Determining the Practical Application of the ‘Transient Advantage’ Concepts

In her article, Rita Gunther pointed out the disadvantages of the ‘sustainable’ competitive strategy and presented the new cutting-edge approach – the transient strategy. According to the author, this method provides the organization with more effective tools to reorganize business areas that are not working well (Gunther 2013). Interestingly, the transient strategy’s fundamental principle is the concept of constant changing and not getting into the trap of superiority.

The author presented the list of well-known giants who lost their competitive advantage precisely because they could not adjust to the new dimensions of the current on occurring markets: Sony, Nokia, and Kodak. One of the most exciting ideas was the concept of “Facing the Truth,” which suggests that the CEO and management should evaluate their firms’ state of affairs and not ignore the apparent shortcomings.

An example of a successful implementation of such a strategy is Google, which conducts quarterly surveys of its employees on how satisfied they are with management practices and working conditions. In particular, employees fill out a questionnaire of 13 questions, which ask them to express their opinion on how fully their potential is revealed within the company and to make comments. Google also practices communal round tables when all company employees are invited to discuss new development strategies or new products, regardless of whether they work on the project or no (Friedman 2019). This approach is practiced because Google trusts its employees and is ready for constant change and constructive criticism. The atmosphere in the company’s offices also expresses its propensity for continuous change in an ever-changing market, which invariably leads Google to success.

The author also presents the concept of “Seven Dangerous Misconceptions,” which prevent companies from developing transient competitive advantage. These misconceptions are the first-mover trap, the superiority trap, the quality trap, the hostage resources trap, the white-space trap, the empire-building trap, and the sporadic-innovation trap. Nokia, which has made it to the author’s anti-list, seems to have fallen prey to each of these misconceptions (“Case Study: How Nokia Lost the Smartphone Battle” 2015). In particular, the company failed to face the truth about the competitive product lines. It was captivated by the atmosphere of fear that paralyzed any innovations, a trait characteristic of the empire-building trap. Moreover, the company failed to develop the new lines of products, even though it was the first to create the tablet-like device, a trait of the hostage-resources trap.

References

“Case Study: How Nokia Lost the Smartphone Battle.” Enterprise Garage. 2021. Web.

Friedman, Zack. 2019. “13 Secret Questions That Google Uses To Collect Employee Feedback.” Forbes, Web.

Gunther, Rita. 2013. “Transient Advantage.” Harvard Business Review, Web.