It’s becoming common to use Kodak as a showcase for failing to innovate: the company is described as having missed the digital revolution because it was focused on protecting its core business, traditional photographic film. The reality is different, though. Kodak is in fact one of the first companies to have worked on digital imaging. In 1992, for one of my clients’ projects, we bought a digital camera. It was a Kodak, the DCS 200, and it costed about $200K. Yes, that’s two hundred thousand US dollars. One can not say Kodak was ignoring the digital revolution! Today, Kodak is still leading digital imaging, as the company holds many patents in this field that are used in products such as HP printers. The painful Kodak factory closures that one can see nowdays are nothing but the price to pay to transition from one era to the other, from the era when Kodak was a chemist to an era when it is a software company. For all its mistakes, Kodak is doing what few companies have been able to do.
No doubt, Kodak was victim of the innovator’s dilemma as described by Christensen: the company tried to "cram" digital photography into traditional photography with the pathetic APS system. But that didn’t stop the them from pressing ahead and ending up, today, in the leading group of digital camera manufacturers. Not bad for a chemist! The initial dilemma, however, probably costed them their leadership, maybe forever, as forecasted by Christensen’s theory.
🇫🇷 Lisez-moi en français
Subscribe to Blog via EmailJoin 8,821 other subscribers
Search my blog
Key wordsaffordable loss apple Artificial intelligence book review Business model business plan clayton christensen conference conflict of commitment Control Coronavirus Corporate transformation Covid-19 creativity Crisis management decision making Descartes digital economy digital transformation digitization disruption disruptive innovation Disruptive technology effectuation entrepreneurial process entrepreneurship Eric Ries fail fast fast second Forbes framing frank knight GE geroski Gillette government Immunity to change incremental innovation innovation Innovation book Innovation management innovator innovator's dilemma Jean-Paul Gaillard Jeffrey Immelt Jim collins Kodak leadership Lean Startup Management Management of uncertainty markides mental model microsoft nespresso Nestlé organizational decline Performance prediction Public expert public sector radical innovation risk risk control Risk management Sarah Kaplan Saras Sarasvathy sense making sony Strategic surprise strategy The balancing act of innovation transformation uncertainty user experience
- Mythe: "Les enfants ne lisent plus à cause de TikTok" Réalité: BookTok fait plus de un milliard de vues. Désormais… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 7 hours ago
- Sur ma liste de lecture. twitter.com/alexiskarklins… 17 hours ago
- RT @OlivierBabeau: La richesse créée par les entrepreneurs n’est pas prise aux gens. Elle enrichit la société tout entière. Contrairement a… 1 day ago
- RT @OlivierBabeau: Il faut le répéter, en dépit des envolées des tribuns démagos : non, l’économie n’est pas un jeu à somme nulle. https://… 1 day ago
- La planification est la solution à tous nos problèmes. What could go wrong? twitter.com/EmmanuelMacron… 1 day ago