Correspondant Oliver Cox speaks out about Blackberry’s refocus into the
corporate market. He asks whether this is brilliant way to rebrand a company or
a backwards step in their approach.
RIM’s Return to its
Cultural Heritage
Last
month Research In Motion (RIM), the makers of the Blackberry smartphones,
announced that they would be transferring their focus. As a result a move from the personal market
to the brand’s spiritual home as a tool for business people is on the horizon.
This is described by the RIM leadership as an attempt to move the company’s
focus back to the area in which it works best.
Is this an effort to redeem a firm which is bleeding value, while in a free-fall
in the personal market? RIM’s products are even experiencing a decline in the
corporate market – Blackberry’s Holy Land. Why the permanent corporate
pilgrimage?
The
relationship between the personal and the corporate within the technology
sector is a paternal one. The corporate market is the originating customer of
computing and while the personal market can be lucrative (especially with
novelty and fashion boosting demand) technology is predisposed to the former.
This is simply because the needs of business in terms of storage and
connectivity, and the ability of businesses to pay are more symbiotic to the
needs of the technology companies. Nevertheless, the paternal relationship does
not necessarily exist within individual tech companies.
Apple
is an example of a company which has found its natural habitat in the personal
tech area, in which it is a marketing prodigy. The tendency for Apple is to
balance the performance and aesthetics of a device so as to create products
where appeal and design is central, with less emphasis placed on abstract
functionality.
Apple,
the masters of the personal, do market products towards the corporate
market to an extent, however. They even herald the tactile and expressive iPad
as a hard-headed business tool. However, I predict that Apple’s strongest
feelings will always be with the personal market, in that the focus of their
portable device software is in making the product as quick, easy and natural to
use means that business can get less use than if they had bought a more
feature-crammed while opaque alternative. The iPad offers the user a beautiful
screen, while the more business orientated Toshiba Thrive
features an HDMI[1] output.
Besides, if Apple can call up crowds of enamoured customers to support their
personal products, why would they want to divert energy to pursue the corporate
market?
As
a company the newer and less concrete Google seems adept at securing both
fronts of the tech market, with the dominance of the Android operating system
(a comparatively personal OS) alongside the popularity of Google Docs (a
specifically business orientated tool). Perhaps this diverse array of successes
is due to the fact that Google’s origins are in web search – an area which
doesn’t really separate the corporate and the personal – allowing them to gain
experience which made their diversification into both sides of the market
easier.
Straying
from a company’s cultural origin can herald perils alongside possible and
substantial gain. The moment when Microsoft started producing two different
generations of software, for business and for personal use was the point when
Gates was able to fulfil the dream of a PC in every home on every desk. By
producing a lower spec operating system (Windows 95)[2], the
company were able to grant computer access to thousands of customers who wanted
a computer for personal use and who couldn’t have afforded Windows NT[3] or
IBM’s OS/2[4].
Today, the corporation is very able to succeed in both markets.
It
would seem that the success of the expedition out of a tech company’s original
territory into the other side of the market depends on branding and timing.
Apple’s branding is supreme, but it is branding which is solidly based around
concepts like fashion, expression and identity, making it harder for the
company to diversify. At the same time, RIM entered a market for the personal
phone which was saturated with able competitors like Google and Apple. When
Google entered the market for smartphone operating systems the largest provider
was Nokia[5], with
Apple only just beginning its explosion, allowing Android to excel.
I
see RIM’s move as potentially a saving decision for a deflating firm;
remembering that it is difficult to be liked be all people – one has to
establish targets. However, some make the point that the market for business
phones does not exist in the same way that it does for business cars or
business computers. While this is arguable, it is not really the point; it
shouldn’t be impossible for RIM to make a market for smartphones which
are bought primarily by businesses or which are used mainly in the business
setting, by creating a sufficiently effective product. I think that RIM can
affectively regroup after the retreat, possibly remaining a reputable company
providing business technology, just one which suffered a brief identity crisis.
This article reflects the
opinion of the author only. If you have any comments or feedback, drop us a
line at [email protected].
(1) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI
(2) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_9