I want to give a first shot at Clayton Christensen, Thomas Craig, and Stuart Hart's (2001) The Great Disruption. （注1）Let's start from the Abstract.
Abstract: The article discusses the relationship between disruptive technologies and economic development. Disruption, a core microeconomic driver of macroeconomic growth, has played a fundamental role as the American economy has become more efficient and productive. Japan's macroeconomic puzzle has a microeconomic parallel. Every market features two types of performance trajectory--the rate at which the performance of a product or service improves over time. The leading companies in such industries are so focused on sustaining innovations and addressing the more sophisticated and profitable customers that they ignore the disruptive innovations piercing into the market from the low end. For example, Japanese steel companies began exporting inexpensive steel targeted at the lowest-quality tiers ofthe American steel market in the early 1960s. As the Japanese captured these markets and drove the prices of their products down, western steel makers simply exited those tiers of the market to focus instead where profit margins were higher. Over and over again, Japanese companies succeeded with this approach. But disruptive technologies also set their own trap. Firms in both the U.S. and Japan face the innovator's dilemma as they approach the high end of their markets and become unable to pursue new disruptions at the bottom. To their credit, Japanese policy makers have been trying to reform the country's financial system and industrial structure. What is clearer, however, is how economic growth is tied to the infrastructure that supports disruptive technologies and the creation of new growth markets.
标题：伟大的颠覆（注2）
作者：克莱顿·克里斯坦森，托马斯·克雷格，斯图亚特·哈特
摘要：本文探讨颠覆性技术与经济发展之间的关系。颠覆（注3），作为宏观经济增长的核心的微观经济驱动力，在美国经济变得更为高效、多产的过程中扮演了重要的角色。日本的宏观经济难题是与其微观经济并联的（注4）。每个市场都会体现两种类型的性能轨迹（性能轨迹是指某种产品或服务的性能表现随时间变化而改进的比率）。某些行业中的领先企业过分关注于巩固性创新以及应对更加成熟的、高利润的客户，以至于忽略了从低端市场切入的颠覆性创新。例如六十年代早期，日本钢铁公司开始是把目标瞄向美国钢铁市场中的最低质量需求层进行低价钢铁出口。在日本人占领这些市场并拉低西方钢铁制造业者在这些市场的产品价格之后，西方公司简单地选择了退出，并转而专注于利润较高的高端市场。正是利用这种方法，日本公司获得了一次又一次成功。但颠覆性技术也为日本公司自己设下了陷阱。无论是美国还是日本公司，在转向高端市场并无力把握低端市场新的技术颠覆的时候，都面临着创新者的两难境地。值得称道的是，日本的政策制定者一直以来都在努力改革本国的金融系统和行业结构。而越来越清晰的是，经济增长是如何与支撑颠覆性技术以及开创新增长市场的基础结构紧密相连的。
注1：本人此番尝试纯属个人兴趣及学习需要，无意侵犯原作者（包括其他译者——如果有的话）的知识产权。任何人可以在此发表评论，进行交流，甚至学术探讨，但请不要复制此间任何内容作其他用途。如需引用，请注明出处及原作者。
注2：great的含义很广泛，在本文中应为“Remarkable or outstanding in magnitude, degree, or extent”的含义，但在中文中暂时难以找出既表达原意又与下文的“颠覆”相匹配的词汇，因“颠覆”只是暂时的译法，所以great在这里暂时译成“伟大的”。
注3：“颠覆”不一定是disruption的最佳译法，网上关于disruptive的译法并不统一，包括破坏性、破坏式、颠覆性，应该还有“中断”、“分裂”的含义。理解文章的本意后，我认为译成“颠覆性”为佳，以对应sustaining维持性、巩固性之意，相应地，我暂时将名词译成“颠覆”。但正如下文指出的，“disruption是宏观经济增长的核心微观经济驱动力”，其确切含义要待考察过经济学中的相关解释才能确定。
注4：原文是“Japan's macroeconomic puzzle has a microeconomic parallel”，本人对自己的译法不太肯定，欢迎指正。
