Case analysis

Disruptive innovation
Introduction
The disruptive innovation theory, introduced in 1995, has definite to be a strong way
of thinking about innovation-based growth. A lot of small business owners, projects
praise it as a guiding star, and so do a lot of executives, good companies including
Intel, etc.

Unfortunately, the imbalance theory is in risk of becoming a victim of its success.

1) Innovators dilemma

Innovator's Dilemma is the one of most important books explaining innovation place,
and addressing reasons of market leaders that fails to capture the next generation of
innovation in their industry objectives.

The dilemma happens when a company that was originally a leader of the market
competes with an annoying competitor. It is very difficult to justify your cannibals to
your board, investors, and yourself. It is also sometimes difficult for team leaders and
organizations that do not have an external perspective to be realized when they are
disrupted.

2) Reasons of failure of big companies

The common reason for why big companies fail is the good management. Decision
making is another reason that it should be taken in consideration and resources that
processes that refuse disruptive technologies, understanding customers; watching
competitor's movements carefully; as well as investing resources to build high
performance, high quality items that will create big profit to companies. These points
are the reasons that explained why do big companies failed when facing the change of
disruptive technology. Below listed the reasons of failure of big companies:

Lack of Planning
Businessmen usually start with small businesses that focus on a service they realize
and like, and many people feel tips for writing a detailed business plan, where they
consider their passion and creativity which is the most demanded. But action plans are
not like busy classroom work. The Business Plan helps entrepreneurs to recognize the
market, how well they fit, way of competition, and how many customers need
success. Business plans illustrate the relationships between values, and all the basic
information of a businessman.

Insufficient Funding
It is a formal term, but Jay Goltz, a small business team leader, has simple words for
reason of small businesses failure: no cash defend. As Goltz notes, the economy
works in loops, with high and low levels. Every businessman faces sudden issues and
expenses. The money that an owner must keep varies from market to market, however
20% of the start-up budget seems to be an acceptable minimum starting point.

Overreaching
Growing too large, too quick is the most reason for the failure of small businesses.
New markets can attract attention, and owners can find new chances for their items
and services. Some owners jump at every single chance to world-wide their sales
without placing proper types of quality management and control. Some entrepreneurs
invest all their working capital in expansion without looking for new ideas and
markets. The Successful small enterprises grow at a stable slow and steady.

Personal Spending

Once new owners work 18 hours in a day, the line between their work and personal
lives is sometimes unclear. Business people sometimes see their business earnings as
personal cash reserves. Failure to maintain business and financial personality directly,
separated, which can lead to heartache, and some very difficult tax issues. Business
consultants believe bad financial management, poor math or insufficient accounting,
however the main problem of small business failures often tends to spend business
money on personal spending.

Big company failure example

Apple Newton - 1993

Apple newton is an example of apple's worst old days, before it was world's most
considerable company.

Forbes stated that Newton PDA changing due to several reasons. First, the prices
started at $700, 8 inch height and 4.5 inch wide and typing recognition was not clear
that eventually lead apple to offer mobile tablet shop in their idea with a summary of
iPad which now not called PDA devices because of emergence of iPad.

3) Kodak fail

Kodak didnt have the vision of rise of new digital technologies which didnt allow it
to succeed. As a result, the first prototype of digital camera was established in 1975
by Steve, who is an engineer who worked for Kodak. The camera was big in shape
and delay to take pictures which took 20 seconds and low quality of the pictures as
well as complicated requirements to connect to a TV screen; however it was obvious
massive sabotage potential.
The correct lessons of Kodak are hidden. Organizations often notice disruptive forces
that affect their industry. They often were diverting sufficient resources to participate
in emerging markets. Their biggest failure was inability to embrace business models
that opens up disruptive change. Kodak established a digital camera, which has been
invested in technology and understood lately share pictures online. Finally, they failed
to recognize that online pictures sharing technology not only a way to spread printing
pictures business.

The next discussion goes, because the outage occurred when the cameras combined
with mobiles, and people switched from printing pictures to publishing them on social
media and mobile phone applications. Kodak completely missed out on it.

Kodak remained a sad history of a lost prospect. The symbol was American talent,
money, and vision to make the change. Instead of, it concluded being a victim of the
destructive consequences of change. Understand the correct lessons, and you can
avoid its destiny.

4) Argument of Yahoo company

Yahoo is one of large companies will have a harder time maintaining the best and
brightest in market. Until now, a reporter explained the problems in Yahoo! With the
price of a flat stock, options gained for few of their good people, the virtual free flow
of the VC dollars attracted some of the best people to do the thing start again.
However, Yahoo, have a huge advantage in maintaining their highest talent. This
could be failure of Yahoo in the next 10 years as they constantly keep doing it in the
same procedure.

Here is most 10 list of yahoo doing to lose talented people:

1. Big bureaucratic company. This is the first reason we notice after the fact of
careless employees. But, it is usually the cause that hides the real cause. No
one likes stale rules. However, when senior talent complains that way, it is
usually a sign that they did not notice as if they had an overview on the
addressed rules.
2. Failure to search for a talent project that ignites their passion. Large
companies have many moving parts. In addition, they often do not have people
wandering around to the best and brightest asking if they enjoy their current
projects or if they want to work on something new they are really interested in
that will assist the company.
3. Helpless annual performance feedback. You will be surprised at many
companies do not do very good job in annual performance feedback. As these
sent and filled to HR, and dont care later of improvements. This leads
 talented employees to refer to boss and they will not be interested in the
permanent future work which leads to point no. 4
4. No explanation about career development. Here's the secret to most
employers: Most workers do not know what they will do in the next 5 years.
As a result, around 5% of individuals can inform if requested. Otherwise, all
wants to discuss about their future work. Most leaders never engage with their
workers about orientations of their career. This offers a chance for both you
and company if you let it out.
5. Transient Ambitions / Strategic Priorities. The challenge facing most
companies is not addressing a strategic priority, such as the establishment of
an incubator, but continues like this for 1 or 2 years of current year. Senior
talent hates to be margined. As if it's committed to a project that will be done,
team leader should give them the chance to make what they have listed.

Conclusion
It is good to remember that disruption is a positive force. Subversive innovations are
innovations that make products and services accessible and easier, making them
available to largest companies.