{"id":8834,"date":"2013-02-06T08:42:24","date_gmt":"2013-02-05T22:42:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/knowledgetoday\/?p=8834"},"modified":"2013-02-06T08:42:24","modified_gmt":"2013-02-05T22:42:24","slug":"blackberry","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/BTOpinion\/blog\/2013\/02\/blackberry\/","title":{"rendered":"Can RIM Reinvent Itself?"},"content":{"rendered":"

From the\u00a0Knowledge@Wharton today\u00a0blog<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Throughout 2012, many analysts were predicting that RIM\u2019s days were numbered<\/a>. And in one way, that turned out to be true.<\/p>\n

Last week, the Canadian firm announced that it would no longer be known as RIM \u2013 or Research in Motion \u2013 and instead was rechristening itself BlackBerry, after its iconic smartphone. Along with the change, the company introduced a new line of devices based on its latest operating system \u2013 BlackBerry 10. Combined, these actions have been widely regarded as a last-ditch effort on the part of the firm to remain a viable player in a market dominated by Apple\u2019s iPhone and devices that run on Google\u2019s Android operating system, such as Samsung\u2019s Galaxy. (In the last quarter of 2012, BlackBerry\u2019s U.S. market share dropped to 1.1%<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

Although many analysts were impressed by the latest BlackBerry devices \u2014 one of which incorporates a sleek, touch-screen interface, a \u201csmart camera\u201d and other features \u2014 some were disappointed that the firm\u2019s newest offerings wouldn\u2019t be available in the U.S. until March. Already, BlackBerry had delayed the launch of its new operating system for more than a year, and the additional delay sent a negative signal to BlackBerry investors. Following the launch, the company\u2019s stock fell by 12%.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis looks like a huge uphill battle for BlackBerry,\u201d says Wharton emeritus management professor Lawrence G. Hrebiniak<\/a>. \u201cIf market share equates with power, BlackBerry is close to powerless.\u201d The company offers far fewer apps than its competitors, he notes, and its enterprise user base is continually eroding as companies move to allow employees to rely on their own devices for office email. In addition, \u201cother smartphones are more powerful than the latest BlackBerry offering.\u201d<\/p>\n

BlackBerry \u201cneeded a bold, \u2018swing for the fences\u2019 move, and all we got is a so-so clone of other recent phones,\u201d says Wharton marketing professor Peter S. Fader<\/a>. \u201cThe image of the company revolves around a no-nonsense phone for busy people who don\u2019t have time or patience to type on a virtual keyboard or to monkey around with apps. Many of the people who have clung to a BlackBerry \u2014 despite the social pressure to leave it \u2014 have done so because of the real keyboard it had traditionally featured, and the many conveniences that come along with it\u2026. The new BlackBerry should have boldly featured a real keyboard and lots of keyboard-based conveniences that iPhones \u2014 and their myriad clones \u2014 can\u2019t offer.\u201d He adds that although BlackBerry announced it would offer a new phone that incorporates a traditional keyboard, \u201cmost people are totally unaware of it.\u00a0Instead, all the hype is around marginal features that don\u2019t offer any meaningful or long-lasting differentiation.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThey had an incredible hold on the very large market segment that loved their keyboard,\u201d notes Wharton marketing professor Jerry Wind<\/a>. \u201cThey made huge mistakes by not keeping the keyboard and building around it the necessary software and quality services\u201d to compete with Apple, Samsung and others.<\/p>\n

In addition, the company\u2019s decision to reform its brand around its well-known namesake smartphone seems like a step backward to some observers. \u201cThe rebranding strikes me as having a certain irony,\u201d says Wharton management professor Daniel A. Levinthal<\/a>.\u00a0\u201dNow that the BlackBerry as a device is becoming associated in people\u2019s minds with a somewhat dated piece of hardware, [BlackBerry is] defining the company\u2019s identity in terms of this particular artifact.<\/p>\n

\u201cAdding to the irony,\u201d Levinthal continues, \u201cis that the alternate business strategy for RIM would have been to embrace their secure data network as the core asset and decouple that from a propriety piece of hardware.\u00a0The \u2018M\u2019 in Research in Motion \u2014 connoting \u2018mobile\u2019 \u2014 is arguably more a contemporary statement than \u2018BlackBerry.\u2019\u00a0They have doubled-down on the propriety hardware in all ways \u2026 and, I think, have lost the last opportunity to reinvent themselves as a software\/service company. They have an installed user base and can certainly generate some revenue from that, but the longer-run competitive dynamics look bleak.\u201d<\/p>\n

According to Hrebiniak, however, there\u2019s still hope for the company. \u201cMobile carriers like BlackBerry\u2019s operating system,\u201d he points out.\u00a0\u201dThere\u2019s no guarantee that this applause will generate sales, but it could help.\u201d And if enterprise customers become more security conscious again, they could gravitate back to BlackBerry, he suggests. \u201cBut, in my opinion, the biggest hope for BlackBerry revolves around competition. A third or fourth player increases competition\u00a0and keeps [company] leaders on their toes. This sparks innovation and lower prices. Apple has shown some weakness of late, which could help BlackBerry.<\/p>\n

\u201cFinally, people sometimes root for and help the underdog, and BlackBerry certainly fits this category,\u201d he adds. \u201cSuper Bowl Sunday has probably affected my thinking, but I think that BlackBerry can make it, despite the very long odds\u2026. The underdog occasionally pulls off the upset.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

From the\u00a0Knowledge@Wharton today\u00a0blog. Throughout 2012, many analysts were predicting that RIM\u2019s days were numbered. And in one way, that turned out to be true. Last week, the Canadian firm announced that it would no longer be known as RIM \u2013 or Research in Motion \u2013 and instead was rechristening itself BlackBerry, after its iconic smartphone. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":336,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8834","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/BTOpinion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8834","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/BTOpinion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/BTOpinion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/BTOpinion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/336"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/BTOpinion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8834"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/BTOpinion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8834\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8836,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/BTOpinion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8834\/revisions\/8836"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/BTOpinion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8834"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/BTOpinion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8834"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.unsw.edu.au\/BTOpinion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8834"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}