When plans go wrong
Introduction
The purpose of this discussion is to
research an organization that had a good plan that did not come to fruition
because the market changed, and many innovative competitors entered the market.
The organization that the researcher selected was Atari. According to Shankar
et al. (1998), “Although pioneers outsell late movers in many markets, in some
cases innovative late entry has produced some remarkably successful brands that
outsell pioneers.”. The researcher will discuss what happens when plans go
wrong, why organizations have unsuccessful plans and
how an organization can work to avoid the impacts of an unsuccessful plan.
When
plans go wrong why organizations have unsuccessful plans and impact example
At one time the Atari gaming
company was the largest video game maker in the world. So, when they filed
bankruptcy it was a shock and a heartbreaking event for the video game
industry. The first system that Atari released was an instant success and they were
unable to replicate its success years and many consoles later (Gallagher &
Park, 2002). In the 1990s throughout the early 2000s, Atari
faced fierce competition and they failed as an innovator when they made the
decision to continue making cartridge-based games and the gaming industry was
moving towards cd-based systems
(Lendino,
2018). Many organizations have failed or unsuccessful plans because they adopt
scenario planning and not strategic planning (Godet, 2000). Atari adopted scenario
planning and not strategic planning because they were focused on the results
and they did not have a good understanding of the ever-evolving video gaming environment.
The
relevance of the example, the impacts and how to avoid the impacts
The fall of Atari is a relevant
example of a company that fails to adopt a sociotechnical plan. Atari focused
more on their technology and company than they did their workers and customers.
They had the wrong view of the video gaming industry and considered gaming to
be an individual process and not an experience that could be shared. Many of the
programmers of their games were not given the proper credit for the work that
was gone and many of them left and formed their own independent ventures. Video
game console companies learned a valuable lesson from what happened to Atari and
are now working harder to avoid issues by valuing their employees more and by adopting
sociotechnical plans and by encouraging the collaboration between their people
and their technology.
Forces
Force
#1: The CD revolution (Technological force)
At one time Atari was the
number 1 video gaming company and they were passed by Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft.
How do you think this happened? First, Atari thought they were invulnerable
because they had most of the market share. Theirs misunderstand of how the gaming
market was heading and their inability to make changes to their hardware platform
allowed the others to out-innovate them. The competition moved to the CD game
format from being a cartridge-based system.
Force #2: Pricing
Atari continued to offer their games in the cartridge
format for years and by the time they developed a CD-based system, it was too
late. Cartridges cost a lot more to create that CD’s and therefore the cost of
the games were higher. So. Pricing was another one of the driving forces behind
the development of CD and then digital download systems.
Summary
An organization that does not have a good plan can find
themselves in a difficult spot when the market changes and more innovative
competitors entered the market. Atari was such a company and at one time they
were the largest video game maker in the world. Atari faced fierce competition
and they failed as an innovator when they made the decision to continue making
cartridge-based games and not cd-based systems. They had the wrong view of the
video gaming industry and considered gaming to be an individual process and not
an experience that could be shared. Theirs misunderstand of how the gaming
market was heading and their inability to make changes to their hardware
platform allowed the others to out-innovate them. Pricing was another one of
the driving forces that influenced innovation. If a company fails
to change with the market, they might soon find themselves out of
business.
References
historical analysis of the US home
video game market. IEEE transactions on engineering management, 49(1),
67-82.
Godet,
M. (2000). The art of scenarios and strategic
planning: tools and pitfalls. Technological
forecasting
and social change, 65(1), 3-22.
Lendino, J. (2018). Adventure: The Atari 2600 at the
Dawn of Console Gaming. Ziff Davis.
Shankar,
V., Carpenter, G. S., & Krishnamurthi, L. (1998). Late mover advantage: How
innovative late
entrants outsell pioneers. Journal of Marketing research, 35(1),
54-70.
Comments
Post a Comment