Innovation at Apple in Business Products, Coursework Example

Introduction

The Apple Computer Company was started in 1976 by Steven Jobs and Steven Wozniak when they built and sold the first prototype in Silicon Valley, California (Yoffie and Kim). The Apple Corporation has since expanded under the leadership of Steven Jobs as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), rebranding the company as Apple, Inc. in 2000 (Yoffie and Kim).  When Jobs resigned as CEO in August 2011 due to illness, the Chief Operating Officer (COO) Tim Cook assumed the role of CEO of the company with the hopes of continuing the tradition of stringent control Jobs exerted over the development of products as well as a variety of related software, services, and peripherals when he controlled the company (Gamble and Marino).   This paper will critique, compare, and contrast the statement that “Innovation at Apple in business products is a result between knowledge management concepts and innovative concept” using the Diffusion of Innovation (DOI) theory and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) as two knowledge sharing paradigms as prospective methodologies to explain how information was transferred and shared within the company and contributed to the phenomenal success of Apple Inc. within its prospective markets.

Literature Review

The DOI theory indicates that organizations can sustain their competitive advantage by having a good strategy as well as the ability to develop, keep, organize, transfer and utilize its resources (Mustonen-Ollila and Lyytinen).  This aligns the system of knowledge sharing with the intentions of an information culture through investment in social capital with the understanding that the concepts of ‘knowledge’ and ‘information’ both refer to a unity of ideas, opinions, facts, models, schemes and intuition which are used in decision making progresses (Liao).

DOI theory is an amalgamation of diverse theoretical principles and mainly focuses on four major factors, which includes the actual features of the specific innovation, how details of the innovation are communicated, time, and the construct of the social system that the innovation is being introduced into (Surry and Farquhar).  There are four theoretical constructs commonly integrated into DOI, which are: “Innovation Decision Process, Individual Innovativeness, Rate of Adoption, and Perceived Attributes” (Surry and Farquhar).

The Innovation Decision Process theory indicates that the dissemination of technology is a temporal process with five distinct stages, which are “Knowledge, Persuasion, Decision, Implementation, and Confirmation” (Rogers 162).  The Individual Innovativeness theory postulates that people that are inclined to innovation will embrace a new idea more quickly than individuals that are less inclined (Rogers). The Rate of Adoption theory presents the supposition that innovations are temporally dispersed in a ‘S’ shaped pattern since novelty undergoes a stage of growth that begins gradually before experiencing rapid, dramatic growth (Rogers 211).

The Theory of Perceived Attributes posits that possible users of technology evaluate an invention according to their perceptions based on five characteristics of the innovation, which are: “Trialability, Observability, Relative Advantage, Complexity, and Compatibility” (Surry and Farquhar). The theory also states that the rate of diffusion for an innovative product will increase if probable users recognize that the product: “1) Can be tried on a limited basis before adoption? 2) Offers observable results? 3) Has an advantage relative to other innovations (or the status quo)? 4) is not overly complex? and 5) Is compatible with existing practices and values” (Surry and Farquhar).

The UTAUT model incorporates eight theoretical paradigms and integrates the critical factors and contingencies relating the prediction of behavioral intention to adapt a technology primarily in organizational contexts (Venkatesh, Thong and Xu 157).  UTAUT has served as a baseline model and has been applied to the study of a variety of technologies in both organizational and non-organizational settings (Venkatesh, Thong and Xu 158).

There are three broad types of UTAUT extensions/integrations. The first type of extension/integration examined UTAUT in new contexts, such as new technologies that include collaborative technology or health information systems, new user populations like healthcare professionals or consumers, and new cultural settings such as China or India (Venkatesh, Thong and Xu 158). The second type is the addition of new constructs in order to expand the scope of the endogenous theoretical mechanisms outlined in UTAUT.  Finally, the third type is the inclusion of exogenous predictors of the UTAUT variables (Venkatesh, Thong and Xu 158).

Analysis

Diffusion research, as illustrated in Figure 1, focuses on market conditions that can increase or decrease the probability that a new idea, product, or practice will be adopted by the target consumer, members of a particular culture, or society as a whole (Rogers).  This includes factors relative to consumer demographics, such as age, gender, and buyer behaviors in addition to the relative market conditions that influence performance (Rogers). Diffusion theory in an effort to increase the adoption of instructional technologies (Surry and Farquhar)

As shown in the Figure 1 illustration, the DOI theoretical model refers to the process that occurs as people adopt a new idea, product, practice, philosophy, or other conceptualization that has introduced the notion of opinion leaders, opinion followers and how the media interacts to influence these two groups (Kaminski).  regarded as a valuable change model for guiding technological innovation where the innovation itself is modified and presented in ways that meet the needs across all levels of adopters (Kaminski).

During Jobs’ tenure as CEO of Apple, Inc., the company grew to become one of the industry’s innovators, ranking third in the world’s market of smart phone distributors (Carr).  With reported revenues in excess of $535 billion as of 2011, Apple, Inc. set the market standards through sales of groundbreaking lines including the Mac Pro, iMac, and Mac mini, which is their desktop line available with user specified configurations (Burrows and Satariano).

Apple Inc. also has a line of laptop computers that include the MacBook Pro, MacBook, and MacBook Air, which can likewise be specially configured and the revolutionized the mp3 player market with various versions of the iPod that include generations of the iPod Classic, Mini, Nano, Shuffle, and Touch (Carr).  The inclusion of legal music downloads through the iTunes program, which included desktop applications and a music catalogue that grew to over 10 billion songs increased sales from 113,000 iPods per quarter to 733,000 units (Yoffie and Kim).

Since his departure as CEO, many analysts speculate whether Cook will be able to duplicate the record profits realized during Jobs’ tenure with Apple, Inc. (Burrows and Satariano).  Throughout his tenure as Apple Inc.’s CEO, Jobs’ was reported as “…reflexively cruel and harmful to people…” although many of the moves he made in his professional life are the actions that grew Apple, Inc. into the mega-conglomerate it is today (Trank and Cornelissen 702).  Apple Inc. was able to  popularity of internet-enabled mobile phones, the behavioral intention towards adopting m-commerce (Lai, Lai and Jordan 720) consists of five constructs including performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and a new construct of “disturbance concerns” (Lai, Lai and Jordan 720)

Performance expectancy denotes the degree to which an individual believes that using the system will help him or her obtain gains in job performance (Tan 9).   Effort expectancy designates the degree of ease associated with the use of the system (Tan 9).  Social influence represents the degree to which an individual perceives that important others believe he or she should use the new system (Tan 9).  Facilitating conditions signifies the degree to which an individual believes that an organizational and technical infrastructure exists to support use of the system (Tan 9).

Apple’s stellar reputation for production of quality products and the new opportunities created by product convergence has produced immeasurable opportunities for Apple through the development of exclusive products such as the iPhone, which was the first touch-screen mobile phone on the market (Yoffie and Kim).  Technological convergence of numerous products into one, as in the innovation of the smartphone, which can perform many of the functions of a computer and still function as an audio communication device, necessitates to production of increasingly innovative and technologically relevant products.

Evaluation

The literature findings implied that there is a positive correlation between knowledge sharing and innovation and the more a firm offers knowledge sharing disciplines such as knowledge donating and knowledge collecting, the more employees will become innovative  (Al-adaileh). The five stages of adoption are awareness, interest, evaluation, trial, and adoption (Hornor).  If knowledge sharing is effective among individuals and groups, problems and difficulties will be solved easily. Additionally, many researchers expressed that knowledge is a vital facet in innovation and the lack of knowledge is considered as a focal obstacle to innovation in service firms (Kama?ak and Bulutlar).

Apple iPhones are one of the many products that helped Apple Inc. distinguish their products in the marketplace and forced competitors to significantly upgrade their smartphone products so that they could compete (Yoffie and Kim).  The iPhone has diverse capabilities including recording a video playback, the ability to download and play various music formats, and play the music through streaming radio (Hardagon and Sutton).  The iPhone is also capable of transmitting or receiving sound and can be combined with other air-interface solutions that facilitate communication through next generation wireless local area networks (WLANs) and 4G mobile communication systems, such as Multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) wireless technology amalgamated with orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (MIMO-OFDM).

Knowledge sharing and innovation are two faces of the same coin in that it can be considered as the winning card for companies operating in the global market, which will grant them a long-term success (Al-adaileh, 2011).  Local and international companies are all fighting to win clients satisfaction by offering the most revolutionary products and services.  Knowledge management is not about technology, but rather focuses on fostering processes that encourage employees to share what they know in a way that increases others’ capabilities (O’Dell & Hubert, 2011).  Knowledge sharing between individuals/clients and organizations/projects becomes critical to organizational performance.

The foundation of communication within an organization is evidentiary when the importance of knowledge sharing is stressed and can be observed in organizations where information and its importance is evident (Alvesson, 2001).  There are different types of work and strategies that reflect the involvement of knowledge used by employees to create and sustain a competitive advantage (Alvesson, 2001).

The value of information sharing as an inherent attribute in knowledge based organizations and is enhanced in business entities where work is based on an intellectual basis because employees are well educated.  Moreover, companies such as these tend to produce high quality products (Alvesson, 2001).  In this capacity, the inclusion of knowledge sharing and innovation significantly contributes to the long- term success for organizations’.  When it comes to innovation and creativity, sharing their knowledge through staff meetings to discuss work progress and solve problems as they occur has been demonstrated to have a strong positive correlation with productivity.

Information culture can provide the organizations with greater benefits and superior advantages. The first benefit that can be attained is the fact that the organization will have the required knowledge to reach at particular decisions that could lead towards the attainment of highly effective results (Choo, Bergeron and Detlor).  The advantages of information culture can also be derived by the process of knowledge management within the organization (Lin).  Knowledge management makes sure that the management is having reliable information so that they can make effective decisions.

In similar pattern, information culture makes sure that all decisions are made on the basis of logical reasons. Moreover, information culture also ensures that information is being used in various processes and departments of the organization. An enhance information culture enables effective decision making, budgeting and overall planning for the organization (Owens, Wilson and Abell).  In other words, it is right to state that information culture ensures that the organization moves towards the path of development and growth while achieving all the strategic long term goals (Choo, Bergeron and Detlor).

The benefits of developing the information culture within the organization are many. However the process of creating the information culture is subject to many different critical aspects (Choo, Bergeron and Detlor).  The most suitable substitute of information culture is said to be the knowledge management. Although there is huge difference between the two distinct concepts, since the information culture is a time consuming process and knowledge management tends to produce the similar results, knowledge management is considered as the appropriate substitute. On the other hand, within the context of information culture or knowledge management, the most important attribute is of the communication between different aspects of the organization (Liao).  All of these attributes of knowledge sharing have contributed to the ability of Apple Inc. to gain an impressive market standing due to unique products such as the iPhone and imparting knowledge throughout the company helps other departments innovate similarly unique products like the iPod.

Conclusion

Overall, Apple Inc. has become a leading innovator of technology and information technology is rooted in access to and transference of data, requiring companies to have the ability to manage huge amounts of information (Venkatesh, Morris and Davis). The rapid dissemination of information and new technology on a daily basis makes it mandatory that Apple Inc. have an efficient approach to engaging in the exchange of new information, which makes communication especially important in such companies (Kaminski).

References

Al-adaileh, R. “The Impact of Organizational Culture on Knowledge Sharing: The Context of Jordan’s Phosphate Mines Company.” International Research Journal Of Finance & Economics 63 (2011): 216-228.

Alvesson, M. “Knowledge work: ambiguity, image and identity.” Human Relations 54.7 (2001): 863-886.

Burrows, Peter and Adam Satariano. “Can Phil Schiller keep Apple cool?” Bloomberg Businessweek Technology 7 June 2012. <http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-06-07/can-phil-schiller-keep-apple-cool>.

Carr, A. “What you don’t know about Apple.” Fast Company 174 (2013): 35-38.

Choo, Chun Wei, et al. “Information culture and information use: An exploratory study of three organizations.” Journal of the American Society for Information, Science, and Technology 59.5 (2008): 792–804.

Gamble, John E. and Lou Marino. “Case 9: Apple Inc. in 2011: Can it prosper without Steve Jobs?” McGraw-Hill, n.d. 350-363.

Hardagon, A. and R. Sutton. “Techonology brokering and innovation in a product development firm.” Adminstrative Schience Quarterly 7.4 (1997): 716-749.

Hornor, Marianne S. “Diffusion of Innovation Theory.” 1998. Online. <http://www.ciadvertising.org/studies/student/98_fall/theory/hornor/paper1.html>.

Kama?ak, R. and F. Bulutlar. “The Influence of Knowledge Sharing On Innovation.” European Business Review 22.3 (2010): 306-317.

Kaminski, J. “Diffusion of Innovation Theory.” Canadian Journal of Nursing Informatics 6.2 (2011): Theory in Nursing Informatics Column. Online. <http://cjni.net/journal/?p=1444>.

Lai, Donny Chi-Fai, Ivan Ka-Wai Lai and Ernest Jordan. “An Extended UTAUT Model for the Study of Negative User Adoption Behaviours.” The 9th International Conference on Electronic Business. Macau, 2009. 720-728. Online.

Liao, L. “A learning organization perspective on knowledge-sharing behavior and Firm Innovation.” Human Systems Management 25 (2006): 227-236.

Lin, H.-F. “Knowledge Sharing and Firm Innovation Capability: An Empirical Study.” International Journal of Manpower 28.3 (2007): 315-332.

Mustonen-Ollila, Erja and Kalle Lyytinen. “Why Organizations Adopt Information System Process Innovations: A Longitudinal Study using Diffusion of Innovation Theory.” Information Systems Journal 13 (2003): 275-297. Online.

O’Dell, C and C. Hubert. “Building a Knowledge-Sharing Culture.” Journal For Quality & Participation 34.2 (2011): 22-26.

Owens, Ian, T.D. Wilson and Angela Abell. “Information and business performance: A study of information systems and services in high-performing companies.” Information Research 1.2 (1995). <http://informationr.net/ir/1-2/paper5.html>.

Rogers, E. M. Diffusion of Innovations. 4th. New York: The Free Press, 1995. Online.

Surry, D. W. and J. D. Farquhar. “Diffusion Theory and Instructional Technology.” Journal of Instructional Science and Technology 2.1 (1997). Online. <http://www.usq.edu.au/electpub/ejist/vol2no1/article2.htm>.

Tan, Paul Juinn Bing. “Applying the UTAUT to Understand Factors Affecting the Use of English E-Learning Websites in Taiwan.” SAGE Open (2013): 1-12. Online.

Trank, C. and J. P. Cornelissen. “Portrait of an Entrepreneur: Vincent van Gogh, Steve Jobs, and the entrepreneurial imagination. , (4), 700.” Academy Of Management Review 38.4 (2013): 700-709.

Venkatesh, V., et al. “User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View.” MIS Quarterly 27 (2003): 425-478. Online.

Venkatesh, Viswanath, James Y. L. Thong and Xin Xu. “Consumer Acceptance and use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and use of Technology.” MIS Quarterly 36.1 (2012): 157-178. Online.

Yoffie, David B. and Renee Kim. “Apple Inc. in 2010.” Case 710-467. 2011. <http://www3.cis.gsu.edu/dtruex/courses/pmba8125/Cases/Apple_Inc._in_2010.pdf>.