# data[].attributes.body
Three principles
Closed loop interaction
Fixed assets as a means of increasing supply chain flexibility.
A single rhythm in the whole chain- " we sacrifice little things for a big win»

# data[].attributes.headline
Zara annual report - innovations in supply chain management

# data[].attributes.subject
Zara annual report - innovations in supply chain management

# data[].attributes.headline
Zara launches online sales in 106 new markets through new global platform

# data[].attributes.subject
Zara launches online sales in 106 new markets through new global platform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Zara currently has stores in 96 markets with an online presence in 49 of those markets. Thanks to store and online integration, orders placed online can be delivered to customers' homes from the stores in the country closest to where they live or they can be picked up in store, ensuring that customer service is fast and convenient.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Environment (cars, pedestrians, whether conditions, GPS, air quality etc.)
SC: Sensors, IOT, software
2. Safety (internal/external)
SC: Passengers safety solutions, pedestrian safety solutions
3. Sustainability - Eco friendly
SC: material utilization, disposables, energy efficiency, hydrogen)
4. New means/types of transportation (air drones, driver less)
5. Entertainment (audio, relax, video
6. Driver health diagnostic: medical assessment.
7. Car self diagnostics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.entities[].name
Rolls-Royce Vision World Premiere Review Rolls Royce Vision Self Driving Car CARJAM

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.entities[].name
Adaptive Cruise Control and Predictive Emergency Braking System

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BMW Vision Self Driving Car World Premiere 2016 New BMW Vision Concept Commercial BMW Vision CARJAM

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
BMW Vision Watch HD Cool New BMW Self Driving Car World Premiere 2016 BMW Vision 100 Concept New BMW Geneva in UltraHD + SUBSCRIBE #CARJAMTV CARJAM TV - Subscribe Here Now https://www.youtube.com/user/CarjamRadio/videos Like Us Now On Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/CarjamTV For The World's Best Car Videos Website: http://www.carjamtv.com BMW VISION NEXT 100: A vehicle for future mobility.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.computerworld.com/article/3313316/mobile-wireless/apple-seizes-power.html

# data[].attributes.headline
Zara Stratford flagship store pioneers new approach to integrating stores and online

# data[].attributes.subject
Zara Stratford flagship store pioneers new approach to integrating stores and online

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pablo Isla, Inditex Chairman and CEO, commented: "The reopening of Zara's flagship in Stratford is an important moment for Inditex. We are in a unique position as we enjoy a global sales platform that fully integrates stores and online. In recent years we have invested in both the most advanced technology and optimised our stores for this aim.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
List of mergers and acquisitions by Apple - Wikipedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Apple Inc. is an American multinational corporation that designs and manufactures consumer electronics and software products. It was established in Cupertino, California, on April 1, 1976, by Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, and Ronald Wayne, and was incorporated on January 3, 1977.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Boston Consulting Group ranks Apple as the world's most innovative company in a report it issued last week. Apple has topped BCG's list of 50 companies every year since 2005 when it inaugurated the ranking. That's quite a contrast to Forbes' 2015 list of the 100 most innovative companies. Apple doesn't make the cut at all. Forbes' No. 1: Tesla Motors, the Palo Alto electric car maker owned by billionaire Elon Musk. Tesla is No. 3 on BCG's list. The second company on Forbes' list, San Francisco cloud computing services company Salesforce, ranks on BCG's list this year at No. 49. But the third company on the Forbes list, Alexion, the Cheshire, CT biopharma company that specializes in drugs for people with rare diseases, doesn't make BCG's top 50.

Why such a contrast? Methodology. BCG quizzed 1,500 senior executives representing a wide variety of industries around the world, simply asking them to name the most innovative companies both within their field and outside it. Those votes counted for 60% of the ranking. Then it looked at the five-year growth in total shareholder return, which accounted for 40% of the ranking. The problem with BCG's method: It is backward-looking, failing to account for future innovation.

Forbes' methodology is far more complex and skewed toward the future. See this post by Forbes contributors and innovation consultants Jeff Dyer and Hal Gregersen, who put it together. Dyer is a business professor at Brigham Young University and Gregersen at MIT Sloan. Together they run a Utah consulting and training firm called The Innovator's DNA. They don't base their ranking on popularity or, as they put it, "editorial whims." Rather they look at how investors pick out firms that they believe are innovative right now and will be in the future. They take into account cash flows from existing businesses and the net present values of those cash flows. Then they compare those numbers with the current enterprise value (market capitalization plus debt, minority interest and preferred shares, minus cash equivalents). The methodology is a bit more complicated than that, using an algorithm that incorporates historical cash flows, but I think I'm conveying the gist. Looking through this lens, Apple has a positive premium of 10.2%, write Dyer and Gregersen, but that puts it way down at 282 nd place.

Is that the best way to look at Apple? Numbers aside, you could argue that the company is iterative rather than innovative. Sure, it revolutionized personal computers, completely changed the way people get music and reinvented the smartphone. But aside from those big steps, which came years apart, it hasn't modified its products very much, aside from small, steady improvements over time, like introducing lighter, more powerful laptops, better phone cameras and brighter, bigger screens. On a month-to-month basis, there's not much happening compared to, say, Android, with its six-inch phablets, bending displays and split keyboards, seemingly released all the time. More important to Dyer and Gregersen, the numbers just don't show Apple innovating in investors' eyes.

But I talked to two partners at BCG who are co-authors of the report, Hadi Zablit in the Paris office and Andrew Taylor in Chicago, who convinced me that, despite the Forbes analysis, Apple is truly innovative. "Apple defines how you do innovation in mobile devices," says Zablit. Apple sets the rhythm of the industry with its yearly launches, he says. "Samsung follows them." Apple is also very good at expanding "adjacencies," like launching mobile payments on smartphones and evolving its music offerings from buying songs to its new subscription service, Apple Music, introduced in late June (as of late October it already had 6.5 million subscribers). "They are a master at expanding their footprint to get new revenue," he says. "Innovation is something new that a customer will pay for."

Taylor also believes that buying into new products and services is a form of innovation. Apple didn't have a headphone business so it bought Beats Electronics as well as the Beats Music streaming service for $3 billion last year. "When you're Apple and you see the super-high-end headphone market exploding, you've got a choice," he says. "They're using M&A to enter into adjacent spaces and increase the value of the systems they offer."

Apple's stock price has been up and down in the past year, moving from $114 in early December 2014 to $133 in late February and back down to $118. But while I'm no tech columnist, and with apologies to professors Dyer and Gregersen, I believe that its revolutionary products, acquisition of Beats and upgrades that seem to improve existing devices without fail, combine to make Apple truly innovative. After all, it applied for 780 patents last year, according to an Inc. ranking (Apple rates No. 11 on that list). A new post by my colleague Liyan Chen shows that hedge funds run by five billionaires are selling Apple stock. I also don't consider myself qualified to make stock recommendations and I won't attempt to predict the future, but I think Apple deserves its spot at the top of BCG's list.

Here are BCG's top 10 most innovative companies:

In February 2018, I took on a new job managing and writing Forbes' education coverage. I'd spent the previous two years on the Entrepreneurs team, following six years writing for the Leadership channel. My mission with education is to explore the intersection of education ...

Read More

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is Apple The World's Most Innovative Company?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Photo by ChinaFotoPress/Getty Images The Boston Consulting Group ranks Apple as the world's most innovative company in a report it issued last week. Apple has topped BCG's list of 50 companies every year since 2005 when it inaugurated the ranking. That's quite a contrast to Forbes' 2015 list of the 100 [...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Recent news has put the world of eye tracking - and by extension, biometrics - back into the spotlight again. Apple recently acquired SensoMotoric Instruments, a German company 26 years in the making that specializes in eye tracking hardware.

While the exact details of the deal have not been publicly released, the move clearly indicates a greater interest in the integration of biometrics into the technological sphere ( Facebook's acquisition of EyeTribe and Google's takeover of Eyefluence further backs this up). This is encouraging news not only for the providers of biometric tools and software, but also for the user.

If a billion-dollar company has made an investment into the eye tracking sphere, then you can expect this to become a big thing - when several other billion-dollar companies follow suit, you can expect this to be world-changing. The greater investment, and consequent development, of eye tracking and other biometric tools means that we're likely to see more and more improvements of these technologies in the months and years to come.

Beyond Eye Tracking

But what will Apple use these tools for? All signs point to the further development of augmented reality (AR), which involves the integration of the digital world with the real world. This is a technological leap forward - of which Tim Cook (CEO of Apple) has stated "I am so excited about it, I just want to yell out and scream". That kind of statement should spark some interest, to say the least.

It would appear that each company that has acquired an eye tracking company has done so in an effort to primarily bolster their AR or VR efforts, and to provide a better collaboration between human and machine. It was only last year that Apple bought Emotient, a facial expression analysis company. It seems only a matter of time before other biometric tools are integrated into the technology that we use - eye tracking could well just be the start.

What Does This Mean for the Field of Eye Tracking and Biometrics?

Such interest and investment clearly tells us that biometrics are valued, and will be a concrete part of future technology. We are beginning to see how this deeper way of understanding humans is breaking through to the mainstream. By collecting the subconsciously generated signals generated by the body, companies and researchers alike are able to understand, and better respond to, the needs and wants of people.

Going towards a future that prizes enjoyable and smooth human experience in a variety of environments (whether it's with mobile devices, in the grocery store, and beyond) is something that everyone can look forward to, and will be made possible by the use and findings of biometric tools.

What Does This Mean for Current SMI Customers?

As for current SMI customers - the immediate future could well present some challenges. Support for existing products will likely discontinue after a while, leaving researchers without support. The continuous development that had previously been part of the customer experience with SMI will also eventually come to a halt. Because of these likely changes, SMI customers will have to forge a new path forwards.

For now, the devices are of course excellent eye trackers, and as hardware they will remain worthwhile using. On the software side, current SMI customers may want to switch, to ensure that the most advanced and up-to-date methods are available to them (not to mention the otherwise lacking software support).

For those who are in the process of procurement or even waiting on funding that includes details of SMI eye trackers, the same high-level quality research is possible through the following companies, filling the gap that SMI leaves behind:

Of course, the exact eye tracker that you need will depend on your research question, so you can always reach out to us to discuss the best fit for you.

The Importance of Hardware Agnostic Software

With the spate of recent acquisitions of eye tracking hardware companies, it seems to be only a matter of time before the next company is picked up. This will inevitably come with the same problems that some SMI customers are facing today - an uncertain future for the work that they have completed, and will do - with data stored in soon-to-be outdated software. As an independent software provider, we are able to provide a solution that can ensure lasting support; iMotions is hardware agnostic, meaning that support and integration for multiple devices is always possible and maintained.

iMotions already offers native integration with SMI devices, and our software is constantly being developed and pushed forwards - we anticipate that this support will continue well into the future. So for those of you who use SMI and iMotions, there are no roadblocks in your way - everything is business as normal. For those who want to ensure an ongoing legacy with eye tracking research and work, iMotions therefore offers a straightforward transition to advanced eye tracking software - with the option to expand into other biometric tools, if desired.

For SMI devices, iMotions integrates with the following:

SMI iView X Red @60Hz

SMI iView X Red @60Hz

SMI iView X Red USB @60Hz

SMI iView X Red USB @60Hz

SMI iView X Red USB @120Hz

SMI iView X Red M @60Hz

SMI iView X Red M @120Hz

With the iMotions software, any of these eye trackers can be used, and the data analyzed. As always, the eye tracking devices can be synchronized directly in iMotions with other biometric tools (such as facial expression analysis, galvanic skin response, EEG, and many, many more).

By choosing a software provider that allows such flexibility, aspects of work such as backwards-compatibility and flexibility are always maintained, which ensures the safety of your work and research going forwards.

iMotions is also here to provide new and incisive solutions should SMI customers wish to use alternative hardware going forward (we already offer native integrations with the leading eye tracking hardware companies, such as Tobii, Gazepoint, and EyeTech, to name just a few). We are here to support and advance your work with eye tracking, in whatever form that takes, well into the future.

While we'll have to wait and see exactly what SMI and Apple produce for the technology of the future, there is one thing that is certain - biometrics will be at the very heart of it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SMI and Apple: What It Means for the Future of Eye Tracking

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recent news has put the world of eye tracking - and by extension, biometrics - back into the spotlight again. Apple recently acquired SensoMotoric Instruments, a German company 26 years in the making that specializes in eye tracking hardware.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Disclaimer: This work has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work produced by our essay writing service.

You can view samples of our professional work here.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UK Essays.

Apple has been evaluated as most innovative company from 2006 to 2008 because of the development of different product such as iPhone, iMac and iPod. The production of music, video, movie and electronic records helped Apple to gain valuable brand recognition as in 2008 it was recognized as 24th most valuable brand (Basu and Wright, 2008).

According to Sliber and Kearny (2009) core competencies are the skills and capabilities of an organization which makes it unique and gives it competitive advantage over its competitors.

The core competencies of Apple were its innovative designs and technology based on software. The latest batch of Apple products includes iPhones, iPad and iPod with more innovative features and colours. (www.apple.com)

Apple is financially very strong company. From 2003 to 2008 it has tripled its sales volume from $24 million to $3.5 billion (De Wit and Meyer, 2010). Due to this factor it is possible for Apple to pay a lot of money to its highly qualified people in research and development department to develop such gadgets which are highly technological. These gadgets should be innovative in its nature, smart in its appearance, could store a lot of data and fast in its processing speed.

The core competencies of Apple are robust. It is very hard to imitate the Apple products and this gives it the edge over its competitors. It has a closed proprietary system, which makes sure for Apple that there is no evasion of its skills and its secret recipe. On the other side Apple is very consistent in its product portfolio development. If any company no matter how successful is, divert its business altogether or try to diversify too much in product line than there are chances that it will lose its core competency.

Let us take an example of Kodak the inventor of snap short photography in 1888. For the first hundred years there was monopoly of Kodak in chemical based photography. In 1990 digital photographic technology came in and instead of Kodak competing and entering the digital market, it remained focused in manufacturing of chemicals and pharmaceutical products. Kodak did not bother competing its digital photographic rivals like Apple, Sony, Cannon and Hewlett Packard. Eventually Kodak ended up losing the digital photographic market. (De Wit and Meyer, 2010)

Now if we talk about Apple, it is really strong in its core competencies as well as in dynamic capability. It has always been responsive to any changes brought in by its competitors. Let us take an example of Dell introduced its tablet in the market and Apple launched its iPad 2. As Samsung developed Galaxy S3 and Apple launched it iPhone 5.

Apple offers a complete range of its products to its customer. If we take an example of Nokia, its user has to use android market to download music, where an iPhone user doesn't need to go anywhere apart from iTunes. Similarly in Nokia you have to create your own backup where as in iPhone the iCloud is there for the backup.

According to Zolo and Winter (2002) dynamic capability is an ability of an organization of being responsive to address the changes taking place in the environment. In terms of Apple it is very dynamic in its nature as it is very responsive to any changes from its competitors. In recent days Samsung is the biggest rival of Apple in mobile technology but it is equally challenging Apple positively. Due to their competition customers are getting the best quality products from both of them. Before Steve Job's comeback, the Apple was struggling for its survival but it made its comeback after he joined, which shows a high level of dynamic capability of Apple.

Evaluation: It has been observed that Apple has been emphasizing more on developing competencies not limited to technology only. With this approach they were thriving to achieve extreme form of technical development and in doing so customer orientation was also not ignored. Every effort were made to developed their products based on differentiation which is initiated by the CEO Spilinder tenure and then the pace was accelerated in Steve Job's time in 1997. Technical expertise of their concerned staff played a vital role that was able to take to an extreme end in terms of product features, functions and specifications. This approach of developing competencies remained an area utmost importance by Steve Job's which helped to register phenomenal in sales and profitability as well. Just due to competency the customer positioned these products in their mind as ultimate unique in functions and no other competitor could produce something closer to this. As Apple's products are highly sophisticated that is why it is exercising the skimming pricing policy and people do not mind opening their valets and buying the unique feature products they are desperate for.

Core competencies and Dynamic capabilities of Dell:

Dell is known for patching business segments with customer demand as process of knowledge creation effects performance and technology level. There is an efficient and easy access to platform with common interface point and a core product with web portals manages integration. The supply chain process of Dell had been upgraded with higher turnover rate. The nearest competitors of PC industry are 10 times higher with specific assembly goods and standardized components. Dell infrastructural solutions with XPS 12 and windows 8 ultra book engages target audience with better performance. The fulfillment model of PC industry allows ten times higher up gradation of supplier process. The lower profit margins and optimized PC industry with assemble finished goods for standardized components manage environmental changes. (www.dell.com)

The delivery of short term processes and market environment with dynamic capability is higher. The changes evolved in market manage small and medium business enterprises (Chopra, 2009). The mass customization of Dell to be used by maximum number of people enhances software and hardware experience (Heizer et. al, 2009).

Evaluation: It is found out that Dell was keen to develop its core competencies which have a different sphere as compared to Apple. Dell adopted their core competency based on two factors that is customized product line and cost leadership. Dell has a unique distribution channel which did not contain any intermediary. It is evidenced that this competency achieved by Dell was contradictory with its business growth strategy where it becomes challenging to continue with customization and without intermediary for a larger size of market. Dell changed their approach towards the business and initiated their new competencies by offering customer friendly products compared to customized products previously. Further they also revised or redesigned their distribution channel by involving retailers therein.

Question No.2

Strategic Alliance

Strategic alliance is a corporative agreement between companies to maximize their eternal skills and technologies while they safeguard against the transformation of competitive advantages to the partners (Verbeke, 2009).

In most recent days we can take the example of the mobile communication networking companies that is Orange and T mobiles. They made a strategic alliance to provide the maximum benefit of network coverage to their customers. They aim to get benefit of the combined resources of both the companies but keeping the legal entities separate from each others. In case of Apple it made many strategic alliances in the past. Before Steve, Apple made the strategic alliance with IBM, Novell and Intel but unfortunately it did not work and the market share gone down. Once Steve came back in 1997, he quitted all the alliances and made a new strategic alliance with the Microsoft (De Wit and Meyer, 2010 p681, p685). According to Lim (2011) the reason Steve made this alliance was that they did not had the license for the software but they had the license for operating system. They ex-board of directors and co founder of apple said that if we had the license for the software then we would have been No. 1 and Microsoft company would not exist. Microsoft invested the $150M in the strategic alliance with Apple for producing the Microsoft office and other products for the Mac.

Merger and Acquisition

Merger and Acquisition is also a good practice to maximize the share holder's wealth. We have seen many successful mergers and acquisitions and one of the best examples is Sony and Ericsson which is called Sony Ericsson. There is a difference between strategic alliance and merger and acquisition. In merger both the companies lose their own entities and give birth to a new company. The main aim of both the companies is same, to make the most profit out of their shared or joint resources.

In relation to Apple, it had made acquisitions. The main aim of Apple is to offer the best possible products to its customers by joining hand to those companies who are the best in their own features. For the same purpose it acquired a German specialist in music software and Emagic as well as Prismo graphic, Silicon Grail and Nothing Real for professional level video creation and production. Apple was using Intel chips in 2005 and in April 2008 Apple made another acquisition with microprocessor, a highly sophisticated company PA Sami and its chips were very economical in cost (De Wit and Meyer, 2010 p688).

The corporate strategy of Apple before Steve's comeback was to outsource with IBM and Novel. As soon as Steve made his comeback he suggested that all its departments should be at one place. The main logic behind this idea was to keep its competency secret so that no one could imitate the product. Apple is a risk aversive and resource driven company which uses its heavy resources to introduce a new products and make its customers to buy that products because of the attractive features of that particular product. Apples looks into its magic box and then decides that what to create. It uses inside approach to get benefit of its research and development.

According to McMahon, (2009) the corporate strategy of Apple is to think different that is Apple's core competency, which is innovative in design and technology and this is the spirit behind its popularity. Buy different, it means if we talk about any entry level mobile phone, we all know that it is used to receive and make calls but Apple says people wants an integrated product which is used for making, receiving calls, listening music and surfing.

The corporate strategy of Apple to maximize shareholder wealth and position in market manages long term challenges (Schneider, 2003). The corporative business agreements with mutual benefits and strategic alliance engaged different countries with common understanding (Lynch, 2006). All kinds of business strategic alliance including international ones in decades optimized failure rate. It had been noted that 49 international strategic alliances all over world helped companies to gain 66% of share. The structure, partner selection and alliance with party involvement leaded to failure (Mintzberg et, al. 1998).

The shareholder wealth had been maximized through Apple industry with successful strategic alliance and partnership goals (Lynch, 2006). The higher shareholder value with partner goals managed alliance setting and development. Two companies merge together with one legal entity as 50% of acquisition continues through it. Tax benefits, lower overall cost and improved management with creation of economical values as positive growth sensing had been created (Mintzberg et, al. 1998).

The direct market access with global corporate strategy by sharing rewards and risks manages strategic alliance. The corporate strategy of company with strategic alliance provides less chance of risks including managerial and financial risks. The stickiness of company with each other through corporate strategy influence profitability margin. The influence of company to create shareholder value enhances through mergers and acquisition. The higher shareholder value with better results with alliance of good partner manages direct access of Apple to create share holder value. The cost of company lowers through market share with possible concerns and division. The long term involvement and strategic optimization gains share holder wealth. In different countries high demand of iPhone with substantial business practice with international strategic alliance gained 69% of failure. The task orientation for substantial practice organizes 69% of failures (Mintzberg et, al. 1998).

Evaluation: After going through this case study of apple it is quite obvious that Apple is very selective in making decisions regarding the mergers and acquisitions because its share holders are very important for it. Ultimately the effect of these mergers and acquisitions reflects on the value of its share holders. It is learned that Steve Job's always had its reservations to protect his technology and continuous development of competencies to leave other competitors way behind in building the abilities. With this approach Steve always opted to build alliances in a manner whereby exercise maximum of control. It is evident that out of all possible alliance of mergers acquisitions and takeovers, Apple preferred to for acquisition and takeovers and avoids mergers to avoid leakages of technical confidentialities.

Question No. 3

Strategic Leadership

Strategic leader thrives to set up direction of an organization by employing appropriate strategies and approaches in meeting the overall expectations of various stakeholders. Strategic leaders are back bones for meeting the corporate objectives by framing the vision and mission of the organization like Apple. Different individuals as strategic leaders carry an approach which is an outcome of combining different attributes like inheritance, socializing and learning through experiences. The features of strategic leaders are not limited to implementing the broader categories of autocratic, democratic or others but they are more of strategic vision, zeal and zest of different individual endeavor to take up the challenge of bringing success for the organization or company.

From 1985 to 1993 John Sculley was the CEO of Apple. He had a vision of saving costs for the Apple. His approach to Apple was not to develop a strong competency through uniqueness but he was more focused on reducing the cost of its products by arranging some alliances with other market leaders. Less emphasis was given to create some unique positioning of the company and he was more to generate a satisfactory level of profits by cutting costs. We will see here he was relying on their partners in the supply chain even for the operating systems and this leadership style proved less effective as the profit reduced to 34% from 50% (De Wit and Meyer, 2010 p681). Eventually his leadership style did not work.

From 1993 to 1996 another CEO of Apple Spindler was trying to get out of all the alliances with Intel, Novell and IBM. His focus was on international growth and most cost cutting efforts. His strategic leadership approach was a short sighted which was limited to only cost savings and not to develop in house capabilities for integrated manufacturing. With this leadership style he could not demonstrate any phenomenal growth in companies operations which were stayed at similar levels.

Gil Amelio was the CEO of Apple in 1996. He had a different strategic view of the company. With foremost aim on cost cutting he focused on product differentiation and premium prices. Though he was a visionary strategic leader but he could not sustain his market share and finally he had to leave the company. His style could not work out as the company lost 3% market share (De Wit and Meyer, 2010 p681).

Steve Job's made his comeback in 1997 as interim CEO of Apple and he was a real visionary leader with lot of devotion, clarity and determination to make Apple as unique and market leader. On continuum he was more towards autocratic with occasional adoption of democratic and parental approaches. He was able to gain confidence of his research teams with high degree of harmony and understanding where any new perceived idea is understood and implemented to its extreme end of product development. He was really a charismatic leader who could influence his subordinates for achieving the set of aims and goals. As a leader he was a perfectionist with less flexibilities and compromises on given tasks. In brief Steve Job's had a clear vision with high degree of determination to take Apple to that strategic position what he aimed for which enabled him to secure strategic positions of Apple in highly competitive market.

In the nutshell Steve Job's took the Apple as his baby. He got so involved in its cross functional activities and his deep role was recognized by all the stake holders to an extent whereby it was impossible to split them apart. This close association of Steve as leader embedded in the mind of share holders as during the time of sickness the market share went down by 2.4% (De Wit and Meyer, 2010).

Diffusion and Breakthrough:

Diffusion of innovation is a theory that seeks to explain how why and with what rate new ideas and technology spread through cultures and this approach has been well adopted and implemented at Apple. By developing new technology and taking it across to the target customers. Though the diffusion carries two different approaches of breakthrough innovation and incremental innovation but having looked into the market responses against the product of Apple, an approach of breakthrough innovation was quite appropriate in case of Apple. It has been observed that breakthroughs are developed by their research teams not rarely addressing the commercial market applications as these technologies have originated in the supply chain of Apple. For example iPod was developed as a substitute to MP3 player and it could load 1000 songs in just 10 minutes and play music for 10 hours. The integrating with the iTunes 2.0 software also made synchronizing music libraries in a few seconds (D Wit and Meyer, 2010 p687).

Break through Innovation:

The successive business practices and innovation for consumer and competitors surprised operational guidance. In 2010 Apple huge bench mark with i-pad created huge amount of profit margins. The production and development of i-pad and laptop for new feature development and innovation gained consumer attention. The competitor progress with personal computers and laptops like i-pad 2 gained positive features and attention. The digital gadgets and product innovation from 2000 provided innovative business solutions. The innovation created by Steve Job's followed by rapid business development in market provided consumer attention and competitor enhancement. The iPad introduction steered with personal computers and laptops provided innovative business features. Steve Job's product based services and leading positioning managed bankruptcy. The breakthrough and diffusion to value Apple chain with counter rapid rewarding help to accomplish good strategic leadership. The software created for effective business solutions provided positive guidance and attention.

The value chain entertainment and innovative practices of Apple helped in progress of conversion and selection. The use of product helped Apple to integrate technology with idea generation, conversion and funding. The attention of integrated diffusion and funding managed easy use of innovative procedures (Alhstrand and Lampel, 1998).

Three components identified by Apple included idea generation, conversion and selection and funding diffusion. The integrated technology with product usage before and after rapid placement regulated choices and preferences. The value chain process of Apple is as followed:

Source: http://issard.wordpress.com

The service content of mobile me technology with substantial and positive business pattern regulated business development. The aggregation content relevant to performance and relevancy managed iTunes, iBook, application store and successive solutions. The hardware and software content use Mac OS X, I Works and A4 CPU that integrates effective business pattern. The handset and appliance like Mac book, iPhone, iPod and iPad regulate business outflow. The distribution and retail sector for successful business optimization includes app store.

Apple computer moved from computer to technological advancement related to software and technological innovation. The ideas and professional business practices with diffusion implementation and regulation for customer database management and amateur managed innovative business solution (Kotter, 1995)

The product and service innovation with new venture and market development with partnership increased sustainability of business (Palmer and Kaplan, 2007). The industry entertainment and game purchasing like online music and game purchasing managed industry insight. The new idea development and innovation of Apple products with slim technology, easy to use and to provide comfortable business services to customers increased its market share. The online audio and video technology with substantial business practice and innovation leaded to on time significant business responses. The implementation of new ideas and implementation for customer database and personification broadened professional users with positive orientation of strategic leadership (Kotter, 1995).

Evaluation

Since 1977 to 1997 Apple changed its 5 CEOs as they were not successful. When Steve made his comeback in 1997 the Apple was struggling to survive and the company was going to be bankrupt. With his charismatic leadership and broad vision he lifted Apple from scrap to sky trough its breakthrough innovations like iMac, iBook, iPod, iTunes, Mac Book Pro, iPhone and iPad. It is observed that if Apple would like to be on the rollercoaster, than it will have to focus the computer market as well as consumer electronics. As the news of Steve's illness was broken in the public, the market share went down. Although the Steve is not there anymore in the Apple but his motivational factor, negotiation skills and creative vision is a code of practice for the following leaders.

Featured review

"Thank you UK Essays for your timely assistance. It has helped me to push forward with my thesis."

Tajeram M

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Core Competencies And Dynamic Capabilities Of Apple Business Essay

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Disclaimer: This work has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work produced by our essay writing service. You can view samples of our professional work here. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UK Essays.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Read this essay on Zara International. Come browse our large digital warehouse of free sample essays. Get the knowledge you need in order to pass your classes and more. Only at TermPaperWarehouse.com"

# data[].attributes.body
Brembo: Brake calipers

Dräxlmaier Group: Interior panels

Peiker Acustic GmbH & Co.: High-speed mobile Internet for cars; In 2012, BMW became the first automaker to introduce this.

Thyssenkrupp: Steering columns, shock absorbers and suspension parts

BorgWarner: Drivetrain components, such as clutches and automatic transmissions

Elringklinger: Gaskets and exhaust system components

Mahle: Piston and cylinder components, valve train systems, and air and liquid management systems

Bridgestone: Tires

Guardian: Windshields and auto glass

GKN Driveline: Axle assemblies

Johnson Electric: Cooling and heating fan modules

Gestamp: Front and rear hood assemblies

Apag Elektronik AG: Interior lighting components

Delphi: Battery and electric vehicle charger components

Hirschvogel: Wheels

Magna: Body casting stampings

Harman/Kardon: Interior music and audio systems

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I am fascinated by the bipolar swings in sentiment toward Apple Inc. Last September, it was a magical company that could do no wrong. But by mid-April, Apple's share price had plunged more than 40 percent, from a peak of $705 to less than $400. Pundits were darkly warning that the "age of Apple" might already be ending.

The black mood has ebbed a bit in the past week. Apple's quarterly earnings weren't as bad as some had feared, and it announced an epic stock buyback. At the end of April, Apple raised $17 billion at low interest rates through the biggest non-bank corporate bond deal in history.

I make no judgment about Apple's stock value. It may have been overpriced last fall, and it might be underpriced right now. Let the manic-depressives decide.

But I am willing to predict that the age of Apple is far from over. I study companies based on their underlying "dynamic capabilities," their deeply embedded capacities to sense change, seize new opportunities, shape markets, and periodically reinvent themselves.

Dynamic capabilities are about more than a company's operating efficiency, financial strength, or even patent portfolio. They are about its deeper institutional ability to innovate, adapt, and compete in a networked world of constant change and of complex business "ecosystems." Can the company get beyond its first breakthrough success and keep coming back with new miracles? Is it at the center of a robust ecosystem? How experienced is it at reinvention and redeploying its resources?

We all know that tech breakthroughs have a short half-life, and we have seen technological change bring even legendary companies to their knees -- just look at Kodak, Polaroid, Digital Equipment, or, more recently, Sun Microsystems.

By contrast, dynamic capabilities take a very long time to acquire. But here is the key: Once a company has those capabilities, they hold up for a very long time and are extremely difficult to replicate.

Under Steve Jobs, Apple obviously had a system down. It didn't simply create new products. It created and revolutionized entirely new product categories, from personal computing and online music to smartphones and tablets.

It's true that Jobs was an almost sui generis leader. He had blazing vision, aesthetic as much as technological, and a passion that were entirely his own. It's also true that Jobs didn't leave behind a secret recipe. But he did instill an approach to innovation, a set of beliefs about what people really want, and -- perhaps most important -- a hard-won experience about how to implement those values in practice. All that is embedded in Apple's DNA and muscle memory.

Jobs didn't run Apple single-handedly, especially during his last several years. The company was simply too big, and he was too sick. What Jobs did was imprint Apple with strong dynamic capabilities: a powerful management team that understood his approach; a deep institutional knowledge about the process of reinvention; and a powerful ecosystem of business partners, suppliers, and collaborators.

"There is no system,'' Jobs once told an interviewer.

Apple is a disciplined company, and we have great processes. But that's not what it's about. Innovation comes from meeting people in the hallways or calling each other at 10:30 at night with a new idea... It comes from saying no to 1,000 things, to make sure we don't get on the wrong track.

If it were that simple, of course, Eastman Kodak might still be on top of world.

But a few companies, and I would argue that Apple is one of them, have internalized what it takes to stay in front. These companies have organized themselves for constant strategic innovation. They know how to adapt their mission and redeploy their strengths in a quicksilver world.

That is what is so enduring about a company like Apple. Its dynamic capabilities are like a neural network: intricate webs of neurons and pathways that have evolved or been trained over a very long time. It's like the difference between the raw talent of a 15-year-old tennis prodigy and the prowess of a Roger Federer. Federer devoted years to training and experimentation, and his skills are embedded in muscle memory and instinct. It's one reason he remained champion far longer than most people expected.

Organizations can have muscle memory too -- not just of Steve Jobs as a person, but of his values, approaches, and insights into what people really wanted from technology.

Steve Jobs is gone, but you don't have to be sentimental to say that his legacy will last for a very long time. And so will Apple.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I am fascinated by the bipolar swings in sentiment toward Apple Inc. Last September, it was a magical company that could do no wrong. But by mid-April, Apple's share price had plunged more than 40 percent, from a peak of $705 to less than $400.

# data[].attributes.headline
Хочу iPhone... Без него такая тоска!

# data[].attributes.subject
Хочу iPhone... Без него такая тоска!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In organizational theory, dynamic capability is the capability of an organization to purposefully adapt an organization's resource base. The concept was defined by David Teece, Gary Pisano and Amy Shuen, in their 1997 paper Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management, as "the firm's ability to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external competences to address rapidly changing environments".

The term is often used in the plural form, dynamic capabilities, emphasizing that the ability to react adequately and timely to external changes requires a combination of multiple capabilities.

The phrase "dynamic capabilities" was introduced in a working paper by David Teece, Gary Pisano, and Amy Shuen.The final, peer-reviewed version was published in 1997.

The idea of dynamic capabilities is similar in some ways to the previously existing concept of operational capabilities; the latter pertains to the current operations of an organization, whereas the former, by contrast, refers to an organization's capacity to efficiently and responsively change these operations and develop its resources.

The main assumption of this framework is that an organization's basic competencies should be used to create short-term competitive positions that can be developed into longer-term competitive advantage. Nelson and Winter, in their 1982 book An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, link the growth of the concept of dynamic capabilities to the resource-based view of the firm and the concept of "routines" in evolutionary theories of organization. Douma and Scheuder describe it as a bridge between the economics-based strategy literature and evolutionary approaches to organizations.

The resource-based view of the firm emphasizes sustainable competitive advantage; the dynamic capabilities view, on the other hand, focuses more on the issue of competitive survival in response to rapidly changing contemporary business conditions. Strategy scholars Gregory Ludwig and Jon Pemberton, in one of the few empirical studies on the topic, called for clarification of the specific processes of dynamic capability building in particular industries to make the concept more useful to senior managers who set directions for their firms.

Dynamic capabilities theory concerns the development of strategies for senior managers of successful companies to adapt to radical discontinuous change, while maintaining minimum capability standards to ensure competitive survival. For example, industries which have traditionally relied on a specific manufacturing process can't always change this process on short notice when a new technology arrives; when this happens, managers need to adapt their own routines to make the most of their existing resources while simultaneously planning for future process changes as the resources depreciate. Similarly, the kind of changes that the theory is emphasizing are the internal capabilities rather than only looking into the external business forces.

The New Dynamic Capabilities framework, posed by Amy Shuen in her analysis of Web 2.0, focuses on the firm's ability to quickly orchestrate and reconfigure externally sourced competences, ranging from Apple, Google Android, IBM Linux developer ecosystems to crowdsourced, crowdfunded open innovations such as the Obama08 mobile app-while leveraging internal resources such as platforms, know-how, user communities and digital, social and mobile networks. The New Dynamic Capabilities framework takes into account digital, information and network economics and the fall of the transaction costs of involved in using specialized services. According to Philip Cordes-Berszinn and Basiouni, though, more research is needed in order to measure the "capabilities" and to appropriately apply the ideas to practical management situations.

Many scholars have argued that the dynamic capability theory is vague and tautological. This is a critical issue, and while the theory remains very helpful when addressing how to respond to the business changing environment, it may fail to describe exactly how. Further, Lawson and Samson suggest that the capabilities of the theory are difficult to identify and/or operationalize, and in some cases, those very capabilities can lead to a core capability becoming core rigidity. As such, the use of the theory in its current state is difficult without being able to further specify, develop, and identify those capabilities.

Wheeler Zahra et al. proposed an operationalization of the dynamic capabilities and to be further tested across different settings and countries. To further clarify concepts related to the dynamic capability and absorptive capacity theories, Wheeler introduced an application derived from the dynamic capability theory for net-enablement. Wheeler's Net-Enabled Business Innovation Cycle facilitates understanding and predicting how firms transform dynamic capabilities associated with net-enablement into customer value using the dynamic capability theory. These net-enabled firms are able to "continually reconfigure their internal and external resources to employ digital networks to exploit business opportunities" through their "routines, knowledge, analysis and rules to create customer value from their net-enablement capability" (p. 128). Accordingly, and based on Wheeler's NEBIC model, Williams have qualitatively developed instruments to measure the dynamic capabilities and Basiouni developed the measurements quantitatively and tested them on many settings and in different countries such as Canada and Saudi Arabia.

A detailed description of processes and theoretical roots is provided by Arndt, Pierce, and Teece (2017). Teece, Pisano, and Shuen proposed three dynamic capabilities as necessary for an organization to meet new challenges: the ability of employees to learn quickly and to build new strategic assets; the integration of these new strategic assets, including capability, technology and customer feedback, into company processes; and lastly the transformation or reuse of existing assets which have depreciated. Teece refers to successful implementation of these three stages as developing "corporate agility".

The first stage, learning, requires employees and managers to reorganize their routines to promote interactions that lead to successful solutions to particular problems, to recognize and avoid dysfunctional activity and strategic blind spots, and to make appropriate use of alliance and acquisition to bring new strategic assets into the firm from external sources. A practical example of this is provided by Jean-Pierre Jeannet and Hein Schreuder, in their book From Coal to Biotech, which lays out how the Dutch company DSM transformed itself twice using 'strategic learning cycles'.

In his 1988 book Managing Quality, David A. Garvin states that quality performance depends on organisational routines for gathering and processing information, for linking customer experiences with engineering design choices and for coordinating factories and component suppliers. Increasingly competitive advantage also requires the integration of external activities and technologies through alliances and partnerships.

Economists Amit and Schoemaker pointed out in 1993 that success in fast changing markets depends on reconfiguring the firm's asset structure to accomplish rapid internal and external transformation. Firms must develop processes to make changes inexpensively while accomplishing reconfiguration and transformation ahead of the competition. This can be supported by decentralization, local autonomy and strategic alliances.

Another "dynamic capabilities" concept is co-specialization. For example, the physical assets, human resources and the intellectual property of a company, having developed together over time, are more valuable in combination than separately, and give a firm a sustainable competitive advantage.

Dynamic capabilities are closely related to the concept of ordinary capabilities as they both are organizational capabilities, yet both are distinct in nature. The resource-based view of the firm and the dynamic capabilities view (DCV) have focused on two broad categories of organizational capabilities that are essential for firm performance: zero-order ordinary capabilities needed to exploit a firm's current strategic assets through day-to-day operations (Winter, 2003) and higher-order dynamic capabilities required to alter a firm's resource base by integrating, building, and reconfiguring competences (Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000; Teece et al., 1997). Qaiyum and Wang (2018) show that ordinary and dynamic capabilities are needed in different contexts.

1. ^ Teece, David; Pisano, Gary; Shuen, Amy (August 1997). "Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management". Strategic Management Journal. 18 (7): 509-533. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.390.9899. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::aid-smj882>3.0.co;2-z.

2. ^ Teece, David; Pisano, Gary; Shuen, Amy (1990). Firm Capabilities, Resources, and the Concept of Strategy (CCC Working Paper 90-8 ed.). University of California, Berkeley: Center for Research on Management.

3. ^ Teece, David J.; Pisano, Gary; Shuen, Amy (August 1997). "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management". Strategic Management Journal. 18 (7): 509-533. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.390.9899. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z.

4. ^ Helfat, Constance E.; Finkelstein, Sydney; Mitchell, Will; Peteraf, Margaret; Singh, Harbir; Teece, David; Winter, Sidney G. (2009). Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 9781405182065.

5. ^ Nelson, Richard R. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-27228-6.

6. ^ Douma, Sytse; Schreuder, Hein (2002). Economic Approaches to Organizations (Third ed.). Financial Times Prentice Hall. ISBN 9780273651994.

7. ^ Ludwig, Gregory; Pemberton, Jon (2011). "A managerial perspective of dynamic capabilities in emerging markets: The case of the Russian steel industry". Journal of East European Management Studies. 16 (3): 215-236. doi:10.5771/0949-6181-2011-3-215. hdl:10419/84023. ISSN 0949-6181. JSTOR 23281688.

8. ^ Basiouni, A; Hafizi, A; Akhtar, N; Alojairi, A (2019). "Assessing Canadian Business IT Capabilities for Online Selling Adoption: A Net-Enabled Business Innovation Cycle (NEBIC) Perspective". Sustainability. 11 (13): 3662. doi:10.3390/su11133662.

9. ^ Shuen, Amy; Sieber, Sandra (2009). "Orchestrating the New Dynamic Capabilities". IESE Insight Review (3): 58-65. doi:10.15581/002.art-1605.

10. ^ Shuen, Amy (2008). Web 2.0: A Strategy Guide: Business thinking and strategies behind successful Web 2.0 implementations. O'Reilly Media. ISBN 9780596553753.

11. ^ Shapiro, Carl; Varian, Hal R. (1998). Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy. Harvard Business Review Press. ISBN 9780875848631.

12. ^ Williamson, Oliver E. (8 December 2009). "Nobel Prize Lecture: Transaction Cost Economics: The Natural Progression". nobelprize.org.

13. ^ Cordes-Berszinn, Philip (November 2013). Dynamic Capabilities: How Organisational Structures Affect Knowledge Processes. Palgrave Macmillan.

14. ^ Basiouni, A (2012). "Innovation in e-Business Models: a Net-Enabled Business Innovation Cycle (NEBIC) Theory Perspective". Ph. D. Dissertation. University of Waterloo, School of Engineering.

15. ^ Wang, C (2007). "Dynamic capabilities: a review and research agenda". International Journal of Management Reviews. 9 (1): 31-51. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00201.x.

16. ^ Wheeler, Bradley C. (2002). "NEBIC: A Dynamic Capabilities Theory for Assessing Net-Enablement". Information Systems Research. 13 (2): 125-146. doi:10.1287/isre.13.2.125.89. ISSN 1047-7047. JSTOR 23011051. S2CID 16277928.

17. ^ Lawson, b (2001). "Developing innovation capability in organizations: a dynamic capabilities approach". International Journal of Innovation Management. 5 (3): 377-400. doi:10.1142/S1363919601000427.

18. ^ Wheeler, Bradley C. (2002). "NEBIC: A Dynamic Capabilities Theory for Assessing Net-Enablement". Information Systems Research. 13 (2): 125-146. doi:10.1287/isre.13.2.125.89. ISSN 1047-7047. JSTOR 23011051. S2CID 16277928.

19. ^ Zahra, s (2006). "Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: a review, model and research agenda" (PDF). Journal of Management Studies. 43 (4): 917-955. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00616.x.

20. ^ Wheeler, Bradley C. (1 Jun 2002). "NEBIC: A Dynamic Capabilities Theory for Assessing Net-Enablement". Information Systems Research. 13 (2): 125-146. doi:10.1287/isre.13.2.125.89. S2CID 16277928.

21. ^ Williams, M (2004). "Organizational routines for choosing Information Technology: a multiple case study examination of NEBIC theory's choosing capability". Ph. D. Dissertation. Indiana University, School of Business.

22. ^ Basiouni, A; Hafizi, A; Akhtar, N; Alojairi, A (2019). "Assessing Canadian Business IT Capabilities for Online Selling Adoption: A Net-Enabled Business Innovation Cycle (NEBIC) Perspective". Sustainability. 11 (13): 3662. doi:10.3390/su11133662.

23. ^ Eisenhardt, Kathleen M.; Martin, Jeffrey A. (October 2000). "Dynamic capabilities:What are they?". Strategic Management Journal. 21 (10/11): 1105-1122. doi:10.1002/1097-0266(200010/11)21:10/11<1105::AID-SMJ133>3.0.CO;2-E.

24. ^ Teece, David J. (August 2007). "Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performance". Strategic Management Journal. 28 (13): 1319-1350. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.319.1687. doi:10.1002/smj.640.

25. ^ Jeannet, Jean-Pierre; Schreuder, Hein (2015). From Coal to Biotech: The transformation of DSM with business school support. Springer. ISBN 9783662462980.

26. ^ Garvin, David A. (1988). Managing Quality: The Strategic and Competitive Edge. Simon and Schuster. p. 204. ISBN 978-0-02-911380-6.

27. ^ Zahra, Shaker A.; Nielsen, Anders P. (1 May 2002). "Sources of capabilities, integration and technology commercialization". Strategic Management Journal. 23 (5): 377-398. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.461.340. doi:10.1002/smj.229. ISSN 1097-0266.

28. ^ Khalid, Saba (2009). Exploring Firm Level Market Knowledge Competence and Its Implications for the Speed and Success of Export Expansion: A Mixed Methodology Study from the Software Industry. University of Vaasa. p. 25. ISBN 9789524762700.

29. ^ Qaiyum, Sameer; Wang, Catherine L. (2018). "Understanding internal conditions driving ordinary and dynamic capabilities in Indian high-tech firms". Journal of Business Research. 90: 206-214. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.05.014.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In organizational theory, dynamic capability is the capability of an organization to purposefully adapt an organization's resource base. The concept was defined by David Teece, Gary Pisano and Amy Shuen, in their 1997 paper Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management, as "the firm's ability to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external competences to address rapidly changing environments".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Apple's Manufacturing in China: Key Issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Excellent story on ethics/globalization/labor etc surrounding Apple's manufacturing in China. I am NOT taking either position - often the media likes to sensationalize. It would be great to learn more about the "facts" involved. Apple is a very good company and I am sure there is much more to the story.

# data[].attributes.headline
Экосистема: все в унисон!

# data[].attributes.subject
Экосистема: все в унисон!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
All Inditex suppliers must meet our strict standards of social and environmental responsibility, and undergo regular audits to check compliance.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Based on the Special Issue edited by David Teece. California Management Review Volume 58, Issue 4 (Summer 2016) For more information, access to a complete list of articles in this issue, or for purchasing options, please visit us online: http://cmr.berkeley.edu Music: "Magic Part 2" by Otis McDonald Footage: © Apple Inc.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BMW Group - Innovation - Technology and Mobility

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Innovative technologies and mobility solutions - what the BMW Group is working on.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Ecosystem

2. Rethink functionality of gadget in the context of emotions and simplicity

3. Marketing

4. Design and beauty as a gadget feature

# data[].attributes.headline
How Zara sells out 450+ million items a year without wasting money on Marketing

# data[].attributes.subject
How Zara sells out 450+ million items a year without wasting money on Marketing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Zara's Business Model, Information and Communication Technologies, and Competitive Analysis :: essays research papers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Category: essays research papers; Title: Zara's Business Model, Information and Communication Technologies, and Competitive Analysis