Date of Submission:
I subscribe to the opinion that the time-tested way for market leaders to command their markets is by a constant introduction of recent technology and aggregate the first mover advantages. To support this opinion, it is necessary to consider the internet market. In the 1990s, the internet market was broadly characterized by the land grabbing element where companies rushed to acquire the market shares. Early entrants such as eBay, Yahoo, and Amazon acquired large market capitalization because investors’ analysts projected that early entry would result in higher returns. Consequently, widespread opinions on first mover advantages and higher market valuations resulted in the gold rush opinions on the early internet entrants. Nonetheless, serious questions arose about this perception. In a few years’ time, a large number of the internet forerunners had disappeared. It followed that new entrants such as Google emerged as the market leaders. Was the perception of first entrant advantage an illusion? The perception of first entrants’ advantage was not an illusion. This owes to the fact that the pioneer companies established a good client base but failed to update their technology. This is the main reason that caused the failure of most pioneer companies. In addition, companies such as amazon that quickly embraced the rapidly changing have managed to command the market to date. It follows that the opinion that the time-tested way for market leaders to command their markets is by a constant introduction of recent technology and aggregate the first mover advantages is a valid argument.
I also subscribe to the philosophy that strategy researchers have a difficult time in explaining to business owners why some companies perform better than others. It follows that the opinion that strategy researchers are head-in-the-cloud types with little relevant information is a fallacy. This owes to the fact that global strategic researchers have a task of conducting an internal audit. Evidently, these strategic researchers have to identify a company’s strengths and weaknesses. In evaluating those traits, the strategic researchers have to examine the environmental, political, technological, and social events that can cause potential threats or provide opportunities. At this point, it is clear that strategic researchers experience a lot of difficulty in explaining to business owners why some companies perform better than others. In fact, it is clear that strategic…