|
OPEN INNOVATION AND ITS IMPLICATIONS ON NOKIA IN THE SMARTPHONE INDUSTRY
Vijayaraghavan Narayanan
GGSB – MBA – PT6
28/11/2009
A Marketing Management paper on Product & Service Innovation
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 2
THE OPEN INNOVATION PARADIGM ........................................................................... 2
The Outside-In Process ..................................................................................................... 3
The Inside-out Process ...................................................................................................... 4
The Coupled Process ......................................................................................................... 5
Hurdles in Implementing Open Innovation ..................................................................... 5
Open Strategy and Open Business Model ........................................................................ 6
NOKIA AND THE SMARTPHONE INDUSTRY .................................................................. 6
Nokia SWOT Analysis ....................................................................................................... 9
Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 10
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 12
Figures ..................................................................................................................... 13
References ................................................................................................................ 15
2
INTRODUCTION
Companies that don't innovate die.1 Due to the rapidly increasing speed of technological
changes, innovation which was once solely an internal affair is gradually being
transformed into a more fluid process integrating internal and external sources of ideas in
terms of products and services. This paper delves into the concept of “Open Innovation”
from an academic perspective and follows it up with a real world scenario, where the
implementation of these business practices in the Mobile handset industry is discussed
from Nokia’s perspective.
THE OPEN INNOVATION PARADIGM
Kotler (2005) defines innovation as an idea, service, product or piece of technology that
has been developed and marketed to customers who perceive it as novel or new.2 New
product development goes through various stages (Figure 1)3 which can be an expensive,
risky and time consuming affair. Yet, companies must innovate before the competition to
satisfy the rapid changes in needs and wants of the customer. Traditionally, new product
development had all R&D efforts coming from within the company. In recent years, this
closed paradigm is getting eroded due to various reasons such as increased R&D costs,
high attrition rates and shorter time-to-market cycles. This has led to the emergence of a
new paradigm called "Open Innovation" (also called “distributed co-creation”).4 It
advocates that, to remain competitive, firms should be flexible in using external ideas
along with internal ones. External ideas can originate from sources such as suppliers,
customers, etc. and internal ideas can be brought outside through licensing, joint
ventures, etc. Open Innovation (OI) practices have been divided into three categories -
the Outside-in, Inside-out and the Coupled process.5
(1) The outside-in process: This paradigm involves the integration of external ideas with
internal ones to create offerings which wouldn’t have been possible through internal
R&D alone.6,7 These external sources could be the suppliers, the customers,
complementary technologies from un-related industries, universities, purchase of
Intellectual property(IP) in terms of patents and licenses and listening posts at innovation
clusters .8 Involving Suppliers can greatly enhance the product R&D as they usually
have more technical knowledge about their components. Suppliers like Magna Steyr are
integrated into parts of the innovation process of various European vehicle
manufactures.9 OI model views customers as part of the problem solving process and
sometimes enables companies to deduce the customers’ needs even before they are aware
of them. Universities are also seen as potentially valuable sources of innovation. Many
companies such as Intel (‘Lablets’)10 , Merck (Merck Gene Index)11 and BT (through BT
Exact)12 have set up networks with universities across the globe to gain from such crosspollination.
A survey of 300 senior executives in 2006 revealed universities(60%) to be
the biggest external source followed by customers(50%) and suppliers(>45%) .13
Companies like P&G (through Connect & Develop)14 and IBM have been early adopters
while others like Siemens have just begun.15 Purchasing IPs (In-licensing) or acquisitions
is also seen as favorable method employed by many companies. Companies like Cisco
match the R&D output of its competitors mainly by monitoring young start-ups around
the globe and involving with them through investments or partnerships which sometimes
lead to acquisitions.16,17 Another OI practice called Crowd-sourcing is increasingly
gaining popularity. The idea is to outsource a problem or a challenge to the masses in the
form of an open call. Solution providers are sometimes rewarded monetarily or through
recognition.18 This model derives from the success of community driven Open source
projects such as Linux OS and Wikipedia. Growing internet penetration and technologies
such as web 2.0 are key contributors to this model. It has even led to the creation of
intermediaries called “Knowledge Brokers”19- Institutions (like innocentive20 and
ninesigma21) that aim to bring together firms (called “seekers”) with difficult technical
problems and individual scientists or teams (called “solvers”). Not only for-profit firms,
but public institutions and Not-for profit firms have also started leveraging these
Innovation Networks for the betterment of society.22, 23, 24
(2) The inside-out process: This OI model refers to processes whereby a business
generates profits by transferring its ideas to the outside environment. The usual routes
taken are outsourcing, licensing and spinoffs.25 It not only saves R&D cost and
development time, but also can generate high margin licensing income thereby promoting
innovative ecosystems. In cases of insufficient financial or technical capabilities for a
project, companies can spin it off into a new venture with help from external investors
and can itself become a customer for that venture. Investors take the development burden
and the company can reacquire successful ventures.26 Bringing out the idea can also help
the company tap into new markets (cross industry innovation) for revenues. IP licensing
(Out-licensing) has become a major source of revenue generation and many companies
such as ARM survive on this model alone.27 By Out-licensing technology, companies can
avoid the cost and risks of product development and still participate in the rewards of a
product developed using its technology.28 Many companies with redundant IPs and
patents can successfully exploit this approach like Philips, which has developed a
thriving licensing business around its more than 60,000 patents.29 Companies such as
Cisco use this process to set a technological standard which is seen as a major reason for
outsourcing the commercialization of a technology. During tougher economic climates
such as recession, the Inside-out approach can yield better results as companies can put
their unsustainable R&D projects outside which may eventually benefit the company
when the market recovers.30
(3) The coupled process: This paradigm couples the outside-in and inside-out processes
and firms usually implement it through alliances and joint-ventures with complementary
partners in which give and take is crucial for success. The objective of most companies
that focus on the coupled process is to set standards or a dominant design for their
products. 31 A recent example is the creation of the Open Handset Alliance,32 a strategic
alliance of 47 companies working in related fields with a common objective to develop
the next generation Open Source Operating System (OS) for the mobile communications
platform.
Hurdles in implementing Open Innovation: In spite of the potential of OI
communities, when it comes to execution there is a significant gap due to various risks
and hurdles involved.33 A few of the challenges include attracting & motivating cocreators,
governance mechanism to facilitate co-creation, management of IP rights and
sustaining quality.34, 35 A study with 107 companies in 2008, showed that risks such as
loss of knowledge (48%), higher coordination costs (48%), as well as loss of control and
higher complexity (both 41%) are mentioned as frequent risks connected to OI activities.
In addition, there are significant internal barriers, such as the difficulty in finding the
right partner (43%), imbalance between OI activities and daily business (36%), and
insufficient time and financial resources for open innovation activities.36 Human costs of
inside-out process must also be considered where good people are often let go along with
the assets they’ve created.37 These factors make it imperative for a company to redefine
its business models to ensure the success and sustenance of its OI activities.
Open Strategy and Open Business Model: To leverage economic value from OI,
companies must change their business models to what is termed as “Open Business
Model”. It provides the much desired combination of leveraged cost and time savings
during value creation with new revenue opportunities for value capture. 38 It also requires
an “Open strategy” which involves balancing the value creation along with the capture of
a portion of the value created, instead of losing sight of value capture during the pursuit
of innovation. Companies such as IBM and Merck have successfully used this strategy in
developing an ecosystem to create value upstream and later capture it downstream. 39
Open innovation allows firms not to perform every function of the value chain (as
defined by Porter40) on their own. A detailed study of how successful OI strategies have
provided anomalies to the traditional concepts such as Porter’s five forces( based upon
ownership ,control and a focus within the firm) call for a substantive revision in these
models .41 Figure 2 depicts the new business model of open innovation and its benefits.42
The mobile handset industry was an early adopter of the outside-in OI model with the
inside-out process gaining popularity in recent times. The following section discusses this
evolution in the Smartphone segment from the perspective of mobile handset maker -
Nokia and analyzes its OI initiatives with those of its competitors.
NOKIA AND THE SMARTPHONE INDUSTRY
Nokia is a Finland based world's number one manufacturer of mobile devices by market
share and a leader in the converging Internet and communications industries with a
presence in over 150 countries.43 The mobile handset industry is an R&D intensive
industry with many of the OI practices such as in-licensing, out-licensing, outsourcing
and strategic alliances being fundamental to a company’s existence. Nokia is one of the
few mobile handset companies that has been embracing other methods of OI as well and
even proclaims itself to be a consumer led company.44 Established in 1986, the Nokia
Research Centre now collaborates on research projects ( in varied fields from nanoscience
to radio research) with leading universities, research institutes and other
technology companies around the world to create an OI network .45, 46 This has helped
Nokia not only to come up with numerous Industry firsts,47 but also present a tangible
vision of the future. 48 Dittrich et al. (2007) have discussed the various OI activities
pursued by Nokia from 1985 to 2002.49 In the current scenario, one of its important OI
activities was the formation of Symbian Joint Venture in 1998 with other handset
manufacturers with market creation as its main goal. In 2001, Nokia released its first
‘open’ Symbian Operating System (OS) phone which allowed third party applications to
be run on it.50 This marked the beginning of the era of ‘Smartphones’ – Phones that offer
advanced capabilities, such as a PC-like OS and Internet access.51 Nokia emerged as a
leader in the Smartphone category with 50.8% market share by Q2, 2007 with Symbian
OS having a share of 65.8%.52 It had a rich portfolio with phones suited for Business and
for entertainment. In the category of Business phones, it already had a healthy
competition from RIM (Research in Motion) and in June, 2007 the PC maker Apple,
announced the launch of its Smartphone – iPhone.53 It offered a never seen before
portable media & communications experience with an elegant, very intuitive yet simple
user interface. Its popularity not only stumped the competitors but soon made it an
industry standard in smartphones.54 A year after its launch, Nokia’s market share was
down to 42.4% with RIM at 15.9% and Apple at 12.9%.55 Meanwhile, in
November’2007, Google made its foray into the mobile market by Open Sourcing its OS
– Android through the Open Handset Alliance.56 This move portrays the ‘Open Strategy’
approach of Google; whereby it creates value upstream (Android) with an intention of
capturing the value downstream (with proprietary applications and online ad revenues).
Nokia, which was already taking a hit in the upper-end Smartphone segment from Apple
& RIM, played a catch-up act by acquiring Symbian in June 2008 and making it Open
Source through the Symbian Foundation - an alliance of various companies including
handset makers such as Samsung and Sony Ericsson.57 Since then many companies have
joined either of the two, with some such as Samsung and Sony Ericsson being part of
both alliances. In July 2008, Apple announced the launch of “App Store” – an online
store where third party developers can sell their applications made for iPhone on a
revenue sharing basis.58 This move reflected the phenomenal “Thought Leadership” of its
CEO, Steve Jobs as it changed the paradigm of a mobile phone sale from a one-time
revenue generation model to that of revenue generation throughout its life-time. Apple
also saw the availability of a huge number of applications as a much more compelling
reason to buy an iPhone. In terms of “Service Innovation” it depicted the OI model,
where Apple benefitted from the R&D efforts of external application (App) developers
with shared revenues. Within a month of its launch, the “App store” was earning $1
million a day.59 It further cemented Apple’s position as the leading Smartphone in spite
of an array of "me-too" devices in the market. The end of Q3, 2008, saw the world
economy plunge into one of its worst financial crisis with most developed economies
falling into recession but Q1, 2009 results showed that although worldwide, Mobile
Phone Sales declined by 8.6%, Smartphones grew by 12.7%.60 Q2, 2009 followed this
trend with 6% decline in mobile phone and 27% increase in Smartphone sales.
Smartphones generally have higher profit margins and an analyst report showed that
Apple & RIM accounted for only 3% of worldwide mobile phone sales in 2008 but 35%
of operating profits.61 These reports were further encouraging for companies who wished
to venture into this segment by taking advantage of Open Source OS as it lowered the
entry barrier (in terms of R&D cost & time) for them.62 Ideally, the “App store”
innovation should have had come from Nokia, as it allowed third party applications since
2001, but it never thought of leveraging its full potential until the launch of the online
“Ovi store” in May’2009.63 By this time, Apple’s “App store” was almost 50000 apps
strong and growing.64 In August, 2009 Nokia made a radical shift by announcing its most
advanced Smartphone (N900) based on the Linux OS – Maemo with availability from
November’2009. In spite of Nokia’s product strategy of “line stretching” , whereby it
offers a wide array of Smartphones for various budgets(albeit at an increased R&D
cost),65,66,67 its market share tumbled to an all time low of 39% in Q3,2009 with sales of
1.8 million for its flagship phone N97 compared to 7.4 million for iPhone.68
Nokia SWOT Analysis: A SWOT Analysis of Nokia in the Smartphone segment
(Figure 3) shows that its strengths such as financial prowess, heavy R&D investments, a
worldwide presence and a wide portfolio help it sustain the leadership position in
Smartphones but its inherent weakness of not having a better flagship product along with
its late catching up act with respect to open-source OS and applications store have eroded
its market share considerably. A big weakness for Nokia is its abject failure in USA
which has the largest mobile internet penetration in the world.69 Q3, 2009 results showed
Nokia shipments to North America to be less than 3%. 70 A key reason is that Nokia
usually sells its phones at full price as compared to others like RIM & Apple which sell
in conjunction with Network carriers at a subsidized rate. In terms of opportunity,
developing countries such as India and China have been making impressive growths in
spite of a tougher worldwide economic climate and Nokia already has a well entrenched
market in them.71 Nokia can get a much better response for entry and mid-level
smartphones in these countries but this sub-segment is soon to attract a lot of competition
as major players like Motorola plan to release tens of smartphones in 2010 with
preference towards Android.72,73,74 Among the Open source OS, Android is gaining more
acceptance with both developers and handset makers alike as compared to the older
Symbian OS which is currently undergoing major updates.75 Since many handset makers
are part of both Android as well as Symbian platform, a high acceptance rate of Android
may cause them to abandon Symbian. The entry of new players in this segment also
poses a threat to Nokia’s market share.
Recommendations: Based on these analyses, following are some recommendations that
can help Nokia improve its market share –
1. Nokia’s primary objective should be to achieve a sizeable market share in the key
region of USA, which is currently the home turf of Apple & RIM.
2. In terms of Services, Nokia should sell on a deferred-income model, i.e. on
installments of 12/18 months along with an attractive initial purchase price. Increased
sales will generate a positive feedback loop as it will encourage more developers to
develop more Apps for it and this will further improve the sales. Nokia can either start a
financial services wing for this purpose (which it can spin off later) or consider tying up
with some multi-national firm. This move can help it in achieving the above mentioned
primary objective. Selling on a deferred income model can lead to reduced R&D costs
also as the company can then lower the number of similar models which have less price
difference among them and offer the combined features for the same price.
3. In terms of Product, Nokia primarily needs a flagship product which is not seen as a
“me too” device and combines revolutionary features with intuitiveness and ease of use.
It must include features which the competitors can’t catch up with in short term. Some
ideas could be like embedding RFID readers which show immense potential. 76
4. Nokia’s new OS, Maemo has received great reviews and is poised to be the ideal next
generation OS for Nokia when compared to the older Symbian OS.77, 78, 79 Nokia can
profit by discontinuing Symbian OS from its high end Smartphones and keeping it for its
entry and mid-range smartphones. Application development won’t be problem as Nokia
is working on a common framework for App development in Maemo & Symbian.80
CONCLUSION
Open Innovation is a paradigm which can yield high returns if implemented properly. It
requires a company to change its business models to balance the act of value creation
with that of value capture in a way that they are sustainable over long term. In a market
where all players are leveraging the benefits of OI, Nokia must usher in a revolution to
improve its market share. The Smartphone segment has illustrated that product
innovation in itself is not sufficient and when coupled with “service innovation”, delivers
enhanced value to customers and profits to the manufacturer. Thus companies that invest
in OI during all stages of the product lifecycle, stand to gain the most in the long term.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In this competitive era, innovation has become the key to survival for most companies. In recent
times, it has become R&D intensive with high costs and long time to market, thus forcing
companies to look beyond their corporate walls for successful implementation of their product or
service innovation projects. This aspect of innovation, popularly known as “Open Innovation” is
discussed in this paper along with its three sub-divisions, namely –
• The Inside-out process - bringing ideas into the company from external sources.
• The Outside-in process - putting internal ideas into the external world
• The Coupled process - blending inside-out and the outside-in process.
Apart from the benefits of Open Innovation, the hurdles and risks faced in its implementation are
discussed along with the need to for companies to change their corporate culture and business
models. As a real world scenario an advanced ecosystem, namely the Smartphone segment of the
mobile handset industry, is taken where all competitors are implementing various Open
Innovation practices. The case of Nokia is analyzed, where in spite of it being an early adopter of
open innovation practices; it is facing rapid market share erosion in recent times due to better
Open Innovation practices from competitors. The paper concludes with some recommendations
to Nokia for improving its market share and emphasizes on the fact that to gain the maximum out
of Open Innovation, a company must have flexible business models to implement both the
outside-in and inside-out process and most importantly must integrate it into all stages of product
development.
References
1 H Chesbrough, Open Innovation, Harvard Business School Press, 2003.
2 P Kotler, V Wong, J Saunders & G Armstrong, Principles of marketing, 4th European edition,
Pearson Education Limited, 2005, p 582.
3 P Kotler et al, Principles of marketing ,p. 582
4 H Chesbrough, Open Innovation
5 O Gassmann & E Enkel, ‘Towards a Theory of Open Innovation: Three Core Process
Archetypes’, R&D Management Conference (RADMA) (Lisabon, Portugal),2004.
6 Gassmann et al, R&D Management Conference,p 7.
7 H Chesbrough, ‘A Better Way to Innovate’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 81 Issue 7, July
2003, p12-13.
8 Gassmann et al, R&D Management Conference, p 7.
9 Gassmann et al, R&D Management Conference.
10 H Chesbrough, Harvard Business Review.
11 H Chesbrough & M M Appleyard, ‘Open Innovation and Strategy’, California Management
Review, vol. 50, no. 1, fall 2007, p 57 – 76.
12 Gassmann et al, R&D Management Conference.
13 Anonymous, ‘Sharing the idea ,The emergence of global innovation networks’, Economist
Intellgence Unit , The Economist, New York , 2007.
14 L Huston & N Sakkab, ‘Connect and Develop’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84
Issue 3, p58-66, March 2006.
15 Enkel et al , R&D Management.
16 Gassmann et al, R&D Management Conference.
17 H Chesbrough, Harvard Business Review.
18 Gassmann et al, R&D Management Conference.
19 P Gwynne, ‘Open Innovation's Promise and Perils’, Research Technology Management, Vol.
50 Issue 6, Nov/Dec2007, p8-9.
20 K. R. Lakhani, ‘InnoCentive.com’. Harvard Business School Case, No. 608–170,2008.
Open Innovation 16
21 J Scanlon, ‘NineSigma: Nurturing 'Open Innovation'.Full Text Available By: Scanlon,Jessie’,
BusinessWeek Online, p21, , 6/12/2007.
22 A Dorizas , ‘Sourcing Wisdom from the crowd’, Government News, vol. 29 issue 9, p10-11,
October 2009.
23 ‘Public Good’, on Innocentive, viewed on 10 November 2009,
http://gw.innocentive.com/ar/challengePavilion/index?pavilionName=Public+Good.
24 ’Developing Countries’, on Innocentive, viewed on 10 November 2009,
http://gw.innocentive.com/ar/challengePavilion/index?pavilionName=Developing+Countries .
25 Gassmann et al, R&D Management Conference.
26 H Chesbrough & A R. Garman, ‘Use Open Innovation to Cope in a Downturn’ ,in Harvard
Business Review , June 2009,viewed on 10 November 2009,
http://hbr.harvardbusiness.org/2009/06/web-exclusive-use-open-innovation-to-cope-in-adownturn/
ar/1 .
27 S Doel, ‘How open innovation made ARM a global power’, eirma - eiq-2009-016-0004,
viewed on 05 November 2009, http://www.eirma.org/f3/local_links.php?action=jump&doi=eiq-
2009-016-0004.
28 G A Frank, ‘Licensing IP Rights: Why, How, What, and When--A Corporate Perspective’ ,
Licensing Journal, vol. 24 Issue 6, p1-6, June 2004.
29 H Chesbrough & A R. Garman, Harvard Business Review , June 2009
30 H Chesbrough & A R. Garman, Harvard Business Review , June 2009
31 Gassmann et al, R&D Management Conference .
32 ‘Open Handset Alliance’, viewed on 16 November 2009,
http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/index.html .
33 Gwynne, Research Technology Management,p 9.
34 Anonymous, ‘Open Innovation in Products and Services’, Credit Union Research & Advice,
p16, 1 July 2008.
35 Bughin, M Chui & Brad Johnson, ‘The next step in open Innovation’, in Mckinsey Quarterly ,
June 2008, viewed on 12 November 2009,
http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/information_technology/networking/next_step_in_open_inn
ovation_2155 .
36 Enkel et al , R&D Management.
37 H Chesbrough & A R. Garman, Harvard Business Review , June 2009
Open Innovation 17
38 H Chesbrough, Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape,
Harvard Business Publishing, 2006.
39 H Chesbrough & M M Appleyard, California Management Review.
40 P Kotler et al, Principles of marketing, 4th European edition, Pearson Education Limited,
2005, p469-470.
41 H Chesbrough & M M Appleyard, California Management Review, p58 – 61
42 H Chesbrough , ‘Why Companies Should Have Open Business Models’, MIT Sloan
Management Review, vol 48, no. 2, winter 2007, p 24.
43 Press Backgrounder,’Nokia in Brief’, March 2009, viewed on 30 October 2009,
http://www.nokia.com/NOKIA_COM_1/About_Nokia/Sidebars_new_concept/Nokia_in_brief/In
Brief_08.pdf .
44 Anonymous, ‘Vision and strategy’, August 2008, viewed on 10 November 2009,
http://www.nokia.com/about-nokia/company/vision-and-strategy.
45 Press Backgrounder, ‘Nokia Research Center’, November 2009 , viewed on 20 November
2009,
46 JBC , ‘Nokia and open innovation’, in Nokia Converstions, 10 November 2009, viewed on 15
November 2009, .
47 Press Backgrounder, ‘Nokia Firsts in Telecommunications’, viewed on 20 November 2009,
http://www.nokia.com/NOKIA_COM_1/About_Nokia/Sidebars_new_concept/Nokia_firsts/First
s.pdf .
48 JBC, ‘ Your Nokia in 2015 – Video’ , in Nokia Conversations, 11 November 2009, viewed on
23 November 2009, http://conversations.nokia.com/2009/11/11/your-nokia-in-2015-video/ .
49 K Dittrich & G Duysters, ‘Networking as a Means to Strategy Change: The Case of Open
Innovation in Mobile Telephony’ , Journal of Product Innovation Management , 24:510–
521,2007.
50 Anonymous, ‘History of Symbian’, viewed on 20 November 2009,
http://www.symbian.org/about-us/history-symbian.
51 Anonymous , ‘Smartphone’, in Dictionary, viewed on 18 November 2009,
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/smartphone.
52 Press Releases, ‘Gartner Says Worldwide Smartphone Sales Grew 16 Per Cent in Second
Quarter of 2008’, in Gartner Newsroom, 8 September 2008, viewed on 18 November 2009,
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=754112 .
Open Innovation 18
53 Press Release, ‘iPhone Premieres This Friday Night at Apple Retail Stores’, 28 June 2007,
viewed on 21 November 2009, http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/06/28iphone.html.
54 D Benjamin, ‘Users' love affair with iPhone stumps Mobile World panel’ , in EE Times, 14
February 2009, viewed on 20 November 2009,
http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206504012 .
55 Press Release,Gartner Says Worldwide Smartphone Sales Reached Its Lowest Growth Rate
With 11.5 Per Cent Increase in Third Quarter of 2008’ , in Gartner Newsroom , 4 December
2008, viewed on 21 November 2009, http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=827912.
56 Press Release, ‘Open Handset Alliance Releases Android SDK ‘ , in Open Handset Alliance,
12 November 2007 , viewed on 20 November 2009 ,
http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/press_111207.html .
57 Anonymous, ‘Members’, viewed on 20 November 2009,
http://www.symbian.org/members/member-directory .
58 Anonymous, ‘ Iphone Developer Program’ , viewed on 20 November 2009,
http://developer.apple.com/iphone/program/distribute.html .
59 N Wingfield, ‘IPhone Software Sales Take Off: Apple's Jobs’, in The Wall Street Journal, 11
August 2008, viewed on 23 November 2009,
.
60 Press Release, ‘Gartner Says Worldwide Mobile Phone Sales Declined 8.6 Per Cent and
Smartphones Grew 12.7 Per Cent in First Quarter of 2009’ , in Gartner Newsroom , 20 May
2009, viewed on 23 November 2009, http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=985912 .
61 S Silver, ‘Apple, RIM Outsmart Phone Market’, in The Wall Street Journal, 21 July 2009,
viewed on 23 November 2009, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124805149501664033.html .
62 Press Release, ‘Gartner Says PC Vendors Eyeing Booming Smartphone Market’, in Gartner
Newsroom, 27 October 2009, viewed on 23 November 2009,
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1215932 .
63 JBC, ‘Ovi store unveiled’, in Nokia Conversations, 16 February 2009, viewed on 23 November
2009, http://conversations.nokia.com/2009/02/16/ovi-store-unveiled .
64 Video, WWDC-2009-Apple unveils iPhone 3GS in CNET News, 08 June 2009, viewed on 24
November 2009, http://cnettv.cnet.com/wwdc-2009-apple-unveils-iphone-3g/9742-1_53-
50072811.html .
65 Anonymous,’ Compare Phones’, in Nokia USA site , viewed on 23 November 2009,
http://www.nokiausa.com/find-products/phones?intc=prdcts-fw-ilc-pnav-con-na-nokiacom-usna-
fp_001b .
Open Innovation 19
66 Anonymous,’Find Devices’, in Nokia India site , viewed on 23 November 2009,
http://www.nokia.co.in/find-products .
67 Anonymous,’Find Devices’, in Nokia Europe site , viewed on 23 November 2009,
http://europe.nokia.com/find-products/devices .
68 Press Release, ‘Gartner Says Grey-Market Sales and Destocking Drive Worldwide Mobile
Phone Sales to 309 Million Units; Smartphone Sales Grew 13 Per Cent in Third Quarter of 2009’
, in Gartner Newsroom, 12 November 2009, viewed on 23 November 2009,
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1224645 .
69 ‘Critical Mass - The Worldwide State of the Mobile Web’, in Nielson Mobile, July 2008,
viewed on 23 November 2009, http://www.nielsenmobile.com/documents/CriticalMass.pdf .
70 Press Release, ‘Quarterly and annual information’, 15 October 2009, viewed on 23 November
2009, http://www.nokia.com/about-nokia/financials/quarterly-and-annual-information/q3-2009 .
71 S Kannan, ‘Solutions will drive Nokia consumption ‘, in Business Line, 19 February 2009,
viewed on 23 November 2009,
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/catalyst/2009/02/19/stories/2009021950130300.htm .
72 S Segan, ‘Motorola Commits to Releasing More Than 20 Smartphones in 2010’ , in Gearlog,
28 October 2009, viewed on 23 November 2009,
http://www.gearlog.com/2009/10/motorola_commits_to_releasing.php .
73 Anonymous, ‘Motorola Posts Unexpected Profit, to Launch 20 Smartphones’, in Mobiledia, 02
November 2009, viewed on 23 November 2009, http://www.mobiledia.com/news/70845.html.
74 Anonymous, ‘Motorola to Launch 20+ Smartphones in 2010’, in Unwiredview, 30 October
2009, viewed on 23 November 2009, http://www.unwiredview.com/2009/10/30/motorola-tolaunch-
20-smartphones-in-2010/ .
75 M Asay, ‘Why is Google Android beating Symbian?’, in Cnet News, 16 November 2009,
viewed on 23 November 2009, http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10398202-16.html.
76 Anonymous,‘French retailers ,financial services providers and mobile operators publish NFC
adoption plans’ , 08 October 2009, viewed on 15 November 2009,
http://www.nearfieldcommunicationsworld.com/2009/10/08/31935/french-retailers-financialservices-
providers-and-mobile-operators-publish-nfc-adoption-plans .
77 GSMArena team, Nokia N900 review: A new hope’, in GSMArena, 26 november 2009 ,
viewed on 28 November 2009, http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_n900-review-421p4.php .
Open Innovation 20
78 Press Release, ‘Maemo 5 injects speed and power into mobile computing’, in Maemo News, 27
August 2009, viewed on 25 November 2009, http://maemo.nokia.com/news/maemo-5-injectsspeed-
and-power-into-mobile-computing/ .
79 D Dumas,’ Hands On With Nokia’s N900’ , in Gadget Lab , 27 October 20009, viewed on 27
November 2009, http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/10/hands-on-with-nokias-n900/ .
80 Press Release, ‘Nokia announces official Qt port to Maemo 5’ , in Qt , 9 October 2009, viewed
on 23 November 2009, http://qt.nokia.com/about/nokia-announces-official-qt-port-to-maemo-5
|
