4/5 (1)

The introduction of AirPods and the changes made to the iPhone, inspired a completely new wireless trend and imposed a new way of using headphones to customers. Even when the wired earbuds were not an issue to be solved to begin with, they have been replaced by a wireless version. It is a very clear example of how companies can impose innovations on customers and drive change. Moreover, the initial dismay experienced by many Apple users, when the AirPods and new line of iPhones (without headphone jack) were introduced, shows how innovation might not completely match the spirit of the moment. Interestingly however, the wireless trend is currently accepted as normal by most, meaning that customers have adapted to and adopted the wireless innovations pushed by Apple. As such, I believe this is an interesting business case to further examine.

In my opinion, this innovation does not truly categorize as a disruptive innovation. Disruptive innovations typically make a product/service more attainable and affordable to a wider/new audience and are introduced by a smaller/new player. One could argue that Apple was a new player in a way, as it was a newcomer in the (nearly nonexistent) wireless earbud market. Yet, Apple is and was one of the largest incumbents in the phone market. In addition, Apple’s shift towards wireless has made listening to music on an iPhone less attainable and more expensive (on the short to medium term). That is, whereas iPhones used to have a headphone jack and charging port, they are now only have a charging port. Customers can buy special wired earbuds and insert it into the charging port, but these earbuds are not included in the iPhone box anymore. Moreover, using wired earbuds means the iPhone cannot be charged at the same time (as the charging port needs to be used for both), unless the user purchases a special splitter. Of course, there is also the option to buy the AirPods, but these come at a rather significant price of €180 and upwards. In general though, the purchase price of an iPhone is already relatively high compared to competitors, meaning that iPhone owners might be more willing to pay for expensive services/products (including the AirPods). Although the AirPods were more of a niche product at first, the concept has become a true hype and has now become more mainstream. That is, competitors have caught on and cheaper alternatives have been introduced. 

• 

Another intriguing aspect of the AirPods hype, are its societal implications. More specifically, some people apparently see or saw AirPods as a symbol of status and wealth. Especially in its initial stages, the concept of AirPods was totally new and out of reach for most, because of the relatively high purchase price. The people that did make the leap and bought AirPods, and could afford to do so, in a way felt privileged. As a result, the internet was flushed with social media posts, memes, videos, articles, etc. In my view, this image has changed to a certain extent, as AirPods and similar (cheaper) alternatives have become much more mainstream in the Western World. 

• 

The described business case does in my opinion give some interesting food for thought. The world was baffled and not enthusiastic about AirPods and the new iPhones (without headphone jack) at first but has now truly embraced the changes. The AirPods have apparently even become a status symbol to some. The wireless trend has become the new normal, meaning that many (if not all) Apple competitors have followed. This business case shows the power of Apple and how Apple can impose innovation on users, without initial happiness/enthusiasm from the customer. What do you think? Is it okay for a company to have this much power and impose innovations on customers? Do you think the wave of wireless innovations is a change for the better? Do you think AirPods are a status symbol? Etc.

References:

1. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/08/technology/apple-iphone.html?searchResultPosition=7
2. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/08/technology/iphone-7-apple-headphone-jack.html?searchResultPosition=9
3. https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/apple-s-airpods-changed-everything-they-gave-company-near-monopolistic-ncna1055656
4. https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-airpods-make-you-look-rich-these-millennials-think-so-11550591284
5. https://www.inverse.com/article/20690-ways-apple-airpods-disrupt-headphones-jack-iphone-7
6. https://twitter.com/WAFCNathan/status/773598072559591425?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E773598072559591425%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.inverse.com%2Farticle%2F20690-ways-apple-airpods-disrupt-headphones-jack-iphone-7
7. https://medium.com/@evangelo/up-in-the-air-what-airpod-memes-tell-us-about-the-future-of-marketing-3623b7714ccd

No ratings yet.

A few years ago a new phenomenon has emerged: shared e-scooters. At this point in time, the effects of shared e-scooters on transport are undeniable. It has gotten to a point where cities without e-sharing scooters have become unthinkable, as most people living in a city have used e-scooters or have at least heard about the concept. E-Scooter Sharing has both its advantageous and disadvantageous. 

In short, shared e-scooters are electric mopeds that users can unlock using their phone. Users can then drive the moped, short distance, within a designated city/area. Furthermore, the e-scooters are dockless and available 24/7. The companies that issue the e-scooters oversee whether the battery is charged, reparations, maintenance, etc. The main e-scooter providers in the Netherlands are Felyx, Check and Go-Sharing. 

One of the main advantages of e-scooter sharing is that it contributes to more connectivity with a city, making it easier to go from one place to another (source 1). That is, some areas of a city are less reachable by public transport and at certain hours of the day (i.e. at night/early morning) public transport is not fully operational. E-scooter sharing partly solves this issue, as the e-scooters are readily available throughout the day in several (including difficult to reach) areas of the city. As such, e-scooters have become an important part of transportation networks in several cities already. Second, e-scooters are convenient, as they are easy to use and take the hassle of owning a scooter away. That is, owning a scooter comes with quite a lot of costs (maintenance, storage, etc.) and with the high risk of theft. By renting an e-scooter this hassle is avoided. Third, e-scooter sharing is relatively eco-friendly, as all scooters run on electricity. Moreover, the fact that scooters are shared, as opposed to owned by individual people, means that one scooters is used more often and by more people. A recent study by Dias et al. (2021) found that e-scooters indeed help combat several environmental issues that cities cope with, such as air pollution (source 2). Lastly, also according to the study by Dias et al (2021), e-scooters help reduce inequalities with regards to access to (public) transport (source 2). As such, one could argue that e-scooter sharing is a disruptive innovation: it has made transport affordable and accessible to a new/wider audience (source 3). 

One of the disadvantages of e-scooters is, in my opinion, that it promotes laziness and passiveness. People tend to sometimes choose to use a shared e-scooter, when they have a perfectly fine, working bike. Second, e-scooters are a nuisance to some people (source 4). The e-scooters are sometimes parked in the wrong place, swarm the roads, etc. Also, drivers of the scooters are not always fully aware of the local (moped) traffic rules, which means some dangerous situations can occur. Third, the e-scooters are prone to theft and vandalism (source 5). Although the e-scooters have systems in place against theft and vandalisms, the e-scooters can be hacked, stolen and/or destroyed. You would think this is a big issue for the companies issuing the e-scooters, but because of the relatively low purchase price of the e-scooters (which are bought in bulk), it is in fact not a mayor threat to their business (source 5).

In short, E-Scooter Sharing contributes to connectivity within a city, is convenient, is relatively sustainable and reduces inequality. However, E-Scooter Sharing does promote laziness and passiveness, is a nuisance to some and is vulnerable to theft and vandalism.

Although there are some drawbacks, E-Scooter Sharing is here to stay, in my opinion. To me, the convenience and ease of use of the concept make it a true asset. Instead of having to wait for the tram for 15 minutes when your bike is broken, you can now make use of an e-scooter. Moreover, there are some exciting possibilities for innovation. E-scooters with smart cameras could for example contribute to making the city a safer place (source 6) and e-scooters could be integrated with the existing public transport network thus turning it into Mobility as a Service (MaaS) (source 7).

References (Pictures):
1. https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/tech/artikel/5033551/elektrische-deelscooter-scooters-huren-escooter-felyx-check-go-sharing
2. https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/de-elektrische-scooter-is-het-snelst-groeiende-deelvervoer-in-de-stad-felyx-wil-nu-internationaal-vliegen~b2c6ab51/
3. https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/289113/vier-dagen-na-start-al-vier-deelscooters-in-beverwijk-uitgebrand-besmeurd-of-vernield

References (Text):
1. https://news.mit.edu/2021/e-scooters-new-micro-mobility-service-0622
2. Dias, G., Arsenio, E., & Ribeiro, P. (2021). The Role of Shared E-Scooter Systems in Urban Sustainability and Resilience during the Covid-19 Mobility Restrictions. Sustainability, 13(13), 7084. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137084
3. Christensen, C. M., Raynor, M. E., & McDonald, R. (2015). What is disruptive innovation? Harvard Business Review, 93(12), 44-53. 
4. https://news.law.fordham.edu/jcfl/2018/12/02/the-rise-of-the-electric-scooter-industry/
5. https://mashable.com/article/e-scooter-hacks-bird-lime
6. https://www.euronews.com/next/2021/09/13/eyes-on-the-road-can-e-scooters-with-cameras-protect-pedestrians-and-make-our-cities-safer
7. Arias-Molinares, D., & Carlos García-Palomares, J. (2020). Shared mobility development as key for prompting mobility as a service (MaaS) in urban areas: The case of Madrid. Case Studies On Transport Policy, 8(3), 846-859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2020.05.017