Global Enterprise and Innovation at Sony Corporation - Case Study Example

? GLOBAL ENTERPRISE AND INNOVATION INDIVIDUAL REPORT Introduction The world we live in today is increasingly becoming competitive in business innovations with countries differing on matters of enabling environment for innovations to thrive. In a bid to analyze and understand global trends in enterprises as well as innovation, this report investigates the operations of Sony Corporation with a special attention of the United States. Either it therefore investigates the innovation environment within the country and as such evaluates the factors with likelihood to influence innovation positively or negatively as pertains to such a firm as the Sonny Corporation. This report will have various segments such as the analysis of main features of business environment within the US, role of government in promoting innovation, credit facilities and resources to the firms, scientific and technological capacity of the nation as well as general analysis of the national innovation systems within the US. Discussion Science and technology has increasingly been sighted to be a direct or indirect factor influencing the living of people within US. Various features define the business environment within the US with innovation as well as job creation being the major. Sustained investments within scientific research as well as strong system of education have been commended for great influence on general economic performance of the country. However, according to a 2011-2014 public policy statement by the ACS specific policies are critical in ensuring favorable business environment. Such policy recommendations include that appropriate tax and trade policies in target of innovation and research should be adopted, encourage innovations through patenting as well as property rights and efficient commercialization and transfer of technological innovation within the country. Besides, the report shows a business environment that is in need of proper framework to encourage investment in research and innovation by small and large firms through such incentives as credit facilities and ensuring favorable business environment by the government (American Chemical Society, nd, 1-2). On the other hand, environmental awareness and conservation is a critical feature within business operations in the US where the government and other agencies increasingly regulate business operations on matters of environmental policies. According to a report by Esty and Charnovitz innovation is increasingly being influenced by policies and rules that are being adopted on environmental management and conservation. The report points to the poor performance of the government in US to implement policies that are favorable to innovation concerning the environment effectively. This has therefore been a hindrance to operations of many firms, which are dependent on environmental policy frameworks (Esty and Charnovitz, 2012, para 1-4). Other factors that continuously have a direct impact on business performances within the US are social, political as well as economic factors. The social impact on business environment in the US is emanating from such aspects as the development of social platform and media, which all business operators must be aware of. Despite the great benefits that arise from social media, equally many shortcomings result from the improper application of the media into the business world within the US. Economic influences in the business environment within US are best examined from the perspective of economic growth of the country. Political factors on the other hand come in as political set up defines policy formulations as well as legal frameworks within the nation (Sviokla and Gutstein, 2012-2013, para 1-5). Increased productivity through innovation by firms lead to improved standards of living of people. Through the design of appropriate policies and effective decision-making, the US government has continually created innovative environment, which has been attractive to such firms as Sony, which wholly rely on innovation. This has been realized through the government’s support of business innovations, collaborating with businesses on shared interests, promotion of rule of law as well as through respecting human rights, which are fundamental in innovations. The government is equally committed to support innovations within the country in the future to have improved welfare to its people as well as supporting the environment in which businesses thrive and innovation is encouraged (U.S. Department of State, 2013, para 1-9). According to a report by Schach (2012), the US government has had a notable track of events in the last number of decades in legislative activities aimed at creation of policies for general technological advancement. Direct measures that the government has taken in encouraging innovation are budget outlays as well as service provision. Besides, the government participates indirectly through legal changes as well as financial incentives. However, as the report notes, government involvement is variant based on nature of a firm; private or public and this has a direct implication to such a multinational as the Sony Corporation operating within the country (Schach, 2012, p. 1-3). Year 2011 marks a milestone in the commitment of the US government to facilitate and encourage innovation through the release of Obama’s ‘strategy for America innovation’ as a policy guide towards improved innovations and new discoveries within the country. The guide stipulates the government’s commitment towards improved innovation as spelt out by challenge in higher competition being faced by American based firms such as the Sony Corporation globally in the 21st century and in a bid to continually lead in future economic innovation. the innovation strategy invests in recovery acts through which the government commits harness increased levels of innovation through educational support, infrastructural development as well as executive regulatory framework aimed at boosting innovation by both private and public sectors (National Economic Council, 2011, para 1-2). The federal government of the US has had a reputation in funding research and development both within the public as well as the private sector besides financial support to institutions of research and higher learning. However, there have been notable variations in rates of financial aid to innovation through credit facilities and financial aid. Industry is a critical source of government spending for innovation and R&D within US. For instance, the nonmanufacturing industry such as the computer services (software development), engineering services as well as the communication services have been a direct beneficially from the financial assistance by the US government. The ATP (advanced technologies programs) provides matching financial resources for consortia and firms investing in pre-commercial technologies (Mowery, nd, p. 1-8). The government provides financial support to private innovations for such firms as Sony due to the high risks involved as well as the heavy financial investments required. According to Wolf, the state has a strategic role to play in encouraging private firms and corporations to invest in intensified research and innovations for a number of reasons. These are the high costs associated with innovation and which often becomes a challenge to many firms, huge uncertainties as well as the lengthy periods of time with which firms invest in innovation (Wolf, 2013, para 1-5). Therefore, private firms are hesitant in investing in innovation because of this cost constrain as well as the uncertainties and risks associated. This has therefore promoted research and innovation through private firms through provision of financial support. Nevertheless, there are policy frameworks that the NIS has put into place in the management of financial services offered to the firms. The general landscape however is favorable for innovation because the government has not put stringent measures for firms to access credit facilities. The US ‘national innovation systems’ has been a very powerful tool for analyzing the innovative performance of the US as well as analyzing the policy frameworks developed and adopted within the country. The NSI is composed of institutions, actors, processes that influence knowledge creation policies, the process of innovation, which translates research findings into applications (for commercial or nonmarket use), as well as the overall processes influencing adoption of general innovations. This therefore confirms that the NSI comprises of Scientific and Technological institution, as well as the Education components (Mowery, nd, p. 1-3). Despite the fact that research universities are relatively recent phenomenon within the United States, they have grown to become a critical component in innovation through training students on innovation, research as well as development. The federal government has a rich history of adequately funding the research institutions with the motive of realizing sustained development through scientific discoveries and innovation. The government has therefore adequately linked public research institutes and universities for pulling together of resources and efforts in efforts to promote innovation (Atkinson and Blanpied, 2008, p. 30-45). Moreover, according to Godin, NIS has various institutional frameworks whose common goal is to foster innovation growth within the US. The framework therefore constitutes of such sectors as the education, government, industry as well as the respective environments. The NSI framework within United States therefore emphasizes on the importance of relationships between the various components that comprise the system. The adoption of the term innovation was from scientific discipline in research and development and this therefore brings on board the critical component of any innovation system, which involves scientific institutions. The institutions are responsible of creation of scientific knowledge, which is fundamental in innovative practices (Godin 2007, p. 4-6). There are two features, which are distinctive concerning innovation as an approach to production and sharing of knowledge. The first feature revolves around the fact that knowledge is produced through interactive processes that bring together various players, which include the government, companies, research institutions as well as universities. This has the implication that none of individual firms like Sony Corporation would be self sufficient and reliant in innovation; it must rely on interactions between the various actors for its success. Secondly, the process of innovation involves continuous loops of feedback between different stages and as such does not have a predefined linear path from one stage to another. This therefore shows that innovation does not have a definite rout from research, process development, engineering and the final product, which is innovation, but on the contrary, the complete interplay of the various actors leads to innovation (Dantas, 2013, para 1-9). The above discussion has revealed the industrial component of innovations within the United States and thus confirmed that industries are critical to the overall innovation level of a country. The American case study reveals that industries are unequally endowed for innovation within the country hence the need for the analysis of potentiality in industrial innovation within the country. For instance, internet and technological industries, the computer industries, pharmaceutical industries as well as other major innovations often carry the ‘made in USA’ label. Special attention in this analysis is on the industries within the United States, which have high potential in innovation. One such an industry is the software development and the telecommunications industry within which Sony (our case study corporation) falls under. Advancement in information technology in 21st century creates great potentials for technological innovation with basic day-to-day life being dependent on the technologies. The Sony corporation for instance invests in electronics, visual media as well as in telecommunications which are critical to modern day living. The NIS therefore takes into perspective the urgency of certain industries within the economy to keep in pace with the current innovation in order to remain relevant and maintain the positive economic growth prospects as determined by general innovation but more specifically on such an industry as IT service industry (Manyika, Pacthod, and Park, 2011, para 1-3). Other industries, which have been in the lead in innovation and which according to a report by Savitz carry great potential for increased innovation in the future are aeronautics, defense, electricity, automobiles, communications, as well as power generation. Moreover, innovations blossomed in industries on consumer goods as well as services like textile, photography, entertainment, soap and shaving (Savitz, 2013, para 1-5). This therefore shows that America has great potential in innovation over a wide spectrum of industries. In conclusion, the above analysis reveals that united States have great potential in innovation, which has been partially exploited. The report shows that much more can be done in exploitation of the innovative resources available within the country in the 21st century. The report’s case study on Sony Corporation within the US reveals that the firm has been one of the leading within the industry of electronics, theatre work as well as in telecommunication. It also shows that the corporation has great potential in utilizing the brand loyalty and the technological advancements within the 21st century to harness its operations within the country and globally. This is therefore a good example of a company in a strategic industry, which confirms that US as a country provides great potential for investors. The current government, just as a number of pats governments in America holds with high regard the role of innovation in driving the economy. It is certain that the government has put into place and continues to invent strategies and policies meant to create an enabling environment for innovation in order to boost innovation capacity of firms, both private and public operating within the country. The country has good innovation infrastructure coupled with favorable government policies such as the finance and credit facilities to encourage investments in innovations. Besides, it has a commendable social political framework through which investors can increasingly reap benefits of their investments. Technological advancement is equally at its best within the country and this would equally boost business performance within the country. Therefore, investing within the country has the capacity to improve on innovation and improved economic performance. However, potential businesses should take into considerations such dynamic factors as the pace and level of technological advancement in order to accurately discern on most profitable enterprises. This is because there is a potential of innovations becoming obsolete fast thus requiring that investors become strategic and more alert. Moreover, investors need be more vigilant in government participation in business and innovation to avoid unfavorable competition, which would result to adverse effects on them especially while operating as private venture. Bibliography Atkinson R. C. and Blanpied W. A., 2008. Research Universities: Core of the US science and technology system. Technology in Society 30, 30–48 American Chemical Society, nd. A Competitive U.S. Business Climate: Innovation, Chemistry, and Jobs. Available at:< http://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/policy/publicpolicies/enable/usbusinessclimate/us-business-climate-pdf.pdf> (Accessed on 4 November 2013) Dantas E., 2013. The 'system of innovation' approach, and its relevance to developing countries. Available at:< http://www.scidev.net/global/policy-brief/the-system-of-innovation-approach-and-its-relevanc.html> (Accessed on 4 November 2013) Esty D. C. and Charnovitz S., 2012. Green Rules to Drive Innovation. Harvard Business Review. Available at:< http://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/policy/publicpolicies/enable/usbusinessclimate/us-business-climate-pdf.pdf> (Accessed on 4 November 2013) Godin B. 2007. National innovation systems: the system approach in historical perspective. Available at:< http://www.csiic.ca/PDF/Godin_36.pdf> (Accessed on 4 November 2013) Mowery D. C., nd. The U.S. National Innovation System: Recent Developments in Structure and Knowledge Flows. Available at:< http://www.oecd.org/science/inno/2380128.pdf> (Accessed on 4 November 2013) Mowery D. C. nd. Nanotechnology and the U.S. national innovation system: Continuity and Change. Available at:< http://innovate.ucsb.edu/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Mowery-Innovation-Systems.pdf> (Accessed on 4 November 2013) Manyika J., Pacthod D. , and Park M., 2011. Translating innovation into US growth: An advanced-industries perspective. Available at:< http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/public_sector/translating_innovation_into_us_growth_an_advanced-industries_perspective> (Accessed on 4 November 2013) National Economic Council, 2011. A Strategy for American Innovation: Driving Towards Sustainable Growth and Quality Jobs. Available at:< http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nec/StrategyforAmericanInnovation> (Accessed on 4 November 2013) Savitz E., 2013. Is The U.S. Really Losing Its Innovative Edge?. Available at:< http://www.forbes.com/sites/ciocentral/2013/01/02/is-the-u-s-really-losing-its-innovative-edge/>(Accessed on 4 November 2013) Sviokla J. J. and Gutstein A. J., 2012-2013. Designing your fiercest competitor: Mastering change by making it real. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. Available at:< http://www.pwc.com/us/en/view/issue-15/business-strategy-competitor.jhtml> (Accessed on 4 November 2013) Schach W. H., 2012. Industrial Competitiveness and Technological Advancement: Debate over Government Policy. Congressional Research Service. Available at:< http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33528.pdf> (Accessed on 4 November 2013) U.S. Department of State, 2013. U.S. Government Approach on Business and Human Rights. Available at:< http://www.humanrights.gov/2013/05/01/u-s-government-approach-on-business-and-human-rights/> (Accessed on 4 November 2013) Wolf M., 2013. A much-maligned engine of innovation. Available at:< http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/32ba9b92-efd4-11e2-a237-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2je9XGTQS (Accessed on 4 November 2013) Read More