apple after steve jobs

8/4/2019 Apple After Steve Jobs

1/14

Apple after Steve Jobs

Submitted To Submitted By

Prof. Shreeniwas V Bidwai Khushboo KumariIBS Mumbai 10bsp0698 (Sec-A)


2/14

Business Strategies followed by Apple

1. Product DifferentiationApple prides itself on its innovation. When reviewing the history of Apple, it is

evident that this attitude permeated the company during its peaks of success. For

instance, Apple pioneered the PDA market by introducing the Newton in 1993.

Later, Apple introduced the easy-to-use iMac in 1998, and updates following 1998.

It released a highly stable operating system in 1999, and updates following 1999.

Apple had one of its critical points in history in 1999 when it introduced the

iBook. This completed their product matrix, a simplified product mix strategy

formulated by Jobs. This move allowed Apple to have a desktop and a portable

computer in both the professional and the consumer segments. The matrix is as

follows:

Professional

Segment

Consumer Segment

Desktop G3 iMac

Portable PowerBook iBook

In 2001, Apple hit another important historical point by launching iTunes. This

marked the beginning of Apples new strategy of making the Mac the hub for the

digital lifestyle. Apple then opened its own stores, in spite of protests by

independent Apple retailers voicing cannibalization concerns. Then Appleintroduced the iPod, central to the digital lifestyle strategy. Philip W. Schiller,

VP of Worldwide Product Marketing for Apple, stated, iPod is going to change

the way people listen to music. He was right.


3/14

Apple continued their innovative streak with advancements in flat-panel LCDs for

desktops in 2002 and improved notebooks in 2003. In 2003, Apple released the

iLife package, containing improved versions of iDVD, iMovie, iPhoto, and iTunes.

In reference to Apples recent advancements, Jobs said, We are going to do for

digital creation what Microsoft did for the office suite productivity. That is indeed

a bold statement. Time will tell whether that happens.

Apple continued its digital lifestyle strategy by launching iTunes Music Store

online in 2003, obtaining cooperation from The Big 5 Music companiesBMG,

EMI, Sony Entertainment, Universal, Warner. This allowed iTunes Music Store

online to offer over 200,000 songs at introduction. In 2003, Apple released the

worlds fastest PC (Mac G5), which had dual 2.0GHz PowerPC G5 processors.

Product differentiation is a viable strategy, especially if the company exploits the

conceptual distinctions for product differentiation. Those that are relevant to

Apple are product features, product mix, links with other firms, and reputation.

Apple established a reputation as an innovator by offering an array of easy-to-use

products that cover a broad range of segments. However, its links with other firms

have been limited, as we will discuss in the next section on strategic alliances.

There is economic value in product differentiation, especially in the case of

monopolistic competition. The primary economic value of product differentiation

comes from reducing environmental threats. The cost of product differentiation

acts as a barrier to entry, thus reducing the threat of new entrants. Not only does acompany have to bear the cost of standard business, it also must bear the costs

associated with overcoming the differentiation inherent in the incumbent. Since

companies pursue niche markets, there is a reduced threat of rivalry among

industry competitors.


4/14

A companys differentiated product will appear more attractive relative to

substitutes, thus reducing the threat of substitutes. If suppliers increase their

prices, a company with a differentiated product can pass that cost to its customers,

thus reducing the threat of suppliers. Since a company with a differentiated

product competes as a quasi-monopoly in its market segment, there is a reduced

threat of buyers. With all of Porters Five Forces lower, a company may see

economic value from a product differentiation strategy.

A company attempts to make its strategy a sustained competitive advantage. For

this to occur, a product differentiation strategy that is economically valuable must

also be rare, difficult to imitate, and the company must have the organization to

exploit this. If there are fewer firms differentiating than the number required for

perfect competition dynamics, the strategy is rare. If there is no direct, easy

duplication and there are no easy substitutes, the strategy is difficult to imitate.

There are four primary organizing dilemmas when considering product

differentiation as a strategy. They are as depicted below.

resolve these dilemmas, there must be an appropriate organization structure. A U-

Form organization resolves the inter-functional collaboration dilemma if there are


5/14

product development and product management teams. Combining the old with the

new resolves the connection to the past dilemma. Having a policy of

experimentation and a tolerance for failure resolves the commitment to market

vision dilemma. Managerial freedom within broad decision-making guidelines

will resolve the institutional control dilemma.

2.Leadership roles

It will facilitate the innovation process: Institutional Leader, Critic, Entrepreneur,

Sponsor, and Mentor. The institutional leader creates the organizational

infrastructure necessary for innovation. This role also resolves disputes,

particularly among the other leaders. The critic challenges investments, goals, and

progress. The entrepreneur manages the innovative unit(s). The sponsor

procures, advocates, and champions. The mentor coaches, counsels, and advises.

Apple had issues within its organization. In 1997, when Apple was seeking a CEO

acceptable to Jobs, Jean-Louis Gasse (then-CEO of Be, ex-Products President at

Apple) commented, Right now the job is so difficult, it would require a bisexual,

blond Japanese who is 25 years old and has 15 years experience! Charles

Haggerty, then-CEO of Western Digital, said, Apple is a company that still has

opportunity written all over it. But youd need to recruit God to get it done.

Michael Murphy, then-editor of California Technology Stock Letter, stated,

Apple desperately needs a great day-to-day manager, visionary, leader and

politician. The only person whos qualified to run this company was crucified

2,000 years ago.

Since Jobs took over as CEO in 1997, Apple seems to have resolved the innovation

dilemmas, evidenced by their numerous innovations. To continue a product


6/14

differentiation strategy, Apple must continue its appropriate management of

innovation dilemmas and maintain the five leadership roles that facilitate the

innovation process.

3. Strategic AlliancesApple has a history of shunning strategic alliances. On June 25, 1985, Bill Gates

sent a memo to John Sculley (then-CEO of Apple) and Jean-Louis Gasse (then-

Products President). Gates recommended that Apple license Macintosh technology

to 3-5 significant manufacturers, listing companies and contacts such as AT&T,

DEC, Texas Instruments, Hewlett-Packard, Xerox, and Motorola. (Linzmayer,245-8) After not receiving a response, Gates wrote another memo on July 29,

naming three other companies and stating, I want to help in any way I can with

the licensing. Please give me a call. In 1987, Sculley refused to sign licensing

contracts with Apollo Computer. He felt that up-and-coming rival Sun

Microsystems would overtake Apollo Computer, which did happen.

Then, Sculley and Michael Spindler (COO) partnered Apple with IBM and

Motorola on the PowerPC chip. Sculley and Spindler were hoping IBM would buy

Apple and put them in charge of the PC business. That never came to fruition,

because Apple (with Spindler as the CEO) seemed contradictory and was

extraordinarily difficult in business dealings. Apple turned the corner in 1993.

Spindler begrudgingly licensed the Mac to Power Computing in 1993 and to

Radius (who made Mac monitors) in 1995. However, Spindler nixed Gateway in1995 due to cannibalization fears. Gil Amelio, an avid supporter of licensing, took

over as CEO in 1996. Under Amelio, Apple licensed to Motorola and IBM. In

1996, Apple announced the $427 million purchase of NeXT Software, marking the


7/14

return of Steve Jobs. Amelio suddenly resigned in 1997, and the stage was set for

Jobs to resume power.

Jobs despised licensing, calling cloners leeches. He pulled the plug, essentially

killing its largest licensee (Power Computing). Apple subsequently acquired

Power Computings customer database, Mac OS license, and key employees for

$100 million of Apple stock and $10 million to cover debt and closing costs. The

business was worth $400 million.

A massive reversal occurred in 1997 and 1998. In 1997, Jobs overhauled the board

of directors and then entered Apple into patent cross-licensing and technologyagreements with Microsoft. In 1998, Jobs stated that Apples strategy is to focus

all of our software development resources on extending the Macintosh operating

system. To realize our ambitious plans we must focus all of our efforts in one

direction. This statement was in the wake of Apple divesting significant software

holdings (Claris/FileMaker and Newton).

There is economic value in strategic alliances. In the case of Apple, there was the

opportunity to manage risk and share costs facilitate tacit collusion , and manage

uncertainty. It would have been applicable to the industries in which Apple

operated. Tacit collusion is a valid source of economic value in network

industries, which the computer industry is. Managing uncertainty, managing risk,

and sharing costs are sources of economic value in any industry. Although Apple

eventually realized the economic value of strategic alliances, it should haveoccurred earlier.


8/14

What next for Apple after Steve Jobs' resignation?

"Steve Jobs had an artist's eye as well as a definition of what great engineering is,"

Eric Schmidt, the chairman of Google, said in his keynote speech at the EdinburghTelevision Festival on Friday.

Steve Jobs unveils the new iPhone 4 in June, 2010 Photo: PAUL SAKUMA

If Apple's arch enemy is paying tribute to the company's departing chief executive

in this way, his replacement, Tim Cook, could be forgiven for feeling daunted

about the challenge which lies ahead of him.

Cook may be well-versed in the company he now finds himself in charge of, but as

Apple vies with Exxon Mobil to be the biggest company in the world, it feels as

though it has reached something like corporate maturity. And companies at the topof the pile have only one way to fall.

That's not to say Jobs' exit marks the start of an immediate descent. Far from it.

Cook is a skilled operational leader while Jobs, widely recognised as the creative


9/14

force of Apple, will continue to make his presence felt in his new role as chairman

for which he has volunteered himself.

The markets clearly have faith in the new set-up, together with the world-beating

team of senior managers that they have gathered around them. However, Cook

must keep sharply focused on Apple's life blood its relentless conveyor belt of

innovation if he is not to oversee the slow demise of the most successful

technology company in the world.

Apple's success in the past decade has been defined by a succession of hyper-

designed, game-changing gadgets that consumers never really knew they neededuntil they were launched and became indispensable.

Jobs had instinctive faith in Apple's new products he eschewed market testing

but that is a rare skill. Among the many tributes to Jobs' legacy this week, rivals

have told how they underestimated Apple innovations.

Dan Hesse, the chief executive of Sprint Nextel who was a director on the iPhone

board when it launched in 2007, said: "Everyone underestimated how incredibly

successful it would be. We took the iPhone seriously, but we were much more

concerned with RIM [the maker of BlackBerry."

Nick James, at Numis Securities, agrees. "It's never been easy to guess where

Apple might go next, even though within 12 months of launching a new product, it

is hard to imagine it could ever have been any other way," he said. "Apple doesn'tso much create new markets as change the way we do everything."

Its products rebalance and in some cases redefine entire industries. Apple may be a

technology company first and foremost, but in the past decade it has arguably been


10/14

the single most dominant force in each of the music, telecoms and print media

businesses.

It does this not through introducing brand new inventions, but by perfecting

existing ideas. Microsoft had been playing around with tablets for years before the

iPad launch, but they had never taken off until Apple's sleek version. However, the

company's pitch-perfect aesthetic should not be allowed to overshadow the rapidity

with which Apple has kept these new products coming to market and the speed

with which they have entirely restructured its revenues.

In 2008, Apple achieved nearly half of its income from sales of Mac desktops andlaptops and around a quarter from the iPod. The iPhone had been in existence for a

year but barely registered 6pc. Fast forward to Apple's most recent results,

covering the three months to June 25, and iPhones accounted for half of Apple's

revenues with iPods contributing just over 6pc.

It's a dizzying recalibration, and one that works just fine if Apple can keep on

coming up with those game-changing ideas.

Apple has not given any indication of what it will tackle next, but speculation is

rife that it will take on the television.

"Apple likes to sell a global product, but television is traditionally quite

fragmented in the way it is delivered," James said. "If Apple goes all the way down

the route of the video distribution model, there is a real threat of it effectivelydisrupting the business models of stalwarts like Sky." But just imagine if Apple

hadn't come up with that iPhone, or if it had been out-smarted by a sleeker, faster

competitor? What sort of decline would Apple be seeing then? Or, rather more

pressingly, if Cook's team does not keep delivering products that are of the same


11/14

level of success as consumers have come to expect from Apple, what sort of

decline could happen when the two-year pipeline that Steve Jobs left in place starts

to run dry?

Unfortunately for Apple, Jobs' resignation has come at a critical time for the

company. It has been used to out-running traditional hardware behemoths but now

it is standing on the edge of an altogether different sort of battlefield.

Google, a new-generation tech giant with ambitions and scope on the same scale as

Apple's, has decided to move into hardware. Its $12.5bn (7.6bn) deal to acquire

Motorola Mobility, the mobile phone maker, signals its intention to take Apple onat its own game. It wants its Android operating system to dominate smartphones

(and, almost certainly, other spheres as well) at the expense of the iOS in iPhones,

and Motorola's war-chest of patents give it the legal might to protect Android's

customers.

It is already gaining ground. In the second quarter of 2011, the Android operating

system was installed in 43pc of all smartphones shipped, compared with 18pc from

iOS.

Meanwhile early Apple loyalists, many of whom once loved its underdog status,

have started to rebel against its dictatorial approach. The new underdog, Android,

is improving with each iteration allowing users more freedom and, as with Apple,

so turning many of them into evangelists.

However, Crispin Reed, managing director of Brandhouse, a branding agency,

said: "Although Apple's products are exciting and somewhat intoxicating, some

believe that its technology and software isn't as sharp as it used to be."


12/14

But while Google is arguably the most pressing threat to Apple's domination, it is

far from the only one. The new hardware start-ups in Silicon Valley have grown up

with Apple kit and understand the importance of aesthetic design and apparent (if

not actual) simplicity.

Companies that are unknown, or that are still a project in a teenager's bedroom,

will develop with that model and endgame in their sights, and as is well

established, technology companies have a tendency to go from 0-100mph very

rapidly.

Other threats comes from the Far East, where manufacturers such as China'spithily-named Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC) or

the mobile phone business Huawei are starting to move away from designing and

producing goods for others, and towards a model where they do it for themselves.

They already have the expertise and the facilities. What is more, many make goods

for Apple, giving them the potential to inconvenience their would-be competitor.

They couldn't easily pull the plugin his position as chief operating officer, one of

Cook's most far-sighted achievements was to tie up a series of exclusive contracts

with its suppliersbut Apple is going to feel the pressure. And it can only sustain

the reported 62pc margin on its iPhones if it is the only place where customers can

get their hands on the goods. The growth of Chinese competitors could also put a

dent in Apple's plans for China to play a starring role in its future growth. In the

three months to June 25 it turned over $3.8bn in "Greater China" China, Hong

Kong and Taiwan something Cook described as "just scratching the surface" of

the opportunity he sees there.


13/14

But perhaps it's a red herring to focus on ways that Apple can keep on growing. It

is true that its goal to date has been to expand in size and scope, but Jobs'

resignation could signal a new phase in its evolution one more defined by focus

and profitability than in the past.

On Wall Street, some Apple-watchers have started to suggest that the company

would be better placed to manage the next stage of its growth path if it were to split

in two. One part could house the hardware business, producing the gleaming

gadgets which have made Apple so beloved by consumers. Meanwhile the much

faster growing iCloud and iOS businesses could be spun out into a software

company. According to US reports, some analysts believe the latter businesses,

which are just three years old, could already be worth more than Apple's current

market capitalisation of $346bn. Separating the two units out would help Apple to

play to their strengths and manage their growth strategies accordingly.

In the meantime, it also has to think of what to do with the $51bn cash on its

balance sheet.

Simon Clements, global equity fund manager at Aviva Investors, says the "upside"

of Jobs' resignation could be the softening of the Apple's board policy on returning

cash to investors. "Given Jobs remains chairman, that is unlikely in the short term,

but the return of cash to shareholders is a very interesting possibility in the future.

From a valuation perspective Apple remains very attractive," he says.

The alternative to returning that cash to investors would be some sizable

acquisitions. While its Silicon Valley competitors have been busy hoovering up

other companies, Apple has been pretty restrained for a company of its magnitude.


14/14

According to Bloomberg data, Apple invested just $1bn in new companies in the

past decade, compared with an average of $15bn by each of its largest US rivals.

If Google is spending $12.5bn on a strategic shift in direction, and hardware giant

Hewlett-Packard is paying nearly that amount for Autonomy, the UK company

based around cloud, Apple will be under pressure to put its money to work.

As it knows only too well, in the world of technology and stoking consumer desire,

no company, however large, can afford to stand still for a moment, and Apple's

war-chest may be Cook's trump card to help it sustain its momentum.

"They're sitting on a cash pile," says Arvind Malhotra, an associate professor at the

University of North Carolina, and an expert on Apple's strategy. "[Jobs] always

grew from within. If [the] lack of his vision and availability of his position causes

the future pipeline not to be there, that's when the acquisition model comes into

play."

apple after steve jobs

Documents