The paper 'Failure at Sun Systems' is a perfect example of a Management Case Study. From a popular perspective, ‘ you learn more from your failures than from your successes. Nevertheless, in the case of failed innovations in organizations, the perspective does not always hold any substantial argument. According to Valikangas, Hoegl, & Gibbert, (2008) failure might generate innovation trauma, which relates to the inability of the business entities and organizations to commit to innovations because of severe disappointment from the previous innovation failures. In their article, these authors focus on discussing the aspect of innovation trauma in the context of Sun Ray relating to the thin-client computing innovation coming from the Sun Labs at Sun Microsystems.
It is essential to note that the close relationship or association between Sun Ray and the highly publicized failure with reference to JavaStation, thus lack substantial change to prove its mettle. The research article also makes substantive suggestions in relation to overcoming innovation trauma as a critical, but underappreciated aspect of innovation management in business entities or companies such as Sun Microsystems depending on the continuous innovation for the achievement or attainment of sustainable competition.
From this perspective, the concept has significance and importance beyond the particular case study because of its influence in the identification of the role of emotions in innovation failure, as well as the need for the managers or executives to mediate in the presence of such potentiality traumatic experiences with the objective of sustaining innovation following serious failures. The purpose of this essay is to appraise the view by the article in relation to the influence of innovation trauma in contributing to the failure of Sun Ray from a critical perspective.
The essay will also examine the influence of the major management errors in explaining the innovation failure with reference to the case of Sun Ray. In the course of developing the essay, it is essential to consider the influence of good and bad employees prior to the assessment of bad management, capital, and employee friendship in relation to the growth and development of an organization. From the above illustrations, the common denominator relates to the involvement of the ego or emotions within the aspects of innovation. Analysis Innovation has a tendency to fail at an alarming rate.
Some of the causes or explanations for the failure of the innovation include developer-based, product-based, and consumer-based illustrations. Nevertheless, the research article notes that the most common explanations depend on the individuals carrying the aspects of innovation forward. Researchers have the tendency of aspects of dreaming, overconfidence, arrogance, and escalation of the commitment to plain ignorance contribute to the failure in innovations. Innovation Trauma at Sun Microsystems The onset of innovation integrates lots of hard work and a dream.
The objective of Sun Ray was to change or transform the industry, thus the launch of the ‘ simple low-cost device’ , which did not require desktop administration at the Enterprise Computing Forum, New York in 1999. In this context, Sun Ray had the perfect opportunity to redefine the concept of ‘ desktop computing’ . In addition, Sun Ray focused on the utilization of the platform to exhibit various benefits by saving more than two million dollars in electricity costs because of the reduced power to run the project.
List of References
1. Jay Moldenhauer‐Salazar, Liisa Välikangas, (2008) "Sun Ray's struggle to overcome innovation trauma", Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 36 Iss: 3, pp.15 – 20
2. Karlsson, J. (2013). The role of HRM in innovation processes-Nurturing or constraining creativity.
3. Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee engagement. Human Resource Management Review, 21(2), 123-136.
4. Bakker, A. B., Tims, M., & Derks, D. (2012). Proactive personality and job performance: The role of job crafting and work engagement. human relations, 65(10), 1359-1378.
5. Ghafoor, A., Qureshi, T. M., Khan, M. A., & Hijazi, S. T. (2011). Transformational leadership, employee engagement and performance: Mediating effect of psychological ownership. African journal of business management, 5(17), 7391.
6. Bakker, A. B. (2011). An evidence-based model of work engagement. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(4), 265-269.
7. Tan, C. L., & Nasurdin, A. M. (2011). Human resource management practices and organizational innovation: assessing the mediating role of knowledge management effectiveness. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(2), 155-167.
8. Mavondo, F. T., Chimhanzi, J. and Stewart, J. (2005), ―Learning orientation and market orientation: Relationship with innovation, human resource practices and performance‖, European Journal of Marketing, Vol.39, No.11, pp. 1235-1263.
9. Tan, C. L. and Nasurdin, A. M. (2010), ―Human resource management practices and organizational innovation: An empirical study in Malaysia‖, Journal of Applied Business Research, Vol.2, No.4, pp. 105-115.
10. Wan Jusoh, W. J. (2000), ―Determining key success factors in new product development: Evidence from manufacturing companies in Malaysia‖, Journal of International Business and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 8, No.1, pp. 21-40.
11. Vidal, R., Carvalho, H., & Cruz-Machado, V. A. (2014, January). Strategic Resilience Development: A Study Using Delphi. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Management Science and Engineering Management (pp. 1245-1255). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
12. Tietze, F., Pieper, T., & Herstatt, C. (2014). To own or not to own: How ownership impacts user innovation–An empirical study. Technovation.
13. Valikangas et al., (2009), “Why Learning from failure isn’t easy (and what to do about it): innovation trauma at Sun Microsystems.” European Management Journal, 27 (4); 225-233.
14. Wilson, N., Wright, M., & Altanlar, A. (2013). The survival of newly-incorporated companies and founding director characteristics. International Small Business Journal, 0266242613476317.
15. Nguyen, N. (2011), How failure size affects learning in innovation.
16. Direction, S. The failure of Sun Ray: Innovation trauma is the likely cause. Strategic Direction, 25(6).
17. Gorrell, C. (2008). Five ways to transform a business. Strategy & Leadership, 36(3).
18. Terranova, C. (2006). Assessing culture at Sun Microsystems: Using a unique exercise to generate vital cultural data during an acquisition. Strategic HR Review, 5(6), 24-27.
19. Stuart, R. (1996). The trauma of organizational change. Journal of European Industrial Training, 20(2), 11-16.
20. Moenkemeyer, G., Hoegl, M., & Weiss, M. (2012). Innovator resilience potential: A process perspective of individual resilience as influenced by innovation project termination. human relations, 65(5), 627-655.