Viewing offline content

Limited functionality available

Dismiss
Deloitte Middle East
  • Services

    What's New

    • Deloitte175

      Join us for a celebration of 175 years of making an impact that matters.

    • Building the Resilient Organization

      2021 Deloitte Global resilience report

    • 2020 Global Gender Impact Report

      A collection of Butterfly Effect stories highlighting how our Deloitte professionals are positively impacting the lives of women and girls around the world

    • Audit & Assurance

      • Assurance
    • Consulting

      • Strategy, Analytics and M&A
      • Customer and Marketing
      • Business Operations
      • Human Capital
      • Enterprise Technology & Performance
    • Financial Advisory

      • Mergers & Acquisitions
      • Forensic
      • Real Estate
      • Turnaround & Restructuring
    • Risk Advisory

      • Strategic & Reputation Risk
      • Regulatory Risk
      • Financial Risk
      • Operational Risk
      • Cyber Risk
    • Tax

      • Global Business Tax Services
      • Indirect Tax
      • Global Employer Services
    • Deloitte Private

      • Family Enterprise
    • Legal

    • Sustainability

  • Industries

    What's New

    • Deloitte perspectives

      Leadership perspectives from across the globe.

    • Deloitte Insights App

      Our thought leadership and Dow Jones news, now at your fingertips

    • Future of Mobility

      Learn how this new reality is coming together and what it will mean for you and your industry.

    • Consumer

      • Automotive
      • Consumer Products
      • Retail, Wholesale & Distribution
      • Transportation, Hospitality & Services
    • Energy, Resources & Industrials

      • Industrial Products & Construction
      • Mining & Metals
      • Oil, Gas & Chemicals
      • Power, Utilities & Renewables
    • Financial Services

      • Banking & Capital Markets
      • Insurance
      • Investment Management
      • Real Estate
    • Government & Public Services

      • Civil Government
      • Defense, Security & Justice
      • Health & Social Care
      • Transport
    • Life Sciences & Health Care

      • Health Care
      • Life Sciences
    • MENA Sovereign Wealth Funds

    • Technology, Media & Telecommunications

      • Technology
      • Telecommunications, Media & Entertainment
  • Insights

    Deloitte Insights

    What's New

    • Deloitte Insights Magazine

      Explore the latest issue now

    • Deloitte Insights app

      Go straight to smart with daily updates on your mobile device

    • Weekly economic update

      See what's happening this week and the impact on your business

    • Strategy

      • Business Strategy & Growth
      • Digital Transformation
      • Governance & Board
      • Innovation
      • Marketing & Sales
      • Private Enterprise
    • Economy & Society

      • Economy
      • Environmental, Social, & Governance
      • Health Equity
      • Trust
      • Mobility
    • Organization

      • Operations
      • Finance & Tax
      • Risk & Regulation
      • Supply Chain
      • Smart Manufacturing
    • People

      • Leadership
      • Talent & Work
      • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Technology

      • Data & Analytics
      • Emerging Technologies
      • Technology Management
    • Industries

      • Consumer
      • Energy, Resources, & Industrials
      • Financial Services
      • Government & Public Services
      • Life Sciences & Health Care
      • Technology, Media, & Telecommunications
    • Spotlight

      • Deloitte Insights Magazine
      • Press Room Podcasts
      • Weekly Economic Update
      • COVID-19
      • Resilience
  • Careers

    What's New

    • Millennial Survey 2022

      Gen Zs and millennials are striving for balance and advocating for change.

    • Candidate Profile

      After applying for a job in this country, you can access/update your candidate profile at any time.

    • Job Search

    • Students

    • Experienced Hires

    • Executives

    • Life at Deloitte

    • Alumni

    • Diversity and Inclusion

  • XE-EN Location: XE-English  
  • Contact us
  • XE-EN Location: XE-English  
  • Contact us
    • Dashboard
    • Saved items
    • Content feed
    • Profile/Interests
    • Account settings

Welcome back

Still not a member? Join My Deloitte

Converge products

by John Hagel III, John Seely Brown (JSB), Maggie Wooll, Andrew de Maar
  • Save for later
  • Download
  • Share
    • Share on Facebook
    • Share on Twitter
    • Share on Linkedin
    • Share by email
Deloitte Insights
  • Strategy
    Strategy
    Strategy
    • Business Strategy & Growth
    • Digital Transformation
    • Governance & Board
    • Innovation
    • Marketing & Sales
    • Private Enterprise
  • Economy & Society
    Economy & Society
    Economy & Society
    • Economy
    • Environmental, Social, & Governance
    • Health Equity
    • Trust
    • Mobility
  • Organization
    Organization
    Organization
    • Operations
    • Finance & Tax
    • Risk & Regulation
    • Supply Chain
    • Smart Manufacturing
  • People
    People
    People
    • Leadership
    • Talent & Work
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
  • Technology
    Technology
    Technology
    • Data & Analytics
    • Emerging Technologies
    • Technology Management
  • Industries
    Industries
    Industries
    • Consumer
    • Energy, Resources, & Industrials
    • Financial Services
    • Government & Public Services
    • Life Sciences & Health Care
    • Tech, Media, & Telecom
  • Spotlight
    Spotlight
    Spotlight
    • Deloitte Insights Magazine
    • Press Room Podcasts
    • Weekly Economic Update
    • COVID-19
    • Resilience
    • XE-EN Location: XE-English  
    • Contact us
      • Dashboard
      • Saved items
      • Content feed
      • Profile/Interests
      • Account settings
    02 December 2015

    Converge products Making 1 + 1 > 2

    03 December 2015
    • John Hagel III United States
    • John Seely Brown (JSB) United States
    • Maggie Wooll United States
    • Andrew de Maar United States
    • Andrew de Maar United States
    • Save for later
    • Download
    • Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on Linkedin
      • Share by email

    “Bundling” functions from formerly distinct products into a single offering can give customers a more economical and convenient way to access those functions—which can disrupt those making and selling specialized products.

    Overview

    Converge products

    Making 1 + 1 > 2

    Def. Integrate distinct products to provide far greater value than the individual products can deliver independently.

     

    Explore the collection of case studies

    Read the full Patterns of disruption report

     

    Amid the proliferation of gadgets, devices, and technology-based services, multiuse products deliver basic functionality across a range of product categories for a customer base that does not require the depth of features offered by single-purpose products. The consolidation of features from many products into one, stand-alone product delivers design and production efficiencies to producers. Meanwhile, as with the Swiss Army Knife introduced in the 1890s, customers gain the convenience and flexibility of easy-to-use products that minimize redundancy.1

    In the report Patterns of disruption: Anticipating disruptive strategies in a world of unicorns, black swans, and exponentials, we explored, from an established incumbent’s point of view, the factors that turn a new technology or new approach into something cataclysmic to the marketplace—and to incumbents’ businesses. In doing so, we identified nine distinct patterns of disruption: recognizable configurations of marketplace conditions and new entrants’ approaches that can pose a disruptive threat to incumbents. Here, we take a deep dive into one of these nine patterns of disruption: converge products.

    DUP_1465_Converge-products_Fig.1b

     

    Convergence consolidates select features from a variety of products—potentially from different sectors or categories—into a distinct, modular product. The most visible example is smartphones converging everything from handheld GPS systems to flashlights to cameras to music players in a single product, displacing each of the individual products as a result. When products start to use similar technological components and underlying infrastructure, producers who focus on developing the common infrastructure to remove redundancies across adjacent markets can expand across existing product sectors and create new ones. For the customer who needs or desires the component functionality, converged products offer a more economical and convenient way to access a breadth of basic functionality than they could get if they had to purchase and maintain distinct products. For example, if a consumer were to purchase the main functions and applications of a smartphone as individual products on Amazon—navigation system, alarm clock, planner, digital camera, cell phone—it would cost over $1,200 and weigh over 8 pounds.2 As customers become accustomed to versatile, multifaceted products and comfortable that the quality can meet their needs—driven by the compelling value proposition of a more economical all-in-one device—their preferences shift from wanting all of the latest technology to desiring high levels of convenience and connectivity.3 In fact, in consumer electronics, 60 percent of consumers preferred a core set of product features at a reasonable price than all the “bells and whistles” at a higher price.4

    Convergence is largely driven by the underlying technology, which, as it becomes standardized, tends to change the economics such that lower-end, stand-alone products can no longer compete with the same capabilities wrapped into a multiuse device. Ravi Mantena and Arun Sundarajan, professors from the NYU Stern School of Business, have described a process whereby technological convergence (for example, adoption of digital technology) is followed by product convergence (multifunctional offerings) and potentially industry convergence.5 As products across a broad range of industries become increasingly digital, there is a higher likelihood of shared underlying, fundamental technologies. As these core technologies (for example, general-purpose hardware, platforms, storage) increasingly overlap across adjacent markets and capabilities blur across previously distinct markets, the economics of product distribution, sales, and marketing will continue to change and result in the displacement of many traditional incumbents.6

    “The component parts of these technologies can be combined and recombined by innovators to create new devices and applications. Since these innovators are working in parallel with similar components, it is common to see simultaneous invention . . .” —Hal Varian, Google chief economist, describing combinatorial innovation

    The economics of production/distribution and the preferences of the customer base determine where convergence, or its opposite “unbundling,” may succeed. In unbundling,8 a new approach makes separate, more specialized stand-alone offerings technically feasible and economically viable in way it was not previously; convergence, on the other hand, occurs when the ability to share an infrastructure, platform, or foundation promises to dramatically improve the economics of providing functionality, such that the individual products can no longer be offered competitively against the converged product. On the demand side, unbundling is more likely to occur when customers have very niche and specialized demands and preferences, possibly desiring more depth, while convergence will emerge most often in the low ends of markets, when customers have similar needs in terms of products and value breadth. Volatile markets and economic downturns, such as the one in the mid-2000s, make some customers more cost-conscious and can amplify the desirability of the value and breadth of a converged product. Research has shown that once most consumers make the initial transition to a lower-priced product, they continue to prefer and purchase lower-end goods because the quality exceeded expectations and satisfied the majority of their needs.9

    Key stats

    • Garmin, a leader in the navigation and mapping technology market, lost 70 percent of its market capitalization in the two years after navigation apps were introduced; TomTom, another leading player, lost nearly 85 percent.10
    • By September 2014, global shipments of digital point-and-shoot cameras, after 29 consecutive months of decline, had decreased 32 percent.11
    • The mobile chip market (global cellular baseband market) was worth $18.9 billion in 2013, up from $8.6 billion in 2006.12

    One reason convergence can be so challenging for incumbents is that the new product, in which their current product capabilities are but a feature, quickly renders existing product lines and the assets that support them obsolete, turning them into liabilities that no longer have a competitive advantage or even a place in the market. The speed with which a converged product emerges and scales can be too fast for incumbents to reallocate existing assets and redesign existing processes. Spanning across multiple categories or sectors, the converged product benefits from the sometimes faster rate of technological advances or product development in an adjacent market and also may achieve scale faster as customers rapidly adopt the offering that delivers far greater value.

    Convergence may also challenge incumbents’ assumptions about how the products are used, what the customer values about the product, and what product category they compete in. The converged product essentially creates a new market that moves with different competitive dynamics than the various single-product markets. Incumbent product companies tend to orient their strategy and operations around the assumption that the product serves a specific, well-established use and that the needs and preferences of the core customer base are static. They focus on measuring their performance against traditional competitors and differentiating themselves through quality, performance, features, or price. A converged product doesn’t fit any one category they are prepared to compete against. They may not even be aware of it until it has already taken significant share—and their own product’s capabilities can become just one feature among many.

    By the nature of convergence, this pattern can affect multiple markets in parallel; however, disruption won’t necessarily occur in all of the affected markets. Those most vulnerable will likely be markets where the customer needs aren’t that differentiated, a minimum quality threshold satisfies the needs of the majority of a given product’s user base, and the underlying technology is becoming more standardized with other stand-alone products used by a similar customer segment. Additionally, convergence will likely be more appealing to customers at lower technology levels where they derive more value from the added convenience, simplification, and ease of ownership than they would from incremental features in one category.13 While expensive, single-purpose products and services also risk becoming outdated if the core technologies are still evolving rapidly, they are less likely to be converged with other expensive products simply because the resulting product would not be affordable to large portions of the market. Some displaced incumbents have successfully navigated the evolving market by moving upstream and focusing on niche, high-end, and specialized portions of the market whose needs cannot be served by multiuse devices.

    Digging deeper

    Does this pattern apply only to the technology industry?

    Convergence tends to relate to technological advances, but we see convergence beginning to take place in a variety of industries, in part because technology is becoming fundamental to most sectors.

    • Insurance: Insurance brokers, capitalizing on newly available means of collecting and analyzing data across a wider number of shared data sources, are now beginning to incorporate risk management services into their portfolios. A Towers Watson Survey reported that 75 percent of global insurers now include enterprise risk management as a vital component of their business.14
    • Medical devices: Treatment of chronic conditions are changing as telemedicine and mobile health converge. Patients use push-to-talk devices in tele-monitoring situations in which sensor data is transmitted to a facility, encouraging patients to become more responsible for their own care delivery and their own health.15 As more diagnostic tools can be powered by and remotely accessed via smartphones and other mobile technology, the need for once distinct medical devices (and facilities) diminishes.

    Isn’t convergence the same as bundling?

    Convergence of products involves absorbing the core capabilities of one or more products into the functionality of a separate and distinct product, which then essentially becomes the combination of two or more products. “Bundling” typically refers to a sales, marketing, and pricing strategy designed to drive the combined sale of more than one product or service, each of which can be used independent of the other parts of the bundle. With convergence, the underlying infrastructure and technology is combined such that only one end product or service is sold, and the individual component capabilities cannot easily be stripped back out of the product.

    Case studies

    Qualcomm “System on a Chip” displaces mobile chipset makers

    Qualcomm gained control of the mobile semiconductor market via the introduction of a new product, the System on a Chip (SoC), in 2002.16 The SoC is an integrated circuit that combines all of the primary components of a computer (for example, central processing unit, graphics card, and memory controller) into a single chip. Consolidating previously separate products into complementary features of a single chip helped Qualcomm to capture market share from incumbents, and lead the mobile semiconductor market. The SoC created value in the following ways for customers (handset manufacturers and mobile carriers):

    • Elimination of redundancy: SoCs could integrate elements (such as memory and graphics capabilities) that were previously duplicated in each component
      • Qualcomm’s MSM6250 single-chip solution eliminated the need for an external applications processor and associated memory, significantly reducing bill-of-material costs, board size, and power consumption. It included MPEG-4 video encoding/decoding, JPEG encoding/decoding, MP3/AAC audio decoding, a 2D/3D graphics accelerator for advanced gaming applications, a MIDI synthesizer, and a digital camera interface that supported up to 2-megapixel resolution.17
    • Cost efficiency: The removal of redundant capabilities in the new architecture yielded lower overall costs and resulted in lower power consumption and more cost-effective memory.
    • Increased convenience: With the smaller, more versatile SoCs, handset manufacturers and mobile carriers could easily deploy chips by simply dropping the SoC in the device rather than having to insert individual components.

    By 2007, Qualcomm led the mobile chipset market.18

    Qualcomm’s entry into the market (see figure 2) with a complex product that broke with the status quo for the industry made it difficult for incumbents to effectively respond. By combining features from products that were assumed to be more valuable on their own, Qualcomm addresses a systemic need for efficiency and simplicity that likely could not be further addressed by any single component product. Qualcomm’s holistic approach to mobile chips challenged the incumbents’ core assumptions about what mobile handset manufacturers wanted and in what form factor. Drawing on several years of R&D, technology designed by Qualcomm allowed the SoC chip to absorb and integrate core functionality from a variety of individual components. Qualcomm also outsourced to third-party foundries (factories/workshops) to quickly scale its offerings to meet surging demand. In addition, had incumbents tried to respond by developing multifaceted chips, they would have been likely forced to write off the expensive assets configured specifically for manufacturing individual product lines.

    DUP_1465_Converge-products_Fig.2

    A variety of conditions facilitated the success of SoC within the semiconductor industry. Within the mobile chip space, many related but distinct offerings that comprised the mobile chipset were purchased by the same customers: handset manufacturers. Thus, the ability to purchase one product that contained all of the components necessary to operate a mobile handset was compelling for customers. In addition, the accelerating rate of product development in the industry led to innovations being adopted faster, likely making all incumbents more vulnerable because of the inflexibility of the R&D- and asset-intensive nature of chips.

    Qualcomm’s SoC was catalyzed by technological advances that, following Moore’s law, were driving ever smaller, faster, cheaper digital components and the emerging standardization around a core technical infrastructure between disparate components that allowed Qualcomm to converge functionality onto a shared infrastructure. In addition, all consumer electronics manufacturers were becoming accustomed to smaller and more compact core parts, and so the handset manufacturers were eager to simplify their designs and development processes and decrease costs using the SoC instead of multiple components.19

    Smartphones displace consumer GPS systems

    With the rise of smartphones, a host of capabilities, including navigation, have been converged in the device. As a result, the market for portable navigation devices (PND), most notably consumer GPS systems, declined sharply, replaced by a variety of mobile and web applications that use GPS satellite data to provide real-time directions to get drivers (and pedestrians, bikers, and transit riders) from point A to B via the most efficient route possible.20

    “Mobile phones are the kind of commodity business we would like to avoid.” —Garmin CEO (in 2003)

    Consumers have become comfortable using smartphones, rather than separate products, for a variety of purposes, driven largely by convenience. With that comfort, consumers increasingly preferred to get directions via the smartphone. Free navigation applications (for example, Apple®22 Maps, GoogleMaps, Waze) are now either preloaded or easy and free to download on nearly every smartphone, leading to cost and time savings. Additionally, the smartphone reduces the redundancy of purchasing, maintaining, and carrying excess devices.

    The primary market leaders within the navigation and mapping technology market—Garmin, TomTom, and Magellan—have all seen their GPS sales erode due to the rise of accessible and easy-to-use mobile apps. Garmin lost 70 percent of its market capitalization in the two years after navigation apps were introduced, while TomTom lost nearly 85 percent.23 In 2007, Garmin had been the top seller of GPS devices and had recently doubled its sales, with 72.6 percent of the company’s 2008 revenue coming from automotive sales.24 By 2015, sales within Garmin’s automotive segment accounted for only 37 percent of overall sales.25 This drastic shift tracked the availability of capable mobile application alternatives (see figure 3).

    DUP_1465_Converge-products_Fig.3

    Portable navigation device sales decreased as consumer adoption of smartphones—and the popular free mobile navigation applications—escalated. Berg Insights estimates PND unit sales to further decrease to 17 million in 2017 and 10 million by 2019, 25 percent of what it was during its peak.26 In contrast, GoogleMaps had 200 million global monthly active users as of May 2011.27

    In the early 2000s, GPS manufacturers recognized that devices were becoming cheaper and easier to integrate with other products, but did not view mobile phone producers as threats because of their core assumptions about the industry and the product. As the Garmin CEO said in 2003, mobile phones represented “the kind of commodity business we would like to avoid.”28 Assuming that high barriers to entry, specifically the ability to acquire GPS location signals from satellites, would prevent mobile phones from taking market share, Garmin felt little pressure to act.29 Those barriers fell when smartphones gained location placement capabilities through GPS chips and cell phone towers, and Garmin struggled to respond, as reflected in its declining popularity during 2008–2013.30 Constrained by its investment built around producing navigation devices, Garmin couldn’t easily reconfigure to offer smartphones or services that competed with the free mobile navigational apps. In recent years, Garmin has shifted its focus to fitness gadgets and units for niche customer segments like sportsmen and sailors.31

    As the enabling technologies for smartphones and GPS systems rode the exponential rate of price-performance improvement, GPS systems became commodities and smartphone ownership skyrocketed. Once the technology provided the ability to integrate the GPS components into the smartphone, smartphone-based navigation applications emerged to meet the basic needs of customers who might have considered buying a personal navigation device, and customers were quick to eliminate the redundancy of carrying a personal GPS.

    Short stories

    Digital cameras

    As smartphone adoption soared in the late 2000s, digital point-and-shoot camera sales decreased dramatically. Once smartphones were able to absorb the core functionality of cameras and provide a similar level of quality, customers opted to use their phones for every-day picture-taking.32 Entry-level cameras cost around $150–$200, while consumers could purchase smartphones equipped with cameras boasting comparable megapixels and sensor sizes for a comparable price accompanied by a variety of other useful features.33 By September 2014, global shipments of digital point-and-shoot cameras had decreased for the 29th consecutive month.34 While for Kodak, this second disruption pushed it closer to bankruptcy, some other incumbents successfully refocused on DSLR offerings to provide higher-quality cameras to a select segment of users whose needs smartphones cannot meet.35

    Insurance

    A relatively volatile economic environment and increased rate of catastrophic events (injured catastrophe losses in 2012 were nearly double those of the inflation-adjusted average from the past 30 years) are beginning to influence insurance companies to adjust their focus.36 Whereas traditional insurance brokers and companies have primarily focused on insuring risk for customers and organizations, they are beginning to also place an emphasis on helping customers manage and minimize risk, taking advantage of similar back-end platforms. Shared foundations and infrastructures across the fields enable providers to collect data in a cheaper and more effective manner, facilitating integration of services. Historically, it would not have been feasible for insurers to engage customers around risk minimization because they lacked analytics, had little visibility into customer behavior, and ineffective technology. By assuming some of the responsibilities typically borne by risk management agencies, insurance companies may not only be converging functionality that was previously managed by distinct entities, but looking out for the best financial interests of customers and themselves.

    Is my market vulnerable?

    Is the use of my product well-established? 

    If the typical range of uses for a product is fairly established and understood, it is easier to identify the capabilities and features required to meet basic needs for the broad customer base. In addition, customers will be more likely to feel comfortable with a converged product if they understand the value they derived from simple, well-established use of the stand-alone product.

    Are my product offerings used across many similar domains, activities, or user bases?

    When distinct products are frequently used either by the same customers or across the same activities, there are clear user benefits to convergence because it eliminates redundancy and increases convenience. Consider whether your customers who use a variety of related products across an activity would accept and prefer to use fewer products.

    Does my product/service have limited domain and functionality?

    When products or services have limited functionality, they are not as useful or versatile to customers as they could be. Thus, firms can enhance the value of a product or service by adding additional capabilities that appeal to customers. Organizations should consider whether their product traditionally serves a very limited scope and if it would be possible for it to expand.

    Is there potential for shared infrastructure across my own and related products?

    When individual products within the same, adjacent, or new industries share core underlying technology infrastructure or platforms, it becomes easier and more beneficial for producers to converge the capabilities. Producers can be incentivized by design efficiencies that may save money (through data collection) and grow their customer base, while customers may be excited about the opportunity to increase convenience.

    Does quality at the lower end of the product category have the potential to eventually meet the needs of a large portion of the customer base?

    When disparate offerings are converged, the quality of each individual offering (as a part of the whole) often initially declines. But as long as the converged product’s quality level can potentially satisfy the needs and preferences of a majority of its user base, the product will find a market. Products within industries that are being transformed by innovative technology and rapid price/performance improvements are especially at risk for convergence. Consider whether new technology has the ability to elevate a product’s performance above a threshold that most customers will accept, rendering it vulnerable to being made a feature of a multifaceted product.

    Credits

    Written by: John Hagel III, John Seely Brown (JSB), Maggie Wooll, Andrew de Maar

    Cover image by: Traci Daberko

    Acknowledgements

    This research would not have been possible without generous contributions and valuable feedback from numerous individuals. The authors would like to thank: Philippe Beaudette, Andrew Blau, Peter Fusheng Chen, Jack Corsello, Larry Keeley, Eamonn Kelly, Vas Kodali, Jon Pittman, Janet Renteria, Peter Schwartz, Dan Simpson, Vivian Tan, Lawrence Wilkinson, Andrew Ysursa, Blythe Aronowitz, Jodi Gray, Carrie Howell, Junko Kaji, Duleesha Kulasooriya, and Kevin Weier.

    Endnotes
      1. Victorinox, “Victorinox Swiss Army Knives info,” http://www.pizzini.at/info_sak_engl.htm, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      2. Josh Ong, “Your smartphone is so smart it takes 14 gadgets and $1,200 to match it,” TNW News, http://thenextweb.com/gadgets/2012/08/25/smartphone-so-smart/, August 25, 2012, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      3. Jin K. Han, Seh Woong Chung, and Yong Seek Sohn, “Technology convergence: When do consumers prefer converged products to dedicated products?” American Marketing Association 73, no. 4 (2009): pp. 97–108, https://terenceow.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/convergence.pdf, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      4. Betsy Bohlen, Steve Carlotti, and Liz Mihas, “How the recession has changed US consumer behavior,” McKinsey Quarterly, December 2009, http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/consumer_and_retail/how_the_recession_has_changed_us_consumer_behavior, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      5. Ravi Mantena and Arun Sundaraarajan, “Competing in markets with digital convergence: Product differentiation, platform scope, and equilibrium structure,” http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~rmantena/papers/msdec02.pdf, December 2002, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      6. Ibid. View in article
      7. Hal R. Varian, “Computer mediated transactions,” American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings 100, May 2010, http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~hal/Papers/2010/cmt.pdf. View in article
      8. Unbundling is a separate pattern, which we will describe in more detail later in this series. It is the opposite dynamic: a product or service that has traditionally been offered as a whole is decomposed into specialized products or services. Unbundling will ensue when underlying economics shift in a way that undermine a previous requirement for a shared infrastructure or platform to produce an economically viable product. As a result of this shift, offerings can now be produced independently in alternate ways. View in article
      9. Bohlen, Carlotti, and Mihas, “How the recession has changed US consumer behavior.” View in article
      10. Larry Downes and Paul Nunes, “Big-bang disruption,” Harvard Business Review, March 2013, https://hbr.org/2013/03/big-bang-disruption/, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      11. Ansuya Harjani, “Oh snap! Digital camera market in ‘free fall,’” CNBC, http://www.cnbc.com/2014/11/05/oh-snap-digital-camera-market-in-free-fall.html, November 5, 2014, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      12. Mark LaPedus, “Can TI rebound in baseband?” EE Times, January 7, 2008, http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1167705, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      13. Han, Chung, and Sohn, “Technology convergence,” pp. 97–108. View in article
      14. “Towers Watson: Global insurers increasingly rely on enterprise risk management,” Carrier Management, April 28, 2015, http://www.carriermanagement.com/news/2015/04/28/138673.htm, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      15. Telemedicine, “Push to talk telemedicine and m-health convergence,” http://itelemedicine.com/push-to-talk-telemedicine/, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      16. Sujit Prasad, “All you need to know about mobile phone chipsets,” ASUS, April 14, 2015, http://www.asus.com/zentalk/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=6163, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      17. Qualcomm, “Qualcomm’s MSM6250 chipset selected by LG Electronics, Inc. for the WCDMA (UMTS) / GSM / GPRS market,” https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2003/09/09/qualcomms-msm6250-chipset-selected-lg-electronics-inc-wcdma-umtsgsmgprs, September 9, 2003, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      18. “Qualcomm, Samsung lead cellphone chip market in 2012,” IHS Electronics, February 25, 2013, http://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/44/qualcomm-samsung-lead-cellphone-chip-market-in-2012, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      19. Ibid. View in article
      20. Jessica Leber, “A shrinking Garmin navigates the smartphone storm,” MIT Technology Review, March 8, 2013, http://www.technologyreview.com/news/511786/a-shrinking-garmin-navigates-the-smartphone-storm/, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      21. Arik Hesseldahl, “How Garmin failed to see the iPhone threat,” All Things, June 12, 2012, http://allthingsd.com/20120612/how-garmin-failed-to-see-the-iphone-threat/, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      22. Apple is a trademark of Apple Inc., registered in the United States and other countries. View in article
      23. Downes and Nunes, “Big-bang disruption.” View in article
      24. Leber, “A shrinking Garmin navigates the smartphone storm.” View in article
      25. GPS Tracklog, “Garmin auto GPS sales continue decline,” http://gpstracklog.com/2015/05/garmin-auto-gps-sales-continue-decline.html, May 3, 2015, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      26. Statista, “Annual unit shipments of PNDs.” View in article
      27. MG Siegler, “Google Maps for mobile crosses 200 million installs; in June it will surpass desktop usage,” Tech Crunch, May 25, 2011, http://techcrunch.com/2011/05/25/google-maps-for-mobile-stats/, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      28. Hesseldahl, “How Garmin failed to see the iPhone threat.” View in article
      29. Leber, “A shrinking Garmin navigates the smartphone storm.” View in article
      30. Ibid. View in article
      31. Ibid. View in article
      32. Robert Dominguez, “Canon vows to hone on high-end camera market after earnings, sales drop due to smartphones,” Daily News, October 27, 2014, http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/canon-earnings-sales-drop-due-smartphone-cameras-article-1.1989081, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      33. Ben Taylor, “How the smartphone defeated the point-and-shoot digital camera,” PCWorld, August 19, 2014, http://www.pcworld.com/article/2466500/how-the-smartphone-defeated-the-point-and-shoot-digital-camera.html, accessed November 11, 2015; Harjani, “Oh snap! Digital camera market in ‘free fall.’” View in article
      34. Ibid. View in article
      35. “The last Kodak moment?” Economist, January 14, 2012, http://www.economist.com/node/21542796, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
      36. Markus Salchegger, Gerald R. Roop, Prasanna Varadan, Daniel Kimmerle, and Mauro Montesano, “Risk adjusted operating model: Transformation strategy for insurers,” https://www.accenture.com/us-en/insight-risk-adjusted-operating-model-transformation-strategy-insurers.aspx, accessed November 11, 2015. View in article
    Show moreShow less

    Topics in this article

    Leadership , Workplace culture , Talent , Strategy , Disruptive innovation , Patterns of Disruption Case Studies

    Deloitte Consulting

    Learn more
    Download Subscribe

    Related

    img Trending

    Interactive 3 days ago

    John Hagel III

    John Hagel III

    Former Co-Chairman | Center for the Edge

    John Hagel (retired) was the co-chairman for Deloitte LLP's Center for the Edge with nearly 40 years of experience as a management consultant, author, speaker, and entrepreneur. He has served as senior vice president of strategy at Atari, Inc., and is the founder of two Silicon Valley startups. Author of "The Power of Pull," "Net Gain," "Net Worth," "Out of the Box" and "The Only Sustainable Edge," John holds a B.A. from Wesleyan University, a B.Phil from Oxford University and a J.D. and MBA from Harvard University.

    • johnhagel3@gmail.com
    John Seely Brown (JSB)

    John Seely Brown (JSB)

    Former Independent Co-Chairman

    JSB served as the independent co-chairman for Deloitte LLP’s Center for the Edge and is a visiting scholar and advisor to the Provost at the University of Southern California. He has published more than 100 papers in scientific journals and authored or co-authored five books. JSB also serves on numerous private and public boards of director. He holds a bachelor's degree from Brown University, a doctorate from the University of Michigan, and eight honorary doctorates.

    • jsb@johnseelybrown.com
    Maggie Wooll

    Maggie Wooll

    Head of Research | Center for the Edge

    As part of Deloitte LLP, Maggie draws on her experience advising large organizations on strategy & operations to engage executives and practitioners in the Center’s work. She explores the implications of changing technologies, and the new strategies they enable, for individuals and their institutions with a focus on the Technology and Education sectors. She received a BSE in Civil Engineering and Operations Research from Princeton University and an MBA from the University of Virginia, Darden.

    • mwooll@deloitte.com
    • +1 415 783 4868
    Andrew de Maar

    Andrew de Maar

    Head of Strategy | Center for the Edge

    Andrew is the head of the strategy at Deloitte LLP's Center for the Edge where he works with senior leaders to rethink what’s required for success in a more rapidly changing world by helping them to reframe their approaches to strategy, innovation, and business transformation. He has worked broadly across industries on emerging opportunities at the edge of business and technology. His writing and speaking focus on the opportunities we all have—as individuals and institutions—to achieve more and more of our potential over time. He has an MBA from Stanford University.

    • ademaar@deloitte.com
    • +1 415 783 5001

    Share article highlights

    See something interesting? Simply select text and choose how to share it:

    Email a customized link that shows your highlighted text.
    Copy a customized link that shows your highlighted text.
    Copy your highlighted text.

    Converge products has been saved

    Converge products has been removed

    An Article Titled Converge products already exists in Saved items

     
    Forgot password

    To stay logged in, change your functional cookie settings.

    OR

    Social login not available on Microsoft Edge browser at this time.

    Connect Accounts

    Connect your social accounts

    This is the first time you have logged in with a social network.

    You have previously logged in with a different account. To link your accounts, please re-authenticate.

    Log in with an existing social network:

    To connect with your existing account, please enter your password:

    OR

    Log in with an existing site account:

    To connect with your existing account, please enter your password:

    Forgot password

    Subscribe

    to receive more business insights, analysis, and perspectives from Deloitte Insights
    ✓ Link copied to clipboard
    • Contact us
    • Search Jobs
    • Submit RFP
    Follow Deloitte Insights:
    Global office directory Office locations
    XE-EN Location: XE-English  
    About Deloitte
    • Newsroom
    • Deloitte events
    • Our blog collections
    • Press releases
    • Press contacts
    • Corporate Responsibility & Sustainability
    • Report an ethics complaint
    Services
    • Audit & Assurance
    • Consulting
    • Financial Advisory
    • Risk Advisory
    • Tax
    • Deloitte Private
    • Legal
    • Sustainability
    Industries
    • Consumer
    • Energy, Resources & Industrials
    • Financial Services
    • Government & Public Services
    • Life Sciences & Health Care
    • MENA Sovereign Wealth Funds
    • Technology, Media & Telecommunications
    Careers
    • Job Search
    • Students
    • Experienced Hires
    • Executives
    • Life at Deloitte
    • Alumni
    • Diversity and Inclusion
    • About Deloitte
    • About Deloitte in the Middle East
    • Privacy
    • Terms of use
    • Cookies
    • Avature Privacy

    © 2022. See Terms of Use for more information.

    Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee (“DTTL”), its network of member firms, and their related entities. DTTL and each of its member firms are legally separate and independent entities. DTTL (also referred to as “Deloitte Global”) does not provide services to clients. Please see About Deloitte to learn more about our global network of member firms.