1. Introduction

Blue Wizard was a giant in the IT and Software field. At the initial stages they did not have high level of competition in the market and due to that Blue Wizard had a high market share. Blue Wizard did not think that they would fall apart due to the competition in the market. They were running the market as the market leader at the time and they did not have much of competition during the initial stages.

Blue Wizard had high level of confidence of itself and because of that they did not care about the new market entrants. The organisation followed the same business model during the time, but innovative new market entrants started capturing the consumers to their services. Blue Wizard was ignoring this new entrants and that did not do anything other than humiliating the new market entrants. They were experiencing high level of competition form Google, Microsoft and Apple during the later stages of the organisation. Many of the diversified areas of the organisation are affected by all of those companies and they were able to capture the market with the highest levels of the creativity. The organisation could have done many things during the time to demolish the market competition. But the organisation failed to do so and later the organisation perished in the business environment and their high level of market share was captured by the new entrants of the market. During the report it would be assessed how the organisation had behaved in the market and what could have done by them to improve their status to meet the competition.

2. Blue Wizard’s innovation and innovation value chain

The innovative organisations are functioning better, because they are finding new ways to conduct their business activities in the market. During the early stages Blue Wizard also had the innovative business framework. All the business tasks and new product introductions were happened according to an innovative framework and during that time the consumers were eager to experience the upcoming products of Blue Wizards (Hansen & Birkinshaw, 2007).

Innovation value chain or IVC gives a good framework to implement the innovation in the organisation and maintain it according to the ongoing business environmental conditions (Hansen & Birkinshaw, 2007).

Figure Innovation value chain

(Source: Adopted from Hansen &Birkinshaw, 2007)

At the initial stage of Blue Wizard the organisation was able to assess the market effectively and identify the consumer requirements accurately. This accurate requirements identification was helpful to the organisation when making the innovative products to the market. The organisation started the new idea generation, conversion that idea into a product and diffuse the product to the market to gain high level of revenue to the organisation. The IVC model was successfully conducted by the organisation.

The biggest mistake of the organisation was they did not care for the new market entrants. The new market entrants were able to implement the IVC model in their organisations and was able to provide innovative products to the market. The consumers of the market favoured those new products and the consumer loved the features of these new products. Since Blue Wizard is ignoring the threat of new entrants it did not provide many innovative products to the market to meet the competition of those new entrants. Eventually the consumers lose their faith and perception towards the organisation and they moved the emerging new entrants to the market. Apple, Microsoft and Google were able to implement much innovative cultures in their organisations and due to that they were able to offer highly innovative products to the market to capture the attention of the consumer.

Since the organisation is losing the functions of IVC, Blue Wizard had to find another ways to meet the market competition. Blue Wizard tried to implement the features that the other organisations are providing with their products. This was not innovative but imitating. But the other organisations were aware of the potential of substitutes and imitating. Especially Apple introduced various new products in a shorter timeframes (Hansen & Birkinshaw, 2007). Due to that the competitive organisations were find difficulties to imitate the features of the products and consumers were eagerly waiting to experience the new feature of innovative product in the market.

The organisation required to implement much more innovative methodologies at that time other than providing the substitutes for the existing high selling products of the market. The consumer would like to experience new features and they would not like to experience the existing features from a different brand. The organisation required to offer new products to the market which would absorb new consumer base to the organisation (Hansen & Birkinshaw, 2007). Also it would improve the organisational position in the market. Blue Wizard was much focusing on their financial stability and they did whatever they could to make that stability happened in the market. All the other competitive brands in the market are making that happen and they are providing new innovative products to the market and built new consumer base and new market around those new products. Especially Apple is maintaining the iPod brand over its original branding Apple. Apple was giving much priority to its product lines and also they are building the brand reputation according to that. By providing the high quality and innovative devices Apple was able to capture the market share of Blue Wizard. Blue Wizard did not pay much of attention, if they did so it could save its market share by providing much innovative product to the market than Apple.

3. Six hat creative thinking to Blue Wizard

Creativity is essential factor to survive the business in the market. The organisation should be able to provide creative solutions to the ongoing challenges of the market. Creative thinking might not be aligned with the logical thinking. But creative thinking should be aligned with the organisational expectations and goals (Amabile & Khaire, 2008).

Creativity is helping the organisation to be more innovative. The innovative new features of the products are coming with the creativity. As the innovative feature, Blue Wizard was also much creative in their early stages. Various creative solutions were offered by the organisation to the ongoing challenges of the business environment (Amabile & Khaire, 2008). The organisation was able to achieve high level of market share due to their creative solutions.

Using the de Bono’s Six Thinking Hat method the organisational creativity process could be explained. According to the theory the first hat is the White Hat which defines the information gathering of the organisation. Blue Wizard was able to capture much of information from the environment and those information was used for the development of the organisation. The second hat, Yellow Hat would defined the activities that are conducting to improve the business processes in the market (Amabile & Khaire, 2008). Blue Wizard was able to identify the market requirements and provide the solutions afterwards. It is safer to say that the organisation was able to conduct these two hats with much greater success according to the case.

The black hat stands for the judgment. The organisation should clearly assess whether their innovative and creative solutions are working in the environment as per their expectations. Various criticism and challenges address should be done accordingly and Blue Wizard can be criticize with this. The organisation was assessing their creative solutions previously. But during the high level of competition they did not assess the success and they just everything without much of an assessment.

Red hat represent the emotions and earlier the organisation showed high level of emotion towards the market and the consumers (Amabile, 1998). The consumer expectations were aligned with the organisational expectations. But later the organisation had high level of self-esteem about themselves (Amabile, 1998). They thought that the other organisations are not competitive enough to them. That was a huge mistake and the new market entrants were able to capture the market because of this mistake. The organisation did not offer any creative solutions to that.

Green hat defines the alternative solution to the market. The organisation was able to provide various alternative solutions to the market during the competition. But those solutions were not capable enough to capture the stolen market share of the organisation. Blue hat defines the thinking process of the organisation. The organisational thinking process should be more aligned to the creativity. Blue Wizard was highly focused on the competition and they did not think much about the creativity during the time.

The organisation had high level of creativity during the early ages of the organisation. They have offered much of innovative and creative products to the market after identifying the consumer expectations. Also when the organisation was losing its value in the stock market the organisation was able to improve that through creative thinking.

The application that Blue Wizard made with the smiling face and frowning face was much creative. The employees of the organisation was aware about the stock prices due to that and they get the idea that they would get much benefits if the stock prices go up. What they can do was improve their efficiency and effectiveness in the business process. This was much successful and the organisation was able to address the stock price decreasing with much positive and creative solution.

Mainly the organisation was unable to differ the creative thinking and logical thinking. The logical thinking was implemented to the creative thinking requirements. Logical thinking and creative thinking are different aspects, but the organisation should be able to use those aspects to achieve the organisational expectations by selecting the most suitable aspect. During the competition the organisation failed to achieve the organisational expectations because they were focusing much on the improvement of the financial status of the organisation. When it comes to new technology, the logical thinking might not be enough. The creative thinking would needed to be implemented to achieve the competitive advantage in the market.

When the time the organisation realized the competitive brands had achieve the market share, it was too late to regain the lost market share. The consumer expectation was the new innovative products and that expectation was not achieved by the organisation through logical thinking or creative thinking. The organisation had implemented poor strategy of providing the substitutes to the market. The imitating the products in the market would not be good to the organisation and its brands. That has polluted the organisational reputation.

To achieve the lost market of the organisation it is required to introduce the brand to the market. The organisation has to improve the innovation of the organisation and new product development. Blue Wizard had the reputation in the market and among the market there would be faithful consumers. Those consumers can make a huge change in the market. By providing the proper marketing and promotional activities the organisation would be able regain its lost market position and it would restore the organisational value in the stock market as well.

4. Bounded rationality of Blue Wizard

Bounded rationality would address the current factors when making the rapid decision in the organisation. The organisation was able to achieve the high market share during the early stages of the organisation because it was entertaining the needs of the consumers. The consumers wanted to have IT and software products and that need was fulfilled by the organisation. Bounded rationality would have high level of relationship with the strategic thinking of the organisation. The strategic thinking would focus on more specific objectives to the organisation. The strategic thinking would look at the organisation as an entity and proposed methodologies to improve the organisation in the environment to mainly gain the competitive advantage in the market (Donald & Eisenhardt, 2012). The competitive advantage would be achieved by using the organisational resources in much creative and efficient ways. Strategic thinking would have high level of differences when it compares to the creative thinking.

The organisation was facing high level of competition in the market at its later stages. Because of that the organisation was losing its market share during the time and that should be addressed through the rationally by the organisational management. The improvement of the share prices in the stock market was a good decision to the organisation and through that the organisation was able to achieve high level of investment to the organisation. Also it was an indication of the improvement of the successful behaviour in the market as well.

The competition had aroused when the new entrants were invading the market (Donald & Eisenhardt, 2012). New entrants of the market had created innovative products to the market with various new features that the consumer can enjoy. The consumers were familiarised with the existing products of the market and the consumers appreciated the innovative new products with higher level of positive perception. The organisational expectation should be aligned with the new market competition at the time. But they did not care for the competition and they wanted to improve their market share and stock prices. The employees were guided to achieve that objective effectively.

The organisational strategic thinking was fragmented during that time. Because of that the bounded rationality of the organisation was limited. Blue Wizard was completely lose their focus of their product development and diversification (De Wit & Meyer, 2010). The continuous research and development should be done to improve the organisational product portfolio and the research findings should be able to address the consumer expectations in the market.

5. Conclusion

The organisation should have improved its creativity to enhance the product differentiation and diversification of the organisation (Brown, 2008). Blue Wizard was able to create new products to the market and with creation of the new products the organisation was able to achieve new market to the organisation initially (Reeves & Deilmer, 2011). That was required during the competition of the new rivals but the organisation was not creative enough to offer new product to the market to make new consumer base to the organisation. Blue Wizard clearly showed their incompetence in the market and that was a major impact to the organisational market share. The consumers believed that the time of Blue Wizard was over in the market (Rigby, et al., 2009).

Blue Wizard was in high level of hopes and they did not think that the new entrants to the market would be problematic to them. They thought that their market share is untouchable and they were performing better in the market (Rigby, et al., 2009). This high hopes and the extreme admiration were not beneficial to the organisation. Actually the organisation failed to assess the organisational capabilities in the market. This wrong assessment had created epidemic situation to the organisation and they had to face the negative consequences. Correct assessment of the organisation would be highly beneficial to the organisation when making the functional plans to the organisation (Rigby, et al., 2009).

The organisation should improve its factor collection for the decision making process. The organisation should not give the rationality only into one level. The strategic thinking and the creative thinking should find the balance in the organisation and it would require to implement much creative solutions to the market to gain the consumer attention.

Reference

Amabile, T., 1998. How to Kill Creativity. Harvard Business Review, pp. 77-87.

Amabile, T., Fisher, C. & Pillemer, J., 2014. IDEO’s Culture of Helping. Harvard Business Review, pp. 55-61.

Amabile, T. & Khaire, M., 2008. Creativity and The Role of The Leader. Harverd Business Review, pp. 101-109.

Brown, T., 2008. Thinking. Harvard Business Review, pp. 86-92.

De Wit, B. & Meyer, R., 2010. Strategic Thinking. Strategy Process, Volume 4, pp. 53-63.

Donald, S. & Eisenhardt, K., 2012. Simple Rules for a Complex World. Harvard Business Review, pp. 69-74.

Hansen, M. & Birkinshaw, J., 2007. The Innovation Value Chain. The Sophisticated Innovator, pp. 121-130.

Reeves, M. & Deilmer, M., 2011. Adaptability: The New Competitive Advantage. Harvard Business Review, pp. 135-141.

Rigby, D., Gruver, K. & Allen, J., 2009. Innovation in Turbulant Times. Harvard Business review, pp. 709-86.

Scholes, J. & Whittington, 2007. Exploring Corporate Strategy. In: Exploring Corporate Strategy. s.l.:s.n., p. 238.