways, and perpetually. This is digital
business transformation.
As executives navigate their firms through the Digital Vortex, the follow-
ing areas have been identified as crucial areas of self-assessment:
Leadership Checklist for Digital Business Transformation
• Which capabilities are required to increase cost value, experience
value, or platform value for customers?
• How can we combine capabilities to magnify the value our
customers receive?
• To what degree do we possess these capabilities today?
• To what degree do competitors—both traditional foes and “over-
the-top” players—possess these capabilities?
• If the landscape shifts dramatically due to digital disruption, how
quickly can we adapt?
• Are our people, processes, and technology29
agile enough?
• How do we increase the agility of our organization to ensure we
can fend off (or capitalize on) new disruptions?
The remit of the Global Center for Digital Business Transformation is to
help companies address these questions head-on. Our Digital Vortex
research into the challenges and opportunities posed by digital disrup-
tion has been a necessary first step—to codify the nature of competi-
tive change—in what will be a five-year journey for IMD, Cisco, and an
ecosystem of other organizations that will be our partners. We hope you
will join us as we crack the code on organizational and business model
change for the digital era.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the important contributions of the
following people to the development of this report: Caroline Ahlquist, Lauren
Buckalew, Andrea Duffy, Remy El Assir, Scott Fields, Cheri Goodman,
Carmen Lewis, Thierry Maupile, Martin McPhee, Bob Moriarty, Kathy
O’Connell, Edzard Overbeek, Michael Riegel, Rick Ripplinger, Anish
Saurabh, Hiten Sethi, Nishant Sharma, Gaurav Singh, Rachael Thomas, Ben
Varghese, and Virgil Vidal.

Digital Vortex
Appendix: Digital Vortex Methodology
Survey Detail
During April 2015, the DBT Center conducted a blind online survey of 941 business leaders
globally to understand the state of digital disruption. The characteristics of the survey respondents
and their organizations are described below.
United States . 41%
China . . . . . 9%
United Kingdom . 9%
India . . . . . . 8%
Brazil . . . . . 6%
Canada . . . . 6%
Italy . . . . . . 6%
Germany . . . . 5%
France . . . . . 4%
Japan . . . . . 1%
Mexico . . . . . 2%
Russia . . . . . 2%
Australia . . . . 1%
Respondent Company,
by Location of Headquarters
Respondent Roles and Functions
Respondent Company, by Industry
Respondent Company,
by Annual Revenue
CPG (Consumer Packaged
Goods) & Manufacturing . . . 23%
Financial Services . . . . . . 18%
Retail . . . . . . . . . . . 12%
Technology Products/Services . 10%
Healthcare . . . . . . . . . 6%
Telecommunications . . . . . 6%
Education . . . . . . . . . 5%
Hospitality & Travel . . . . . 5%
Pharmaceuticals . . . . . . 5%
Media & Entertainment . . . . 4%
Oil & Gas . . . . . . . . . 3%
Utilities . . . . . . . . . . 3%
Less than $50 mil . . 4%
$50 mil < $100 mil . 9%
$100 mil < $500 mil 20%
$500 mil < $1 bil . 20%
$1 bil < $5 bil . . . 22%
$5 bil < $10 bil . . 11%
$10 bil or more . . 14%
Company Executive
(e.g., CEO, CIO) . . . . . . 33%
Senior Vice President, VP . . 29%
Director . . . . . . . . . 38%
Information Technology (IT) . . 24%
General Management . . . . 19%
Finance . . . . . . . . . 16%
Manufacture, Supply, Logistics 7%
Sales . . . . . . . . . . . 6%
Marketing . . . . . . . . . 5%
Customer Service . . . . . . 4%
Human Resources . . . . . 4%
Legal, Risk Mngt, Compliance . 4%
Research & Development . . . 4%
Other . . . . . . . . . . 4%
Procurement . . . . . . . . 2%

Digital Vortex
Industry Ranking Methodology
The DBT Center industry ranking methodology is based on a combina-
tion of third-party and survey data. In order to assess the relative po-
tential for digital disruption by industry, the following methodology was
employed.
Step 1: Identify Indicators of Digital Disruption Potential
The analysis of digital disruption potential by industry began with the
identification of key indicators of the potential for digital disruption de-
scribed in the table below.
The DBT Center believes these are meaningful indicators of the relative
potential for digital disruption by industry because they address the fol-
lowing questions:
• Where are investors and the market placing their bets?
• How many companies are working to disrupt industries using
digital technologies?
• When, and at what rate, is digital disruption likely to occur in an
industry?
• With which business models are digital disruptors likely to attack
industries, and what are their chances of success?
• What level of disruption are these digital disruptors likely to drive
within an industry?
Indicators of Potential for Digital Disruption
Investment
The level of investment in companies that are focused on using digital technologies to disrupt indus-
tries. This is an indicator of where investors are placing their bets and where they see the most op-
portunity for digital disruption to drive economic value.
Timing
The length of time until digital disruption has a meaningful impact on an industry and the rate of
change that digital disruption will drive in the industry.
Means
The level of barriers to entry that digital disruptors face in an industry, and the means of disruption
(such as the number of disruptive business models) they can use to surmount these barriers.
Impact
The extent of disruption (such as impact on market share of incumbents) and the level of existential
threat that digital disruptors represent to an industry.

Digital Vortex
Step 2: Quantify Indicators of Digital Disruption Potential
After defining indicators of the potential for digital disruption, the next step was to identify the
specific metrics used to quantify these indicators. Based on examination of dozens of potential
metrics, we selected those listed below. Because these metrics were from different sources and
in different units, they were translated to standardized z-scores. For indicators with more than one
input metric, the z-scores for the metrics were averaged. The final step was to calculate a cumula-
tive z-score for each indicator of disruption potential.
Metrics Used to Quantify Potential for Digital Disruption by Industry
Metric Indicator Definition Source
Venture capital in
digital disruption
Investment
The number of venture-backed private
companies valued at $1 billion or more by
industry as of April 2015.
The Wall Street
Journal, April 2015
Number of years to
digital disruption
Timing
The mean number of expected years until an
industry experiences an impact from digital
disruption as predicted by industry executives.
DBT Center survey,
April 2015
Extent of
exponential rate of
digital disruption
Timing
The percentage of industry executives that
expect digital disruption in their industry over
the next five years to be exponential (i.e., an
increasingly rapid rate of change).
DBT Center survey,
April 2015
Number of likely
digital disruption
models
Means
Out of five distinct disruptive digital business
models tested in the survey, the mean number
that executives believe are likely to have a
disruptive impact on their industry within the next
five years.
DBT Center survey,
April 2015
Barriers to entry for
digital disruptors
Means
The percentage of executives from each industry
who believe barriers to entry for digital disruptors
are nonexistent, very low, or low.
DBT Center survey,
April 2015
Displacement
of top market
incumbents
Impact
The mean number of top 10 incumbents by
market share that executives expect to be
displaced by digital disruptors within the next five
years.
DBT Center survey,
April 2015
Risk of being put
out of business
Impact
The percentage of respondents by industry that
believe there will be a somewhat or significantly
increased risk of being put out of business over
the next five years due to digital disruption.
DBT Center survey,
April 2015

Digital Vortex
Step 3: Calculate Industry Ranking for Digital Disruption
Potential
For each industry, the cumulative z-scores for each indicator were
summed to arrive at a cumulative z-score by industry. These scores were
then used to arrive at the industry ranking, shown here:
Step 4: Analyze Patterns
The scores calculated in Step 3 are illuminating beyond the level of indi-
vidual industries. The order and groupings of industries highlight some
key patterns about how digital disruption is likely to occur both within
and across industries. The DBT Center used the scoring and underlying
data to inform both the in-depth analysis of the patterns of digital disrup-
tion across industries and the Digital Vortex analysis that are the focus of
this report.
Industries Ranked
by Potential for Digital Disruption
Technology Products & Services #1
Media & Entertainment #2
Retail #3
Financial Services #4
Telecommunications #5
Education #6
Hospitality & Travel #7
CPG & Manufacturing #8
Healthcare #9
Utilities #10
Oil & Gas #11
Pharmaceuticals #12

Digital Vortex
Notes
1. Bloomberg, October 29, 2014.
2. “Short Messaging Services Versus Instant Messaging,” Deloitte, 2014.
3. Tellingly, WhatsApp itself is now being disrupted by a new slate of companies with lofty
ambitions and deep pockets. Apple’s iMessage platform and WeChat, from Chinese In-
ternet giant Tencent, are already taking big shares of global messaging and voice traffic.
4. “Telecom Companies Count $386 Billion in Lost Revenue to Skype, WhatsApp, Others,”
Fortune, June 23, 2014.
5. “Alibaba Claims Title For Largest Global IPO Ever With Extra Share Sales,” Forbes, Sep-
tember 22, 2014.
6. “Unicorns Are Breeding Like Rabbits,” CB Insights, May 21, 2015.
7. This is true for a particular type of vortex, known as an “irrotational” vortex. Other forms
of vortices possess different characteristics. For an overview of how vortices work, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex.
8. Earlier research conducted by Cisco revealed a high degree of parity in terms of readi-
ness to exploit IoE for competitive success. “Internet of Everything (IoE) Value Index,”
Cisco Systems, 2013.
9. The Economics of Information Technology: An Introduction, Hal Varian and Carl Shapiro,
2004.
10. “Clayton M. Christensen: An interview by Bob Morris,” June 9, 2011.
11. “Interbrand’s 15th annual Best Global Brands Report,” Interbrand, October 9, 2014.
12. “Q1 2015 U.S. Banking Review,” Forbes, May 22, 2015.
13. “15 Years Online!” Wells Fargo, May 15, 2010.
14. “Wells Fargo: 20 Years of Internet Banking,” Wells Fargo, May 18, 2015.
15. “Big Banks Report Steady Increases in Mobile Banking,” St. Louis Business Journal,
January 17, 2015.
16. “Under Armour Buys Health-Tracking App MyFitnessPal For $475 Million,” Forbes, Feb-
ruary 4, 2015.
17. “Under Armour Turns Ambitions to Electronic Apparel, Monitoring Apps,” The Wall Street
Journal, February 27, 2015.
18. “Snapchat Is A Lot Bigger Than People Realize And It Could Be Nearing 200 Million Ac-
tive Users,” Business Insider, January 3, 2015.
19. “Snapchat Raises $537.6m via Common Stock Sale at $16bn Valuation,” International
Business Times, May 30, 2015.
20. “German Solar Records May Keep Traders Busy on Weekends,” Bloomberg, April 15,
2015.
21. “Elon Musk’s Grand Plan to Power the World With Batteries,” Wired, May 1, 2015.
22. “Disrupting Banking,” CB Insights, March 22, 2015.
23. “Hospitals Are Learning How To Share And It’s Saving Them Millions,” Forbes, Decem-
ber 16, 2014.
24. “The Big Meh,” Paul Krugman, The New York Times, May 25, 2015.
25. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Joseph Schumpeter, 1942.
26. “The Law of Accelerating Returns,” Ray Kurzweil, March 7, 2001.
27. As predicted in Cisco’s Value at Stake model for IoE, it is not just the net-new money up
for grabs as a result of billions of new connections, although this is substantial, but also
migrations in value from losers to winners.
28. Stall Points, Matthew S. Olson and Derek van Bever, Yale University Press, 2008.
29. Cisco has invested significantly in understanding the technology strategies foundational
to enabling business agility. We refer to this as Fast IT. With the creation of the Global
Center for Digital Business Transformation, IMD and Cisco now aim to identify comple-
mentary strategies for the people and process change that will unlock still more IoE
value.
About IMD:
IMD is the top-ranked
business school, rec-
ognized as the expert
in developing global
leaders through high-impact executive
education. The school is 100% fo-
cused on real-world executive devel-
opment; offers Swiss excellence with a
global perspective; and has a flexible,
customized, and effective approach.
IMD is ranked first in executive edu-
cation worldwide (Financial Times
2008-2014) and first in open programs
worldwide (Financial Times 2012, 2013
& 2014).
IMD is based in Lausanne (Switzerland)
and has an Executive Learning Center
in Singapore.
www.imd.org
About Cisco:
Cisco, (NASDAQ:
CSCO) is the world-
wide leader in net-
working that transforms how people
connect, communicate, and collabo-
rate. Information about Cisco can be
found at http://www.cisco.com. For
ongoing news, please go to http://
newsroom.cisco.com.
To learn more, visit imd.org/dbtcenter
or contact the Global Center for Digital
Business Transformation at dbtcenter@
imd.org.

jim G. Digital_Vortex_06182015

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to jim G. Digital_Vortex_06182015 (20)

jim G. Digital_Vortex_06182015