Placing Blackberry Back into the Market Frontline - Case Study Example

PLACING BLACKBERRY BACK INTO THE MARKET FRONTLINE By: Presented Literature Review Introduction: Mobile phone technology is among the most lucrative businesses at the moment (Regalado, 2011). Though not really old, the success and developments in the industry are hard to compare with the duration the devices have been in full operation. This has been the result of fast innovation that has ensured no single level of technology dominates the market so long. The level of completion among the industry’s giants is currently geared towards the operating systems and their efficiency, considered to be a user’s regard of their effectiveness in meeting their communication and entertainment needs. Some of the companies that recently did not respond very fast have suffered huge losses to the extent that they have had to shift their focus elsewhere. An example is Siemens, which has sunk to a lesser technologically competitive electronics and electrical engineering (DW, 2005). At the moment, four companies are doing especially well in trying to cope with the ever changing needs of demanding customers. The engagement is especially on the operating system of the day. Emigh (2010) reported that Apples iOS, Googles Android OS, RIMs BlackBerry OS 6, and Nokias Symbian OS were the leading technologies. This therefore presented the four giants at the time, Apple, Google, RIM and Nokia on the path of excellence, largely if they shared the market equally. With equal market share, the companies would be confident of predictable sales and profits. However, Google is not a phone manufacturer and the firm sells its technology to other companies, including the influence-building Huawei. Sony Ericsson has also been a regular importer of Google’s innovations, which has given it an edge while competitors like Siemens have given up the technology competition. News that blackberry has lost its grip in the smart phone market is common place in major international news outlets as well as smaller local outlets. Research in motion (RIM) that produces the blackberry product has been the leading smart phone seller among other competitors. In the middle of the recession, it was touted as one of the very few firms that did not seem to feel the impact of the severe global recession. At the time, RIM was said to be very responsive to individual client’s needs, shunning the trying temptation to raise its business dealership to the level of enterprises. But its fortunes have largely dipped and sales-dip headlines are as many as were of its success are doing rounds. A December 2012 publication regarding the shrinking sales on the CNN news site reported that the company had shipped 6.7% less than the previous three months period. Critics have taken one the firm’s management for their failure to respond to the emerging trends in the mobile market, an area that RIM’s competitors have exploited to great success. One of the more successful competitors, Huawei, has built its phones on the more advanced android platform, which is a Google revolution in response to RIM’s Blackberry OS 6. Discussing the results of the last quarter of 2012, Goldman (2012) noted a slight profit over a huge loss incurred in the previous season. Most of that gain, it was remarked, came from a tax benefit (Goldman, 2012). Purpose of the Study: This study hopes to come up with alternative methods for RIM to enhance the competitiveness of its product, Blackberry, in the market. While much of the solution seems vented towards a reestablishment in the level of Blackberry’s technology, the study hopes to unearth more problems at RIM that could be key o the decline in sales, their magnitude and the effect they have had so far. This done, the research project will then shift focus to the trends among the more successful competitors at the moment, just to have an overview of any areas RIM might have performed dismally resulting in its fading fortunes. Of particular interest will be the management structure at RIM, seeking explanations from available literature as to why certain decisions were made, and why the response to competitors’ widening takeover of the market share has not been especially quick. The rate of response among their competitors will provide a clear glimpse into whether it is still possible that RIM could make a quick turn around to the profitable firm it is known to be. Proctor (2011) decries the observation that RIM has failed to read the signs of time. The final report is expected to offer possible solutions to the problem at RIM that has caused the decline in sales, and consequently affected the profits to the extent that huge losses have lately been reported. The overall performance is pegged on both the reported quarterly and annual sales and profit. A time scale spanning the period of the economic recession – a time that the firm was reporting huge profits – up to the last quarter of 2012 will offer enough coverage through which the change in trend form double-digit percentage sales rise to the current double-digit percentage sales decline can be evaluated conclusively. Significance of the Study: Why the study is important: The importance of this research stems from the need to sustain a working environment at the RIM. One may wonder what will happen if such giant employers as RIM keep falling won’t unemployment in future bite too hard. Despite the government’s efforts to keep as many citizens in employment, such trends as we are observing at RIM are unfortunately bound to reverse the already hard earned gains. If the trend remains so, funds set aside for bailing such companies will have to be increased, which will further impoverish the employment-uncertain American. Furthermore, thousands of investors are bound to lose their capital in company shares if the decline leads to collapse- a possible spectacle. Perhaps an early solution to this problem will caution other firms bound to follow the way of RIM. There is an urgent need to keep the local manufacturers afloat, so as to mitigate the economic drain expected from uncontrolled take over of the local market by foreign companies. Such a drain would slowly be positioning the nation into an importer of technology instead of the exporter the country is known to be. Marketing theory and its relevance in the case of blackberry: Branding is the ultimate strategy suggested by this research to take Blackberry to the next level of competitiveness. The customer focus strategy laid by incoming management at RIM (Blatchford, 2011), seems keen at establishing the various levels of needs for their customers. Issoherranen & Kess (2011, 396) discuss the need for unique branding in the context of Blackberry’s competitors, Nokia. The company assumed a single-stream of products, thereby dropping its earlier tag of a multi-manufacturer. The relevance of the Nokia case to Blackberry is best captured by Blatchford (2011) where he proposes that Blackberry define its products to point directly to specific categories of customers. This overhaul is achievable if Blackberry rebrands its products to recapture its initial market majorly comprising business executives. This research seeks to fill the missing link at Blackberry, by providing a positive solution that will in future be emulated by other firms in similar situation. Pousttchi & Wiedemann (2006) suggested various approaches laid by companies to encourage usage of their products, and thereby boost sales. The most acceptable for Blackberry in its current situation is changing brand image. Other than this, other alternatives offered by Pousttchi & Wiedemann (2006) include sales promotion, enhancing brand loyalty, building brand awareness, mobile word-of-mouth and building customer database. Clearly, Blackberry is beyond all these steps except for rebranding. It is an expensive exercise and it may take some time to regain foothold in a considerably competitive market, but RIM has the current position it holds in the market for a head start. Beus & Matanda (2010) observed that it is vital that a company renews its brand in order to sustain changing needs and image among its customer base. According to Merrilees & Miller (2008), it is essential that a company creates noticeable linkage between the old and the new brand. Clearly for Blackberry, the linkage is simple to establish, but the company must again fight hard to shed the current picture painted of it and reconnect to the very initial image it bore at the time of its inception- a brand for the business executives. This will further allow Blackberry to interact with other classes of customers at different levels. Importance of the study: This research will not only be useful to the current management at RIM, it is bound to be a reflective mirror for many other firms across the industry divide to feature their efforts at staying afloat and commanding their respective markets. Citing particular stakeholders, the government is of course very interested in knowing why Blackberry is not selling as it used to. If a time comes and the company goes down, the government will take the blame for rising unemployment. At the same time, it is already known that the firm has already survived on a tax exemption at some point just to avoid heavy losses, and this survival technique is bound to impoverish the ordinary tax-paying American. Relevance Several technology based firms that have either sunk or are feeling overstretched at the fast pace of events will have a point to learn, because the case of RIM could be relevant to any of them in some way. Shareholders are watching with bated breath as every sign points to decline in profits thereby causing decline in dividends. Methodology Due to the vastness of the firm, some advantages as well as disadvantages are expected in collecting the data. Much of the data is available online, and only credible sources with similar data will be used to cover the content of this research. The disadvantage is that it is not possible to pay several visits to the firm since there is little time, therefore since not much will be achieved from inside the firm’s premises, the views of Blackberry users will be largely considered. Vanek (2012) notes that the likert scale is a very helpful question type when measuring opinion or experience. To collect the views, questionnaires will be administered. A likert scale kind of rating will be used to rate the functionality of the various functions of the Blackberry. An alternative form will also be provided for one of the top competitor’s ratings, just to be sure what services Blackberry could focus on improving. To analyze this data, independent samples t-test will be run on the SPSS software to determine whether any significant statistical differences exist between the corresponding functionalities of the two brands. However, to ascertain prudence as required of any standard statistical data analysis, screening will be done before the analysis in order to examine suitability of the data for the intended tests, giving further room for making conclusions. Trend analysis will also be used to study the consistency of volume of sales and the effect it has had on the profits the company makes. Charts describing the time responsive movements of the variables will be considered. Limitations Time is the first big challenge to attaining a report as comprehensive as should be at this level. However, with only two months to the final submission, it will not be practical that observation of physical operations at the firm will be feasible. Again the amount of time required to understand the internal structure of the management is quite expansive, which leaves very little room for understanding the entire firm’s operations well. The necessary budget to sustain informative site studies is very high and without having attracted the attention of corporate to fund this endeavor fewer than needed visits may be made. This may limit the range of conclusions drawn from direct observations. This may also be triggered by meager understanding of the firm’s operations emanating from the time constraint. Bibliography Blatchford, J. (2012). Manifested Marketing: Research in Motion – How Branding Can Save BlackBerry. Web, DW Team. (2005). Siemens Sells Cell Phone Unit. Emigh, J. (2010). BlackBerry Fading Against Android OS and iPhone. Brighthand, Smart Phone News and Reviews. Web, 23rd Feb 2013. Goldman, D. (2012). BlackBerry Maker Research in Motions Sales Tumble 47%. CNN Money. Isoherranen, V., Kess, P. (2011). Strategy Orientation Analysis in the Mobile Phone Case Business. Modern Economy, 2011, 2, 395-402 Matanda, J., Beus, S. (2010). Employee’s Perceptions of Rebranding Process: Case Study of Rebranding of an Australian Supermarket Chain. Pp 3. Merrilees, B., Miller, D. (2008). Principles of Corporate Rebranding. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 42 Iss: 5/6, pp.537 – 552. Osborne, B. (2009). RIM reports annual revenue up 84%. Geek.com. Web, 23rd Feb 2013. Pousttchi, K. & Wiedemann, G. (2006). A Contribution to Theory Building for Mobile Marketing: Categorizing Mobile Marketing Campaigns through Case Study Research. MPRA Paper No. 2925. Proctor, R. (2011). The Blackberry Signal of Change: Understanding How to Predict and Manage Disruptive Innovation. Regalado, A. (2011). Smartphones, Tablets, and Wireless Data Plans are Already a Trillion-dollar Business. It’s Just the Beginning.MIT Technology Review. Vanek, C. (2012). Likert Scale – What is it? When to Use it? How to analyze it? Surveygizmo. Web, 24th Feb 2013. Read More