NOTE: This was supposed to be a business analysis. Thus, it’s rather linear and direct. The presentation and “paper” combined were supposed to be no more than 1 page long.

–

Presently, the ability to create holistic experiences for customers largely determines the success or failure of a business. Manufacturing and distributing a product or service is just the beginning. Nowadays, customers expect to receive gratification from the product or service before, during and after the sale has taken place.

Shouldice is an excellent example. The hospital’s founder not only came up with a brilliant hernia removal process, but he went further ahead and created an entire experience for the convalescents. Patients not only get their hernias removed, they also stay in a very relaxing and unrestricted environment afterward. They can roam freely around the hospital’s amazing landscape and enjoy the many amenities set to entertain them and ameliorate their post-operation discomfort. Furthermore, the recovery process is quite unique. Fellow patients can get together and share their experiences and stories, creating an immediate sense of community. Thus, it can be easily seen that these innovations (i.e. the hernia removal process, the post operation treatment and the soothing environment) constitute the remarkable Shouldice experience.

Does this look like a hospital to you?

Source: saludygestion.com

Finally, the only recommendation I can really make to Shouldice, from a technological standpoint, is that the organization should update its website and overall online experience. The hospital’s Internet site could be heavily enhanced to showcase the nature of Shouldice’s hernia removal process – currently, there’s only a text description of the technique – as well as to include more multimedia elements for future patients’ clarification. This course of action, combined with Shouldice’s incredible reputation thanks mostly to word of mouth, would draw more attention, and patients, to the healthcare center.

Google has a very comfortable, not to say completely dominant, position in the Internet’s search and advertising market. Nevertheless, the threats that could ultimately steal the lion’s share from California’s tech giant abound. For instance, international competitors have begun to emerge in ascendant Internet markets. Baidu (China) and Yandex (Russia) are notable examples. Furthermore, a little bit closer to home, firms like Expedia (travel), Zillow (real state) and iMedix (health care) are hoping to capitalize on web search’s vertical markets. Also, advertisers have started to pay close attention to social networks, as more and more people flock to sites like Facebook and MySpace.  So, basically, we are not talking about a single threat to Google’s supremacy. Rather, it’s a huge amalgamation of different competitors and factors.

Source: SEOmoz

Whether we are talking about external threats (e.g. international competitors, vertical markets, social networks, et cetera) or internal (e.g. attrition, policy changes, et cetera), the reality is a sound strategy must be in place in order to secure Google’s supremacy. What can the company do then? Do the words change, fail and adapt ring any bells?

Companies must be nimbler than the competition if they are to retain a desirable competitive advantage and increase their market share. Internet companies are no exception. As a matter of fact, given the Internet’s perennial state of flux, companies focusing on technology and using the web as the de facto business medium should be, generally, receptive to constant change and innovation more so than other organizations.

If Google is able to produce and establish another technology-based product in the market, reaping the financial benefits of this new venture greatly along the way, then the prospect of expanding and investing heavily in the company’s core competencies would be easier to attain. Thus, Google could, with relative ease, take on more new products and keep spawning revenue. The company has tried to do this for a while now. Products such as Orkut (a pseudo social network of sorts) and Knol (a Wikipedia-like knowledge repository) are among the organization’s many attempts to expand into other online markets. However, success has proven to be elusive. Google must be more assertive and focus on diversifying its core businesses now, before another player disrupts Internet’s search and advertising market for good.

The fact that Google decided to shut down Lively is symptomatic of tough times ahead.

Game on!

Source: Emotiv

From a business perspective, the commercialization of new, multipurpose technology should start, preferably, in the industry that promises the biggest and fastest financial recoupment. The reasons for this are mainly two-fold: mitigated risks and the likelihood of having strong appropriability of rent increases.

When one is a technology prospector, such as Emotiv, with a product that can potentially become the dominant design in a recently created industry, the natural desire is to retain absolute control of the new technology and its intellectual property. In that way, the financial gains could easily offset the initial investments and produce enough revenue to keep the venture moving forward.

The business reason for Emotiv to be focusing on the entertainment industry in parallel is quite simple: this industry has a bigger market than the other likely industries at hand; as well as a more permissive environment for new technology. This is, of course, a positive thing for Emotiv and its competitors, since they immediately have more potential customers. However, even though the EPOC has other promising, more important and far-reaching applications, such as medical devices and automobiles, none of them, unfortunately, guarantees a more prominent and pivotal financial gain. Thus, from a very broad perspective, society at large suffers a bit (we’ll be all playing video games with neuro-headsets before the EPOC is used in hospitals). Alas, from a business standpoint, this is the smartest move.

Emotiv has several options here. They could continue working exclusively on gaming paraphernalia or, instead, as they currently are, keep developing and expanding the business into multiple industries at the same time. Although there’s nothing wrong with the status quo, I would recommend a focus on gaming solely during the initial stages of the EPOC’s commercialization. After the brand has matured and cemented in the gaming/entertainment industry, then, and only then, I’d suggest Emotiv to expand into other markets.

Why am I advocating for this master plan? Simple. The company’s current strategy (i.e. exploring smaller markets at the same time it does gaming) could divert the organization’s focus and make it go astray; resulting in tragic revenue loss. I don’t think that’s a scenario Emotiv’s investors would like to contemplate.

–

Why am I writing about this, you ask? Ah, right. I’m done with classes! I’ll probably have more time to write about business and technology. Emotiv is a good exercise because its EPOC has so much potential. What do you think? Do I make any sense at all or am I just full of it? Chime in!