3.1 Introduction about EMI Music Industry An example that

3.1 Introduction about EMI MusicIndustry      An example that appears in mind when thinking aboutrugged technologies Music industry. Over the centuries, registration labelshave been able to provide huge profits For music sales, music shows andbusiness.

However, as the biggest source of revenue, Physical sales started tosee a steady decline during the possibility of downloading online Came. Butthis decline did not try to understand this new one Warner, Universal, EMI, andSony (/) BMG Benefit. These record labels have been continuously followed bycontinuous strategic efforts To get their physical sales back to an acceptablelevel. However, each key The record label seems to be struggling to keep itshead above water.

Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot

Premium Partner
From $18.00 per page
4,8 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,80
Delivery
4,90
Support
4,70
Price
Recommended Service
From $13.90 per page
4,6 / 5
4,70
Writers Experience
4,70
Delivery
4,60
Support
4,60
Price
From $20.00 per page
4,5 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,50
Delivery
4,40
Support
4,10
Price
* All Partners were chosen among 50+ writing services by our Customer Satisfaction Team

The answer to questions about why the debates have failed isvery important Scientific literature and ultimately, three main approaches canbe divided. Christensen (1995) began saying it was impossible for a post If youacquire this new technology directly, they will only see the existingrequirements. Dushmani (2004) believed that he was able to continue to worksuccessfully It installed the mobile phone in its system. Tripsz, (1997)finally finished It depends on certain properties and complement assets Notonly old technology, it has become obsolete. Therefore, the second chapter willbe related to the theory written about decay Technology and innovation.Possible answers to this analysis and positions Explained.

The next chapter isthe method used to conduct this case Inspection. The fourth chapter is relatedto the analysis of EMI’s strategic decisions For the past fifteen years.Finally, we will try to examine the last chapter of this decline Christensenhas predicted, or whether it is possible or not Many companies failed to takeresponsibility to maintain the hazards Last. The effect of this analysis isused to make a careful prediction The future of the entire music industry.3.2 Disruptive TechnologyThefirst player to have played for a long time Technology should define thesurvival of companies in a big way. This competition will change theirfoundations and their profit margins are not less. He called this event ‘DestructionCreation’, which means a successful serious technological innovation a pause toreduce demand for positions due to changing customers the new technology-basedproducts are their purchasing behavior.

 3.3 Why innovative companies arefighting renewed?Companiesare established and become dominant players in the market, and sometimes theyare There is little incentive to radically change their ideas in production. Asthey did Their current value networks are often affected when faced withserious discoveries. There are a lot of examples of where new ticket sales areon the market If you can not make the code, do it better than the digitalcamera case Its market position should be kept. However, there are some in thepast The success of the post indicates that it is impossible for dominantwarriors Keep their key position even when confronting competing entrances Market(Ansari, Crap, 2012)Forinstance, IBM, the company established in mechanical business tools, is able toPioneer in Electronic Business Tools (Hill, Rotherham, 2003) But I do notunderstand how to get these (technical) findings correctly It’s easy. Over theyears, various theories have been created about what is being done No strategyshould be pursued when conducting a ruthless struggle Innovation. In the nextcolumns, some of these studies will be discussed         3.3.

1 Key Factors for SuccessBefore deciding how a company is dealing with itstransformation The environment and therefore should change itself, we’ll see Acompany, ie resources, processes and natural factors in nature Values. First,there are enough resources to deal with the most responsible people Innovationand change, but those sources are mostly used or used Invalid investments.  Secondly, in the processes-the organizationis organized into everything – a game These processes will be determinedbecause the change in this process is contributed There will be enough toradically change the way a company operates Business. (Christensen, Orordord,2000)Furthermore, the responsibility for maintaining theproduction and distribution processes Invest in innovations that match theirkey business.

This way is new The technology / discovery will have their R& D capabilities and benefits Key Brand (Suite, Telely, 2011) Moreover,when a company faced a rapid change, the structures should be Keeping thebusiness alive often contributes to fall. However, A firm wants to change itsstructures when faced with changes It disturbs those systems that are used toincrease the risk of failure of the company Confirms credibility. (Hill,Rothermel, 2003) Thirdly, companies that work in a company determinea company’s business Rules for employees are designed to command For instance,if companies make more profits, they will eat Avoid investing in dangerous andserious inventions. Most of the time, small, growing If companies do not haveresources, they will take this task on them Needed. On the other hand theirvalues ??are still invested in these types of investments They do not hesitateto invest in small markets, and do not need to get a particular and high demandMargin. Their processes are much more intuitive than predetermined sets andstructures Structures and this is something that gives them the flexibility toinvest in serious innovation On the other hand, the positions are reluctant todo so.

(Christensen, Orordord, 2000)    3.3.2 Three main reasons for the failiureare Birkinshah and many othersBirkinshaw, Bessant and Delbridge (2007) reviewvarious types of study and They have come to the conclusion that there arethree main reasons for the companies Struggle when dealing with serious andpotentially bad discoveries.

First, additional inventions give more incentive Firmnessof future profit. Also, it seems that this will be a profit Very soon realized.Serious discovery is often fragmented and latitude Wait for companies to leavetheir way, Expected projects. And, in the uncertain state, establishedcompanies will invest they are less afraid of extreme innovation because theyfear to crush their own products (hill, Rothermel, 2003)Second, a responsible person has long-termrelationships with others Companies and a large value network have beencreated. These other partners give a company there is little inspiration tochange because it can change their partnerships Use for all players. Creatingnew networks ensures that the company receives new intelligence Skills for disruptivefindingsThird, established companies have some practicesdepending on their processes Business structures, as mentioned above, are hardto break.

Most of the staff there is no reward and a thought to get out of thebox to bring some improvements to the desk the reward is part of the system.Serious findings are not necessarily disruptivefindings It is important to prevent new entrance examinations first It isdifficult to find these inventions and thus keep its market Share. To find aninnovation, serious innovation is a necessity in the crumbling.        3.3.3Important obstacles will attack innovation               Picture 1Figure 1 shows how the discovery process works andit gives a clear view of what elements Influence. Innovative forms are oftensmall infinite loops, which are heavily embedded just. Large cycles are guidedby basic guidelines: identification, development, plant and Implement.

Disruptive discovery is not like a platform from stage to platform increasednovelty, but the continuous process of learning, feedback and feeds forward.This is affected by many obvious factors, such as the whole process Economics,politics, social structures and competition, but endocus elements Discussedabove. (Asing M, 2006)  All of these factors can create disruptive findingsof a company’s capabilities. The main blockers for this development have beenidentified. The most important is discussed below3.3.

3.1 Adoption Barrier Successful products, designs, and technologieshave been successful in this success, preventing risky attempts at dangerousdiscoveries. 3.3.3.2 Mindset BarrierIt’shard to keep their traditional way of throwing it off to established companies.They have to regularly review their basic approaches and make sure they ‘know’their routine approaches.

In addition, older skills prevent the new skills fromlearning. If a firm has to deal with serious discoveries, it’s a lack ofknowledge, it’s not easy to tell any science correctly.Acompany’s mental and business models work hard and often stand in the way ofinterruptions.

This is one of the reasons why new business models or successivecompanies or foreigners often find success in innovations and positions. 3.3.3.3 Risk Barrier     Revenueexpects managers to avoid risks and invest in emerging markets. When faced withhigh uncertainty, new opportunities are ignored, especially when dealing withtechnical research. Administrators will first ask questions whether or not theycan catch new technology.

However, when they invest in intense innovation, itssuccess depends on the environment in which it is grown. The company must be infavor of instability and risk-taking and do not support a climate of managementcontrol, but trusted by its employees. Moreover, many companies of establishedcompanies are reluctant to suppress their previous investments. They look attheir income from a short-term perspective and try to preserve theirtraditional business.  3.3.

3.4 Nascent BarrierCompaniesare encouraged to invest in mature technology due to its reliability. Inaddition, their highly developed value networks work best in these technologiesand are strongly embedded in the company. Moreover, it is difficult to convincethe customers of a new innovation. (Ahuja, Lambert, 2001) Also, with the actingestablishment, they have no creativity to develop extremist findings.Furthermore, market research is dependent on existing customers whether or nota discovery is followed.

This is largely rejected, and the market they have notseen yet. Over time, changing customer needs and established companies shouldask for additional technical nuances instead. Future customer requirements arespecialized to predict, which arises when a new technology introduces itself.In addition, the discovery teams need to be granted freedom to pursue theirviews on a stimulating business system necessary in a vitally changingenvironment. 3.3.3.5 Infrastructural BarrierDisruptivediscovery requires a clear infrastructure, but sometimes it is not veryevolving in the company’s processes.

Often, these findings are not properlyfollowed and are not without competitiveness for final adoption and marketrelease.