The paper "Managing Change and Innovation - Apple " is a good example of a management case study. Within the modern highly competitive and dynamic business environment, organizations must innovate in order to be responsive to market needs (Muhammad et al. , 2011). In doing so, however, they are faced with the challenge of opting for an externally-driven or internally-driven innovative approach (Rahman & Ramos, 2012). In the externally-driven approach, it is believed that a firm is able to and should ideally apply both external and internal ideas in trying to advance technologically while the internally-driven approach recommends the use of only in-house talent and resources in the innovative process (Marques, 2014).
Although the internally driven approach has its strengths of ensuring the protection of corporate rights and profitability, an externally-driven approach is preferable as it considers the business within a globalized system and helps to optimize research. This paper discusses externally and internally driven approaches to innovation, arguing that the externally-driven perspective is more realistic. Internally-Driven Innovation Traditionally, organizations used to adopt internally-driven strategies for innovation. This was achieved through having research and development centers, departments or units that would help in exploring, developing, and commercializing their innovations.
A good example of an internally-driven approach in the modern marketplace is Apple Inc. The company always chose internally-driven innovation as its strategy. Development was guided by the simple philosophy that new ideas and innovations had to be generated from within the company, and the user experience of its products was highly controlled (Ullrich & Vladova, 2016). Apple Inc. is one of the most closed organizational systems dealing in technology. It only shows off products after its official announcement and does not market itself in trade shows or even allow its workers to discuss its unannounced products.
The company has, however, managed to produce groundbreaking innovations. For instance, the iPod transformed how people listen to music. Its original iMac also helped to redefine computerization through having an all-in-one PC. The iPhone is on its part a major transformative feature in smart-phone production. Going by this, one might, therefore, conclude that an internally-driven strategy could be a good idea (Johnson et al. , 2012).
Beckford, J. (2012). Quality: A Critical Introduction. New York: Routledge, 2012
Dahlander, L., & Gann, D. (2010). How open is innovation? Research policy, 39(6), 699-709
Herzog, P. (2011). Open and closed Innovation: different cultures for Adifferent strategies. Wiesbaden: Gabler
Huff, A, Moslein, K and Reichwald, R. (2013). Leading Open Innovation. Boston: MIT Press
Johnson, K., Li, Y., Phan, H., Singer, J and Trinh, H. (2012). The Innovative Success that is Apple, Inc.
Marques, J. (2014). Closed versus open innovation: evolution or combination?. International Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 196
Muhammad, A., Faheem, M., Dost, M and Abdullah, I. (2011). Globalization and its impacts on the world economic development. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(23)
Rahman, H and Ramos, I. (2012). SMEs and open innovation: global cases and initiatives. Hershey: Business Science Reference
Ullrich, A and Vladova, G. (2016). Weighing the pros and cons of engaging in Open Innovation. Technology Innovation Management Review, 6(4)