Marketing Myopia Blackberry - Term Paper Example

MARKETING MYOPIA –BLACKBERRY By Executive Summary Thereport is an in-depth analysis of marketing myopia and especially the mistakes that management in organisations make that come to claim the future of these firms. A number of companies have ceased operations due to the wrong decision that its management made that rendered them redundant or rather obsolete in their particular industries. The essay entirely focuses on RIM, the manufacturer of Blackberry smartphones by following a chronological elaboration of how the technological giant fell being a market leader in U.S.A. to a point that it is currently facing liquidation because it cannot continue to operate or meet its obligation. Marketing Myopia –Blackberry Introduction An organisation’s management is the team of employees who are entrusted by the stakeholders to come up with policies and decisions that will see the firm to achieve its objectives as well as adapt to any changes that are foreseen in the market environment. Marketing myopia is a common problem facing a number of organisations as the management fails to venture and analyse the larger perspective of their industry but rather concentrate on a single objective that ends up being redundant due to the dynamic nature of current markets. A company that is a market leader in an industry can be rendered redundant if its market approach does not rhyme with the current ramifications, forces, factors and shifting trends in the market (Soman and Marandi, 2010). The failure of organisations to define their objectives from the customers’ perspective makes them be more oriented to the products that they produce and with time they will eventually lose touch with the clients since they are not responding to their needs. Customer is always supreme in any business since the company is set to meet their needs. Marketing myopia occurs when organisations chose to be product-oriented rather than being customer-oriented to serve the needs of clients thus end up neglecting the opportunities that are present in their industry (“Harvard Business”, 2013). With time, different firms will seize the opportunity and through their aggression the previous companies will be rendered redundant since their products will no longer be appealing to the customers. The essay is going to elaborate of how management makes mistakes in choosing the objectives of their organisation and in particular it will deal with the case of Blackberry (Lee, 2013). Background to the Case Research in Motion (RIM) the firm that manufactures BlackBerry line of products was a renowned technology giant in America during its early years since it was the only firm that provided technological solutions to enterprises at that time. The organisation invested in research activities thus coming up with innovative products and services that made a technological jewel of the time. The instant email service that RIM came up with through its mobile email pager was widely acclaimed since people would send email messages instantly at the convenience of their palms (Allen et al., 2010). Previously, the company had a full perspective of its objectives it was a technology company that provided communication solutions not limited to email only. In 2002, the first launched its first smartphone the BlackBerry 5810, the device was warmly received in the market driving the market share of RIM to approximately 43% in the United States of America (Boone, 2012). Conversely, its market leadership was not meant to last for long since its executive implemented a myopic approach to designing the future strategy for the company. Five years later Apple launched the iPhone device and then Android smartphones came into the market. It marked a revolution in the communication sector since new solutions and technologies had been launched that sought to threaten the dominance of Blackberry in the market. The leaders at Blackberry were too contended with their market leadership and did not want to mitigate the threat that Apple and Google were presenting, to a market, they had dominated for long (Giachetti, 2013). Despite the strong brand loyalty that consumers had built with their products, they came up with various kinds of views urging the company to upgrade its products to offer similar or rival services to those of iPhone. However, the management acted to know it all and dismissed those views. They ignored the needs of the consumers forgetting the fact that business is primarily founded on the needs of the customers. The management myopia demonstrated by the management at RIM led to its steady decline in the industry; currently the company is inconsequential as it commands a mere 3% of the market (Sweeny, 2013). Marketing Myopia Theory and Literature Theodore Levitt is the pioneer of the marketing myopia ideology that has revolutionised the manner in which people think as far as management issue are concerned. It is no longer imperative to make short-sighted insights into business with the hope of expecting luck or nature to take its course concerning the success of your firm. According to Theodore marketing myopia, is when the management of a firm fails to listen or heed the needs of the consumers and rather takes a product oriented approach (Grant, 1999). The companies ignore what the customers want to stick to the products that they are offering in the market. Relatively, it occurs when the management confines the objectives of the organisation to a limited perspective instead of being open to leverage for any opportunity that may be present in the industry (Tiwari and Buse, 2007). For instance, a firm that is operating trains for transport should not limit its business objectives to trains and railroad rather it should target the larger transportation industry. In case of any dynamism that may tend to render trains obsolete the company will opt for other means of transportation since its goal is transportation in general. Similarly, is a firm is dealing with plastic bottles it should not entirely focus on those bottles alone but have a bigger picture of containers so as in the event plastic bottles are rendered redundant the organisation will still be in business (McNish, and Silcoff, 2015). The marketing myopia premise is founded on a number of elements some of which are going to be discussed as follows. An error of analysis is very common among many organisational executives since they perceive some industries to have more opportunities that the other. It is imperative for one to say that the oil industry is more viable that the rail industry since there are more opportunities in oil that in rail. That is utterly false; the point is the players in the oil industry are more creative and innovative to the point that they can come up with ideas that have ensured their firms remain competitive through the course of time (Livingston, 2008). If innovation and creativity was incorporated in the organisational strategies in the rail firms it is prudent that the industry would be still flourishing at this moment since it would have been able to weather any form of market dynamism that would have threatened its future. Self-deceiving cycle contributes to a large percent of market myopia since most of the industry players tend to believe that a growth industry will continue to grow as population increases thus making it more affluent. In essence the notion of a growth industry is not valid all industries at some point were growth industries and it takes the strategies of the players to propel the vigour of that particular industry by confronting substitute or competing goods (Ranchhod, Gauzente, & Tinson, 2004). Marketing Myopia from a Managerial Point of View RIM had previously positioned itself as a dynamic firm that was no tied to any particular product or service but provided all round technology solutions in the communications industry. The company did not limit itself as a provider of wireless solutions hence to be product oriented with instant email services only. In the wake of a revolution in the communication sector with the entry of iPhone and Android smartphones so many managerial lapses from the firm’s executive. To begin with the management made the error of analysis, they underrated the impact the other industry competitor would bring into the market given its dominance as it commanded almost half of the market (Tiwari and Buse, 2007). The failed to come up with strategies that would curb the increased competition from iPhone by upping its game but instead the retained status quo and RIM was beaten at its own game. Blackberry was the favourite brand among a significant percentage of the consumers in the American market since it blended technology with style to give customers appealing products that ensure convenient communication (Pringle and Field, 2008). Security was another feature that the company capitalised on since most corporates preferred its devices since they were assured of secure email communication as the technology implemented by RIM was the best in the market. The company had numerous opportunities to capitalise to counter any threats from its competitors, but its management chose to ignore the fact that RIM was under threat from the new market entrants (Mourdoukoutas, and Siomkos, 2009) Conversely, it was evident that the management at RIM opted for a product-oriented approach rather than listening to the needs of their clients to come up with more satisfying products. After the launch of its first touch smartphone Blackberry Storm, the device was not received well in the market given the standards that iPhone had earlier set in style, looks, and technology. RIM fashioned its device in a manner that it was not equipped with the popular apps that were common to the customers and at the same time it filed to captivate a number of functionalities that iPhone had come up with (Krum, 2009). Consumers were ready to hold on to their favourite brand by suggesting an inclusion some application and utilities to Blackberry phones to make them competitive enough to the iPhone that had seemed to revolutionise the market. Instead of taking heed of the needs of the consumers the management assumed they knew it all and ignored the feedback from their clients on upgrading their devices. The clients had to move with the market dynamism; thus they had no choice but switch to alternative brands that satisfied their needs. It is from this instance that a detachment between Blackberry and its consumers occurred (Livingston, 2008). The company maintained a hardliner stance on upgrading its devices according to consumers’ needs and, as a result, most of its loyal customers had to seek better methods elsewhere. Management Myopia at RIM is the crucial element that led to the obsolescence of a technological giant that once commanded the market by nearly 50%. Currently, Blackberry is an insignificant player in the communications industry since the percentage of market share that it commands is less than 3% thus depicting it as a dying brand. It is these ramifications that led to the company announcing to sell its assets and exit the market since it is no longer competitive and thus not financially viable to continue operating (Gow and Smith, 2006). Traditional Myopia The assertions of Theodore Levitt on usual prejudice are the ones that were resonated with the case of Blackberry. The management opted for a product-oriented approach instead of a customer –oriented approach whereby they would listen to the needs of the clients and align their operations into satisfying them. Had the management not ignored the needs of the customers they would have upgraded their devices according to the needs of the consumers and probably they would have been competitive players in the current market if not market leaders just as before (Levitt, 2008). The disjoint between user needs and managerial perspective is the primary reason that led to the obsolescence of Blackberry. It is imperative that it’s not their technology that was outdated but their failure to leverage from the opportunities that came with smartphone technology but instead choose to remain with their conventional technology. Apple’s iPhone is consequently successful because the firm implemented a customer–oriented perspective by making the needs of the consumers to be paramount to anything else (Hasen, 2012). Recommendation Managers should also design the objectives of their organisations in a manner that aligns them to the desires of their consumers since they are the core element of the firm. The customers’ needs should always be part of an organisation’s goals because it’s their mandate be to ensure the customers are satisfied or gets value for their money to ensure they maintain loyalty for the perpetual life of the business. Similarly, the strategies that organisations implement should not be focused on short term issues only but also address long-term objectives to ensure the company adopts contingency measures that will aid it during tough times. Management should adopt R&D for their organisations to enable them to keep abreast with the changing consumer tastes and preferences. Management must also realise that the “customer is the king” and their satisfaction is the key to creating customer loyalty and expanding the market share of the business. Ultimately, it is evident that marketing myopia is a necessary evil that requires management to remain focused by establishing concrete and SMART objectives to provide guidance in the execution of the company’s strategies. Thus, in their pursuit to deliver innovative and quality products, business and management should ensure that they do not lose their touch with the customers. References Allen, S., Graupera, V., & Lundrigan, L., 2010. Pro smartphone cross-platform development: iPhone, BlackBerry, Windows Mobile, and Android development and distribution. [New York, N.Y.], press. Boone, L. E., 2012. Contemporary marketing, 2013 update. [s.l.], Cengage learning custom. Giachetti, C., 2013. Competitive dynamics in the mobile phone industry. [Basingstoke], Palgrave Macmillan. Available at: http://www.palgraveconnect.com/doifinder/10.1057/9781137374127. Gow, G. A., & Smith, R., 2006. Mobile and wireless communications an introduction. Maidenhead, Open University Press. Grant, C., 1999. Theodore Levitts marketing myopia. Harvard Business Review Press. 2013. HBRs 10 must reads on strategic marketing. Hasen, J., 2012. Mobilized marketing how to drive sales, engagement, and loyalty through mobile marketing. Hoboken, N.J., Wiley. Available at: http://www.myilibrary.com?id=362042 [Accessed on 17 Apr. 15] Krum, C., 2009. Mobile marketing: finding your customers no matter where they are. Indianapolis, Ind, Que. Kurtz, D. L., & Boone, L. E., 2011. Contemporary business. Hoboken, N.J., Wiley. Lee, I., 2013. Strategy, adoption, and competitive advantage of mobile services in the global economy. Hershey, PA, Information Science Reference. Levitt, T., 2008. Marketing myopia. Boston, Mass, Harvard Business Press. Livingston, J., 2008. Founders at work stories of start-up are early days. Berkeley, Calif, press. McNish, J., & Silcoff, S., 2015. Losing the Signal The Untold Story Behind the Extraordinary Rise and Spectacular Fall of BlackBerry. Available at: http://www.contentreserve.com/TitleInfo.asp?ID={70A265DA-71EA-4A31-94AF-C73BE37330F2}&Format=410. [Accessed on 17 Apr. 15] Mourdoukoutas, P., & Siomkos, G. J., 2009. Seven Principles of WOM and Buzz Marketing. [S.l.], Springer Science & Business Media. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02109-1. [Accessed on 17 Apr. 15] Pringle, H., & Field, P., 2008. Brand immortality how brands can live long and prosper. London, Kogan Page. Retrieved from http://www.books24x7.com/marc.asp?bookid=31016. [Accessed on 17 Apr. 15] Ranchhod, A., Gauzente, C., & Tinson, J., 2004. Marketing strategies: a twenty-first century approach. Harlow, FT/Prentice Hall. Soman, D., & N-Marandi, S., 2010. Managing customer value: one stage at a time. Singapore, World Scientific Pub. Sweeny, A., 2013. Blackberry planet the story of research in motion and the little device that took the world by storm. Hoboken, N.J., Wiley. Sweeny, A., 2013. Blackberry planet the story of research in motion and the little device that took the world by storm. Hoboken, N.J., Wiley. Tiwari, R., & Buse, S., 2007. The mobile commerce prospects a strategic analysis of opportunities in the banking sector. Hamburg, Hamburg Univ. Press. Read More