Kodak
Kodak was the biggest name in the photograph industry. In the early days,
Kodak camera was used to take pictures using Kodak film, and Kodak technology. Although Kodak was the absolute leader in the
photograph industry the company declared bankruptcy in 2012 (He, 2012).
In the late 1800s, the company Kodak was founded by two people, George Eastman
and Henry Strong. Originally, Kodak was
the name of Eastman’s camera, and later he decided to name his company after
his name. Henry Ford was an investor in the film industry. George Eastman was
the inventor of the technology behind photography used by Kodak.
Eastman made photography generally available to the public by making the
camera available for sale along with the film, which was used to take the
pictures. Once a consumer takes the picture, they would send the films back to
the company where it would be developed. The company sold the film at the cost
of processing or developing the firm for customers.
In 1976, Kodak had an 85% market share in cameras and a 90% market share
in the film. They had a great marketing message to their customers; Kodak
Moments, which refers to any moments that worth taking pictures in someone’s
life (Tsurumi & Tsurumi, 1999).
Kodak’s business performance starts to decline in 2003. In 2003, Kodak “seemed
to have missed the enormity of the changes to their business that were being
brought about by the switch from film to digital photography” (Kodak gets back in the picture, 2005, para 4). Although
digital cameras came to light in early 1994, the same digital camera started to
take over Kodak’s market share starting from 2005. Declining sales of Kodak
products (camera and films) in its retail distribution network resulted in a
big challenge for the company to hold onto shelf space became harder (Shih, 2016).
Kodak the need for an innovative product, digital camera, which became
the way of the future in the film industry.
Unlike other companies such as Cannon, although Kodak was the first inventor
of the digital camera, the company did not focus on this new technology enough
to market its product.
According to Walker (2017), in 1975, “Steven Sasson - a young engineer
at Eastman Kodak -invented the first digital camera” (para. 2). However, Kodak
treated the innovative digital camera business as a side project than the way
of the future. Kodak was not motivated
about digital cameras because they were the expert in films. They had over 100 years
of experience in producing cameras and films that were sold at the lowest prices.
They made money from selling films. In some cases, Kodak would give free cameras
for consumers to buy films and prints. In digital cameras there is no firm and,
in some cases, there is no printing of photos. Kodak’s decision ignoring
digital cameras as the industry standard. The result of digital disruption, the
“environmental turbulence induced by digital innovation that leads to the erosion
of boundaries and approaches that previously served as foundations for
organizing the production and capture of value” (Skog, Wilmelius, & Sandberg,
2018, p.431), results in Kodak’s profitable business to its knees in the
present business environment.
References
He, H. (2012). The strategy research of the technology
innovation and consumption of the experience under the electronic-economic
business affairs - the enlightenment of the development of fuji and Kodiak. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 268-270, 1993.
Kodak gets back in the picture. (2005). Strategic Direction, 21(3), 24-26.
Shih, W. (2016). The real lessons from Kodak's decline. MIT Sloan Management Review, 57(4), 11-13.
Skog, D. A., Wimelius, H., & Sandberg, J. (2018).
Digital disruption. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 60(5), 431-437.
Walker, A. (2017). Positive disruption. Building Surveying Journal, 16-17. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/positive-disruption/docview/2190959735/se-2?accountid=35812
Tsurumi, Y., & Tsurumi, H. (1999). Fujifilm-Kodiak
duopolistic competition in japan and the united states. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(4), 813-830.
Comments
Post a Comment