Efforts to bring electric vehicles to market are stumbling—electric car maker Fisker Automotive just recalled all 2,400 of its plug-in hybrid cars; Electric Vehicle battery maker A123 is being acquired by Chinese parts supplier Wanxiang Group; Tesla's CEO says the next six months will decide their fate. It's a good time to point out that not all disruptive innovation is good, and not all good innovation is disruptive.
(to read more, jump to the post Not All That Disrupts, at The Hargadon Files)
Is it a good thing to frame the electric vehicle as a disruptive innovation or not? That is a relevant question. To those people fond of the next big technology thing it might - disruptive innovation sounds good - and maybe also for bubble venture capitalists. However, if we want to see the majority of consumers adopt EV, we might better frame it as something in between the old and new. Nothing changes with respect to basic functionality - you can drive from A to B and take people or things with you. It is convenient, safe, fast enough, etcetera. The only (crucial) difference is that you have to charge your car - at home or elsewhere - which takes time, from half an hour to as long as eight hours. The big question now is: can users accept this, or will this be the spanner in the wheels and should we work hard to create more convenient charging solutions. The rise of the new hybrids with range extenders seems to solve this problem, as well as fast chargers, wireless chargers and battery swapping. But framing the issue in a new but also familiair way might help as well - charging your car is the same as charging your laptop or smartphone - nothing revolutionary, you just have to think about it and not forget - and use any 'stationary' time to charge. Car meets smartphone, not disruptive for the consumer, but combinatorial. This might help to convince more consumers than framing it as disrupting your world.
Posted by: Stephanvandijk | September 03, 2012 at 08:16 AM