“Making SMal Big: SMaL Camera Technologies” is an innovative product that made s
ID: 356677 • Letter: #
Question
“Making SMal Big: SMaL Camera Technologies” is an innovative product that made significant profits in the first year but then quickly was attacked by competitors. The evolution and technology of the product in detail. It ends with five different options for technological and business strategy, along with pros and cons of each strategy. SMaL Camera Technologies created a disruptive technology but made some bad decisions failing to get high revenues from commercializing its product: It did not build on internal marketing capabilities and also decided against in-house manufacturing and distribution. Startups must be managed very differently and their management has to make important choices in the first few years of operation that determines the firm’s direction. Though startups are at a disadvantage (resources, visibility and age) when it comes to commercializing disruptive technology, they also have significant advantages over larger and stronger firms, who rarely go disruptive and prefer market-pull strategies. They can maintain low visibility till they have all the resources, manufacturing and distribution facilities in place, then hit the market; first entering a niche market making less profits and then going mainstream.
QUESTIONS
1. How can dreams of annual revenues past $100 million by senior management hamper wise technological strategy decisions?
2. Are the SMaL camera units of technology easily copied?
3. Was it strategically wise to go to the CES show prematurely and show off the SMaL camera concept?
4. Is it a good strategy to have external marketing for the SMaL camera?
5. Is it a good strategy to have only external manufacturing of the SMaL camera?
Explanation / Answer
QUESTIONS
1. How can dreams of annual revenues past $100 million by senior management hamper wise technological strategy decisions?
The dream of annual revenues past $ 100 million can dilute its research-oriented approach to a market-oriented approach.
Secondly, The organization was focusing more energies and resources on branding and promotion without building their marketing capabilities.
Thirdly The commercialization and launch of the product were not well executed. The competitors jumped in before the company could start consolidating making revenues. The options offered by competitors had many new add-ons though was not as slim and small as the SMal but the technology was superior in terms of having better picture quality, flash etc.
2. Are the SMaL camera units of technology easily copied?
The SMal camera units were easily copied as many new competitors quickly entered the segment within one year of its launch in the market. SMal could not efficiently commercialize their product also due to lack of marketing capabilities. They were also late in giving the facilities which the competitors added to their products as the competitors had the advantage of copying, improving and adding new innovations. The second year could not generate the same revenues as the customers’ demands changed and the company could not adapt fast enough due to lack of manpower and resources.
3. Was it strategically wise to go to the CES show prematurely and show off the SMaL camera concept?
Going to the CES show was a bad decision as it got the competitors on a high alert and they immediately starting developing similar products. The option of maintaining a low visibility while they had consolidated their resources of manufacturing and distribution should have been followed. They should have done the market launch with full preparation and proper market research.
4. Is it a good strategy to have external marketing for the SMaL camera?
The strategy of having an external marketing setup did not go in favor of SMal camera as it was not good for their brand image. Further, the SMal had lost touch with the customer who wanted better facilities like a flash and better quality of the picture which was not possible with the current credit card size camera. There go to market approach lacked the facility to get customer, competitor and market feedback. The time lag to innovate and adapt was slow due to lack of feedback and resources.
5. Is it a good strategy to have only external manufacturing of the SMaL camera?
The idea of having only external manufacturing facility again created a negative for the organization as it was dependent on a third party for its supplies, the technology became vulnerable and accessible to the competitors, the external manufacturer cannot innovative and has time lags so new ideas could not be executed immediately.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.