The Evolving Nature of Marketing Myopia
By: Richard K. Yu
Tags: Marketing, Education, Business, Innovation, SEO

3. Case Studies

Of course, what good is the theory if we don’t have some great examples of disastrous failures in the form of companies and business executives who eschewed the idea of marketing myopia and did the opposite: product optimization.

Exhibit A — Kodak

One of Kodak’s historical cameras.

The short version, Kodak was obsessed with perfecting its film products that it ignored the R&D that it had invested into digital technologies and the digital technology wave as it was occurred.

It’s a classic case used by many marketers to demonstrate the importance of knowing your customer. In Kodak’s case, this lack of awareness or knowledge say them fall from one of the most prominent brands for creating photographs, videos, and the like, into an afterthought.

Scott Anthony at the Harvard Business Review explains it the best in his report on the matter.

An easy explanation is myopia. Kodak was so blinded by its success that it completely missed the rise of digital technologies. But that doesn’t square with reality. After all, the first prototype of a digital camera was created in 1975 by Steve Sasson, an engineer working for … Kodak.

The irony is palpable. Kodak literally had the tech for the digital revolution and blundered itself off a financial cliff onto the jagged rocks of bankruptcy below.

Exhibit B — Blockbuster

The general theme here is that not listening to your customers will royally destroy your business, especially if there are adaptable competitors in the market willing to quickly step in and capitalize during your company’s moment of indecision or muddled judgment

In Blockbuster’s case, they had confidence in their linear model of renting and selling movies from physical locations. They considered the acquisition of the now dominant Netflix to be a liability because of the uncertainty associated with its business mode.

An article in Inc.com elucidates the situation:

Think about Blockbuster, the blue and yellow pigeon of the entertainment world. You probably think their demise was inevitable as soon as Netflix burst onto the scene. What you may not know is that the movie rental giant had several opportunities to acquire Netflix but balked, citing current sales.

The idea of marketing myopia strikes again in the sense the Blockbuster forgot who they were selling products and services for — people wanting to see movies. The myopic part of Blockbuster’s decision making when it came to the issue of Netflix as a competitor was that Blockbuster never sought to change or question the validity of its business model — which had worked fine in the past.

In doing so, they ignored the needs of the customer. Naturally, as technologies for online streaming became more robust, the damage caused by this myopia on the part of Blockbuster’s oversight regarding serving their clients was irreversible. They had lost control of the entertainment market to Netflix because of their complacency with respect to customer needs in comparison to product design.

Exhibit C — Nokia

Same story here folks, Nokia lost a big chunk of its market share due to Android devices and the iOS. This WIRED article by Alexandra Chang summarizes the market shift lucidly regarding Nokia’s brilliant downfall.

With its full touchscreen and app-based operating system, the iPhone changed the very definition of what a smartphone should be. Yet Nokia failed to respond to the iPhone and the shifting consumer demand that came with it.

Nokia honestly found itself in dead water when the touchscreen of the iPhone came out and captivated customers with its never-before-seen technology. In one fell swoop, the unbreakable Nokia became a brand of the past. There was no counter-reply, no new innovation on the part of Nokia. The company was simply blindsided.