The Differences of Entrepreneurial Activities between Different Industries - Essay Example

Comparative Analysis of the Entrepreneurial Journey By Introduction Ideally, entrepreneurship is starting business from scratch, and includes all aspects from idea conception to management of a business in the long-term. There are several factors that contribute to the entrepreneurship such as the ability to innovate, the ability to persevere, time management, efficient use of resources, good communication skills, exemplary interpersonal skills, ability to plan, as well as leadership skills, just to mention a few. Large businesses start from a very humble beginning to international corporations. The essay is a comparative analysis of two businesses, The Body Shop, and Dyson, which were started by outstanding entrepreneurs. Specifically, the essay addresses entrepreneurial journeys of these two companies, by comparing and contrasting various aspects of entrepreneurship. In a larger picture, the companies’ business models from the start up to where they are now will be discussed in finer details. The two companies belong to different industries, which mean that the essay adds on to the existing knowledge of the differences of entrepreneurial activities between different industries. Dyson Company background Information Dyson Limited is a British based technology firm that designs and manufactures hand dryers, vacuum cleaners, heaters, and bladeless fans, among other products. The company sells products in more than seventy countries across the world, and was founded in 1993, by James Dyson, an entrepreneur who believes in failures. The company is headquartered at Malmesbury, England, in the United Kingdom, and operates as a private company (Nicolas & Simmonds 2012). It belongs to the technology industry. In 1971, James Dyson experienced several problems with the use of conventional wheelbarrow he used to renovate his premises. During his day to day activities, he realized that when the wheels got stuck in the mud, the wheelbarrow became unstable, and was prone to breakdowns. The steel body damaged paint work, which became covered with cement. These problems made Dyson to think about improvements, and by 1974, he had a fiberglass prototype of a wheelbarrow instead of using a wheel. This is when the ball barrow was born (Gammack et al. 2013). Later on, he bought a Hoover Junior vacuum cleaner, but while using it, he discovered that the vacuum clogged quickly. Due to his frustrations, he emptied the bag to restore the sanction, but he did not recognize any effect. He opened the bag to investigate and found that dust accumulated inside, and clogged the fine material mesh, preventing the device to work efficiently. He decoded to develop a better vacuum cleaner (Dyson et al 2013). These are just examples of the many innovations, Dyson initiated before establishing his own brand. Between 1979 and 1984, Dyson came up with more than five thousand prototype designs, with the first design being a vacuum cleaner, which was blue and red in color. The machine brought him little success since he struggled to obtain a licensee for his device in the United Kingdom and America. Companies like Hoover never wanted to license the design, for the reason that the vacuum bag would cost up to $500 million, thus Dyson was a big threat to their earning powers (McLenna et al 2012). In 1983, Apex, a Japanese firm licensed the design. Using the income from Japanese licensing, Dyson established the Dyson Company, with a research center and factory in Wilshire, England. By June 1993, he had started producing dual cyclone vacuum cleaners that were selling at $200 (Dyson 2012). His first cleaner was named DC01, and became the bestselling in the United Kingdom for a period of one and half years. By 2009, Dyson Company had produced air-powered vacuum cleaners, and other products such as Dyson Hot, bladeless fan heater, and Air Multiplier, just to mention a few. The company has opened several production plants overseas, with its first oversea production site being operated in Malaysia (Scott & Thompson 20110. Body Shop Background Information The Body Shop International is England-based Corporation. It is headquartered at Little Hampton, West Sussex, and was established in 1976. The company sells more than 1,200 cosmetic and beauty products, and was founded by Annita Roddick, a famous entrepreneur, but now it is part-owned by L’Oreal. In 1970, Annita visited The Body Shop that was housed in a garage in Berkeley, California. The Body Shop sold lotions and scented soaps, and was run by two partners who helped immigrant women to know how to make beauty products by use of natural ingredients (Zadek et al 2013). Six years later, Annita Roddick set up a similar shop in the United Kingdom, with the same name, color scheme and cosmetic products. In 1978, Roddick offered the Body Shop partners $3.5 million to adapt another name, Body Time. By 1992, the process of rebranding the initial Body Shop was finalized. Since 1976, the Body shop expanded rapidly, with a growth rate of 50% per annum 9Carroll & Buchholtz 2014). The Body Shop now operates in different countries such as Philippines, Mexico, Korea, Indonesia, Thailand, Luxembourg, and Taiwan, among others. Roddick actively participated in solving societal problems such as women stereotyping. In late 1980s, the company organized environmental and social campaigns aimed at inspiring women, and as a way of promoting the business. The company’s code of ethics prohibits testing cosmetics on animals 9Jensen et al 2011). Comparing the two businesses Business Models that led to establishment of the two shops are quite different, but shares one thing in common, that they were not original ideas of the pioneers. The Body Shop was a copy of a business that already existed in California; as well Dyson used existing prototypes to produce innovative products (Holt 2011). This is to say that the ideas were not original, but the way they were put into use differs from the original forms. Simply put, Dyson and Roddick ideas were to innovate what is already existing, which is one core characteristic of a successful entrepreneur. According to (Edwardson 2011) an entrepreneur must be innovative by coming up with different ways of doing things. However, an entrepreneur is a problem solver. These were the key concepts that guided the two founders to establish their businesses. Dyson observed the defects that machines like Hoover Junior had, and decided to come up with better devices. Moreover, Roddick observed how The Body Shop operated in California, and decided to bring the same idea in the United Kingdom. Though she copied the idea, she implemented it in an emerging market, other than in California, the home country of The Body Shop. However, the Body Shop developed more advanced products, which were different from the ones that were offered by the original Body Shop (Du et al 2010). This is to say that, both Dyson and The Body Shop were founded by innovative entrepreneurs. Dyson and Roddick were both social entrepreneurs. Corporate social responsibility is one of the most important aspects in entrepreneurship, and dictates how a business is going to fit in the society. If a business exercises corporate social responsibility, it is likely to grow faster than one that does not (Du et al 2010). Both Dyson and The Body Shop exercised social corporate responsibility in their early stages. Roddick actively participated in campaigns that were aimed at conserving the environment. In fact, in 1990, she joined the Demos Think Tank Advisory Council whose members addressed environmental issues such as pollution, and the use of green ways of production. In 1990, she also founded a child organization known as Children on the Edge. This came after she visited Romanian orphanages where she observed the sufferings orphans encountered. COTE was established with an objective of housing children who were affected by conflict, disabilities, HIV/AIDS, and natural disasters. In 2005, Roddick gave out to the society an equivalent amount of $104 million (Crittenden et al 2011). Just like Roddick, Dyson actively took part in solving societal problems. As part of his entrepreneurial journey, Dyson established an award program named The James Dyson Award, and Foundation. This program is aimed at encouraging the next generation of designer engineers to be creative and successful. It is an international program, and runs in 18 countries. Members of the Foundation often visit schools and universities providing workshops to students as a way of encouraging them to pursue engineering. Both Dyson Limited and The Body Shop faced controversies as they struggled to build their brands. After several years of establishing The Body Shop, Jon Entine, the co-owner of The Body Shop based in California, noted that Roddick had copied everything about the shop. Roddick’s brochures were even similar to that of Jon’s. This was unethical according to human rights activists. It became very hard for Roddick to expand her operations to America, but to end this controversy; she signed confidentiality agreement with original shop owners (Crittenden et al 2011). The two parties solved the matter, and the original shop was renamed, Body Time. Similarly, Dyson faced criticism about the use of prototypes. When Dyson invented bagless vacuum, he was laughed at, and no local company was willing to manufacture his designs. However, the technology was recognized by a Japanese company, which motivated Dyson to fly abroad and sign a contract. When they signed the contract, the company went ahead and manufactured the vacuum without him. They later sued Dyson for fraud. Dyson and Roddick struggled a lot to obtain the rights to do business. Obtaining intellectual property rights by the two was not an easy move, it involved lawsuits. Differences in their Entrepreneurial journeys The fact that Dyson Limited operates in a completely different industry from The Body Shop means that the businesses encountered different challenges during their start-ups. Dyson operates in the technology industry while The Body Shop operates in cosmetics industry. Challenges that engineers encounter during their day to day activities are completely different from what beauty therapists encounter. Dyson Limited needed a lot of capital to establish, unlike The Body Shop that only needed a place to set up because it was already being operated in California. Dyson struggled a lot to develop a machine that could be produced by local manufacturers. Dyson’s idea could not be turned into a business without adequate financing. Roddick’s idea was already a business, and could start small by use of local ingredients. This saw Dyson travel a lot to seek a person who could believe his technology (Du et al 2010). Dyson had background knowledge of his business as opposed to Roddick who only copied what others did. Dyson had attended Royal College of Arts where he had shown exemplary performance. Roddick on the other hand started a shop after travelling to California and saw how The Body Shop operated there. It is from her visit when she realized that she can change the cosmetic industry by coming up with products that are healthy. In fact, Roddick never liked cosmetic industry before she opened a shop because most businesses used false adverts to convince people to buy their products. On the other hand, Dyson was passionate from the beginning when he was studying at Royal College of Arts. Dyson Limited and The Body Shop business models were not similar from the start. Dyson business model was to always come up with something new that could be used to address the existing challenges. Simply put, the company was founded on innovative business model that aimed at addressing challenges in the technology industry. On the other hand, The Body Shop is built on ethical consumerism. One of the controversies that led to establishment of The Body Shop in the U.K is the use of ingredients that were tested on animals. This upset Anita Roddick who was strongly opposed to the idea of animal testing. The Body Shop became the first company to prohibit the use of such ingredients. Up to date, The Body Shop values ethics by using products that are not harmful to the overall health of human beings. Roddick strongly opposed misleading advertisements that made people purchase poor quality products advertised as high-end products. Simply put, Dyson and Roddick had differently philosophies of success, the former emphasized on innovation while the latter emphasized on ethical behavior. The objectives of establishing the two ventures were completely different. Roddick first set up The Body Shop in 1976 with the sole aim of making extra income for herself and her family while her husband was working in South America. She had the idea of providing high quality skin care merchandises in refillable containers, all advertised with true depiction of the product’s properties rather than hysteria. This saw receive the 1991 World Vision Award for Development. On the other hand, Dyson formed the company to address the challenges he was facing at home. While working at home, Dyson discovered that the tools he worked with did not function as he intended. This led him to do research on how he can develop better tools that could be operated effectively. From the above observation, it can be noted that Dyson and The Body Shop have several things in common with regards to their entrepreneurial journeys. Both companies started small, but have now grown to corporations operating in more than 50 countries. Dyson and Roddick, the founders of the companies, are world-known entrepreneurs for their outstanding performance. It is worth noting that the two businesses operate in different industries meaning that they face different challenges, and were established with different goals in mind. However, there are challenges that are similar to all entrepreneurs regardless of the industry of operation. This is to say that both Dyson and The Body Shop experienced challenges like; lack of adequate financing during start-ups, competition, lawsuits, and difficulties in establishing brand loyalty. Bibliography Carroll, A., and Buchholtz, A. 2014. Business and society: Ethics, sustainability, and stakeholder management. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. Crittenden, V. L., Crittenden, W. F., Ferrell, L. K., Ferrell, O. C., and Pinney, C. C. 2011. ‘Market-oriented sustainability: a conceptual framework and propositions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 71-85. Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., and Sen, S. 2010. Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8-19. Dyson, F. J. 2012. Is science mostly driven by ideas or by tools? Science, 338(6113), 1426-1427. Dyson, J., and Brough, I. J. 2013. U.S. Patent No. 8,469,660’, Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Edvardsson, B. 2011. The service excellence and innovation model: Lessons from IKEA and other service frontiers; Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 22(5), 535-551. Gammack, P. D., Dyson, J., Smith, A. G., Brough, I. J., Teyu, M. S., and Salleh, N. M. 2013. U.S. Patent No. 8,454,322. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Jensen, T., and Sandström, J. 2011. Stakeholder theory and globalization: the challenges of power and responsibility. Organization Studies, 32(4), 473-488. Holt, D. 2011. Where are they now? Tracking the longitudinal evolution of environmental businesses from the 1990s. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(4), 238-250. McLennan, R., Dyson, L., Prather, K. W., Morrison, J. A., Baker, R. E., Maini, P. K., and Kulesa, P. M. 2012. Multiscale mechanisms of cell migration during development: theory and experiment. Development, 139(16), 2935-2944. Nicolas, F., and Simmonds, K. J. 2012. U.S. Patent No. 8,092,166. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Scott, C., Lundgren, H., and Thompson, P. 2011. Guide to supply chain management. New York, NY: Springer. Zadek, S., Evans, R., and Pruzan, P. (Eds.). 2013. Building Corporate Accountability: Emerging Practice in Social and Ethical Accounting and Auditing. London: Routledge. Read More