Part 2 : AAP vs BJP+CONG is actually Michael Porter vs Clayton Christensen

In last post, I explained why AAP shouldn't exist as per Michael Porter's model. Reality is that AAP exists and it exists as an exponentially growing political force. So, how did AAP manage to do it? AAP used simple strategy that is called 'disruptive strategy' of Clayton Christensen.  AAP did following things which led to disruption of the Indian Political System (Market). These steps taken by AAP clearly defines what a new company should do to break into bad industry (as per Michael Porter's strategic model).

1. Give Inferior yet Sufficient Product
Arvind and other AAP leaders brought forward  the idea of 'Lokpal', a cure for corruption. It was clear that this solution can't replace bad governance or stop bad governance. This solution was aimed at reducing the pains of citizens. Team offered a pointed & single solution for people's most of the pains. Good governance is something that citizens look for but in absence of good governance, citizens accepted inferior yet sufficient product i.e. 'Lokpal'.

2. Create New Market
AAP knew from day one that it can't  target the full market, so AAP went for city based urban voters. Urban voters especially, youngsters don't take interest in politics. AAP targeted educated urban youth and made it fashionable to get involved in political discussions.  Once AAP was able to mobilize youth, other urban segments got attracted to AAP. AAP created a new market of voters i.e. urban youth.

Above two strategic moves & perfect implementation of these  created a challenge for old political parties in India. Why can these political parties not respond to AAP? Reasons for failure of BJP and Cong to contain AAP are following-


1. Incumbents can't Respond due to Connected Parts
Incumbents can't respond directly to AAP as incumbents (BJP & Cong) have more connected parts. These different parts across the nation are same for citizens.   For example, AAP promised to reduce power tariff in Delhi. BJP & Cong can't do that blindly as they are ruling other states too and similar demands will start coming for other states. 

Another example is that AAP can decide not to field any candidate with criminal background. BJP and Cong is full of criminals and even if party leadership decides to get rid of these criminals, these parties will fail in many states and state governments will fall. So even if these parties may wish to get rid of these criminals, they can't.

2. Incumbents can't Spin off new Organization
Incumbents have cultural problems and even if they want, they can't respond to AAP due to connected parts.  To get rid of this limitation, they must spin off new organization to take on AAP. These old organizations can't do that as they will have to loose a lot of political space to new outfit. In politics, it will be impossible to control the new outfit and hence launching new outfit, is impossible for incumbents.

3. Incumbents can't Block Resources of AAP
Incumbents natural reaction to the AAP's growing popularity would have been to block resources of AAP. They failed to do so due to Crowd funding of AAP and Higher outreach of Internet & Social media.  AAP is not financed by a big corporate house and hence neither Government pressure nor  pressure of goons can cut supply of funds to AAP. Internet and social media made sure that AAP's ideas reach to masses instantly and freely. Putting media houses at notice also didn't work due to internet and social media.

Over all, its an unequal fight. On one side, there  is AAP, a new idea with no baggage and on other side there are incumbents with old ideas and historical baggages. AAP can't loose the battle if it doesn't wish to do so.