by Andy
March 20, 2011
The March 14th issue of Business Week showed yet another example of the power and influence of relevance. Apple continues to be a favorite to all observers of business and the #1 bane to Blackberry and Android. While Apple appears to stand alone, it is actually propped up by many. Apple relies heavily on the excellence and expertise of Adobe and Microsoft and many others. In this particular article, Steve Jobs poked fun at Samsung and its Galaxy Tab – a strong product in its own right. But Jobs looked down his nose.
To be clear, Apple is a technology firm for sure. But I would argue that Apple is more of a design firm that relies on technologies developed and supplied by a host of suppliers, partners, employees and retailers that helps it deliver an ever-expanding array of cool products. It is Apple’s vision and leadership that got them here, which led to the products that fulfill its vision – not the other way around.
Because of this leadership, Apple gets much of the credit for consumerizing technology — even if that technology is primarily developed by or sourced from others. According to Business Week, Samsung “makes some of the most important components Apple buys including memory chips and displays… the brains inside Apple’s smartphones and tablets.” Clearly, Apple and Samsung are intimately dependent on each other yet Jobs belittles away and Samsung takes it. It has to. Samsung must remain thick-skinned to Jobs’ because without Apple, annual revenues at Samsung would plummet.
Going forward, Apple is well positioned for extraordinary success because it is at the epicenter of the entire category. Apple controls the vision and direction of where the category is going even though it does not necessarily control the intellectual capital behind all the technology. All others listen to and (sometimes begrudgingly) follow Apple’s lead by building the apps and technologies needed to help Apple achieve its vision of the future.
Talk about influence! That’s the power of relevance. Apple did it by engaging in and leading the broader discussions that mold the category’s future success; and not by sitting on the sidelines. It also shows that new leadership can assume the throne no matter how entrenched the presumed leader may be. Smartphones used to be the world of Blackberry. If Apple ever stops setting the vision for the category, the door will open for Android.
Communicating relevancy is not about showcasing your expertise, but hosting the broader conversation around the issues that matter. It’s not about you, but everything surrounding you. The more folks believe you can lead and influence, the more they will let you.
I saw this really great post today.
I saw this really great post today.
Excellent points (as always). Today Apple IS most Relevant. But tomorrow? Can those who seek to surpass Apple become more Relevant? If history is any guide, I believe so.
There was a time when personal computing was the sole domain of Apple. In the early 1980s the Apple IIe and the first Macintosh were dominant. IBM’s PC was prhobitively expensive for individual consumers (and not nearly as ‘fun’ as Apple’s computers). Apple was most Relevant.
Then IBM signed a non-exclusive licensing agreement with startup Microsoft for their operating system and Compaq reverse engineered IBM’s PC. The price of PCs plummeted, Apple couldn’t compete, Microsoft became most relevant and the rest was history.
Well, for the next twenty years or so, anyway. Personal computing was Microsoft’s domain.
Then came the iPod and iTunes. Then the iPhone. Then the iPad. Apple regained the status of most Relevant. Today, it’s beyond dispute. But what about tomorrow?
Could history repeat itself 30 years later? Could another enterprise become more Relevant than Apple? Again? I think so.
Excellent points (as always). Today Apple IS most Relevant. But tomorrow? Can those who seek to surpass Apple become more Relevant? If history is any guide, I believe so.
There was a time when personal computing was the sole domain of Apple. In the early 1980s the Apple IIe and the first Macintosh were dominant. IBM’s PC was prhobitively expensive for individual consumers (and not nearly as ‘fun’ as Apple’s computers). Apple was most Relevant.
Then IBM signed a non-exclusive licensing agreement with startup Microsoft for their operating system and Compaq reverse engineered IBM’s PC. The price of PCs plummeted, Apple couldn’t compete, Microsoft became most relevant and the rest was history.
Well, for the next twenty years or so, anyway. Personal computing was Microsoft’s domain.
Then came the iPod and iTunes. Then the iPhone. Then the iPad. Apple regained the status of most Relevant. Today, it’s beyond dispute. But what about tomorrow?
Could history repeat itself 30 years later? Could another enterprise become more Relevant than Apple? Again? I think so.
I completely agree with your assessment of Apple as a leader in the personal electronics marketplace. However, I think your post begs the question; what do I (or my company) do if I am not the dominant force in the market? How does Samsung, Motorola, or the myriad of smaller players break the viselike grip of an icon like Apple?
At least part of the answer has to be superior products and innovation, but often the best product does not win. Therefore, there has to be more.
I would be interested in your thoughts on how to change perception when you have a company that is on the outside looking in.
While dethroning the leader is certainly no easy task, waiting for a crack in the door to mobilize is NOT the answer. Brilliant products (or the perception thereof) come from brilliant companies. Unless the companies actively showcase their brilliance and help guide the category toward the future, rather than react to a future defined by others, they will remain outside. Take a portion of expensive awareness programs and redirect to relevancy. Just make sure the topics you wish to own matter to the broader industry. If they do not, then you could cement your irrelevance for a very long time.
I completely agree with your assessment of Apple as a leader in the personal electronics marketplace. However, I think your post begs the question; what do I (or my company) do if I am not the dominant force in the market? How does Samsung, Motorola, or the myriad of smaller players break the viselike grip of an icon like Apple?
At least part of the answer has to be superior products and innovation, but often the best product does not win. Therefore, there has to be more.
I would be interested in your thoughts on how to change perception when you have a company that is on the outside looking in.
While dethroning the leader is certainly no easy task, waiting for a crack in the door to mobilize is NOT the answer. Brilliant products (or the perception thereof) come from brilliant companies. Unless the companies actively showcase their brilliance and help guide the category toward the future, rather than react to a future defined by others, they will remain outside. Take a portion of expensive awareness programs and redirect to relevancy. Just make sure the topics you wish to own matter to the broader industry. If they do not, then you could cement your irrelevance for a very long time.
Apple’s vision and business approach certainly play a key role. Ultimately, though, I think you’re right when you say that its their leadership and vision that got them there because they create products delivering on their vision. In this case, I see vision as “how can we create products for consumers that are not just usable and useful but desirable”. They’re so attuned to deliver what their customers want vs. what they as a brand THINK their consumers want. Seems very simple but very difficult to deliver on.
Apple’s vision and business approach certainly play a key role. Ultimately, though, I think you’re right when you say that its their leadership and vision that got them there because they create products delivering on their vision. In this case, I see vision as “how can we create products for consumers that are not just usable and useful but desirable”. They’re so attuned to deliver what their customers want vs. what they as a brand THINK their consumers want. Seems very simple but very difficult to deliver on.
I saw this really good post today.
I saw this really good post today.
Looking forward to reading more of your articles in the future.Go for it.
Looking forward to reading more of your articles in the future.Go for it.
Sofort Kredit…
Thanks so much for providing individuals with such a special opportunity to read in detail from this website. It is often very pleasant and stuffed with a great time for me personally and my office co-workers to visit your website particularly three ti…
Sofort Kredit…
Thanks so much for providing individuals with such a special opportunity to read in detail from this website. It is often very pleasant and stuffed with a great time for me personally and my office co-workers to visit your website particularly three ti…
Great article. Thank you to tell us more useful information. I am looking forward to reading more of your articles in the future.
Great article. Thank you to tell us more useful information. I am looking forward to reading more of your articles in the future.
VRy exciting to read them.
VRy exciting to read them.
Very good article, well written and very thought out.
Very good article, well written and very thought out.
Excellent post! I might actually even listen to what you’re saying.In general your whole blog is a plus. I’m digging it.
Excellent post! I might actually even listen to what you’re saying.In general your whole blog is a plus. I’m digging it.