In capitalism, competition is very high, and only the most efficient firms that innovate themselves regularly stay in the market. This article is an example of a firm that fell complacent and tried to survive on its past achievements. Eventually there came a time when it was no longer competitive in the market and had to file for bankruptcy.
4 comments:
I agree with your assessment that the firm became too complacent and reliant on its position that it prevented itself from adapting before it was too late. That is the problem some successful firms have because they don't anticipate market demands changing, which is a problem in the photo industry because of the rapid developments that have occurred in the last decade. It would be interesting to see how Kodak would have done, and how the market would have shifted, if they had introduced their digital camera in 1976 or 77.
Do you think if a firm is extremely ahead of their competition that they can stay competitive without innovation?
I don't think any firm can stay ahead without innovation...especially not in today's world.
Kodak never really wanted to develop a presence in the world of new technologies. Instead, it focused on high-end cameras for niche markets, and when George Eastman died, Kodak became very nostalgic, which prevented the company from moving forward.
Kodak is one of my favorite digital brands because I still use film camera most of the time. But most of people don't currently. It is kind of sarcastic that Kodak is actually the first firm invented digital filming, while it decided to hold it because it was afraid that the new technology will jeopardize its leading status at that time.
Post a Comment