The Role of Innovation in Strategy: Google vs. Apple - Case Study Example

The role of Innovation in Strategy: Google vs. Apple Innovation is an essential business strategy necessary for the modern organizations to stay in the current heavily globalized and competitive market. Science and technology is developing rapidly and based on that living standards are also developing rapidly. The ability to keep in pace with the customer expectations is an important factor in determining the success and failures of an organization at present. Google and Apple are two of the most prominent organizations at present which conquered global markets with the help of innovative products and services. Google is a prominent player in the computer application software business industry whereas Apple is the leader and most valuable organization in the consumer electronics industry. This paper analyses the role of innovation in strategy, taking Google and Apple Inc. as examples, based on McKinsey 7S Model and Mintzberg’s model.   The role of Innovation in Strategy: Google vs. Apple Google is the company which succeeded in unveiling the potentials of search engine business to world. Even though many other companies such as Yahoo, Bingo, Amazon etc are engaged in search engine business, none of them tasted success as tasted by Google. The ability to think differently helped Google to make the organization one of the largest in the word at present. It should be noted that Google entered the computer business world just as a search engine provider. However, they diversified their activities to different areas such as online book business, social networking, operating systems etc. Google books is currently causing big problems to Amazon whereas Google plus is causing problems to Facebook. Android is the operating system developed by Google mainly for mobile phones which is challenging Apple’s operating system; iOS at present. On the other hand, Apple is also not far behind to Google as far as innovation is concerned. In fact they did succeed in bringing huge revolutions in the technology world. The introduction of it’s “I’ series products such as iPhone, iPad, iPod, iTune, iMac etc brought huge success in the market. In fact the tablet era has started with the introduction of Apple’s iPad. They are currently the most valuable technology company in the world and second biggest company in the world in market capitalization. McKinsey 7S Model Mintzberg’s model: Google vs. Apple McKinsey’s 7 S model says that skills, staff, style, strategy, systems, structure and shared values are the seven parameters which can determine the ways in which an organization normally operates. The figure given below illustrates McKinsey 7 S model with respect to the functioning of an organization. (McKinsey 7 S model, 2011) It should be noted that Google introduced Google books, Google plus, android etc like new products in order to gain upper share in the computer related industries. Amazon was the number online book seller before Google establishes its world’s largest online book store a couple of years before. Same way facebook was the leader in social networking and Google’s Google plus is currently causing trouble to facebook. Nokia was the market leader in mobile phone industry until the entry of Apple with its revolutionary product; iPhone. iPhone has mesmerized the technology world at the beginning of 2000, with its unique facilities such as touchscreen, multimedia facilities etc. iOS was the operating system used in iPhone which caused too much worries to the competitors like Samsung. In order to help Apple’s competitors in mobile phone market, Google developed its prestigious android operating system which is currently causing major problems to Apple and iPhone. Samsung’s galaxy S2 which is working on android platform is causing too many worries to Apple and iPhone at present. Henry Mintzberg suggests that the traditional way of thinking about strategy implementation focuses only on deliberate strategies. Minztberg claims that some organizations begin implementing strategies before they clearly articulate mission, goals, or objectives. In this case strategy implementation actually precedes strategy formulation. According to Mintzberg, Success is the most likely outcome when strategy is appropriate and implementation good whereas - Roulette involves situation wherein a poor strategy is implemented well. Moreover, Trouble is characterized by situations wherein an appropriate strategy is poorly implemented whereas Failure involves situations wherein a poor strategy is poorly implemented (Barnat, 2005) It should be noted that Microsoft introduced tablet computers much earlier than Apple in the market. However, Microsoft failed to capture the market because of the untimely introduction of its tablet PC’s in the market. On the other hand, Apple introduced tablets just in time and they succeeded in selling millions of iPads in the market as of now. In short, strategy formulation and implementation is as important as the development of new products and services. Strategies should be suited to the current market requirements. It is often said that even better quality products may fail in the market if the marketing strategies are inappropriate whereas poor quality products may excel if the marketing strategies are good. At the beginning of globalization, Parker Pen Company tried to introduce their pen products all over the world with the help of a unique marketing strategy. They thought that for same product, same marketing strategy may succeed everywhere. They failed to recognize the fact that even for same product, different marketing strategies are necessary in different markets because of the huge differences between different markets with respect to economy, politics, social and cultural factors. Apple and Google are two companies which did succeed in the reading the market pulses very well. The success of Apple’s “I” series products and Google’s online book store and android operating systems remind us the abilities of these companies in reading the market trends very well. It should be noted that when Apple introduced, iPad and iPhone in the market, no other companies had any such products in the market. Same way, before the introduction of Android by Google, mobile industry was struggling because of the absence of a suitable operating system to cater its needs. In short, the ability to think differently helped these companies immensely in gaining success in the market. Business strategies of Google and Apple are entirely different. While Google gives more importance to team work in its organization, Apple gives more importance to individual works. Both Google and Apple do not bother much about democratic management styles. These companies switch between democratic and autocratic management styles time to time, as a business strategy, in order to get desired results. It should be noted that Google’s attempt to seize social networking market from the hands of facebook suffered major setbacks because of the failure of its business strategies. Google introduced Google plus without bothering too much about the basic concepts of social networks. They thought that their huge brand name may help them to make Google plus a success in the market. They failed to realize the fact that the current consumers are more quality conscious and they will never go after old wine in a new bottle. In fact, people found nothing interesting or unique in Google plus compared to facebook and they stuck with facebook instead of going after Google plus. Apple’s iphone is also currently facing troubles with the introduction of Samsung’s galaxy S2. Galaxy s2 is more powerful than iphone and it has more interesting features than iphone. Moreover, it makes use of Google’s prestigious Android operating system which is believed to be the most useful mobile operating system at present. Verma (2006) has pointed out that “Google’s high growth rate is creating new HR challenges for the company. Google has built a culture where a well-chosen elite accommodates flexibility, shifting roles and, above all else, urgency” (Verma, 2006). The case of apple is also not much different. Qumer (2009) pointed out that “Unfairness in promotions and overall treatment is a common complaint in Apple Company” (Qumer, 2009, p.15). Apple often says that it is more focused in employability rather than employment security. In other words, Apple is trying to dictate the employees. Moreover, apple often encourages individual work instead of team work. They allow fresh employees to grow under experienced ones. However, once a fresh employee got enough training, Apple allots independent work to him. Thus the employee may get more job stress in Apple Company than in other companies. Work-life balancing is also a distant dream for Apple employees. The case of Google is also not much different. In short, human resource management in both the companies is not free of controversies. Innovation in human resource management is necessary for both the companies. Conclusions Apple and Google are two of the biggest technology oriented companies in the world at present. Both the companies did succeed in introducing innovative products and services in the market. The ability to read the market pulses very well isolates these companies from other companies. These companies succeeded in formulating and implementing adequate business strategies for the present business world which helped them to sustain top spots in the market. In short, innovation is the key to success which is evident from the examples of Google and Apple Inc. References Barnat,R. (2005). The Relation Between Strategy Formulation And Strategy Implementation. Retrieved from http://www.strategy-implementation.24xls.com/en105 McKinsey 7 S model, (2011). Retrieved from http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_7S.html Qumer S.M, (2009), Apple Inc’s corporate culture: The good, the bad and the ugly, ICMR Center for Management research, www. Icmrindia.org Verma, M. (2006). Google’s HR Dilemma. Retrieved from http://www.ibscdc.org/Case_Studies/HRM/HRM0020P.htm Read More