Identifying Sources of Disruption in the Context of Sustainability-Driven Innovation

Sammanfattning: Introduction: Research shows that the lifespan of large companies gets shorter and shorter, the average age of companies on the list of fortune 500 is 33 years, the average age is expected to decline to 12 years by 2027 (Anthony et al., 2018). Innovations that are driven by social, environmental or sustainability issues are defined as sustainability-driven innovations (Metz, 2016). Not much is known when it comes to what sources can trigger a disruptive sustainability-driven innovation.    Problem background: There has been many troubling studies about the damage we as humans bring upon our blue planet, these studies are apocalyptic (Osborn 1948; Carson 1962; Meadows et al 1972; Cole et al 1973). To be able to meet the aspirations of millions rising from poverty, we need transformation and change throughout society, and disruptive innovations is the key to unlock this transformation (Sterman, 2015). The disruption literature is well developed when it comes to what sources can trigger a disruptive innovation. There does not exist literature on what sources that can trigger sustainability-driven innovations.   Purpose: The purpose of this thesis is to create a conceptual model that show possible sources of disruption for sustainability-driven innovations. The knowledge created by the conceptual model will be used at a later stage to develop a monitoring tool for TOMRA. To fulfill the purpose of this master thesis we have developed the following research question: what sources can trigger a disruptive sustainability-driven innovation?   Methodology: To answer the research question, this thesis used an exploratory research design, inductive research approach and the single case study with participants from four companies that acts in three different industries and five interviews with experts in the field of sustainability-driven innovations as the chosen research method. The primary data has been collected from 13 interviews from new entrants, incumbents, experts and governmental agencies. Secondary data were collected to support the analysis.   Findings: The key findings of this thesis are eight new sources of disruption; established technology, public value, public opinion, political decisions, political goals, legislations, subsidizations and demo-pilots    Conclusion: Our study showed that there was a gap in the disruption literature, especially when it comes to the source of disruption. Because the study found other sources that might trigger a disruption rather than only new technology and new BMs. Realizing that, the sources of disruption were expanded to have three subcategories that influence each other, technology and BM, citizen awareness and policy.