Reevaluating Kodak’s Strategy
In terms of responding to the post on strategic errors made by Kodak since 1990, I tend to disagree with the student’s argument that this company paid much attention to boost the future of the shrinking film industry rather than identifying innovative changes.
In my opinion, I think Kodak was right when it applied a resource-based view approach to ensure that it utilizes available opportunity to save the shrinking future of the film market.
It is imperative to note that a company cannot employ innovative changes without having clearly defined strategy on its future performance (Hill & Jones 2012, p. 382). Therefore, I advocate that this was not an error and instead, Kodak was on the right track as opposed to the argument presented in the post.
In addition, despite the fact that the company missed a chance to be the first one to enter digital imaging market, it does not necessarily indicate that it lacked a competitive advantage amidst other film companies.
It is notable that there are film companies that could be leading in the digital market especially due to innovation but fail to succeed especially if the internal environment is not conducive. Contrastingly, industries which consider their market-based view to evaluate the external and internal environment of the business are likely to take off quite easily (Thompson et al 2012, p. 53).
Secondly, in as much as innovation is important as the student notes in the post, marketability of film products cannot be excluded since it can boost the performance of company in spite of minimal innovation (Thompson et al 2012, p. 53). Nevertheless, I agree with the student’s argument that innovative changes are essential since they enable a company to produce topnotch services to clients (Barney 2001, p. 44).
For this reason, I concur with the opinion that failure by Kodak to adopt digital technology in 1990s led to the emergence of other film industries that slowly took its position.
Therefore, despite the fact that Kodak has maintained its competitive advantage, other upcoming film companies have dominated the market and consequently low returns for Kodak.
Comments on the alternative strategic moves which Kodak could have made since 1990 to produce better outcomes for its stakeholders
It is definite that information provided by this post is a clear indicator that the main goal in an organization is to increase the profitability and better outcomes that will benefit the shareholders. Previous studies have revealed that there are strategies that can be applied in order boost share prices.
I tend to disagree with the student’s argument presented in this post that Kodak should abandon its profitable traditional business and embrace the digital one. In my opinion, I suggest that the company should incorporate both traditional and digital platform since it might take time before customers get used to the new changes.
Huang (2011, p.173) notes that changes should be effected gradually. Nevertheless, gradual elimination of ancient technology for modern one could be a vital strategic move for the company. In this case, I support the argument that highlights that technological diversification would finally save the company from being bankrupt and boost its potential to expand its sales.
Additionally, I own up the suggestion presented by the student that Kodak should gradually sell off the ancient business imaging, a factor that will save it from high operational cost. This will also enable the company to reshape and release its digital products to numerous niche markets and hence eliminate its historical competitors.
References
Barney, J.B 2001, ‘Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes.’ The Academy of Management Review, vol. 26 no. 1, pp. 41-55.
Hill, G & Jones, G 2012, Strategic Management: An Integrated Approach, Cengage Learning, Mason, USA.
Huang, K. 2011, ‘Technology competencies in competitive environment.’ Journal of Business Research, vol.64 no. 2, pp. 172-179.
Thompson, A. et al 2012, Crafting and Executing Strategy, McGraw-Hill Companies Inc, New York.