{"id":17,"date":"2016-10-02T16:14:36","date_gmt":"2016-10-02T23:14:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/?p=17"},"modified":"2016-10-03T14:40:16","modified_gmt":"2016-10-03T21:40:16","slug":"growth-vs-sustainability","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/2016\/10\/02\/growth-vs-sustainability\/","title":{"rendered":"Growth vs. Sustainability"},"content":{"rendered":"

The world is more turbulent than ever; the productivity frontier is shifting outwards rapidly due to technological innovations. Consumer purchasing patterns are becoming more unpredictable. Hence, it has become difficult to for a firm to be customer-oriented; therefore, I feel businesses should shift towards variety-based positioning .[1]<\/a>
\nBusinesses adapt to changes to keep themselves relevant in the markets. Apple and Samsung are close rivals that end up using points of parity in the strife of positioning themselves equal or greater in value. Samsung has a product cycle that beats apple by a month\u00a0[2]<\/a> while apple launches products similar to Samsung (Apple watch).<\/p>\n

We understand why Nokia failed (it was stuck at that point) by looking at the pace consumers are adapting to newer technologies and constantly striving to get to latest innovations. More than 50% of IOS users installed IOS 10 in just 2 weeks of its initial launch\u00a0[3]<\/a>. However, Nokia lied inside the productivity frontier which did not utilize the resources in the most optimum way. It couldn\u2019t introduce new software\u00a0[4]<\/a> to support innovative hardware as it wrongly aimed for growth rather than sustainability. Samsung and Apple are always up to date with technology (hence close to each other on the frontier as well); close rivalry will mutually hurt them. Either of them would have to reallocate their resources to different direction of the frontier to sustain in the market.\"screen-shot-2016-10-02-at-3-24-12-pm\"<\/p>\n

Competition results into shorter life cycles of products. Apple\u2019s product life cycle is 1 year (with multiple transient\u00a0[1]<\/a> phases within the year). It also moves upwards on the frontier while delivering more value and operational effectiveness as it outsources most of its manufacturing. Moreover, shorter product life cycle increases the frequency of purchase due to high brand loyalty.<\/p>\n

\"screen-shot-2016-10-02-at-4-02-11-pm\"<\/p>\n

Apple could easily grow through lowering their prices that will flood their balance sheet with far exceeding revenues. However, trade-offs are purposely made in order to sustain in the market in the long term. Hence, they have to strategically limit what they offer in order to maintain the premium brand image. The transient advantage is strategically important and that advantage is measured through customer\u2019s perspective.<\/p>\n

Words: 447<\/strong><\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> McGrath, Rita Gunther. “Transient Advantage.” Harvard Business Review<\/em> (2013): 62-70. Web. 2 Oct. 2016.<\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> Porter, Michael E. “What Is Strategy?” Harvard Business Review<\/em> (1996): 61-78. University of British Columbia<\/em>. Web. 1 Oct. 2016.<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> Lee, Se Young. “Samsung Trips on Quality Control in Rush to Pip Apple.” Reuters<\/em>. Thomson Reuters, 06 Sept. 2016. Web. 02 Oct. 2016.<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> Campbell, Mikey. “Apple’s IOS 10 Now Running on More Devices than IOS 9.” AppleInsider<\/em>. N.p., 30 Sept. 2016. Web. 02 Oct. 2016.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> Surowiecki, James. “Where Nokia Went Wrong.” The New Yorker<\/em>. N.p., 2013. Web. 02 Oct. 2016.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The world is more turbulent than ever; the productivity frontier is shifting outwards rapidly due to technological innovations. Consumer purchasing patterns are becoming more unpredictable. Hence, it has become difficult to for a firm to be customer-oriented; therefore, I feel businesses should shift towards variety-based positioning .[1] Businesses adapt to changes to keep themselves relevant […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":42110,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/42110"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":26,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17\/revisions\/26"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/suprabheballary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}