visit
[Thanks to , Clayton Christensen’s former Chief of Staff, for his help on this post!]
The theory of disruption explains how smaller companies with fewer
resources can topple established, well-run businesses: disruptors target segments of the market that incumbents rationally ignore in favor of
more profitable customers. Aided by new technologies and business
models, upstarts create offerings that are “good enough” for low-end consumers and previous non-consumers, before gradually moving upmarket and unseating incumbents over time.
The Passion Economy has massive disruptive potential, as it connects non-producers with non-consumers. Empowered by new digital platforms, creators in the Passion Economy are introducing new products and services aimed at those who previously couldn’t afford or were over-served by existing offerings.
These new creator-led products and services expand the market and tap into latent demand. This is classic disruption theory, and the Passion Economy thus threatens numerous incumbents.If you haven’t read that post, I recommend , as it lays the groundwork for this one.Any industry that is a talent-based industry is at risk of disruption by Passion Economy businesses. Beyond what is traditionally regarded as a talent-based industry (e.g. entertainment), the Passion Economy’s scope extends into any industry where the customer doesn’t view the product/service as a commodity, but cares deeply about the specific individual involved in its creation.
This broader lens of talent implies that the Passion Economy encompasses education, media, fitness, sales, and many other lines of work.Talented individuals can eschew traditional employment and leverage new platforms to monetize and grow. This process enables new producers to enter the market as well as as new products/services to flourish.Here are some examples of how Passion Economy models can disrupt incumbents in various industries:MBAs, career-focused education, online certifications, etc.
Modular, creator-led learning options designed with an eye towards ROI can be far more valuable than an expensive, long-term education that few can afford.While online course creators’ offerings don’t yet possess the brand prestige of a top-tier institution’s credential, they can be more aligned to the specific interests that students have, adapt curricula more responsively to external events or feedback, and offer greater convenience at lower prices than traditional solutions.For instance, is a blogger, podcaster, and course creator, best known for his blog Smart Passive Income. He offers a number of online courses about building an online business, ranging from validating an idea to starting a podcast, with prices ranging from free to $1,000. These are courses that entrepreneurial learners over-served by traditional 2-year MBA programs might find appealing as an alternate, modern business education. Another example is NYU Professor Scott Galloway, whose 2-week online course “” teaches the basics of brand strategy for $500.K-12 education
Companies offering education targeted at K-12 students, like Prenda or Outschool, are creating robust networks of community-based education providers that have disruptive potential for independent and private schools. Enabled by managed marketplaces that facilitate trust, ensure compliance with regulations, and vet and support teachers, these networks help customers find and select a teacher/school that fits their preferences
and desired learning environment.
Media
Pre-internet, it was immensely challenging for individual writers and other content creators to get distribution. For journalists, the primary path to
making an income consisted of joining an established news organization
with an advertising department, production capabilities, and delivery
processes.
Individual media creators can increasingly go into business for themselves: talented writers can create their own publications (Substack, Ghost, Mailchimp + Memberful + Stripe), audio content creators can distribute via RSS feeds and monetize their listeners directly (Supercast, Glow.fm), and visual content creators can earn an income through user donations and
subscriptions (Twitch, Patreon), merchandise (Pietra), or advertising.
Fitness / personal training
While new online creator-led fitness content may not be as immersive as going to an in-person trainer, they enable consumers to follow routines from creators they love, often at lower prices with greater convenience. The disruptive potential of the creator-led online fitness market is in
relation to gyms, boutique fitness classes, and personal trainers that provide community and accountability, but are expensive and inconvenient for many consumers. By leveraging digital platforms like Fitplan or Playbook, or even just enabling payments or donations on Zoom/other
video conferencing solutions, creators are offering scalable, cheaper, and more convenient fitness instruction.
The question of market size was one of the top questions I received from readers of my blog post “.” Many people were optimistic about this trend, but were unsure of how
large the market could be: how many individuals can actually make a living this way? And how many consumers want to consume and pay for creator-led products/services?
“Markets that do not exist cannot be analyzed [...] Not only are the market applications for disruptive technologies unknown at the time of their development, they are unknowable.”The same analytical techniques for forecasting the market size of sustaining technologies fail when applied to markets that don’t yet exist:
“It is simply impossible to predict with any useful degree of precision how disruptive products will be used or how large their markets will be.”A notable example of how wrong forecasts for disruptive innovations can be is Uber: forecasted a best-case scenario of $1Bn annual revenue; in reality, Uber’s 2019 full-year gross bookings were .
As a general rule, the potential market for non-consumers vastly exceeds what is already being consumed.
A couple of useful ways to begin thinking about the potential market size of the Passion Economy is to approach it in terms of supply and demand.On the supply side, according to a , 71% of Americans (110M) would prefer to be self-employed. This huge contingent of aspiring entrepreneurs suggests that many individuals will embark down the “”
journey, initially exploring side hustles and earning supplemental
income, with some eventually forgoing traditional employment altogether.
On the demand side, massive pockets of consumer spend are up for grabs,
should Passion Economy workers create lower-cost, more convenient
offerings. Each of the industries below are categories where creator-driven content is already pulling consumers away from incumbent offerings:
Success is not built into the definition of disruption: Not every disruptive path leads to a triumph, and not every triumphant newcomer follows a disruptive path.
For example, any number of internet-based retailers pursued disruptive paths in the late 1990s, but only a small number prospered. The failures are not evidence of the deficiencies of
disruption theory; they are simply boundary markers for the theory’s application. The theory says very little about how to win in the foothold market, other than to play the odds and avoid head-on competition with better-resourced incumbents.
Many disruptive innovations take a generation for their full effect to be
realized, as new behaviors enter the mainstream. A disruptive innovation’s beachhead is among low-end customers or previous non-consumers, but successful companies must move upmarket and improve their offerings to appeal to mainstream customers.
Overall, creator products and services find their greatest success when workers intimately understand and serve the needs of their customers. As
outlined in my blog post “,” creators who want to earn a living without amassing a massive audience should tap into consumers’ desire for tangible results and transformation; provide premium content, community, and accountability; and appeal to users’ desire for status, recognition, and access.
4. Incumbents aren’t going to build for the Passion Economy; startups will
Large companies commonly respond to disruptive technology by waiting until the market is large enough to be interesting. Christensen writes that
“it is a seductive logic that can backfire, because the firms creating new markets often forge capabilities that are closely attuned to the requirements of those markets and that later entrants find difficult to
replicate.”
Because the market size of total creators who can potentially monetize through non-ad-based means is uncertain and appears small, and because direct user payments represent a lower-margin business than advertising (Patreon’s take rate starts at 5%, whereas ad-based platforms often keep 100% of ad revenue), incumbents are not incentivized to iterate on the business model and offer creators more valuable paths to monetize until it’s too late.
Last fall, I wrote: “We envision a future in which the value of unique
skills and knowledge can be unlocked, augmented, and surfaced to
consumers.” New technologies and business models in the Passion Economy enable more people to unlock economic value from their creative skills and passions.
Acknowledgements: Thank you to for creating the image for this post.
Originally published as “"