Shots in the Dark

8 Responses

• Anonymous
  6/13/2014 1:29 pm

  She has tattoo of the Harvard H (and one of the TImes T). Icky.

• Sam Spektor
  6/17/2014 4:56 pm

  Off topic, but it has a lot to do with The NYT.

  This is what happens when a professor at The College writes an article that is beyond her sphere of competence. There are number of facts that are wrong or taken out of context and clearly she doesn’t understand the corporate world. In addition, her confusion about newspapers as organs of journalism and newspapers as part of corporations is naive at best.

  Lepore should stick to writing about things where she has expert knowledge. She is not a good lecturer and it is clear that she has not done the work necessary to write a coherent fact based article about disruption.

  It is, however, good to see that one Harvard professor is willing to take on another Harvard professor. If only she had the expertise to get it right.

  file:///Users/sam/Desktop/Jill%20Lepore:%20What%20the%20Theory%20of%20“Disruptive%20Innovation”%20Gets%20Wrong%20:%20The%20New%20Yorker.webarchive

• Richard Thomas
  6/17/2014 9:43 pm

  Game on:

  http://harry-lewis.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-bogosity-of-disruption-theory.html#comment-form

• Sam Spektor
  6/18/2014 2:21 am

  Not really RT.

  I didn’t comment on Christensen because I have little knowledge about what he does. I do have a bit of knowledge about corporations and investment funds and some of Lepore’s arguments hold no weight and others are taken out of context.

  Even exceptional Harvard professors have to be careful when they venture beyond their sphere of competence.

• Sam Spektor
  6/18/2014 8:26 am

  sorry to be off topic again, but here is some more on HMC

  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-18/harvard-money-managers-exit-on-subpar-private-equity-bets.html

• mad at-er
  6/19/2014 8:51 pm

  and more off-topic links - since I know that Richard and many of the commenters here are interested in how universities handle sexual assault allegations, I thought you’d be interested in FIRE’s take on the most recent draft guidelines from the administration. Among other things, “FIRE is particularly pleased that the proposed regulations do not attempt to mandate that campus judiciaries decide sexual assault cases using our judiciary’s lowest evidentiary threshold, the preponderance of the evidence standard”: http://www.thefire.org/department-of-education-offers-proposed-campus-sexual-assault-regulations/

• Richard Thomas
  6/22/2014 9:08 pm

  Now that I’ve read both, I actually think Jill Lepore’s New Yorker article stood up pretty well to Clayton Christensen’s pretty patronizing (“listen up, Jill!”) but, more importantly, substantively unpersuasive, Bloomberg response.

• Kourtney
  7/1/2024 1:47 am

  You can always tell an expert! Thanks for connributitg.

Leave a Reply