pexels-photo-66997

A Day with Clayton Christensen 

Though the world may seem darker without Clay in it, his teachings and his example will inspire us to make the world much brighter regardless of our profession.

The sun rose this spring on a world that seems less bright without Clay Christensen in it. I first met him about 20 years ago when I was a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Chicago and serving as the advisor to the Latter-day Saint Student Association. We had received school funding to bring LDS speakers to campus who represented excellence in both their professional and their personal lives. Richard Bushman from Columbia was one of our first speakers, and he recommended Clay as a potential speaker who perfectly matched those criteria, plus, “He recently published a book on innovation a lot of people are excited about.”

My wife and I picked up Clay from O’Hare and brought him to Hyde Park in our dilapidated minivan. He seemed completely at ease—mentioning as an aside how proud he was of his own Chevy Nova. I tried to engage him in conversation about his work at Harvard; he was much more interested in finding out about the three booster seats in the back seat which we had shuffled around to try to accommodate his 6’8” frame. 

Clay asked detailed questions about our young family—we had three kids ages five and below, including our daughter, Chaya, who had cerebral palsy. Throughout the day, Clay gave us the feeling that it was his honest privilege to be spending time with us rather than the other way around. He started asking me about my own research. I gave him a brief summary, but eventually admitted that I was more interested in a marketing career. However, I worried that business would be an intellectually barren enterprise and that there was no realistic path for me into that field.

Clay’s energy lit up the van as he responded to my questions. He talked about the intelligence, discipline, and intense creativity that lay behind great business strategy, product development, and consumer communications. He proudly showed us his watch and recounted starting a company with some MIT professors who developed a new type of ceramics used in the case. Even though his academic career was going very well, he admitted missing the excitement of personal involvement in business management. “The executives I know in the Boston area are every bit as bright as my colleagues at the Harvard Business School—plus they create real products that are meaningful to millions of people.”

But, I asked, what about giving up teaching? Here he grew somber. He said, “Tom, you are always a teacher. As a manager, you have a greater impact on your employees than anyone outside of their immediate family. You are constantly teaching them not only about how to do their jobs, but how to treat each other. Because you have such a great impact on people, management can be one of the noblest professions there is.” He laughed off my concern about getting hired in the first place. Clay had only known me for a few hours, but he said he was confident I would find a way—and that I should keep in mind that he would be happy to support me as best he could.

We later had lunch with other students in the Latter-day Saint Student Association at a local restaurant; our server came up to me as we were leaving with tears in her eyes. “Who is that man? He is so kind.” She seemed to mean both the way he treated her during the meal and his generosity with the tip after he had unexpectedly picked up the tab for our whole group. Clay spoke at the University of Chicago’s business school where he illustrated disruptive innovation by taking his Motorola flip phone out of his pocket. “This may seem like a simple toy to us now, but cell phones will likely overtake PCs as our dominant way of working and communicating.” (With the iPhone launch still eight years away, this was an idea that seemed very implausible to us at the time.) He concluded by applying his theory of disruptive innovation to our personal lives: “Even though your immediate career needs will seem more pressing, always invest in your family life first or you risk having your profession overwhelm things that are infinitely more important.” A few weeks after his visit, we received a thank you card from Clay for inviting him to come spend time with us. Attached to the note was the thousand-dollar stipend the university had paid him to come—he had signed it over to our family with the note, “You need this more than I do.”

Clay was as good as his word—as busy as he was, he supported me in transitioning out of academics into a marketing career spanning Disney, Procter & Gamble, Microsoft, and Nestlé. In turn, I remember how kindly he treated our family and I have tried to treat those I manage the same way. I reached out to him a few years ago about connecting with universities in the NYC area in regards to teaching part time; he gave me advice leading to my current appointments at both Yale and Columbia. Along with that guidance came his mantra: “Remember you are not teaching the students what to think—you are helping them learn how to think.”

Though the world may seem darker without Clay in it, his teachings and his example will inspire us to make the world much brighter regardless of our profession. My day with him changed my life. That experience reminds me that I can potentially do the same with each person I work with every day of my own.

About the author

Tom Hafen

Tom Hafen is the head of marketing for Nestlé Waters Growth Brands. He has taught marketing at Yale and Columbia. He has an MBA and Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Chicago.
On Key

You Might Also Like

Barry Keoghan shines in weak star vehicle

“Bring Them Down” is a careful small-town drama about Irish sheep farmers. The film stars Christopher Abbott as Michael after his acclaimed performance as the villain in “Poor Things,” and titular role in “Wolf Man.”  Barry Keoghan plays opposite as Jack, the son of neighboring farmers. Keoghan also made his mark in a Yorgos Lanthimos film, “Killing of a Sacred Deer.” He is as up-and-coming as an actor can be, set to star in the highly anticipated Beatles biopic.  The film is mostly a showpiece for the two talented leads to luxuriate in the acting moments that the revenge plot affords them. Abbott builds a character suspended in tension between his guilt over his mother’s passing, his deference to his strong-willed father, his honor, and his self-sufficiency. Keoghan has a slightly more complicated job, as he needs to find the motivation to start the feud inside a character that is juvenile and slight. As a showcase, the film is a success. Not many people will see it, but it will certainly help burnish the reputations of Abbot and Keoghan as formidable actors. And the plot is good enough to serve that purpose. Caroline, Michael’s ex-girlfriend, and Jack’s mother, has decided to leave Jack’s father because of their financial problem. A bridge is out, and Michael’s father is reluctant to let Jack’s family cross his property. So Jack hatches a plan to steal two prized rams from Michael’s family. When Jack’s dad catches him, he makes him kill the ram and get rid of it. The woman they sell it to offers them good money for sheep legs, offering what Jack sees as a solution to his family’s problems. But rather than tell the story in a forthright way, the edit tells the story twice, first from Michael’s point of view, and then from Jack’s. So during the first half of the film things move so fast and with so little context, you struggle to know what’s going on. Then when it restarts, the audience doesn’t know the device yet, and doesn’t figure it out for about twenty minutes when plot points begin to repeat themselves.  Once we figure it out, the idea isn’t terrible. When we were strictly in Michael’s perspective the feud seems meaningless and is cast in strictly moralistic terms. When we revisit it through Jack’s perspective, we can begin to appreciate the complicated factors that led to Jack’s decision.  But the edit doesn’t tell the story clearly enough. So the main emotion I felt while watching the film was confusion. I’m certain that the film would improve on a rewatch, but the ultimate story that a feud develops because Jack steals Michael’s sheep to keep his parents together doesn’t have enough heft to draw me back. It’s a pastoral film, and it does a good job of capturing the place. Colm Meaney, who plays Michael’s father, Ray, does a particularly notable job speaking Irish at length. First-time director Chris Andrews has some interesting ideas. He is clearly capable of letting talented actors do what they do best, a skill that will serve him well in his directing career. The film is also shot in a subdued way that highlights the natural light and natural beauty of the setting, but without ever drawing attention to itself.  The use of fire in the film’s back half is particularly notable.  “Bring Them Down” is R-rated for its violence and language. The domestic violence where Jack’s mother beats Jack’s father is particularly harrowing. But I found the film’s moral message to be largely in the right place. Jack’s theft leads to nothing but suffering. And revenge is shown as almost entirely futile. The film even offers a glimpse at honest redemption. Still, I wouldn’t watch this with my kids, at least until they were adults.  Two and a half out of five stars. “Bring Them Down” releases in theaters nationwide February 7, 2025.

Remembering the Bible

If we write off the Bible as irrelevant, we lose its proposals on meaning, purpose and self-worth. Other widely embraced answers, however, are despairing. 

Convenient Post-Modernism

As the last bulwark for the rule of law in our nation, I’ve been discouraged to see the attacks on the Supreme Court from all corners in light of the recently leaked decision in the Dobbs abortion case. We’ll likely be looking at this issue in greater depth in Public Square soon. But for now, I wanted to highlight just how pervasive anti-institutionalism has become across our country. We’re All Postmodernists Now John Stonestreet and G.S. Morris write for the Stream about how “We’re all Postmodernists Now.” They are focusing on a loss of trust primarily from the political right. Which is why the sudden return of this trend to the left is so noteworthy. Post-modernism is not a sustainable framework, but it is increasingly used as a temporary tool to pursue specific political or cultural goals. As Latter-day Saints, we agree with their statement that, “Truth is knowable and that it doesn’t depend on the source but a reality external to ourselves.”  These trends are certainly worthy of continued concern.  

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!