Fitbit Swot Analysis Paper

496 Words1 Page

Innovation taxonomies A type 1 innovation where, “a firm seeks to be unique in its industry along some dimensions that [buyers widely value]” (Porter, 1985, p14) gives Fitbit a competitive advantage by selling different tracker variants to different user groups; all based on its numerous strategic resources and value propositions. Fitbit’s product line helped to redistribute market share. After Fitbit’s Charge HR and Surge trackers started selling in December 2014 (Fitbit Inc, 2015), it still had the highest market share (in unit shipments) in 2014 and 2015 (Figure 1). Implication for 5 forces Fitbit’s increased product line can help it become more competitive by selling more trackers with different specialisations helping reduce the threat …show more content…

They had one or two features that the previous version did not have. By satisfying the established customers’ needs that a firm is familiar with (Christensen and Bower, 1996), Fitbit’s new tracker variants are sustaining innovations which are low risk. Value Chain Fitbit uses outbound logistics by outsourcing its products’ manufacturing to contract manufacturers in Asia and component suppliers worldwide (Fitbit Inc, 2015). It believes that “using outsourced manufacturing enables greater scale and flexibility at lower costs than establishing [its] own manufacturing facilities” (ibid, p97). Fitbit’s has; agreements and close relationships with many large retailers and distributors, and a large global distribution base that is unmatched in the market (ibid). Dynamic capabilities Fitbit’s user community, which emerged through its platform, has enabled it to organise for “ambidexterity”. The platform’s success has enabled Fitbit to “achieve new and innovative forms of competitive advantage… [and] address rapidly changing environments [specifically, technological changes impacting digital devices]” (Teece et al, 1997,

More about Fitbit Swot Analysis Paper

Open Document