Competitive Advantage: Google Case Study

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Due to the tendency of businesses to develop more quickly than their consumers demands change, most businesses eventually produce goods and services that are too smart, costly, and complex for most of their markets customers. A companys comparative advantage demonstrates how it may differentiate itself from rival businesses. An organization has a comparative advantage if it can produce an item or service at a lower opportunity cost than other businesses. Its standout product, marketing plan, and customer outreach achieve this. Thus, the paper aims to discuss disruptive innovation and the aspects of competitive advantage in the business market.

In economics, a circumstance is said to as having a comparative advantage, which allows for the possibility that one party may create an item or service at a lower opportunity cost. It demonstrates a nations economic edge over other nations when manufacturing a certain commodity or service. Sometimes it is thought that specialization and labor division will lead to comparative advantage. To put it another way, trade between nations may be advantageous for both sides if one nation specializes in producing one item or service. In contrast, another nation specializes in offering a different good or service. Among all technological companies, Google currently has the biggest competitive advantage (Matthews, 2021). This is because they can apply all three elements of Clayton Christensens disruption architecture.

They offer services at no cost, with great performance, such as a continually developing search engine, and little distinction because they provide products not unique (Matthews, 2021). The organizations competitive advantage is primarily its capacity for innovation. The company uses the disruptive innovation principle to learn more about customers desires and how they will utilize a product or service. They then employ this knowledge to develop new products that meet those demands practically and affordably. One of the best disruptive innovation instances is Uber, which has impacted the taxi industry by providing an app-based ride-sharing service that enables customers to book rides from their smartphones (Dooley, 2019). Making it easier for passengers to find local drivers available for pickup or drop-off has changed how people see transportation and move about cities. Another is Amazon which originally served as an online bookshop but has now added eBooks and services for cloud computing (Dooley, 2019). Still, Google has been able to capitalize on its position as a market leader by developing new products and through the open communication channels provided by its flat organizational structure, which fosters innovation and design.

Function-based, product-based, and flatness are the three primary pillars of Googles cross-functional organizational structure. Roles and the organizational function they fulfill are used to arrange the structures function-based branch. As a result, Google is split into the worldwide marketing and financial sections. Top-down communication is made easier by these categories, and they also aid in navigating any disruptive internal or external changes. To maintain its position in the market and find new methods to improve its corporate structure and business strategies, Google continuously assesses its rivals. One of Googles most significant and striking components is flatness, which describes open communication channels between lower and top management levels within a business. As a result of its efficient usage of open communication, Google generates a wide range of concepts and cutting-edge tactics from all parts of the company to accomplish a single objective.

Overall, to assess a firms competitive advantage, it is necessary to use Clayton Christensens disruptive innovation theory because it assists in deciding on a company. They can take advantage of all three elements of Christensens disruption frameworklow cost, high performance, and low differentiation. Google currently has the strongest comparative advantage of any technology company because they provide products that are not unique. Due to this, they are at a disadvantage to larger companies with equivalent resources. Businesses might avoid being disrupted by new technology or products by concentrating on incremental improvements instead of ground-breaking discoveries. However, throughout time, this method frequently results in stagnation or even decline when compared to rivals that emphasize innovation more than little modifications.