Technology has played a significant role in elevating entrepreneurship globally. Innovative ideas have been diverse to fit the digital world in business and market systems. Products have been improved through technology; hence, encouraging competition in the market. When the quality of products advances through innovation, their value increases, enabling them to gain a competitive edge against other brands (Pech 2016). An intersection of design and technology improves the commercialization of goods and services in the modern world. Various companies have emulated using innovation in improving their business ideas and engaging in a competitive market. Technology has enabled entrepreneurs to develop software and programs that uphold their success in their companies (Vorbach et al., 2017). Also, companies can research various techniques to enhance their services and apply them accordingly. This essay discusses the comparison between companies that upheld the triadic approach to entrepreneurship and companies that did not use the method.
The Amazon Company has constantly upgraded with technology by innovating more straightforward ways of accessing its products online. However, disruptive innovation has led to the enhancement of the provision of services by the Amazon Company. Besides, radical innovation has made products cheaper and affordable to the general public fond of Amazon products (Pech 2016; Tou et al., 2019). For example, readers have benefitted from the disruptive innovation as they can download softcopies of diverse books and buy them at less than half the price. People’s perspective about online products has changed as they are now attracted to Amazon’s more affordable online products.
Disruptive innovation can be used to determine a company’s success as it pushes away competitors in the market systems. Besides, disruptive innovation is easy to use, simple, cost-effective, and consists of one engineering design achieved through digitization. Businesses that depend on hardcopy books and articles have been made redundant by the enhanced invention (Del Bosco et al., 2019; Tou). The originality of their ideas on entrepreneurship was based on less developed innovation before technology evolved.
Also, some companies such as Apple Company have resolved to close innovation. Apple Company has not successfully applied the three-dimensional approach to innovation and entrepreneurship. Hence leading to a lack of enhanced profits in their products. Companies using closed innovation do not approve other companies from using their business designs. Also, companies such as Apple do not share their expertise and prefer not to disclose their business models identified by their engineers. According to Pech (2016), the kind of business perspective has been discarded in favor of open-source innovation.
The intense global competition in commerce does not encourage closed innovation as companies benefit from shared expertise by applying new business designs. The main limitation of this invention is that it relied entirely on in-house expertise that took time to develop (Pech, 2016; Eckhardt et al., 2018). Sharing manufacturing ideas enables companies to enhance their engineers’ designs and strengthen their arguments. Besides, products in an open-innovation model are designed to fit their purpose and the market.
To sum up, companies’ business success depends on their flexibility in coming up with innovative ideas that fit the digital market. Companies that follow the three-pronged approach have been more successful in their business endeavors than companies that have ignored the new models of innovation strategies. Also, companies that re-invest their surplus profit in their business often have a competitive advantage. Innovation ideas go hand in hand with business ideas towards commercializing a new product in the market.
References
Del Bosco, B., Chierici, R., & Mazzucchelli, A. (2019). Fostering entrepreneurship: an innovative business model to link innovation and new venture creation. Review of Managerial Science, 13(3), 561-574.
Eckhardt, J. T., Ciuchta, M. P., & Carpenter, M. (2018). Open innovation, information, and entrepreneurship within platform ecosystems. Strategic entrepreneurship journal, 12(3), 369-391.
Pech, R. M. (2016). Achieving the innovative edge in technology, engineering design, and entrepreneurship. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 5(1), 6.
Tou, Y., Watanabe, C., Moriya, K., Vurpillat, V., & Neittaanmäki, P. (2019). A new concept of R&D in neo open innovation: transformation of R&D triggered by Amazon. International Journal of Managing Information Technology, 11(1). Web.
Vorbach, S., Wipfler, H., & Schimpf, S. (2017). Business model innovation vs. business model inertia: The role of disruptive technologies. BHM Berg-und Hüttenmännische Monatshefte, 162(9), 382-385.