case study analysis samsung

Remarkable Recovery: Samsung Crisis Management Case Study

Have you ever wondered how a global tech giant like Samsung managed to navigate a major crisis and bounce back stronger? 

In the world of corporate governance, effective crisis management can be the difference between irreparable damage to a company’s reputation and a successful recovery. 

In this blog post, we delve into a Samsung crisis management case study to learn about exploding batteries to the intricate strategies employed to restore trust.

Samsung’s journey offers valuable insights into the intricacies of crisis management in the digital age. 

Join us as we explore the key lessons learned and best practices from this high-stakes situation, shedding light on the remarkable recovery efforts that propelled Samsung forward.

Let’s learn about sailing through tough times through Samsung crisis management case study

Background of Samsung History and growth of Samsung as a global conglomerate 

Samsung, founded in 1938 by Lee Byung-chul, started as a small trading company in South Korea. Over the years, it steadily expanded into various industries, such as textiles, insurance, and retail.

In the 1960s, Samsung ventured into electronics, marking the beginning of its transformation into a global conglomerate.

With a focus on technological innovation and a commitment to quality, Samsung rapidly gained recognition for its consumer electronics products, including televisions and appliances.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, Samsung significantly diversified its business portfolio, entering the semiconductor, telecommunications, and shipbuilding industries.

This diversification strategy helped Samsung become a key player in multiple sectors, solidifying its position as a global leader. Notably, Samsung’s semiconductor division became one of the largest chip manufacturers in the world, supplying components to various electronic devices worldwide.

Samsung’s ascent continued in the 2000s, driven by its successful expansion into the mobile phone market. The introduction of the Galaxy series, powered by the Android operating system, catapulted Samsung to the forefront of the smartphone industry.

The company’s innovative designs, cutting-edge features, and aggressive marketing campaigns contributed to its rise as a major competitor to Apple’s iPhone.

With its global reach, Samsung has consistently ranked among the world’s largest technology companies, epitomizing South Korea’s economic prowess and technological advancements.

Samsung has also been considered one the best companies that successfully managed and implemented change initiatives.

Overview of Samsung’s position in the technology industry

In the consumer electronics segment, Samsung has established itself as a dominant force. Its diverse product lineup encompasses televisions, smartphones, tablets, wearables, home appliances, and audio devices.

The Galaxy series of smartphones, in particular, has enjoyed immense popularity and has emerged as a fierce competitor to other industry giants. Samsung’s televisions are also highly regarded for their cutting-edge display technologies, such as QLED and MicroLED.

The company’s advancements in semiconductor technology have contributed to faster computing speeds, increased storage capacities, and improved energy efficiency.

Samsung’s influence extends beyond consumer electronics and semiconductors. The company is actively involved in telecommunications infrastructure, including the development of 5G networks and the production of network equipment.

Samsung has also made notable strides in the realm of software solutions, including its own mobile operating system, Tizen, and various software platforms for smart devices.

Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Crisis

The Note 7 battery issue marked a significant crisis for Samsung, leading to a widespread recall of the flagship smartphone and causing considerable damage to the company’s reputation.

The crisis began in September 2016 when reports emerged of Note 7 devices catching fire or exploding due to faulty batteries. These incidents raised concerns about consumer safety and triggered a wave of negative publicity for Samsung.

Upon receiving initial reports of battery-related incidents, Samsung initially responded by issuing a voluntary recall of the Note 7 in September 2016. The company acknowledged the problem and expressed its commitment to addressing the issue promptly and effectively.

Samsung attributed the battery malfunctions to a manufacturing defect, specifically a flaw in the design that caused a short circuit.

To ensure customer safety, Samsung advised Note 7 owners to power down their devices and refrain from using them. The company swiftly implemented measures to exchange the affected devices, offering customers the option to either replace their Note 7 with a new unit or receive a refund.

Samsung also collaborated with mobile network operators and retail partners to facilitate the recall process.

In its initial response, Samsung took steps to communicate with customers and the public about the issue. The company published official statements expressing regret for the inconvenience caused and assuring customers of its commitment to resolving the problem. Samsung emphasized its dedication to quality and safety, promising to conduct thorough investigations and implement necessary improvements to prevent similar incidents in the future.

Media coverage and public perception during the crisis

During the Note 7 crisis, media coverage played a significant role in shaping public perception and amplifying the negative impact on Samsung’s brand.

The crisis received extensive coverage from both traditional media outlets and online platforms, leading to widespread awareness and public scrutiny. Here’s an overview of media coverage and its influence on public perception:

• News Outlets: Major news organizations across the globe reported on the Note 7 battery issue, highlighting incidents, the recall, and subsequent developments. Television news segments, newspapers, and online news articles extensively covered the crisis , emphasizing the potential safety risks and consumer concerns. The constant media attention contributed to the widespread dissemination of information and increased public awareness of the issue.
• Online Platforms and Social Media: Social media platforms played a pivotal role in the crisis, enabling the rapid spread of information and user-generated content. Users took to platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube to share their experiences, express concerns, and criticize Samsung’s handling of the situation. Viral videos, photos, and personal accounts of Note 7 incidents gained traction, further fueling negative sentiment and influencing public perception.
• Expert Analysis and Opinions: Alongside news coverage, experts and industry analysts provided their insights and opinions on the crisis. Their assessments of Samsung’s response, the potential causes of the battery issue, and the implications for the company’s brand reputation contributed to the overall narrative. Expert opinions had the power to sway public perception and shape the understanding of the crisis.
• Consumer Forums and Discussion Platforms: Online forums and discussion boards dedicated to technology and consumer experiences became hubs for discussions surrounding the Note 7 crisis. Consumers shared their frustrations, exchanged information, and warned others about potential risks. These platforms served as gathering places for individuals affected by the crisis and amplified the negative sentiment surrounding Samsung’s brand.

Financial implications and losses incurred by Samsung

The Note 7 crisis had significant financial implications for Samsung, resulting in substantial losses for the company. Here are some of the key financial impacts experienced by Samsung as a result of the crisis:

• Recall and Replacement Costs: The recall and replacement process incurred significant costs for Samsung. The expenses involved in collecting and replacing over 2 million of Note 7 devices, including logistics, shipping, and refurbishment, were substantial. The costs also encompassed the testing and certification of replacement devices to ensure their safety. The total recall cost was estimated at $5.3 billion.
• Decline in Sales and Market Share: The crisis had a detrimental impact on Samsung’s sales and market share in the smartphone industry. As consumer confidence in the Note 7 and Samsung’s brand reputation declined, potential buyers shifted their preferences to alternative smartphone options. The decline in sales of the Note 7, coupled with the negative impact on the perception of other Samsung products, led to a loss of market share for the company.
• Stock Price Decline: The Note 7 crisis had an immediate impact on Samsung’s stock price. News of the battery issue, recalls, and subsequent negative media coverage led to a decline in Samsung’s stock value. Samsung shares fell approximately to 7 percent right after 2 months of the crisis.

Crisis Management Strategy Employed by Samsung

Following are the key aspects of Samsung Galaxy Note 7 crisis management strategy:

Immediate actions taken by Samsung to address the crisis

In the face of the Note 7 crisis, Samsung swiftly implemented a range of immediate actions to address the situation and mitigate the impact on consumers and the company’s brand reputation. Here are some of the key actions taken by Samsung:

• Voluntary Recall: As soon as reports of battery issues emerged, Samsung initiated a voluntary recall of the Note 7. This proactive step demonstrated the company’s commitment to consumer safety and willingness to take responsibility for the problem.
• Temporary Production Halt: To address the root cause of the battery issue, Samsung temporarily halted production of the Note 7. This decision aimed to prevent further distribution of potentially defective devices and allow for thorough investigations and corrective measures.
• Transparent Communication: Samsung made efforts to communicate openly and transparently about the crisis. The company issued official statements and press releases acknowledging the problem, expressing regret for the inconvenience caused, and reassuring customers of its commitment to resolving the issue. Transparent communication was crucial in maintaining trust and providing timely updates to affected consumers.
• Collaboration with Authorities: Samsung collaborated closely with regulatory authorities and industry experts to investigate the battery issue comprehensively. By engaging external expertise, the company aimed to identify the root cause and develop effective solutions. This collaboration demonstrated Samsung’s commitment to finding the best possible resolution.
• Customer Support and Safety Guidelines: Samsung provided clear instructions to consumers regarding the use of Note 7 devices, emphasizing the importance of safety. The company advised customers to power down their devices, participate in the recall, and utilize alternative devices in the interim. This approach prioritized customer safety and aimed to prevent further incidents.
• Increased Battery Testing and Safety Measures: Samsung implemented enhanced battery testing procedures and stringent safety measures to prevent similar incidents in the future. The company adopted more rigorous quality control processes, including additional safety certifications and testing standards, to ensure the highest levels of product safety.

Communication strategies employed by Samsung

Samsung employed various communication strategies to address the Note 7 crisis and manage the impact on its brand reputation. Effective communication was crucial in maintaining transparency, addressing consumer concerns, and rebuilding trust. Here are some of the communication strategies employed by Samsung:

• Official Statements and Press Releases: Samsung issued official statements and press releases to provide updates on the progress of the recall, investigations, and corrective actions. These statements expressed remorse for the inconvenience caused and reiterated the company’s commitment to customer safety. Clear and concise communication helped keep customers informed and reassured them that Samsung was actively working to resolve the issue.
• Direct Customer Communication: Samsung directly communicated with customers to provide instructions and updates on the recall process. The company utilized various channels such as email, SMS messages, and notifications through its official website and smartphone apps. This direct communication ensured that customers received important information and guidance regarding the recall and replacement program.
• Social Media Engagement: Samsung actively engaged with customers and the public on social media platforms, including Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube. The company responded to customer queries, addressed concerns, and provided updates on the progress of the recall. By engaging in two-way communication, Samsung demonstrated its willingness to listen, respond, and provide assistance to affected customers.
• Collaboration with Industry Experts: Samsung collaborated with industry experts, battery manufacturers, and regulatory authorities to investigate the root cause of the battery issue. This collaboration was communicated to the public, showcasing Samsung’s commitment to finding solutions and ensuring that the necessary expertise was involved in resolving the crisis.
• Advertisements and Marketing Campaigns: Samsung launched advertising and marketing campaigns focused on rebuilding trust and emphasizing its commitment to quality and safety. These campaigns highlighted Samsung’s dedication to addressing the issue and regaining consumer confidence. Advertisements often emphasized the company’s rigorous testing procedures and quality control measures to assure customers of the safety of its products.
• CEO Apology: Samsung’s CEO issued a public apology, taking personal responsibility for the crisis and expressing regret for the inconvenience and concern caused to customers. The CEO’s apology aimed to convey sincerity, empathy, and a commitment to rectifying the situation, while also reinforcing the company’s accountability and determination to regain trust. The apology was published on a full page in 03 major US newspapers – the Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and The New York Times.

Collaborations with regulatory authorities and industry experts

Samsung worked closely with government agencies and regulatory bodies in various countries where incidents related to the Note 7 were reported. The company shared information, conducted investigations, and cooperated with authorities to ensure compliance with safety regulations and guidelines. Collaboration with government agencies helped align efforts to address the crisis and establish industry-wide safety standards.

In the United States, Samsung collaborated with the CPSC, an independent federal agency responsible for ensuring the safety of consumer products. Samsung worked together with the CPSC to investigate the battery issue and coordinate the recall process. This collaboration ensured that the recall efforts followed established safety protocols and provided consumers with accurate information.

Samsung collaborated with battery manufacturers to investigate the specific manufacturing defects that caused the battery issue. The company worked closely with these partners to analyze the battery designs, manufacturing processes, and quality control measures. By involving battery manufacturers in the investigation, Samsung aimed to identify the root cause and implement corrective actions to prevent similar issues in the future.

Samsung engaged independent testing labs to conduct thorough assessments of the Note 7 batteries and verify the effectiveness of corrective measures. These labs specialized in battery testing and certification, providing expertise and unbiased evaluation of the battery performance and safety. Collaboration with independent testing labs helped validate Samsung’s efforts to address the battery issue and instill confidence in the effectiveness of the solutions.

Post-Crisis Recovery and Rebuilding 

Samsung implemented more stringent quality control measures across its product development and manufacturing processes. This included enhanced battery testing protocols, increased inspections, and stricter quality assurance standards. By demonstrating a commitment to producing reliable and safe products, Samsung aimed to rebuild customer trust.

Extended Warranty and Customer Support: Samsung extended warranty periods for existing and new devices, including the Note 7, to provide customers with added assurance. The company also enhanced its customer support services, ensuring that customers could easily access assistance, product information, and technical support. These initiatives aimed to demonstrate Samsung’s commitment to customer satisfaction and support.

  Launch of subsequent product lines and their impact on brand perception

Following the Note 7 crisis, Samsung launched subsequent product lines, including flagship smartphones like the Galaxy S8 and subsequent iterations. These launches played a crucial role in shaping brand perception and rebuilding trust. Key factors that influenced brand perception and the recovery process include:

• Emphasis on Safety and Quality: Samsung placed a strong emphasis on safety and quality in its subsequent product launches. The company implemented rigorous testing procedures and introduced new safety features to ensure the reliability and safety of its devices. By highlighting these improvements, Samsung aimed to regain customer trust and reassure them of its commitment to producing high-quality products.
• Positive User Experience: Samsung focused on delivering positive user experiences with its new product lines. This included improvements in design, performance, and functionality to enhance customer satisfaction. By providing users with exceptional products, Samsung aimed to rebuild its reputation and generate positive word-of-mouth, contributing to brand recovery.
• Brand Messaging and Marketing: Samsung’s marketing efforts during subsequent product launches were carefully crafted to reinforce positive brand associations and regain customer trust. The company emphasized innovation, customer-centricity, and the commitment to quality and safety. Marketing campaigns highlighted features, benefits, and technological advancements to create a positive brand image and overcome the negative perceptions associated with the Note 7 crisis.

Final Words 

Samsung’s handling of the Note 7 crisis serves as a case study in crisis management. Despite the significant financial and reputational setbacks, the company took proactive steps to address the crisis, regain customer trust, and prevent similar incidents in the future.

The Samsung crisis management case study highlights the importance of swift and transparent communication, customer-centric actions, and continuous improvement in product safety and quality. By effectively addressing the crisis, Samsung was able to navigate the challenging situation and rebuild its brand, reaffirming its position as a leading global technology company.

Overall, the Samsung crisis management case study provides valuable insights into how a company can recover from a major setback, restore customer trust, and strengthen its position in the market through strategic actions and a relentless commitment to customer satisfaction and product excellence.

About The Author

Tahir Abbas

Related posts.

06 Steps to Create Risk Register for Change Management

How to Get Employees’ Buy-in during Change Management

Advantages and Disadvantages of an Agile Organization

How Samsung Became a Design Powerhouse

The electronics manufacturer now emphasizes design over efficiency. by Youngjin Yoo and Kyungmook Kim

Summary .   

Until 20 years ago, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics manufactured inexpensive, imitative electronics for other companies. Its leaders valued speed, scale, and reliability above all. The few designers working for the company were dispersed in engineering and new-product units, and they had little status in an organization that emphasized efficiency and engineering rigor.

Then, in 1996, Lee Kun-Hee, the chair of Samsung Group, grew frustrated by the company’s lack of innovation and concluded that in order to become a top brand, Samsung needed expertise in design, which he believed would become “the ultimate battleground for global competition in the 21st century.” He set out to create a design-focused culture that would support world-class innovation. But shifting to an innovation-focused culture without losing an engineering edge is not a simple matter. It involves managing a number of very real tensions.

Samsung’s success in making this shift stems from a single early decision—to build design competency in-house rather than import it. The authors describe how the company created a committed, resourceful corps of designers who overcame internal resistance by deploying the same tools they use in pursuing innovation: empathy, visualization, and experimentation in the marketplace.

HBR Reprint R1509E

Until 20 years ago, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics manufactured inexpensive, imitative electronics for other companies. Its leaders valued speed, scale, and reliability above all. Its marketers set prices and introduced features according to what original-equipment manufacturers wanted. Its engineers built products to meet prescribed price and performance requirements. At the end of the process designers would “skin” the product—make it look nice. The few designers working for the company were dispersed in engineering and new-product units, and individual designers followed the methods they preferred. In a company that emphasized efficiency and engineering rigor, the designers had little status or influence.

Partner Center

Samsung Electronics: Global strategies

This case study describes how Samsung Electronics transformed into a world-class company and the strategic challenges it faces as it looks to sustain its success in both developed and emerging markets. It has been 20 years since Lee Kun-Hee announced the New Management initiative that played a crucial role in transforming Samsung from a second-tier Korean firm producing low-quality products to a first-rate global electronics firm. In less than two decades, Samsung has become a leading global brand known for innovative products. In 2012, Samsung achieved $188 billion in sales, had the leading global market share in the mobile phone and TV businesses, and was the 9th most valuable brand in the world according to Interbrand. A key factor in Samsung’s growth was its push into emerging markets: while other multinational firms were reluctant to enter emerging markets due to risky business environments, Samsung created strong positions in many emerging markets, including the priority markets of China and India. The case provides a platform for exploring how Samsung was able to achieve success in both developed and emerging markets at the same time – a feat that its main competitors such as Nokia and Apple did not achieve. A closer look at the strategic approaches in the key emerging markets of India and China illustrates how Samsung’s performance varied across products and regions. The case also provides an opportunity to discuss the topic of innovation and how multinational companies (MNCs) such as Samsung can come up with solutions to the unique challenges faced by price-sensitive emerging market consumers having to deal with institutional voids. Even though the context is consumer electronics, the lessons that this case provides should appeal to other companies and industries as they seek to strategically position themselves for future challenges and opportunities in both developed and emerging markets.

Our objective in this case is to stimulate discussion and reflection on the following key issues: 1) Organizational transformation: Lee and his top management team led Samsung to prosperity through the New Management initiative that created a more focused, efficient and international organization. 2) Strategic innovation: Samsung achieved success in emerging markets by importing innovations from developed markets and focusing on local innovations and adaptations. 3) Competing in emerging markets: Samsung’s advantages in speed have contributed to its success in developed markets. Can its strengths in speed be helpful in both emerging markets and developed markets at the same time? 4) Sustaining success: Samsung is a leader in key product categories in both developed and emerging markets – can it remain on top in the fast-moving consumer electronics industry in the face of strong global and local competition?

The Case Centre

Cranfield University

Wharley End Beds MK43 0JR, UK Tel +44 (0)1234 750903 Email  [email protected]

Harvard Business School Publishing

60 Harvard Way, Boston MA 02163, USA Tel (800) 545-7685 Tel (617)-783-7600 Fax (617) 783-7666 Email  [email protected]

Asia Pacific Case Center

NUCB Business School

1-3-1 Nishiki Naka Nagoya Aichi, Japan 460-0003 Tel +81 52 20 38 111 Email  [email protected]

IMD retains all proprietary interests in its case studies and notes. Without prior written permission, IMD cases and notes may not be reproduced, used, translated, included in books or other publications, distributed in any form or by any means, stored in a database or in other retrieval systems. For additional copyright information related to case studies, please contact Case Services .

Research Information & Knowledge Hub  for additional information on IMD publications

In this study, we analyze how the performance-aspiration gap influences strategic change in family firms, providing evidence of the moderating role...

The case highlights the significant role played by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in reducing its environmental footprint and promoting ...

To restore Rio Tinto's social license and direct its decarbonization activities, CEO Jakob Stausholm places a strong emphasis on developing relatio...

With half the world going to the polls this year, how do businesses manage political risk? IMD’s David Bach suggests businesses must look beyond th...

The former Italian premier and ECB president’s call for massive EU investment is a wake-up call to Europe’s economic stagnation. But can the contin...

Innovation is a core element in the business toolbox. A new framework is helping corporate leaders integrate social sustainability in their innovat...

There is a Chinese saying that wealth does not last beyond three generations, and the reality is that sustaining family businesses is a significant...

Julia Binder and Manuel Braun delve into why a circular approach to business can help build more resilience and boost profitability.

Peter Lorange explains how artworks support his decision-making process and can also help new businesses thrive.

Demand Planning Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are frequently criticized for being too complex or irrelevant. However, an emerging approach is g...

• SMB Technology
• Mobile Productivity
• Mobile Security
• Computing & Monitors
• Memory & Storage
• Digital Signage
• Trending Tech
• Hospitality
• Manufacturing
• Transportation
• Food & Beverage
• Live Events & Sports
• Spectaculars & DOOH
• Gaming & Esports
• White Papers
• Infographics

Case Studies

• About Samsung Insights
• Our Experts

Subscribe to Insights

Get the latest insights from Samsung delivered right to your inbox.

See our Privacy Policy

Samsung Business Insights

All Case Studies

Good American seamlessly bridges online and in-person commerce with Samsung displays and VXT software

When opening its first stores, Good American partnered with Samsung to create a dynamic, interactive shopping experience with displays.

Convoy of Hope uses Samsung displays to build in-depth connections

At the newly constructed Convoy of Hope headquarters, a Samsung outdoor LED wraparound board shares the nonprofit’s message to the community.

Houston Astros up the score at Minute Maid Park with state-of-the-art Samsung displays

The Houston Astros recently upgraded with a state-of-the-art Samsung LED scoreboard and video displays at Minute Maid Park to enhance fan experience and engagement.

Millard Public Schools level up their technology game with Samsung digital displays

At Millard Public Schools in Omaha, Nebraska, Samsung displays with ScorevisionLE (SVLE) software amplify the middle school experience, in both competitive programming and fan engagement.

The Wall powers collaborative design at Lucid Motors

While reviewing new designs, the design team at Lucid Motors benefits from the high-definition image quality and color resolution on Samsung’s The Wall.

Hilton Waikiki Beach welcomes and wows guests with The Wall All-in-One

Located above the main lobby bar, Samsung’s The Wall in the Hilton Waikiki enhances the experience for both guests and locals. Hospitality TVs in guest rooms and other Samsung displays throughout the property elevate the property.

Buona Beef selects Samsung Kiosk for its digital transformation

Buona Beef, a renowned Chicago brand, added Samsung Kiosks to their locations to increase sales and efficiency of service.

West Sayville Fire Department leads the way with interactive displays

Samsung digital signage throughout the West Sayville Fire Department improves operations, communications, and productivity for all its members.

Miami high school’s connected campus elevates education and engagement

College preparatory Christopher Columbus High School recently outfitted their campus with Samsung display technology to create a connected campus. Interactive whiteboards in the classroom promote effective, collaborative learning, while digital signage throughout the campus streamline communication for all.

The Wall brings digital excellence to Syracuse University

The S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications at Syracuse University installed Samsung's The Wall to provide a wow factor to current and prospective students.

My Business Courses

Learn Digital Marketing, Sales and Business

Samsung Electronics: Quality Improvement Case Study

Samsung Electronics, a global leader in consumer electronics, has long been recognized for its commitment to innovation and quality. However, like any industry giant, the company has faced its share of quality improvement challenges.

In this case study, we will explore how Samsung Electronics identified opportunities for quality enhancement, implemented robust quality control measures, and leveraged technology to achieve excellence in their products.

By delving into the strategies and outcomes of their quality improvement initiatives, we can gain valuable insights into the complex world of quality management in the electronics industry and the lessons that can be applied to various business contexts.

Samsung Electronics: A Legacy of Innovation

Samsung Electronics has forged a legacy of innovation through its commitment to continuous technological advancement and groundbreaking product development. The company's journey towards innovation began with its inception, and it has consistently pushed the boundaries of what is possible in the tech industry.

Samsung's relentless pursuit of technological advancement is evident in its diverse range of products, from semiconductors and smartphones to home appliances and beyond. The company has consistently invested in research and development, driving progress in areas such as AI, 5G technology, and IoT. Samsung's ability to anticipate and meet the evolving needs of consumers has solidified its position as a global leader in innovation.

Furthermore, Samsung's legacy of innovation extends beyond product development. The company has actively contributed to shaping industry standards and technological ecosystems, driving progress and fostering collaboration within the tech community. By consistently delivering groundbreaking solutions, Samsung has cemented its reputation as a trailblazer in the global tech landscape.

This commitment to innovation not only sets Samsung apart but also paves the way for future advancements in technology.

Identifying Quality Improvement Opportunities

To identify quality improvement opportunities, Samsung Electronics must first analyze defects in production to pinpoint areas for enhancement.

Additionally, a comprehensive analysis of process efficiency is crucial to identify bottlenecks and inefficiencies.

Furthermore, a detailed examination of customer complaints can reveal valuable insights into areas that require improvement.

Defects in Production

Identifying and addressing defects in the production process is crucial for Samsung Electronics to continually improve the quality of its products. Effective defects management and production optimization are essential for ensuring customer satisfaction and maintaining a competitive edge in the market. The table below outlines key areas for identifying defects and optimizing production processes:

Process Efficiency Analysis

In the context of ensuring high-quality production, an essential aspect involves conducting a comprehensive analysis of process efficiency to identify opportunities for quality improvement. This entails a detailed examination of the manufacturing processes to streamline operations and enhance overall product quality. The analysis focuses on identifying areas for improvement and implementing changes to optimize efficiency and minimize waste.

Key elements of the process efficiency analysis include:

• Value Stream Mapping: Visualizing the production process to identify areas of improvement.
• Root Cause Analysis: Investigating the underlying reasons for inefficiencies or defects.
• Performance Metrics Tracking: Monitoring key performance indicators to assess process effectiveness.
• Standard Operating Procedures Review: Evaluating and updating procedures to ensure efficiency and quality.
• Continuous Improvement Initiatives: Implementing ongoing efforts to enhance processes and drive quality improvements.

This analytical approach enables Samsung Electronics to continuously enhance its operational efficiency and product quality.

Customer Complaints Analysis

Regularly monitoring and analyzing customer complaints is a crucial step in identifying opportunities for quality improvement at Samsung Electronics. By effectively addressing customer dissatisfaction, Samsung can enhance customer satisfaction and loyalty. The table below illustrates an example of a customer complaints analysis, outlining the types of complaints and their root causes.

Analyzing customer complaints allows Samsung to pinpoint areas for improvement, such as streamlining manufacturing processes, optimizing service operations, and enhancing product development. This approach is essential for maintaining high-quality standards and continuously improving customer satisfaction. Identifying and addressing the root causes of complaints can lead to sustained quality enhancement and increased customer loyalty.

Implementing Robust Quality Control Measures

As Samsung Electronics aims to fortify its quality control measures, the focus will be on implementing process improvement strategies to enhance product quality and reliability.

This will involve the meticulous integration of robust quality control processes throughout the production cycle, ensuring that performance metrics are continuously tracked and analyzed to identify areas for improvement.

Ultimately, the goal is to establish a comprehensive framework that safeguards product quality and customer satisfaction.

Process Improvement Strategies

Implementing robust quality control measures is a critical component of Samsung Electronics' process improvement strategies, ensuring the consistent delivery of high-quality products to customers.

To achieve this, the company employs the following strategies:

• Continuous Improvement : Samsung Electronics focuses on constantly refining its processes to enhance product quality and customer satisfaction.
• Quality Assurance : The company utilizes stringent quality assurance protocols to detect and rectify any deviations from established quality standards.
• Data-Driven Approaches : Samsung Electronics leverages data analytics to identify trends and potential areas for improvement within its manufacturing processes.
• Employee Involvement : The company encourages active participation from employees at all levels to contribute ideas for process enhancement and quality control.
• Supplier Collaboration : Samsung Electronics collaborates closely with its suppliers to ensure the quality of incoming components, thereby maintaining high standards throughout the production process.

Quality Control Implementation

Employing a comprehensive framework of stringent quality control measures, Samsung Electronics ensures the consistent delivery of high-quality products to its discerning customer base.

The company has implemented a multifaceted approach to quality control, encompassing thorough testing at every stage of production, stringent adherence to industry standards, and a robust feedback mechanism from customers and market data.

Samsung Electronics emphasizes continuous improvement in quality control through the use of advanced technologies, such as automated inspection systems and machine learning algorithms to detect and address potential defects proactively.

Furthermore, the company has established a culture of quality consciousness among its employees, ensuring that every individual is committed to upholding the highest standards.

Performance Metrics Tracking

A meticulous tracking of performance metrics is essential for ensuring the efficacy and success of robust quality control measures within Samsung Electronics. To achieve this, the company utilizes a comprehensive approach to performance metrics tracking, encompassing various key aspects:

• Quality Control: Samsung Electronics focuses on tracking quality control metrics such as defect rates, customer complaints, and product returns to identify areas for improvement.
• Productivity Tracking: The company also diligently tracks productivity metrics, including production yield, cycle times, and equipment downtime, to optimize operational efficiency.
• Data Analysis: Utilizing advanced data analysis tools, Samsung Electronics examines performance metrics to identify trends, root causes of issues, and opportunities for enhancing product quality and productivity.
• Continuous Improvement: The company emphasizes the continuous monitoring and tracking of performance metrics to drive ongoing quality improvements and operational enhancements.
• Benchmarking: Samsung Electronics employs benchmarking techniques to compare performance metrics against industry standards and best practices, facilitating a proactive approach to quality control and productivity tracking.

Overcoming Quality Improvement Challenges

Samsung Electronics faced significant hurdles in overcoming quality improvement challenges, requiring a comprehensive and strategic approach to drive meaningful change.

One of the primary challenges was integrating quality control measures across diverse product lines and manufacturing processes. Samsung addressed this by implementing a unified quality management system that standardized quality control protocols, enabling the company to consistently monitor and improve product quality.

Additionally, risk management posed a significant challenge due to the global scale of Samsung's operations. To mitigate this, Samsung developed a robust risk assessment framework that identified potential quality risks at various stages of production and supply chain, allowing for proactive intervention to prevent quality issues.

Another obstacle was fostering a quality-centric culture across all organizational levels. Samsung tackled this by instituting extensive training programs and incentivizing employees to prioritize quality. Furthermore, the company established clear quality improvement goals and regularly communicated progress to drive accountability and motivation.

Leveraging Technology for Quality Enhancement

Leveraging advanced technological solutions has become imperative for achieving significant enhancements in product quality across diverse industry sectors. For Samsung Electronics, technology integration and quality assurance techniques have played a pivotal role in driving continuous quality improvement.

The following approaches highlight how leveraging technology has led to quality enhancement at Samsung Electronics:

• Implementation of advanced data analytics tools for real-time quality monitoring
• Integration of Internet of Things (IoT) for predictive maintenance and quality control
• Utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) for automated quality inspection and defect detection
• Adoption of virtual reality (VR) for immersive quality testing and training simulations
• Deployment of blockchain technology for transparent supply chain management and quality tracking

Monitoring and Evaluating Quality Performance

The implementation of advanced data analytics tools, integration of Internet of Things (IoT), and utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) have significantly influenced the monitoring and evaluating of quality performance at Samsung Electronics. Quality measurement at Samsung Electronics involves the continuous collection and analysis of data from various sources, such as production processes, customer feedback, and supply chain operations. This data is then used to assess the performance of products and processes in real-time, enabling prompt corrective actions when deviations from quality standards are identified.

Continuous improvement is a key focus in Samsung Electronics' quality monitoring and evaluation processes. Through the use of advanced analytics, the company is able to identify trends, patterns, and potential areas for improvement. Furthermore, AI algorithms are employed to predict and prevent quality issues before they occur, contributing to proactive quality management.

The integration of IoT allows for real-time monitoring of equipment and processes, providing valuable insights into the production environment. This comprehensive approach to quality performance monitoring and evaluation enables Samsung Electronics to consistently enhance the quality of its products and processes, thus maintaining its position as a leader in the electronics industry.

Achieving Excellence: Quality Improvement Outcomes

Consistently delivering high-quality products and processes is the ultimate goal of Samsung Electronics' commitment to continuous improvement and proactive quality management. The company has implemented various quality improvement strategies and continuous improvement initiatives to achieve excellence in its outcomes.

Some of the key outcomes of these efforts include:

• Enhanced Product Quality : Through rigorous quality control measures and continuous monitoring, Samsung Electronics has significantly improved the overall quality of its products, leading to higher customer satisfaction and loyalty.
• Streamlined Processes : The implementation of lean manufacturing principles and process optimization techniques has resulted in streamlined operations, reduced waste, and improved efficiency across the organization.
• Improved Supplier Relationships : Samsung Electronics has focused on building strong partnerships with its suppliers, fostering collaboration, and ensuring that high-quality standards are maintained throughout the supply chain.
• Enhanced Employee Engagement : By promoting a culture of continuous improvement and providing employees with the necessary training and resources, Samsung Electronics has seen increased employee engagement and contribution to quality enhancement efforts.
• Market Leadership : As a result of its relentless pursuit of quality excellence, Samsung Electronics has solidified its position as a market leader, setting industry benchmarks for quality standards and innovation.

Through robust quality control measures, Samsung Electronics has been able to achieve excellence in quality improvement.

By leveraging technology and continuously monitoring and evaluating quality performance, the company has established a legacy of innovation in the industry.

Like a master craftsman refining a diamond, Samsung has honed its quality improvement processes to achieve brilliance in its products, setting a standard for others to follow.

Similar Posts

Danaher Corporation: Strategic Growth Case Study

Danaher Corporation has garnered attention in the business world for its strategic growth efforts. The company's approach to expansion, encompassing both organic growth strategies and strategic acquisitions, has positioned it as a force to be reckoned with in various industries. However, what truly sets Danaher apart is its ability to not only acquire companies but…

Bombas: Social Impact and Business Case Study

Bombas, the sock company known for its one-for-one donation model, has gained significant attention for its unique approach to social impact and business. The brand's journey from a simple idea to a thriving business with a strong commitment to social responsibility is both inspiring and thought-provoking. As we explore the case study of Bombas, we…

Olay (Procter & Gamble): Brand Revitalization Case Study

Procter & Gamble's Olay has been a prominent name in the beauty and skincare industry for decades. However, as market dynamics shifted and consumer preferences evolved, the brand faced challenges in maintaining its relevance. The case study of Olay's brand revitalization offers a compelling narrative of strategic repositioning, product innovation, and a digital transformation that…

Id Fresh Food: Fresh Success Case Study

Id Fresh Food has been making waves in the food industry with its remarkable success story. The company's journey from its early beginnings to becoming a household name is nothing short of inspiring. It all began with a simple idea and a commitment to using quality ingredients, but what really set them apart was their…

L.L. Bean, Inc.: Inventory Management Case Study

L.L. Bean, Inc. has long been recognized for its iconic outdoor gear and apparel. Behind the scenes, lies a complex and finely tuned inventory management system that is worth exploring. As the retail landscape continues to evolve, the case study of L.L. Bean's inventory management provides valuable insights into the strategies and technologies that have…

Aspire Food Group: Innovative Food Solutions Case Study

Aspire Food Group's innovative approach to sustainable food solutions has garnered attention in the global food industry. By focusing on edible insects as a protein source and implementing innovative production strategies, the company has been able to address critical challenges in the food supply chain. The case study delves into Aspire Food Group's founding vision,…

• Open access
• Published: 21 October 2019

Planting and harvesting innovation - an analysis of Samsung Electronics

• Seung Hoon Jang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7984-7383 1 ,
• Sang M. Lee 2 ,
• Taewan Kim 3 &
• Donghyun Choi 4  

International Journal of Quality Innovation volume  5 , Article number:  7 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

23k Accesses

1 Citations

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

This study explores how firms manage the entire life cycle of innovation projects based on the framework of harvesting and planting innovation. While harvesting innovation seeks new products in the expectation of financial performance in the short term, planting innovation pursues creating value over a long time period. Without proper management of the process of planting and harvesting innovation, firms with limited resources may not be successful in launching innovative new products to seize a momentum in high tech industries. To examine this issue, the case of Samsung Electronics (SE), now an electronics giant originated from a former developing country, is analyzed. SE has shown to effectively utilize co-innovation to maintain numerous planting and harvesting innovation projects. Both researchers and practitioners would be interested in learning about how SE shared risks of innovation investment with external partners at the early stage of innovation cycles.

Introduction

Globalization and advances in technologies have made the global market extremely dynamic and competitive. While companies like Apple have created new customer value by introducing such products as iMac computer and iPhone, many other firms have failed to adapt to the fast-changing environment. Kodak, the creator of the film camera, became history since it failed to adapt to the digital era in a timely fashion. To compete successfully in the dynamic global market, organizations must continuously innovate ways to create value [ 1 ]. Thus, innovation has been an important topic to both management researchers and practitioners [ 2 ]. Many studies have explored the relationship between innovative activities and organizational performance [ 3 , 4 ]. The firm’s ability of managing innovative projects has been considered as a key dynamic capability, resulting in new product development [ 5 ]. Innovative activities of the firm have generally shown to positively impact organizational outcome.

Although a number of studies in this research stream have introduced various types of innovation based on learning styles [ 6 , 7 ] or objects [ 3 ], few have paid attention to the timing of financial return from innovation. Given the importance of financial payoff from innovation for firm survival and sustained competitive advantage, research on how a real business should manage both innovation and cash flow is critical. Thus, in this study, we intend to answer the following two research questions.

RQ1: Which classification of innovation can best explain the heterogeneous timing of financial payoff realization?

To answer this question, we applied a classification scheme of planting and harvesting innovation [ 8 , 9 ]. Planting innovation involves pursuing potential sources of competitive advantage, including original technology, which may create value in a long term perspective. In contrast, harvesting innovation aims to develop new ways to monetize planted innovation, including new products for market launching, in the expectation of commercial success in a relatively short term. The aim of this research stream is to determine how to implement planting and harvesting innovation and measure the results of ensuing innovative activities. From this perspective, this study examines how a real global firm manages both types of innovation.

RQ2: How are planting and harvesting activities of innovation actually implemented in a successful global business firm?

To answer this question, we focus on Samsung Electronics (SE) which has become the world’s largest electronics firm through successful planting and harvesting of innovation. While SE has developed many innovative new commercial products, it has focused on fundamental breakthrough technologies as the source of future growth momentum. This case may provide valuable implications for firms from developing economies. To compete in high tech industries, these businesses need to invest a large amount of capital to risky innovation projects. Otherwise, they may remain low value added entities, like assemblers or fast followers. The case of SE, like many other success stories, exhibits a possibility that multinationals originated from developing countries can become leading global firms based on their efforts and vision for breakthrough innovations.

Given the current turbulent global business environment, as observed by trade disputes between the USA and China and the recently disrupted supply of critical input resources from Japan to Korea, it is imperative for firms to develop core competences based on innovation. In the digital age, businesses must rely on innovation to enhance their dynamic capabilities [ 10 ] to enhance agility, flexibility, and resilience for value creation [ 1 ]. Thus, this study which focuses on the effective management of planting and harvesting innovation is expected to make important contributions to the literature.

This study examines how firms can implement innovation projects for both short- and long-term perspectives. For this purpose, we first reviewed the literature for major research streams of innovation. Then, a case method is used to examine how planting and harvesting of innovation have helped SE became a dominant global electronics firm, around 2012. In addition to secondary data, executive interviews reported in media also describe how SE employees implemented planting and harvesting innovation. The results of qualitative analyses are presented and articulated. Finally, the implications and limitations of this research are presented. The framework of planting and harvesting innovation provides a theoretical background on how firms can strive for both short-term cash flow and a long-term momentum despite their limited resources. Furthermore, the study results provide insights to practitioners through the case study of SE which struggled initially to save the cost of innovation by collaborating with external partners for planting and harvesting innovation.

Innovation under resource constraints

Planting versus harvesting innovation.

Researchers in various fields, including economics, sociology, and technology management, have been interested in innovation [ 11 ]. The characteristics of innovative outcomes have been investigated as a major research agenda [ 12 , 13 ]. As Damanpour and colleagues [ 14 ] suggested, the introduction of novel ideas or technologies is the core of innovation. According to Van de Ven [ 15 ], innovation can be described as “the development and implementation of new ideas by people who over time engage in transactions with others within an institutional order ([ 15 ], p590).” Several definitions of innovation have focused on how to apply creativity to business operations and processes [ 15 , 16 ]. These studies imply that the main focus of innovation research has been on whether the firm creates new tangible or intangible values.

However, innovation has shown to lead to varied results. The meta-analysis by Rosenbusch et al. [ 17 ] reported that different contexts explain heterogeneous outcomes resulting from innovation. Even if firms implement similar innovation projects, the result can be different due to environmental factors. In addition, innovation sometimes improves the value of marketing skills rather than creating new technical capabilities [ 18 , 19 ]. What these results imply is that characteristics of innovative activities are complex. Since a single concept cannot explain the nature and outcome of innovation, researchers need to consider diverse classifications to explain the phenomena of innovation. Given the importance of cash flow in business, a greater focus is required on the influence of innovation on the survival and prosperity of the firm. Even when firms obtain breakthrough technologies, they may not survive when they fail to create new products/services and resulting cash flow as discussed by Jang [ 8 ] and Jang and Grandzol [ 9 ]. Furthermore, the large amount of investment needed for innovative activities requires firms to prioritize and manage their projects based on the commercial potential. Thus, there is a need to search for a new framework that can provide better explanations on innovation with respect to this issue. The most existing classifications of innovation are not based on the timing of financial outcomes of innovative activities.

One of the typologies regarding this topic is the categorization of radical and incremental innovation based on the sharpness of change in innovative practices [ 20 ]. A more drastic transformation can be expected from radical innovation projects while a relatively slight newness can be added to existing technologies during the incremental innovation process. Since radical innovation can pursue both drastic breakthrough and immediate commercialization, there exists the disparity between the distinction of radical and incremental innovation, the main focus of this paper. Space shuttle can be considered as an example of radical innovation as the realization of reusable spacecraft but it is generally considered as a product for immediate use rather than a long-term growth momentum. Such discrepancy leads researchers to develop a new categorization of innovation based on the expected timing of financial outcome.

The Code-Division Multiple Access (CDMA) wireless technology is an interesting case for this point. The CDMA technology was developed by Qualcomm ( www.qualcomm.com ), but the commercial CDMA phones were first created and produced by Korean manufacturers, including SE and LG. While Qualcomm was interested in developing CDMA as planting innovation, SE and LG focused on commercializing the technology for harvesting that innovation. Qualcomm could benefit from licensing fees in the long term with the success of commercial products based on CDMA. In contrast, the short-term cash flow was derived by SE and LG as they sold more CDMA phones to individual consumers.

From this perspective, innovation can be categorized based on its relatedness to the firm’s performance in the short or long term [ 8 , 9 ]. While certain types of innovative activities may result in an increase of the firm resources engaged in the current competition, others can create value that has long-term potential. This approach modifies the definition of innovations by Gumusluoglu and Ilsev [ 21 ] as described in Jang [ 8 ] and Jang and Grandzol [ 9 ]. First, harvesting innovation can be described as the development of a new resource that can help launch new products/services in the short term. New products, such as Toyota Prius, would be a good example of this type of innovation. Planting innovation refers to the creation of potential firm resources that are based on the state-of-the-art innovation in the expectation of long-term financial benefits. For instance, the invention of hybrid engine technology “plants” potential for future value while the creation of a hybrid car like Prius “harvests” the results of the planting of that innovation.

There are several reasons why planting innovation may not result in new commercial products/services in the short term. First, there may be social constraints that would not allow the use of innovative technology, resulting in no market for new products/services. The commercial use of human stem cell research in the USA has been prohibited by the Food and Drug Administration [ 22 ]. Firms initiating planting innovation in this area cannot expect commercial success due to this regulation, except perhaps in other countries. Second, firms may need to wait for the advent of other complementing technologies for the commercialization process. Thus, firms face a high degree of uncertainty about the financial outcome of planting innovation in the long term, especially in the biotech industry. The development of a new technology usually has a high probability of failure. Therefore, planting innovation may not lead to financial gains in the short term even if firms succeed in developing a technology.

The characteristic of planting innovation makes it distinct from invention. Innovation requires entrepreneurial utilization of technological newness by definition, while invention includes scientific and/or technological breakthrough for discovery purposes [ 23 ]. Firms invest in planting innovation projects in the expectation of long-term profits. Although the result of planting innovation may directly create cash flows in the form of patent fee, firms usually wait until finding out how to apply the result of planting innovation. In contrast, harvesting innovation pursues short-term profits by launching new products or services. In the 1970s, the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) at Xerox initiated the development of innovative technologies such as Ethernet (or LAN technology) and copper wire-based Ethernet communication [ 24 ]. Due to the lack of commercial intention of Xerox both short and long term, these developments can be classified as examples of invention rather than planting innovation.

Given the heterogeneous characteristics of planting and harvesting innovation, ambidexterity can be important in balancing such innovative activities. Studies on exploitative and explorative innovations have examined this issue [ 6 , 7 , 25 ]. Since pioneering efforts for new processes or technology involve much risk, firms need to optimize the return of their investment in both types of innovation. One possible approach is to utilize external capabilities through M&A, alliances, or industry-academia collaborations through open innovation. Such arrangements would allow firms to share the risk of innovation with other participants [ 1 ].

In addition, convergence has played a major role in explaining value added activities in modern firms [ 1 , 26 ]. Globalization has encouraged the convergence revolution which allows value creation from the synergy of diverse disciplines, industries including IT, biotechnology, and nanotechnology [ 26 ]. The co-innovation platform helps converge diverse types of innovations for value creation [ 1 ]. Multinationals participating in co-innovation are expected to collaborate with stakeholders, including suppliers, customers, partners, and outsiders. Therefore, outside stakeholders can be active partners who co-create shared goals.

Overall, the classification of innovation can contribute to research by providing clearer guidelines related to the timing of financial outcome of innovation. While planting innovation can result in potential resources for long-term value creation, harvesting innovation is intended to generate continuous cash flows to those engaged in the current market. Following the case of exploitative and explorative innovation, researchers in this field should also consider ambidexterity of the organization. By doing so, firms under resource constraints can be prepared for an optimal portfolio of innovation projects, resulting in better organizational performance in the long term.

• Case analysis

In this study, the case of Samsung Electronics (SE), now the largest electronic firm in the world from a former emerging economy, is examined to unveil the processes of harvesting and planting innovation and their results. Innovative activities have been the core strength of SE and are expected to continue creating value for SE. The Mission 2020 of Samsung ( http://www.samsung.com ) states that it will “inspire the world, create the world” through creative and innovative solutions. This implies that the firm intends to pursue innovation over time beyond the development of commercial products for short-term returns.

Several qualitative techniques are employed to investigate the SE case. First, we collected articles including executive interviews from 2000 to 2012. The articles were manually coded into planting and harvesting innovation frameworks after a careful review of contents. News reports were analyzed via local portal sites, including Lexis-Nexis ( http://www.lexisnexis.com ) and Naver ( www.naver.com ). Particularly, we searched Naver, the major Korean portal website, to collect news articles concerning SE research topics from 2002 to 2012. We chose this period, 2002 and 2012, to collect data for this study as this is when SE made the significant transformation to become a dominant global IT leader. The search keywords used were “Samsung Electronics” and “Innovation.” The search using the keywords assured the study to verify that all related articles are captured. After removing duplicates, we investigated the contents of 183 related news articles. Based on the analysis, all the key interviews of executives and managers at SE were collected and examined. In addition, the other secondary data sources like the websites of companies, universities, and local governments were examined.

Samsung Electronics

SE has been a major global player in electronics and related industries for over three decades. Hoovers ( www.hoovers.com ), a leading corporate information provider on large businesses, describes the overall state of this firm as the new “Electronics Samson.” In year 2015, it reported $171 billion revenue and $16 billion net profit. Its major products include digital electronics, semiconductors, and DVD players. Financial Times ranked Samsung Electronics as 19th in their 2015 FT Global 500 ( www.ft.com/ft500 ). It is beyond doubt that this firm has been successful in creating value for its customers.

The webpage of Samsung Electronics ( www.samsung.com ) and Samsung C&T ( www.samsungcnt.co.kr ) describes the history of Samsung Group and Electronics as follows. Samsung group was founded in 1938 as a small retail firm in Daegu, Korea. The founding chairman, Lee Byung-Chull, established Samsung-Sanyo Electronics to diversify the business in 1969. As the name implies, the firm collaborated with Japan’s electronics giant Sanyo. It began production of black-and-white TV sets for the first time in 1970, as an outsource manufacturer. After changing its name to Samsung Electronics, the firm began to produce color TV sets, video recorders, microwaves, and personal computers. It has rapidly developed as a global firm since it entered the semiconductor industry in the early 1980s. Since South Korea has recently been accepted as a developed economy [ 27 ], it can be said that SE began as an emerging market firm.

Given the fact that SE was founded only about five decades ago, the current performance and growth are astonishing. Despite the current status, the firm used to be considered as a fast follower [ 28 ]. SE had focused on producing existing products with better quality at lower prices than other global firms. It is an interesting research topic to examine how and why SE has evolved into a global giant in the electronics industry.

To provide an explanation on this issue, we investigated how SE has implemented innovation to achieve strategic objectives. In 2001, President of Booz Allen and Hamilton Korea stated that Korean firms need to pursue breakthrough innovations to adapt to new market environments [ 29 ]. In other words, SE as well as other major Korean manufacturers began to pursue innovation rather than continue to follow market leaders to survive in the dynamic global marketplace.

Harvesting innovation at Samsung Electronics

SE has engaged in various innovation activities to gain global competitive advantage. By doing so, the firm has been able to create value and benefit from new markets with expectations of stable cash inflows. For instance, SE developed new products like Rambus DRAM and Nand flash memory rather than increasing the accumulation rate of semiconductors [ 28 ]. Since these new products reflect the needs of customers, including PC or smartphone manufacturers, the innovation brought a large amount of profit in the short term. Given the astonishing results that SE has accomplished, its process of harvesting innovation has drawn much attention.

SE has continued implementing innovative activities steadily. The Value Innovation Program (VIP) Centre, setup in 1998, has played a key role in developing innovative new products at SE [ 28 , 30 , 31 ]. This Centre has shown to nurture creativity and broaden the ideas of R&D staff. As the chief researcher at SE stated, the introduction of value innovation methods has contributed to the creation of many new ideas [ 28 ]. Through this system, all participants were expected to overcome the trap of past success syndrome, leading to what is possible.

Blue Ocean Strategy (BOS) [ 32 ] has been the backbone of the harvesting innovation process at SE [ 30 ]. SE invited W. Kim, the main author of BOS, to train its executives. Senior executives have encouraged the dissemination of value innovation at SE based on the BOS approach [ 33 ]. SE strives to create value which its customers never even expected through value innovation for new products. SE’s value innovation includes value management and value creation [ 33 ]. While the former focuses on cost reduction and efficiency improvement, the latter aims to generate added value. Therefore, the firm searches for creative ideas rather than implementing traditional continuous improvement type programs.

SE has found practical tools to implement harvesting innovation based on BOS [ 31 ]. First, the VIP Centre has utilized the strategy canvas, a framework of implementing BOS [ 32 , 34 ]. In the Centre, managerial decisions on important projects have been made based on the value curve of each unit against competitors, resulting in new products like 40-inch LCD TV. In addition, the “7 Tools Method” practiced in Japan, which enables firms to empirically recognize value factors of their customers, was introduced [ 35 ]. For instance, a survey of 226 Japanese employees triggered the production of a laptop that works well even in a bad wireless environment. These types of techniques have helped SE create new products successfully by reflecting innate needs and requirements of individual and business customers.

It has been reported that all of the creative ideas from the VIP Centre have been reflected in the design and development of new products of SE [ 36 ]. As a result, innovativeness of the firm’s new products has been globally recognized as the numerous Innovation Awards of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) attest (see Table 1 ). These achievements prove that the innovative results of SE have been widely recognized by professionals in the field as well as ordinary customers. SE has succeeded in developing new products through harvesting innovation activities.

Planting innovation at Samsung Electronics

SE has also focused on the creation of innovative ideas which may not realize any meaningful revenue in the short term. The major results of planting innovation are original technologies which can result in competitive advantage and lead to future business success. The CEO of SE stressed the importance of “technology preparation management,” pursuing core technologies in order to respond to the convergence across technologies and products [ 37 ]. This statement exhibits the strong will of top management of SE to implement the planting innovation strategy.

The Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology (SAIT) has played a critical role in developing original technologies. The website ( www.site.samsung.com ) describes the research efforts currently in place. The Future IT and Convergence domain seeks technologies across real 3D processing, communication theory and network, multicore processing, data intelligence, and medical imaging. The New Materials and Nanotechnology domain aims at developing flexible electronics, solid state lighting, film ceramic crystal composite materials, micro-system integration, oxide materials and devices, spintronics, and nanostructure and materials research. The Energy and Environment domain focuses on energy storage, energy conversion, and environment fields. The Bio and Health domain explores gene analysis and point of care testing (POCT). Indeed, SE has encouraged researchers to create a broad range of intellectual capital for the purpose of leading future technologies.

Furthermore, it seems likely that SE seeks Chesbrough’s [ 2 , 38 ] open innovation to improve efficiency and effectiveness of planting innovation. By doing so, the firm can create innovative results with less burden in time and resources. The CEO mentioned that open innovation needs to be encouraged to shorten the technology life cycle and to enable convergence in the electronics industry [ 37 ]. Thus, SE senior managers have aggressively focused on the utilization of external ideas and capabilities [ 39 ].

M&A has been a major instrument to acquire external intellectual capital. SE has acquired several firms, including SanDisk, Amica (a Polish electronics firm) in 2009, and Transchip (a non-memory semiconductor manufacturer in Israel) in 2008 [ 40 ]. SE informed the board of directors of SanDisk about its intention of collaborative innovation orientation and human resource retention in SanDisk [ 41 ]. Such M&A activities have enabled SE to obtain proven and complimentary intellectual capital and dynamic capabilities, including R&D employees.

SE has also managed a broader range of intellectual capital without much investment by sharing their proprietary technologies with partners. For example, SE and IBM, two top US patent firms, established a cross-licensing agreement which allows the participants to utilize each other’s patents for innovation in 2011 [ 42 ]. These firms can share their patents without additional investment, resulting in a more stable basis for innovative activities. This type of contract enables SE to implement planting innovation with finite capabilities. Executives of SE and IBM also announced that the objective of cross-licensing lies in sharing intellectual capital in the expectation of continuous innovative outputs. In sum, SE has implemented planting innovation through SAIT internally and has utilized external capabilities through M&A and licensing for significant financial gains in the long run. SAIT has implemented several major research projects independently as well.

Ambidexterity and co-innovation

Since SE is implementing planting and harvesting innovation simultaneously, one major task is balancing both types of innovative activities. Otherwise, the firm may suffer from lack of financial cash flows or future leadership in the industry. Despite their brand image, major manufacturers of wristwatch had to overcome the loss of sales volume in the 1970s due to the revolutionary quarts movement technology [ 43 ]. Although US electronic giants initiated the transistor technology, Japanese manufacturers like Sony harvested the lion’s share of its benefits with their transistor radios [ 44 ].

The significance of inter-organizational cooperation in attaining competitive advantage cannot be ignored [ 45 ]. Thus, any organization, however large or global it may be, cannot be competitive for long without collaboration with other world-class partners. From this perspective, the success or failure of firms today lies in managing the relationships with other value chain partners and stakeholders [ 4 ].

Beyond the conventional exploration and open innovation focusing on the use of external resources, SE has been searching for the best way to simultaneously implement planting and harvesting innovation through co-innovation with stakeholders [ 1 ] (see Fig. 1 ). The main focus of the VIP Centre has been on how to encourage collaboration among internal departments. Resulting convergence across departments has enabled the firm to recognize the diverse viewpoints other than the opinions of core engineers. The VIP Centre director stated that those firms interested in value innovation need to adopt the cross-functional team (CFC) concept with a separate space to promote inter-departmental collaboration for value innovation [ 34 ]. This process is expected to encourage formal and informal sharing of ideas, opinions, and viewpoints since participants have more opportunities to communicate with many people. For instance, the CFC team consisting of marketers, designers, and engineers developed a new slim style laptop which caught the fancy of Japanese consumers [ 35 ]. Furthermore, the members of the Centre frequently collaborate with external partners [ 35 ].

Co-innovation at Samsung Electronics. Based on the information from SAIT ( www.SAIT.samsung.com ) and Kim’s [ 35 ] study

SAIT has played a significant role in connecting SE with external entities ( http://www.sait.samsung.co.kr ), such as universities, through the Global Research Outreach (GRO) program and other collaborators via the Collaborative Open Research Expert (CORE) program. These efforts have allowed the firm to share the risks inherent in planting innovation. Thus, the firm has been able to reduce the uncertainty involved in innovative practices and maximize its value with finite organizational resources.

Another example of collaboration lies in its value-chain management beyond the use of external capabilities. An association of Samsung’s collaborating vendors, Hyup-Sung-Hoe, has played a key role in co-innovation processes [ 46 ]. SE and collaborating vendors have participated in innovation activities, including sectional committee meetings. It is evident that SE’s innovation activities cover not only its own value chain but also that of its partners. Given the fact that current business activities must include vendors, the improvement of innovation capabilities of the entire value chain is essential for gaining competitive advantage. SE also considers the creation of new ventures with excellent technologies as another outcome of its open innovation strategy [ 47 ]. The firm manages its entire value chain to compete successfully, as opposed to conducting business with partners for short-term monetary rewards. Figure 1 presents SE’s value chain convergence activities.

SE has participated in the various industry-academia collaboration projects. This partnership has enabled SE to interact with partners to utilize their tangible and intangible resources. Particularly, research universities can provide professional human resources, research expertise, and infrastructure. In 2012, SE established the Centre for Intelligent Computing (CIC) with Seoul National University [ 48 ]. While the former supports the facilities and programs, the latter provides research ideas and its faculty resource. Such projects allow SE to benefit from the results of collaborative innovation while sharing the burden of investment. Furthermore, individual participants would likely to share ideas and opinions due to their “relationships” even after the official project is completed, beyond organizational boundaries. SE has also established the Samsung Talent Program (STP) with 14 Korean universities [ 48 ]. This program is intended to nurture and develop R&D employees to fit its needs.

The use of a co-innovation mechanism has played a key role in managing planting and harvesting innovation with limited organizational resources. SE has established networks with the various innovation partners, including diverse internal departments, academia, technicians, customers, and suppliers to collaborate and co-create for shared goals. In addition to external resources, the closely interconnected relationships among participants are expected to nurture collective intelligence. Overall, co-innovation allows SE to manage both types of innovation, harvesting and planting, while coping with its fast expanding global presence.

Firm performance

The innovation investment of Samsung Electronics has shown tremendous financial return as can be seen in Fig. 2 . The financial information from Daum ( www.daum.net ), a major portal site in Korea, exhibits that SE’s sales volume has dramatically increased since the early 2000s. As SE has paid more attention to harvesting innovation, its sales volume surged from 2001 to 2004. This implies that the firm continued its growth by actively pursuing innovative activities which created much financial gain in the short term.

Annual revenue of Samsung Electronics. Based on the financial information from Daum ( www.daum.net ) and Hoovers ( www.hoovers.com ) and news articles from Naver ( www.naver.com )

The revenue of the firm diminished drastically in 2007 with the global financial crisis. This “earning shock” was due to the decrease of demands for LCDs and semiconductors [ 49 ]. The global economy was in recession for several years afterward. For example, in 2012, the Federal Reserve Bank announced that the net asset of median family in the USA decreased by 38.8% from December 2007 to June 2009 [ 50 ]. Given that the consumption of middle-class families in the USA has been the locomotive of global economy for decades, the effect of the macro-economic crisis would be challenging for many global firms.

SE executives began to search solutions for the creation of original technologies, while continuing its innovation harvesting efforts. Despite the global financial crisis, SE has continued its growth [ 50 ]. In 2017, the revenue was approximately $224 billion [ 51 ]. SE has steadily expanded its business after it introduced harvesting and planting innovation despite the hostile macro-economic environment and recent ownership succession.

Discussion and evaluation

This study investigated planting and harvesting innovation to answer the research question, “Which classification of innovation best explains the heterogeneous timing of revenue realization?” While harvesting innovation seeks commercial results in a relatively short term, planting innovation pursues the development of new ideas and technologies for a long term. For instance, a firm with the CDMA wireless technology may not succeed financially without the dispersion of CDMA phones. Given the finite amount of resources, firms need to efficiently balance planting and harvesting innovation. Otherwise, they would fail to develop both new products/services for market launching and original technologies for future market expansion while continuing their business activities.

A case analysis was employed to answer the second research question, “How are planting and harvesting activities of innovation implemented in a successful global business firm?” Samsung Electronics (SE) was chosen as a case study since it has become the largest electronics firm in the world but originated from a former emerging economy, South Korea. Despite its limitations, SE continued to grow by using innovation as a vehicle to move from an outsourcing firm to a global leader in innovation. It is a dramatic success story for a local firm in Korea which began its business in the 1970s. Since SE established innovation as the core of its business activities in its mission statement, it has implemented the dual strategy of planting and harvesting innovation.

SE has participated in various activities to develop innovative new technologies as well as products. The interviews reported were collected from news articles to analyze the stream of innovative activities of SE. Harvesting innovation has led to the initiation of a broad range of new products, allowing the firm to access global customers and also received world-renowned innovation awards. SE has also focused on planting innovation which can result in original technologies. Based on Blue Ocean Strategy, the Value Innovation Program (VIP) Centre has been primarily responsible for developing new products. The Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology (SAIT) pursues original technologies which can continuously support technological leadership in the years to come.

Co-innovation [ 1 ] has enabled SE to focus both planting and harvesting innovation activities with limited resources. External collaborators have contributed to the application of SE’s tacit knowledge for convergence that is difficult to imitate by competitors. The VIP Centre and SAIT have played a critical role in encouraging collaboration among innovation value chain partners, including academic researchers, technicians, vendors, and customers to co-create value. It has enabled the firm to pursue innovative outcomes while managing financial stability. The financial performance of SE exhibits that its innovation activities have resulted in a remarkable success.

Conclusions

The digital age is characterized by the increased complexity and uncertainty of the business environment [ 1 ]. In the environment of increasing velocity of change, business firms must develop dynamic capabilities through innovation to adapt to change with agility, flexibility, and speed [ 4 ]. There have been various innovation approaches in the literature: exploitative vs. explorative [ 7 ], disruptive [ 52 ] vs. non-disruptive [ 53 ], ambidexterity [ 54 ], and convergence innovation [ 55 ]. However, the purpose of innovation remains the same, which is to create new or added value by applying ideas or technologies in a fundamentally different way [ 1 ]. What is not widely known is that innovation is not one integrated process. Instead, there are several steps and cycles in innovation. Planting innovation involves creating new ideas, scientific breakthroughs, or new technologies. Planting seeds does not guarantee a good harvest. Many nurturing steps such as careful planning, risk taking, and entrepreneurship are needed to have a successful harvest. Thus, studying the most spectacular success transformation case of SE through its innovation process provides meaningful theoretical and practical insights and a contribution to the literature of innovation.

This study is not free from limitations. Although SE can be considered as one of global leading innovators originated from Korea, a success story from one of the poorest countries in the world to an advanced economy, the generalizability of the single case study can be limited as Tversky and Kahneman [ 56 ] suggested. Future researchers should conduct relevant studies in various contexts to overcome such limitation. In addition, the qualitative analysis tool of Gibbert et al. [ 57 ] can be used to lessen the concern on generalizability.

There are many factors that have contributed to the success of SE. In this study, we used the revenue as the reference of SE’s efforts of harvesting innovation. There could be many other factors that contributed to the performance of SE. However, we believe these factors all contributed to the combined efforts of SE in harvesting innovation.

In addition, it is also expected that future studies may apply more refined research methods to examine the process and consequences of planting and harvesting innovation. While we believe in the merits of the research method applied in this study, it is also possible that executives might have exaggerated the process and outcomes of their projects. Future researchers are expected to cross-check the results of planting and harvesting innovation by utilizing multiple research methods.

Despite the limitations, this research provides several meaningful implications. It uses a distinction of planting and harvesting innovation [ 8 , 9 ] to examine how a firm grows into a global leader despite its finite managerial and financial resources. While planting innovation aims to implement technological advancement as a potential source of long-term profits, harvesting innovation focuses on the development of new products for market expansion in the short term. The framework of planting and harvesting innovation is expected to provide a tool for managers to distribute limited funds for various types of innovation projects. It shall enable them to clarify whether the current focus of innovation investment lies in launching new innovative products or seeking competitive advantage for future profits. The case of Samsung Electronics exhibited that its innovation has focused on both short-term profits and technological innovation for the future growth momentum. Firms are recommended to follow this notion to compete successfully in high tech industries with limited financial, technological, and managerial competencies.

Collaboration is also required for firms seeking both planting and harvesting innovation. Given their shortage of resources and competencies, firms need to share the risks and the burdens of innovation projects with external partners. Following the case of Samsung, they are expected to cooperate with various entities, including research institutions, suppliers, customers, or new ventures. It enables firms to afford the cost of breakthrough innovation despite their finite resources and experiences. Collaboration helps these firms create innovation results for advanced as well as emerging economies.

This study also provides implications from methodological perspectives (Table 2 ). The use of indirect interviews from news articles allowed us to observe the opinions of SE executives over time. In addition, it can collect the opinions of executives at the time of innovative activities rather than asking current employees’ perceptions about what happened in the past. It provides future researchers with an effective method for exploratory research. The use of this underused but promising methodology can contribute to overcoming the limitations of research in the management field despite its possible limitations.

Practitioners can obtain lessons from the results of this study. They could observe how SE, a former emerging market firm, dispersed investment risks by collaborating with the various stakeholders to implement planting innovation. The convergence of internal and external ideas, from suppliers, academia, other businesses, and customers, is essential for the implementation of both types of innovation with finite resources. Furthermore, they need to nurture innovative capabilities of entire internal and external stakeholders as co-innovators. This shall allow firms to achieve the network effect of innovation.

As suggested by Lee [ 4 ], the main focus of innovation projects has been on how to benefit business activities in new ways. Lee [ 58 ] and Schniederjans and Schniederjans [ 59 ] also examined how practical operational issues like quality practices can be improved by innovation.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Blue Ocean Strategy

Consumer Electronics Association

Cross-functional team

Centre for Intelligent Computing

Collaborative Open Research Expert

Global Research Outreach

Palo Alto Research Center

Point of care testing

Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology

Code-Division Multiple Access

Samsung Talent Program

Value Innovation Program

Lee SM, Lim SB (2018) Living innovation: from value creation to the greater good. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, U.K

Book   Google Scholar  

Chesbrough H (2003) Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA

Google Scholar  

Damanpour F, Walker RM, Avellaneda CN (2009) Combinative effects of innovation types and organizational performance: a longitudinal study of service organizations. J Manage Stud 46(4):650–675

Article   Google Scholar  

Lee SM (2018) Innovation: from small “i” to large “I”. Int J Quality Inno. 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40887-018-0022-4

Lawson B, Samson D (2001) Developing innovation capability in organizations: a dynamic capabilities approach. Int J Innov Manage 5(3):377–400

He Z-L, Wong P-K (2004) Exploration vs. exploitation: an empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organ Sci 15(4):481–494

March J (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ Sci 2(1):71–87

Jang S H (2012) Ownership structure, absorptive capacity, and innovation: planting vs harvesting innovation (doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/businessdiss/29/

Jang SH, Grandzol C (2014) Value co-creation in emerging economies: planting and harvesting innovation perspectives. Int J Serv Sci 5(3/4):171–181

Teece DJ (2014) The foundation of enterprise performance: dynamic and ordinary capabilities in an (economic) theory of firms. Acad Manage Perspect 28(4):324–338

Gopalakrishnan S, Damanpour F (1997) A review of innovation research in economics, sociology, and technology management. Omega 25(1):15–28

Nohria N, Gulati R (1996) Is slack good or bad for innovation? Acad Manage J 39(5):1245–1264

Johannessen JA, Olsen B, Lumpkin GT (2001) Innovation as newness: what is new, how new, and new to whom? Eur J Innov Manage 4(1):20–31

Damanpour F, Szabat KA, Evan WM (1989) The relationship between types of innovation and organizational performance. J Manage Stud 26(6):587–602

Van de Ven AH (1986) Central problems in the management of innovation. Manage Sci 32(5):590–607

Rogers M (1998) The definition and measurement of innovation. Working Paper. Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, Melbourne, Australia

Rosenbusch N, Brinckmann J, Bausch A (2011) Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. J Bus Venturing 26(4):441–457

Stieglitz N, Heine K (2007) Innovations and the role of complementarities in a strategic theory of the firm. Strateg Manage J 28(1):1–15

Teece D (1986) Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res Policy 15(6):285–305

Dewar R, Dutton J (1986) The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: an empirical analysis. Manage Sci 32(11):1422–1433

Gumusluoglu L, Ilsev A (2009) Transformational leadership, creativity, and organizational innovation. J Bus Res 62(4):461–473

Halme DG, Kessler DA (2006) FDA regulation of stem-cell based therapies. New Engl J Med 355(16):1730–1735

Schmookler J (1966) Invention and economic growth. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA

Chesbrough H, Rosenbloom RS (2002) The role of business model in capturing value from innovation: wvidence from Xerox Corporation’s technology spin-off companies. Ind Corp Change 11(3):529–555

Simsek Z (2009) Organizational ambidexterity: towards a multilevel understanding. J Manage Stud 46(4):597–624

Lee SM, Olson DL, Trimi S (2010) The impact of convergence on organizational innovation. Organ Dyn 39(3):218–225

Park Y, Lee JY, Hong S (2011) Effects of international entry-order strategies on foreign subsidiary exit. Manage Decis 49(9):1471–1488

Song D (2004a) Open the era of value innovation: (3) the case of Samsung Electronics. Hankyung Business Daily (April 19) Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=015&aid=0000701971

Hwang I (2001) No future for Korean firms: (1) technology imitation. Maeil Business Newspaper, September, 20 Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=009&aid=0000151003

Lee T (2005) [Searching blue ocean] Large firms: Samsung Electronics, be a consumer. Hankyung Business Daily, October 10 Retrieved from http://www.hankyung.com/news/app/newsview.php?aid=2005100701291

Lee T (2006) Korea innovation forum 2006: Samsung electronics VIP centre. Hankyung Business Daily, February 14 Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=015&aid=0000872791

Kim W, Maugborne W (2005) Blue ocean strategy: how to create uncontested market space and make the competition irrelevant. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA

Song D (2004b) Open the era of value innovation: (5) VI from executives. Hankyung Business Daily, May 5 Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=015&aid=0000706660

Song D (2005) Toward the blue ocean: an interview with Lee Dong Jin, a VIP centre Vice President at Samsung Electronics. Hankyung Business Daily, November 8 Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=015&aid=0000848475

Kim M (2004) The era of value innovation: (4) VI embedded in Samsung. Hankyung Business Daily, May 4 Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=015&aid=0000706224

Kim Y (2007) Samsung value innovation program (VIP) centre. Financial News, November 4 Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=014&aid=0000355858

Yang H (2008) Samsung Electronics Vice President Lee Yun Woo: initiate future core technologies. Financial News, July 1 Retrieved from http://www.fnnews.com/news/200807011810110422?t=y

Chesbrough H (2012) Open innovation: where we’ve been and where we’re going. Res Techno Manage 55(4):20–27

Lee D (2011) Samsung Electronics Vice President Choi Jisung: respond early to even natural disasters. Daily Maekyung, April 1 Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=009&aid=0002439029

Jin S (2009) Samsung takes over Polish Amica. Moneytoday December 22 Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=008&aid=0002254573

Kim B (2008) Samsung Electronics announces proposal for combination with SanDisk in letter to board of directors. Moneytoday, September 17 Retrieved from https://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=008&aid=0002034388

Yonhap (2011) AsiaNet: Samsung Electronics and IBM announce patent cross-license agreement. February 9 Retrieved from https://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=104&oid=001&aid=0004904103

Barrett ME (2000) Time marches on: the worldwide watch industry. Thunderbird Int Bus Rev 42(3):349–372

Lynn LH (1998) The commercialization of the transistor radio in Japan: the functioning of an innovation community. IEEE T Eng Manage 45(3):220–229

Dyer JH, Singh H (1998) Relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Acad Manage Rev 23(4):660–679

Kim C (2009a) Collaborating vendors benefit from Samsung Electronics. Maekyung Economy, August 23 Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=024&aid=0000026894

Kim M (2009b) Samsung embraces ventures. Munhwailbo, November 4 Retrieved from https://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=021&aid=0002013900

Park Y (2012) Industry-academia collaboration, ‘upgrade.’ Economic Review. In: March 9 Retrieved from http://www.econovill.com/archives/39043

Park S (2007) The bad performance of Samsung Electronics in the first quarter, Why? Sekyeilbo, April 14 Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=022&aid=0000220925

Bae B, Go S (2012) The middle class in Korea and U.S. was demolished as the result of the global financial crisis in 2008. Kukminilbo, June 12 Retrieved from https://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=101&oid=005&aid=0000514948

Hoover’s Company Records (2019) Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. In-depth Records, January 23 Retrieved from https://advance-lexis-com.proxy-bloomu.klnpa.org/api/document?collection=company-financial&id=urn:contentItem:5H1P-0GF1-JBPR-X276-00000-00&context=1516831

Christensen CM, Rayner M, McDonals R (2015) What is disruptive innovation? Harvard Bus Rev 93(12):44–53

Kim WC, Maubourgne R (2019) Nondisruptive creation: rethinking innovation and growth. MIT Sloan Manage Rev Spring:46–56

O’Reilly CA, Tushman ML (2013) Organizational ambidexterity: the past, present, and future. Acad Manage Perspect 27(4):324–338

Lee SM, Olson D (2010) Convergenomics: strategic innovation in the convergence era. Gower, Surrey, UK

Tversky A, Kahneman D (1986) Rational choice and the framing of decisions. J Bus 59(4):251–278

Gibbert M, Ruigrok W, Wicki B (2008) What passes as a rigorous case study? Strategic Manage J 29(13):1465–1474

Lee D (2015) The effect of operational innovation and QM practices on organizational performance in the healthcare sector. Int J Quality Inno 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40887-015-0008-4

Schniederjans D, Schniederjans M (2015) Quality management and innovation: new insights on a structural contingency framework. Int J Quality Inno 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40887-015-0004-8

Download references

There was no funding support for this study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Zeigler College of Business, Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania, Bloomsburg, USA

Seung Hoon Jang

Department of Management, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, USA

Sang M. Lee

Kania School of Management, University of Scranton, Scranton, USA

School of Air Transport and Logistics, Korea Aerospace University, Goyang, South Korea

Donghyun Choi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the developing of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seung Hoon Jang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Jang, S.H., Lee, S.M., Kim, T. et al. Planting and harvesting innovation - an analysis of Samsung Electronics. Int J Qual Innov 5 , 7 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40887-019-0032-x

Download citation

Received : 25 April 2019

Accepted : 11 September 2019

Published : 21 October 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40887-019-0032-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Planting innovation
• Harvesting innovation
• Co-innovation
• Multinationals

• Harvard Business School →
• Faculty & Research →
• June 2005 (Revised February 2009)
• HBS Case Collection

Samsung Electronics

• Format: Print
• | Pages: 26

More from the Authors

• Faculty Research

Global Strategic Management

• April 2013 (Revised November 2013)

Microsoft in Korea

The unfairness trap: a key missing factor in the economic theory of discrimination.

• Global Strategic Management  By: Jordan I. Siegel
• Microsoft in Korea  By: Jordan I. Siegel and Lynn Pyun
• The Unfairness Trap: A Key Missing Factor in the Economic Theory of Discrimination  By: Jordan I. Siegel, Naomi Kodama and Hanna Halaburda

TDWI | Training & Research | Business Intelligence, Analytics, Big Data, Data Warehousing

Research & resources.

• White Papers

How Samsung used data to jumpstart a $1B product launch

May 10, 2022.

It’s not every day a company launches a billion-dollar product. Samsung’s Mobile team does so at least twice a year. With mounting pressure from lower-quality competitors and a rapidly changing global marketplace, it’s critical to understand the complex galaxy of variables that can impact success.

The marketing and analytics teams at Samsung had access to a wealth of dashboards and market reports, but digging even one level deeper into the data could take weeks to answer a single question. When the team needed to understand upgrade preference across demographics, device profiles, carrier loyalty, and more, they needed answers fast.

Read this case study to learn how Samsung is able to successfully address critical business decisions with an augmented intelligence solution.

Sponsored by Sisu

I agree to receive email communications from 1105 Media, Inc. containing news, updates and promotions regarding offers from select vendors. I understand that I can withdraw consent at any time.

Your e-mail address is used to communicate with you about your registration, related products and services, and offers from select vendors. Refer to our Privacy Policy for additional information.

TDWI Membership

Get immediate access to training discounts, video library, research, and more..

Find the right level of Membership for you.

• About / Contact
• Privacy Policy
• Alphabetical List of Companies
• Business Analysis Topics

Samsung’s Generic Competitive Strategy & Growth Strategies

Samsung’s generic competitive strategy and intensive growth strategies set business goals for technological innovation as a critical factor in developing competitive advantages. Headquartered in Korea, the conglomerate competes with technology-intensive firms, such as Apple , Google (Alphabet) , Microsoft , Sony , and Intel , which create strong competitive forces, as determined through a Five Forces analysis of Samsung. The industry environment imposes aggressive competitive behavior that typically involves rapid technological innovation for product differentiation, as seen in the evolution of smartphones available in the global market. To effectively compete, Samsung’s generic competitive strategy and growth strategies must involve investment in technological innovation. The resulting competitive advantages enable the company to keep its competitive position as one of the best performers in the semiconductors, consumer electronics, and home appliances industries. Samsung’s generic competitive strategy and intensive strategies for growth are suited to the current business environment and the strategic positioning of the multinational organization’s operations.

The generic competitive strategy and intensive growth strategies of Samsung Group permeate its entire organization, influencing the strategic choices and implementations of its divisions and subsidiaries. The Group’s unitary leadership is responsible for the corporate strategic direction and competitive advantages of the conglomerate and its technology-focused subsidiaries. Samsung’s generic competitive strategy and intensive growth strategies are observable in product design, marketing strategies, and the business organizational development direction of subsidiaries.

Samsung’s Generic Competitive Strategy (Porter Model)

Samsung applies broad differentiation as its generic competitive strategy. Based on Michael E. Porter’s competitive strategy model, the strategic objective of broad differentiation is to maintain competitive advantage by providing unique (or differentiated) products targeting a wide market, which in this case is industry-wide, involving practically every person or group that buys smartphones, laptops, and other equipment. To achieve Samsung’s strategic plans for growth and expansion in the global market, this generic competitive strategy requires the application of product development as a main intensive growth strategy to compete with other technology firms.

Samsung’s investments in product development are a strategic implication of differentiation as its generic competitive strategy. For example, the company invests in technological innovation to support the competitive advantage of its products in the consumer electronics market. Another implication of this generic competitive strategy is Samsung’s marketing mix (4Ps) and related strategies that promote products as unique or different alternatives to the majority of competitors. This marketing approach and technological innovation sustain the corporation’s competitive advantages and value chain effectiveness in satisfying customers’ needs in consumer electronics, computing technology, and home appliances.

Other generic competitive strategies, such as cost leadership, differentiation focus, and cost focus, are also applied in Samsung’s operations, but to a limited extent. Cost focus leads to the company’s being the best-cost provider in some segments of the semiconductor and electronic components markets. The limited application of cost focus still comes with innovation standards that reflect Samsung’s main generic competitive strategy of broad differentiation. These generic strategies align with the company’s intensive growth strategies to succeed in sustaining the technology firm’s competitive advantages.

Samsung’s Intensive Growth Strategies (Ansoff Matrix)

Market Penetration (Primary) . Samsung’s revenue growth depends on market penetration as the primary intensive strategy. In Igor Ansoff’s matrix, the strategic objective of market penetration is to grow the technology business by increasing its revenues from the sale of current products in current markets, such as the European Union’s consumer electronics market, where the corporation already has operations. Competitive advantages and business strengths identified in the SWOT analysis of Samsung combat negative forces from competition in these markets. As an intensive growth strategy, market penetration depends on the effectiveness of the generic competitive strategy of broad differentiation, in terms of how the company creates technologically innovative products that are differentiated enough to attract target customers in current or existing markets.

Product Development (Secondary) . Considering the emphasis of product superiority in Samsung’s corporate mission and vision statements , product development is a major intensive growth strategy of the enterprise. A strategic objective of product development in this case is to grow the business through new products, such as new electronic gadgets. Also, this intensive strategy grows Samsung’s operations through iterative innovation, which leads to improved versions or variants of existing products. For example, the company regularly rolls out new smartphone models, similar to what competitors are doing in their product development strategy. The implementation of product development as an intensive growth strategy is based on Samsung’s generic competitive strategy of differentiation, which requires product development for uniqueness that differentiates the business from the competition. Economies of scope based on the conglomerate’s various subsidiaries support product development and competitive advantage by providing technological expertise and material inputs from the subsidiaries. Samsung’s organizational culture (work culture) affects human-resource support for operational effectiveness, value chain efficiencies, supply chain management, and other business activities that fulfill the strategic objectives of product development.

Market Development . The global scale of Samsung’s operations makes market development a minor intensive strategy for business growth. Market development’s strategic objective is to enter new markets using the company’s existing products, such as introducing new Galaxy tablets in Latin American markets after these products’ introduction in the United States. As an intensive growth strategy, market development’s success depends on product value and competitive advantage, which in this case comes with Samsung’s generic strategy of differentiation via technological innovation. For example, effective innovation for cutting-edge technological design makes the corporation’s products more competitive when rolled out in target markets. With this intensive growth strategy, introducing products to new markets may come with changes in the geographical units of Samsung’s organizational structure (company structure) .

Diversification . Samsung’s diversified business operations maintain multiple revenue channels and spread risk across industries and markets. This intensive growth strategy’s implementation is infrequent in the technology conglomerate, considering regulatory hurdles and other barriers. With the strategic objective of establishing new profitable businesses, the diversification strategy grows Samsung typically through acquisitions of smaller firms, such as Harman International Industries. The minor role designation of this intensive growth strategy limits the risks of establishing new business operations. In implementing diversification, the generic competitive strategy of differentiation is also applied for competitiveness and strategic alignment among Samsung subsidiaries’ business operations.

Some Considerations – Samsung’s Generic Competitive Strategy & Intensive Growth Strategies

Samsung’s generic competitive strategy and intensive growth strategies direct the organization’s growth and development. Differentiation plays a major role in building the company’s competitive advantage, although other generic competitive strategies, such as cost leadership and focus strategies, also support the technology enterprise and its competitiveness. Samsung’s operations management strategies and administration must align with the differentiation generic competitive strategy and the intensive growth strategies to support business growth while competing with aggressive multinational companies.

• López, D., & Oliver, M. (2023). Integrating innovation into business strategy: Perspectives from innovation managers. Sustainability, 15 (8), 6503.
• Samsung – Brand Identity .
• Samsung R&D Center .
• Samsung Catalyst Fund .
• Taherdoost, H. (2023). An overview of trends in information systems: Emerging technologies that transform the information technology industry. Cloud Computing and Data Science , 1-16.
• U.S. Department of Commerce – International Trade Administration – Software and Information Technology Industry .
• Copyright by Panmore Institute - All rights reserved.
• This article may not be reproduced, distributed, or mirrored without written permission from Panmore Institute and its author/s.
• Educators, Researchers, and Students: You are permitted to quote or paraphrase parts of this article (not the entire article) for educational or research purposes, as long as the article is properly cited and referenced together with its URL/link.

MBA Knowledge Base

Business • Management • Technology

Home » Business Analysis » Case Study: Samsung’s Innovation Strategy

Case Study: Samsung’s Innovation Strategy

The success of Samsung has been widely acknowledged in the last decade. Samsung, the world’s largest television producer and second largest mobile phone manufacturer, is also the largest firm of flash memory maker. Furthermore, Samsung was ranked by Fast Company Magazine to be third most innovative company in the consumer electronics. The company grew from a local industrial leader into a worldwide consumer electronics brand, with up to 261,000 employees, 14 public listed companies, 470 offices and facilities in 67 countries. Samsung was ranked as 11th world’s most innovative companies. It is one of the two Korean companies in the Top 20 companies. While Sony, the Japan’s biggest consumer electronics, was ranked as 10th, only one position above Samsung. This has brought questions among management gurus how this growing company could drive innovation to create success within a short time and remain innovative despite the difficulties of internationalization . In addition, it could overcome many well-built rivals from Japan and Europe.

Shared vision and top management commitment are the important component leading to create innovative atmosphere . In creating such organization, if leaders are not committed in their actions, innovation couldn’t be systematic in a company. Top executive’s role modelling is one of the main differences between innovative and non-innovative organizations. Moreover, employees should realize a company’s goals to align with their innovative effort. Samsung’s new management beliefs applied in the late 1990’s is “we will devote our human resources and technology to create superior products and services, thereby contributing to a better global society.” This shows the company’s strong willpower to contribute to the worldwide people’s prosperity in the 21st century. This message encourages every employee in the firm to innovate with the clear goal of being global superior producer.

Appropriate Structure

The innovative organization tends to have characteristics of organic structures with open and dynamics systems. At first, the reduction of organizational layer and downsizing are concerned as cost control . An increase in use of information technologies, such as email, internal blog, shared data repository, also leads to the need of eliminating middle management. The possible consequences for this are faster responsiveness to market, higher competitiveness, more flexibility, and reducing processes between divisions. This leads to flatter organisation that is not only the change of organisational structure but also the change of decision-making process . In order to avoid delays and support for rapid innovation, decisions should be delegated to the innovation team. The approval of top management is only needed at the checkpoints or gates of the innovation process. Furthermore, Innovation is not suitable with multi-level hierarchy as the new idea and radical innovation must pass through many approvals with high possibility of ideas being rejected. Moreover, this will discourage strong leaders, who try to overcome its cumbersome, but the slow-response organisation will eventually obstruct their abilities. For example, in 1989, Samsung had 3-7 steps for project approval. This took up 24 days for the proposal to go through 7 approvals to arrive final decision step from the president. On the contrary, proposal in 1995 needed maximum of 3 approvals decided on the same day. This change of the important process leads to speed of running business. Furthermore, the proposal form in 1995 is in English, this signified an attempt for globalization .

Key Individuals

With the goal of creating innovation in the company, Samsung needs the world-class human resources from both technical and business backgrounds. Its branding strategy is not only to create a brand that people trust and admire, but also to be a company that they desire to join. To foster this breakthrough R&D, Samsung set up worldwide objectives to catch the attention of the smartest people from around the world, and retain them. These people will be trained and implanted Korean and Samsung culture through one week of intensive Korean daily conversation class, one week of Orientation about company’s history, philosophy, and culture, and develop general management skills delivered by senior Samsung executives. The recruitment of world’s smartest innovators, inventors and designers are fundamental to the company’s success in creating the future technology.

Besides having the best people for the development of innovative capabilities, Samsung has a tool to identify the key players, such as Project leader, promoters, idea champions, or gatekeeper, in the organization. Experiential education programs that are enjoyable, innovative and effective have performed this identification task. For example in the Samsung Semiconductor unit, 90 managers were organised into groups and assigned to build up new equipment through the use of Lego blocks. The tool was just simple Lego blocks, but the equipment created in this experiment had to be functional. This activity, which required both creativity and teamwork, provided managers comprehension of the role each member played in team. Who is promoter, supporter, idea generator, and critical thinker are identified.

Effective Team-working

Currently, team-working increasingly reflects a deeper recognition that this method of working offers greater economic benefits. Cross-functional teams is an effective tool to bring in different knowledge sets needed for solving production problems, creating new businesses , or develop new strategies. Work as a team needs more participation, higher commitment, sharing knowledge and self-management . This is more organic and flexible approach that helps to initiate innovation implanting across organisational and national boundaries. For example, Automakers from USA and Japan collectively worked on the development of new car model. Committing to consumer trends, Samsung set up a group of about 30 businessmen called CNB (Create New Businesses) who had to discover long-term social and technological fashions and imagine new products, which fulfill promising demands. Samsung has harvested the fruits from its team-working and strong commitment to innovation , transforming low-quality producer to become a brand that create stylish mobile phone. In 2010, its sales of mobile phones were ranked as number one in the US market.

Long-term Commitment to Education

Invest in people is another key initiative needed to emphasize in the development of innovative organisation. Army without essential weapons cannot deliver its full potential. Those needed weapons are knowledge, which has to be developed by best practice training. Companies, such as Hewlett Packard, and Samsung, have committed in training and development programs to help spread innovation capability all over the organisation. Besides internal training programs, offering scholarship, postgraduate study opportunities and international work placement for its staff in 120 offices across 57 countries provide Samsung linkage with renowned universities, also bringing in knowledge and collaboration to the organisation. The by-product from doing so is incentives that help to attract and retain of the best and brightest inventor and businessperson from the global industry.

Extensive Communication

Communication is one of the factors causing failure in investing in ideas that go wrong since the beginning. These are those ideas that do not align with the company’s need. Communication within company about its strategy and customer demands is needed for the clear innovation pathways of researchers. Idea generated from either internal or external organisation must go through many steps of modification before adopting into a company. These steps become troubles for the huge companies. In the case of Samsung, idea management has been introduced to manage ideas from thinkers and distribute them all over the company. They will be evaluated by colleagues, supervisors, or assigned review staffs who add views, opinions and knowledge. In addition to internal communication, networking between firms is also key component in the creation of innovation . The network organisation is a group of several independent companies, which perform different tasks and contract one another. For example, one firm in the network focus on research and product design, another manufactures it, and a third does distribution. This approach gains a wide acceptance as it has strong rationale including rapid change of business environment , the cumbersome of large-size companies, importance of speed and flexibility. Moreover, partners’ collaboration helps to blend and complement different core competency in creating better innovation. Samsung has utilized this concept by building a team, called TechnoValley, undertaking only planning and marketing of product. Other partners in the network took care of technology, production, distribution, and promotion.

High Involvement in Innovation

Building a visionary company requires 1 percent vision and 99 percent alignment. In order to build a sustainable innovation culture, staffs have to practice innovation in everything they do. Practicing to tackle small challenge will make them ready for a bigger challenge. Samsung manager plays an important role in supporting this culture of practicing innovation by encouraging the innovation process and not pushing employees to short circuit the solution process.

External Forces

External forces shapes Samsung to become technology leaders. Previously, closed innovation was the model that Samsung Electronics followed. They invested in the best people and centralized their R&D unit. Today, Samsung cannot depend only on internal innovations, which may create the advanced operating system for mobile phone but not attractive one. Samsung open innovation center established to create striking design and user-friendly interface of Samsung mobile phone. It successfully engaged customers and suppliers in the innovation process at the early stage. Being based in Korea with large group of young technology-concerned consumers provides Samsung an innovative edge in consumer electronics including mobile phones. The replacement rate for mobile phones in Korea is estimated at 6-18 months, thanks to young Koreans who swiftly adapt new technology. Therefore, these trendy people have participated in testing and giving feedback, which provide significant information about customers’ desire. Korea, therefore, becomes an invaluable testing location for innovations prior to the companies unveil them on the world stage.

Creative Climate

Public reward for those who distinguish themselves as mains actor in innovation culture and who promote the value of innovation is the powerful tool to expand innovative thinking throughout the enterprise. There are many examples of escalating the visibility of innovation success, such as the company innovation award, inventor hall of fame. This illustrates the commitment a company have on its innovation and inspire employees by making them proud of their success. Idea management through the use of IT have increased the rate of product and process improvement, as contributions of ideas are traceable. It open up the communication all over the company and promote culture of sharing and creativity. Ideas are developed and talked widely not only in vertical but in horizontal fashion leading to innovative atmosphere. After the introduction of knowledge management solution in Samsung Electronics, there was a change in organizational climate. Employees have been become confident to be more suggestive, trustful, responsive to change, and eager to innovate. Forum and blog postings are the place for knowledge sharing where an automatic rewarding system is executed. The profitability of the products launched, have been chosen as the innovation performance indicators.

Learning Organization

Sharing knowledge and skill of employees brings about innovative performance. Samsung has identified two main challenges in the creation of learning organisation that are knowledge discovery and knowledge sharing. In the past, problems occurred due to lack of knowledge management, for example, lost of valuable knowledge from poor management, or repeating the same failures. To tackle such problems, organizational mechanisms and technological solutions to facilitate the innovation process in Samsung have been introduced. Firstly, Samsung Brainstorming Hours has been arranged to capture and spread ideas in any step of innovation process from idea generation to conversion and commercialization. This is not applied only in the new product development process, but also solving complex problems or business improvement. Two hours weekly meeting for cross-functional team in the room with tall windows, wireless connection, big-screen TV, snacks and drinks is designed to foster innovation process. This comfortable surroundings helps innovation workers to socialise with each other and share ideas. Secondly, company-wide simple but powerful blog has been introduced to encourage knowledge sharing and discovery. The blog helps employees understand and discuss ideas so as to extend previous knowledge continuously. Thirdly, knowledge warehouses have been built to have codifiable critical knowledge stored and accessible throughout Samsung Company. The “Lessons Learned System with Alert function” has been used to manage this knowledge and share it. For storing lesson learned, project managers has been trained about how and what knowledge to collect and given the project management manuals including many useful procedures such as how to write a closing report, how to create and store a project model, how to perform an After Action Review. In order to control overwhelming information, Alerts system notifies employees of newly stored knowledge that might be of interest and useful to their work.

Samsung has successfully transformed from local low quality manufacturer to a brand that produce admirable and stylish consumer electronics. Company performance has proven that Samsung has come to the right direction in last decade. The achievement of becoming innovative organisation started from the declaration to be the global leader in the industry in late 1990s. After the re-configuration and adopting team-working practice, Samsung organisation has been altered to be flexible and organic, leading to ability to develop innovative capability. In addition to the recruitment of the best people into the organization , Samsung has an experimental education tool to identify the key individuals, such as project leader, promoters, or gatekeeper, so as to blend different roles in creating innovation . These people are working under the well-designed knowledge management system and trustful and suggestive communication with the support of supervisors, fostering creative climate. Rewards system for innovative contributor, organisational mechanism and technological solutions has brought about the knowledge discovery and sharing throughout the company, creating learning organisation that sustains Samsung innovation competency.

Related posts:

• Case Study: iPod, Apple’s Best Innovation
• Case Study of Dyson: Competitive Advantage through Innovation
• Case Study: Business Model Innovation and Customer-Driven Innovation at Dell
• Case Study: Kellogg’s Business Strategy
• Case Study: Business Strategy of Sony Corporation
• Case Study of Apple: Competitive Advantage Through Innovation
• Case Study of Apple: Strategic Enablers and Barriers to Innovation
• Case Study of Jack Welch: Leadership that Creates Innovation
• Case Study: Disney’s Diversification Strategy
• Case Study: Ryanair Business Strategy Analysis

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Essay Service Examples Business Samsung

Business Analysis: Case Study of Samsung

Business Analysis Case Study

Introduction.

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Organization Type and Strategies

Competitors, structure, and key players, problem and issues, samsung note 7 explosion, battery-induced explosion, swot analysis, opportunities, assessment and implementation plan, recommendations.

• Choi, K. (2014). Samsung brand awareness rising. The Korea Times. Retrieved from: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/tech/2018/12/693_149983.html
• Golson, J. (2016). Replacement Samsung Galaxy Note 7 phone catches fire on Southwest plane. The Verge. Retrieved from: https://www.theverge.com/2016/10/5/13175000/samsung-galaxy-note-7-fire-replacement-plane-battery-southwest
• Interbrand. (2019). Samsung. Retrieved from: https://www.interbrand.com/best-brands/best-global-brands/2019/ranking/samsung/
• Jeong, E., Wells, G., & Kim, Y. (2016). Samsung Rushes to Contain Fallout From Galaxy Note 7 Recall. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from: https://www.wsj.com/articles/samsung-rushes-to-contain-fallout-from-galaxy-note-7-recall-1473777044
• Lopez, M. (2017). Samsung Explains Note 7 Battery Explosions And Turns Crisis Into Opportunity. Forbes. Retrieved from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/maribellopez/2017/01/22/samsung-reveals-cause-of-note-7-issue-turns-crisis-into-opportunity/#6d45fe6624f1
• Martin, V. (2019). Samsung SWOT Analysis & Recommendations. Panmure Institute. Retrieved from: http://panmore.com/samsung-swot-analysis-internal-external-factors-recommendations
• McGrath, D. (2010). Analyst: Samsung is likely to pass Intel in ICs. EETimes. Retrieved from: https://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1257223
• Nisen, M. (2013). Samsung Has A Totally Different Strategy From Apple, And It's Working Great. Business Insider. Retrieved from: https://www.businessinsider.com/samsung-corporate-strategy-2013-3
• Omer, K. S. (2019). Swot Analysis Implementation’s Significance on Strategy Planning Samsung Mobile Company as an Example. Journal of Process Management. New Technologies, (1), 56.
• Samsung. (2019). Retrieved from: https://www.samsung.com/us/
• Samsung Newsroom. (2019). Samsung Electronics Wins 49 IDEA Design Awards. Retrieved from: https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-electronics-wins-49-idea-design-awards
• Samsung Security. (n.d.). Communication with Stakeholders. Retrieved from: http://www.samsungsecurities.com/csr/engagement.do?cmd=list&MenuCode=M020102
• Velazco, C. (2013). How Samsung Got Big. TechCrunch. Retrieved from: https://techcrunch.com/2013/06/01/how-samsung-got-big/

Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions.

Cite this paper

Related essay topics.

Get your paper done in as fast as 3 hours, 24/7.

Related articles

Most popular essays

Samsung Group is a South Korean multinational conglomerate founded on 1 March 1938 (Samsung US,...

Samsung group is a South Korean multinational conglomerate founded by Lee Byung-Chul in 1938....

• Product Placement

Samsung sells a greater number of smartphones than any other individual company in the world....

• Consumer Behavior

Samsung is a South Korean conglomerate headquartered in Samsung Town, Seoul. It comprises of...

Through dependable items and administrations, inventive thoughts, skilled individuals,...

Burris said in (2020) The Samsung Bunch could be a South Korea-based combination company that...

Marketing strategy is a long-term, forward-looking approach to planning with the fundamental goal...

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, South Korean multinational electronics company, has been a major...

• Marketing Strategy

This report was written to show what is Samsung's marketing strategy and how do they promote their...

Join our 150k of happy users

• Get original paper written according to your instructions
• Save time for what matters most

Fair Use Policy

EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via [email protected].

We are here 24/7 to write your paper in as fast as 3 hours.

Provide your email, and we'll send you this sample!

By providing your email, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Say goodbye to copy-pasting!

Get custom-crafted papers for you.

Enter your email, and we'll promptly send you the full essay. No need to copy piece by piece. It's in your inbox!

Evaluating Risks and Decisions: A Samsung Case Study Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Samsung is a consumer electronics firm based in South Korea with a wide product range that includes computers and smartphones. Founded in 1938, as a grocery store, the company has since grown from a small family-owned enterprise to one of the largest in the world (Regan, 2018). This paper evaluates how the firm applies Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) in its corporate practices to manage risks and business decisions when operating internationally.

A Critical Reflection Based On ERM

The application of ERM policies depends on a myriad of factors. Three main frameworks for conducting reviews include Integrated Risk Management (IRM), IS031000, and COSO-ERM standards (Hessami, 2019). IRM standards seek to evaluate risk management processes based on four main criteria that evaluate financial, strategic, operational, and hazard risks affecting an organization (Coleman, 2018). Comparatively, IS031000 focuses on three main areas of evaluation – principles, frameworks, and processes (Rael, 2017). Comparatively, the COSO-ERM cube focuses on strategic, operational, reporting, and compliance risks as highlighted in figure 1 below.

As highlighted in figure 1 above, the COSO-ERM model highlighted above evaluates a company’s internal environment through objective setting, event identification, risk assessment, risk response, control activities, information assessment, and monitoring. In the context of Samsung’s risk management plan, the COSO-ERM framework will be used to analyze the firm’s risks and decisions.

Internal Environment

For purposes of this review, Samsung’s internal environment is evaluated based on the efficacy of its management and leadership styles. Relative to its competitiveness in the global market, the South Korean firm has adopted a combination of western and Asian leadership styles to be successful (Samsung Inc., 2021). For example, its bold risk-taking appetite stems from the assimilation of western ideals in the company’s management framework. Alternatively, its treatment of workers is based on the Asian philosophy of fairness, equity, and hard work (Regan, 2018; Biberhofer et al., 2019). Broadly, the hybrid management and leadership philosophy adopted by Samsung is responsive to its risk management objectives.

Objective Setting

A company’s objectives influence the design of its key processes and activities. Samsung’s objective is to develop superior products and services that enhance societal value (Samsung Inc., 2021). Using the COSO-ERM framework to analyze this objective, quality emerges as a core consideration for the firm’s success in achieving this goal (Ensign, Fast and Hentsch, 2016; Grunert, 2017). The company also complies with existing laws and guidelines to make sure that its business processes are consistent with the global code of conduct for conducting multinational operations.

Event Identification

There are various sources of risk in the consumer electronics industry. Top of the list is the COVID-19 pandemic, which has disrupted supply chain patterns and created shortfalls in demand for goods that were hitherto non-essential. Trade wars pitting western and Asian companies are also significant sources of risk for Samsung (Baack, Czarnecka and Baack, 2018). Therefore, the COVID-19 pandemic and ongoing trade wars between western and Asian nations emerge as significant sources of risk for Samsung Electronics.

Risk Assessment

A comprehensive assessment of Samsung’s risk profile is provided in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Samsung’s risk assessment

According to the risk events highlighted in Table 1 above, two risk categories affect Samsung’s operations – COVID-19 and trade wars. The above risks have been ranked according to the risk profile matrix highlighted in figure 2 below and trade wars is the most impactful

A company’s risk management attitude defines the kind of strategies it is likely to adopt in a risk management scenario. Relative to this statement, Samsung can initiate four major types of responses: tolerate, treat, transfer, or terminate a risk (Kumar, Rahman and Kazmi, 2016). Appropriate risk responses will be to treat and transfer the risks, respectively. Trade wars are transferable because they are initiated at an intergovernmental level and Samsung has little control over associated processes. Comparatively, risks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic should be “treated” because they can be mitigated through the deployment of robust health-based and prevention-oriented strategies (Archetti, 2021; Hutchins, 2018). Modalities for implementing these strategies are highlighted below.

Control Activities

According to the proposed strategies highlighted above, the appropriate risk response for managing risks caused by the COVID-19 pandemic is “treatment.” This is because the firm can develop health safeguards to protect its customers and employees from infections (Adhikari, 2018). Comparatively, risks associated with trade wars can be “transferred” because third-party actors, such as insurance companies, can develop products that protect the firm against this type of risk.

Information and Communication

Most companies use Information and Communication Technology (ICT) tools to carry out various functions, including risk management. Such is the case of Samsung because it uses ICT to carry out sustainable business operations by diversifying its risks across different portfolios (Samsung Securities, 2020; Makrides, Vrontis and Christofi, 2020). At the same time, the company uses ICT in risk identification and assessment because it provides a relatively accurate assessment of the same, relative to other evaluative models (Chopra, Avhad and Jaju, 2021). The risk posed by the adoption of this technology includes system breakdowns and the failure of some employees to understand how to use the company’s risk management software (Pesch et al., 2017). Nonetheless, this risk profile is low and the company has successfully used its ICT infrastructure to manage its risk management activities.

Risk Monitoring

In this paper, the main sources of risk for Samsung have been identified to be trade wars and the COVID-19 pandemic. These risks have implications on the organization if not effectively monitored (Regan, 2018). The two levels of risks should be evaluated weekly to understand their implications on the organization (Rael, 2017). The chief risk manager should collaborate with the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to understand the implications of these risks on various aspects of the firm’s corporate and industry performance.

Role and Impact of Governance, Technology, and Resilience

Role of governance.

Companies have varied ways of managing their risk categories. Two major strategies are adopted by firms when managing risks is to (i) explain why they have not been addressed as stipulated in corporate governance reports or (ii) to comply with rules and guidelines stipulated in the corporate governance report (Rael, 2017). Samsung’s risk management approach should follow the second approach of explaining situations where corporate governance rules and policies have been followed, or not. This is because the two risk events identified in this document – COVID-19 and trade wars – change periodically, while the company’s corporate management rules are rigid (Grunert, 2017). Explaining the responses may be a useful way of navigating these changes.

Samsung’s CEO should take responsibility for the above actions by making sure that the company’s corporate management guidelines are followed. Alternatively, the firm’s Board of Directors should review the performance of the CEO by reviewing how the company’s overall risk management plan helps in the realization of its goals (Köbis, Soraperra and Shalvi, 2021). The process should be open and transparent to ensure there is sustainability of business process outcomes (Adhikari, 2018). By doing so, the process will be fair and receptive to all parties involved.

Impact of Governance

The impact of Samsung’s corporate governance policies on its risk management processes is vast because of their outreach and influence on various aspects of business performance. In the context of Samsung’s operations, corporate governance plays a critical role in moderating the relationship between managers and employees by defining the expectations and roles of each party (Haenlein et al., 2020; Köbis, Soraperra and Shalvi, 2021). From an organizational standpoint, the company’s corporate governance policies will play a critical role in standardizing operational procedures across various product divisions – especially in the way it manages risk (Rael, 2017). Apple Inc. and Huawei are Samsung’s competitors in the consumer electronics industry, which have developed and implemented similar corporate management policies with varied levels of success (Apple Inc. 2021; Adoko, 2017). From their experience, the failure to implement good corporate governance policies in managing a company’s risk events may result in increased inefficiency and unresponsiveness to the changing nature of a firm’s risk events (Adoko, 2017). Therefore, it is important to make sure that such policies are developed by consulting relevant parties.

Role of Technology

As highlighted in this document, ICT plays a critical role in determining how Samsung makes decisions regarding its risk management processes. Relative to this statement, some researchers suggest that ICT is the foundation for the development of innovation policies for use in the corporate setting (Dimic, Orlov and Äijö, 2019; Köbis, Soraperra and Shalvi, 2021). Nonetheless, given the sporadic nature of Samsung’s risk events – COVID-19 and trade wars – technology will play a critical role in formulating, implementing, and monitoring its risks (Adoko, 2017). Particularly, it will help to track risk events in real time, thereby allowing managers to be informed of their impact on organizations. Some technology tools, such as Skype and Zoom, will also be used to communicate appropriate risk management strategies to respective teams based on data collected from the above-mentioned risk tracking processes.

Impact of Technology

The use of ICT tools to undertake Samsung’s risk management processes will have financial and operational implications on the multinational. From a financial perspective, technology may lead to reductions in operational costs because of its inexpensive nature (Kumar, Rahman and Kazmi, 2016; Archetti, 2021; Hutchins, 2018). The firm may also need to automate some of its risk management processes, such as risk monitoring, to accommodate these changes (Kumar, Rahman and Kazmi, 2016; Archetti, 2021; Hutchins, 2018). Some companies have successfully adopted this strategy to manage their risks (Kemp, 2018; Palmatier and Sridhar, 2017). For example, Google and Apple have used machine-learning techniques to minimize their risk exposures because they provide an effective way of improving their overall risk management plans (Apple Inc., 2021; Kelleher, 2019). Overall, technology will have a positive impact on Samsung’s performance by improving its risk tracking and monitoring processes.

Role of Resilience

As highlighted in this document, risk events may have far-reaching implications on a company’s overall performance. Its resilience determines the effects that these events will have on its overall performance (Lewis, Ricard and Klijn, 2018). In this regard, resilience determines the ability of a company to adapt to the changing dynamics affecting its internal and external operations (Hernaus, Juras and Matic, 2021; Management Association, Information Resources, 2018). Samsung has demonstrated market resilience in the manner it manages its risk exposures (Regan, 2018). For example, by being resilient, the company has addressed its market and product challenges by recalibrating its business processes to mitigate known risks (Regan, 2018). In this regard, its resilience has played a critical role in affirming its position as a dominant company in the consumer electronics business.

Impact of Resilience

As highlighted above, Samsung’s resilience has had a positive effect on its overall business performance. For example, it has been able to address customer concerns in problematic product segments, such as the Samsung Galaxy Note, which caught fire when charging (Regan, 2018). Its resilience in the wake of such missteps has given competitors little room to exaggerate the company’s weaknesses (Bérard and Teyssier, 2018). Therefore, its resilience has helped it to maintain market dominance by countering negative information and experiences from customers and competitors. Based on the above examples, Samsung’s resilience is unmatched in the technology industry.

The insights highlighted in this paper have highlighted the role that ERM and corporate governance play in supporting Samsung’s risk management plan. Two strategies have been proposed for each risk category with the “treatment” option being associated with COVID-19 risks, while the “transfer” option is linked with risks associated with trade wars. It is proposed that the adoption of sound corporate governance policies and the implementation of a robust risk identification criterion will play a critical role in maintaining Samsung’s resilience in the competitive consumer electronics market.

Reference List

Adhikari, A. (ed.). (2018), Strategic Marketing Issues in Emerging Markets . New York, NY: Springer.

Adoko, O. P. (2017), Risk Management Strategies in Public-Private Partnerships . New York, NY: IGI Global.

Apple Inc. (2021). About us. Web.

Archetti, C. (2021), ‘When public relations can heal: an embodied theory of silence for public communication’, Public Relations Inquiry , Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 1-13.

Baack, D. W., Czarnecka, B. and Baack, D. (2018), International Marketing . London: SAGE.

Bérard, C. and Teyssier, C. (eds.). (2018), Risk Management: A Lever for SME Development and Stakeholder Value Creation . London: John Wiley and Sons.

Biberhofer, P. et al. (2019), ‘Facilitating work performance of sustainability-driven entrepreneurs through higher education: the relevance of competencies, values, worldviews, and opportunities’, The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation , Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 21–38.

Chopra, A., Avhad, V. and Jaju, S. (2021), ‘Influencer marketing: an exploratory study to identify antecedents of consumer behavior of millennial’, Business Perspectives and Research , Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 77–91.

Coleman, L. B. (2018), Managing Organizational Risk Using the Supplier Audit Program: An Auditor’s Guide along The International Audit Trail . London: Quality Press.

Dimic, N., Orlov, V. and Äijö, J. (2019), ‘Bond–equity yield ratio market timing in emerging markets’, Journal of Emerging Market Finance , Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 52–79.

Ensign, P. C., Fast, J. and Hentsch, S. (2016), ‘Can a technology enterprise transition from niche to wider market appeal in the turbulent digital media industry?’, Vikalpa , Vol. 41, No. 3, pp. 247–260.

Grunert, K. G. (ed.). (2017), Consumer Trends and New Product Opportunities in the Food Sector. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

Haenlein, M. et al. (2020), ‘Navigating the new era of influencer marketing: how to be successful on Instagram, TikTok, and Co.’, California Management Review , Vol. 63, No. 1, pp. 5–25.

Hernaus, T., Juras, A. and Matic, I. (2021), ‘Cross-echelon managerial design competencies: relational coordination in organizational learning and growth performance’, Business Research Quarterly , Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 445-467.

Hessami, A. G. (eds.). (2019), Perspectives on Risk, Assessment and Management Paradigms . London: Books on Demand.

Hutchins, G. (2018), Supply Chain Risk Management: Completing In the Age of Disruption . London: Greg Hutchins.

Hutchins, G. (2019), Project Risk Management . London: CERM Academy for Enterprise Risk Management.

Kelleher, J. D. (2019), Deep Learning . Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Kemp, K. (2018), Misuse of Market Power: Rationale and Reform . Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Köbis, C., Soraperra, I. and Shalvi, S. (2021), ‘The consequences of participating in the sharing economy: a transparency-based sharing framework’, Journal of Management , Vol. 47, No. 1, pp. 317–343.

Kumar, V., Rahman, Z. and Kazmi, A. A. (2016), ‘Assessing the influence of stakeholders on sustainability marketing strategy of Indian companies’, SAGE Open , Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 987-1109.

Lewis, J. M., Ricard, L. M. and Klijn, E. H. (2018), ‘How innovation drivers, networking and leadership shape public sector innovation capacity’, International Review of Administrative Sciences , Vol. 84, No. 2, pp. 288–307.

Makrides, A., Vrontis, D. and Christofi, M. (2020), ‘The gold rush of digital marketing: assessing prospects of building brand awareness overseas’, Business Perspectives and Research , Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 4–20.

Management Association, Information Resources. (ed.). (2018), Social Media Marketing: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice . New York, NY: IGI Global.

Palmatier, R. W. and Sridhar, S. (2017), Marketing Strategy: Based on First Principles and Data Analytics. London: Macmillan International Higher Education.

Pesch, U. et al. (2017), ‘Niche entrepreneurs in urban systems integration: on the role of individuals in niche formation’, Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space , Vol. 49, No. 8, pp. 1922–1942.

Rael, R. (2017), Smart Risk Management: A Guide to Identifying and Calibrating Business Risks . London: John Wiley & Sons.

Regan, M. (2018), Samsung . New York, NY: ABDO.

Samsung Inc. (2021), Our mission and values . Web.

Samsung Securities. (2020), Strengthening risk management. Web.

• Analysts, Securities Firms, and Conflicts of Interest
• Tesla Inc. Dealing with Risk and Uncertainty
• Abbott Laboratories' Risk Management Interventions
• Enterprise Security Risk Management
• Risk Management: Definition, Types, and Future
• Dealing with Risk and Uncertainty in Business
• Risk Factors Affecting Bank Nordik’s Operations and Risk Management
• A Risk Management Plan For United Airlines
• Risk Management in a Technology Company: Huawei
• Risk Management in a Real Estate Developer Company: Evergrande Group
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, February 28). Evaluating Risks and Decisions: A Samsung Case Study. https://ivypanda.com/essays/evaluating-risks-and-decisions-a-samsung-case-study/

"Evaluating Risks and Decisions: A Samsung Case Study." IvyPanda , 28 Feb. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/evaluating-risks-and-decisions-a-samsung-case-study/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Evaluating Risks and Decisions: A Samsung Case Study'. 28 February.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Evaluating Risks and Decisions: A Samsung Case Study." February 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/evaluating-risks-and-decisions-a-samsung-case-study/.

1. IvyPanda . "Evaluating Risks and Decisions: A Samsung Case Study." February 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/evaluating-risks-and-decisions-a-samsung-case-study/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Evaluating Risks and Decisions: A Samsung Case Study." February 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/evaluating-risks-and-decisions-a-samsung-case-study/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, samsung electronics: analyzing qualitative complaint data.

Publication date: 20 January 2017

Teaching notes

“Samsung Electronics had experienced a series of quality-related problems, including the recall of one of its LCD TV models. Unfortunately for quality director Kevin Sarni, there was no single root cause behind these problems: Samsung's supply chain management, product design, and testing/quality assurance functions all played a role.

Sarni regularly worked with quantitative data from Samsung's customer complaint database, but recently he had been shown comments about Samsung products posted on the website ConsumerAffairs.com . The number and emotional tone of the website postings concerned him; he worried these kinds of complaints might touch off a social media—fueled public relations firestorm that would make his job more difficult.

He wanted to analyze this feedback, but had no experience with qualitative data. An internal Six Sigma Black Belt consultant suggested he start by creating an affinity diagram and use that to create a Pareto chart to determine which issues to address first. Once Sarni completed the unfamiliar diagrams he had still another task ahead of him: examining the results to see if they justified taking short—term action to address the quality problems raised in the complaints.”

Organize and analyze qualitative data using affinity diagrams

Identify priorities using Pareto charts

The case reinforces the importance of approaching problem solving in a methodical and data-driven manner and demonstrates the power of visual (vs. table-driven) tools.

• Business Process Improvement
• Crisis Management
• Customer Relationship Management
• Customer Service
• Manufacturing
• Operations Management
• Organizational Effectiveness
• Total Quality
• Customer Satisfaction

Boepple, J. (2017), "Samsung Electronics: Analyzing Qualitative Complaint Data", . https://doi.org/10.1108/case.kellogg.2016.000291

Kellogg School of Management

Copyright © 2013, The Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University

You do not currently have access to these teaching notes. Teaching notes are available for teaching faculty at subscribing institutions. Teaching notes accompany case studies with suggested learning objectives, classroom methods and potential assignment questions. They support dynamic classroom discussion to help develop student's analytical skills.

Related articles

All feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

• Silver Bee Group
• [email protected]

• NEW SOLUTION
• Top Visitors
• Popular Topics
• Newest Members
• Newest Papers
• Top Donators

Samsung Case Study

• University Login

Recent Topics

New entries.

• Quality Parts Company
• Lincoln Electric
• Vêtements Ltée
• Google Case Analysis

Most Recent Request

• oilwell cable comp
• research methods
• human resource sho
• toyota adopts a st

Ease your MBA workload and get more time for yourself

Apple vs. Samsung: A Case Study on the Biggest Tech Rivalry

Harshit Verma

Humans are amazing animals, I mean we are smart and can do almost anything. Be it flying, cooking, innovating, and even revolutionizing the whole world with unbelievable technology. Think about this, the first computer was built in 1822, by a smart human called Charles Babbage. It used to have vacuum tubes and large compartments for storage. We have grown from that time at a rapid scale and efficiency, we have seen multifold growth in technology.

So much so, that the computer that once occupied a whole room by itself, now sits in your hand. Moreover, it just sits on our palms for a long time now as our screen times jump.

The smartphone industry has grown and has become one of the biggest industries in the world. Right now, there is a smartphone user base in the billions. This growth has led to the establishment of smartphone giants. Behemoth organizations like Apple and Samsung.

We all have that friend who is an ardent fan of apple, and we all have got a friend too who is always in love with Samsung. This takes us back to the smartphone war that has continued since time immemorial. The android vs apple war. This disparity in demographics is a good indicator of the product market. The user market is much skewed in different directions.

This article is the dissection of the silent raging war between Apple and Samsung. Read on to discover stories and not many known facts about the tech hulks.

Apple Apple Product Line Samsung The Rivalry Inception of Samsung and Apple How Samsung and Apple Turned From Friends to Foe The Billion Dollar Samsung Apple Lawsuit The Court Rule and Afterwards FAQ

It's not a necessity to introduce Apple . The reason is that it is already a brand, a valuable brand which has managed to make a place in the hearts of people all around the world. That also explains why the company has no ‘about us’ section on its website.

Apple is the brainchild of Steve Jobs. It is an American multinational company specializing in consumer products in the tech line. The company is the biggest technology company with its magnanimous revenues and the most valuable company in the world . That too started from a garage and managed to become the most recognizable company in the world. It has been revolutionizing personal tech for decades.

Apple Product Line

Apple 1 was the first computer handmade by Steve Wozniak (Apple co-founder) under the name Apple in 1976. It was a computer encased in a wooden block. Then followed by Apple 2 which was more successful than the predecessor. After the success, they faced good losses in the fall of Apple 3. It faced overheating issues.

After seeing such failure they started to work on innovating something new. To come out of this deep pit, Something that will hopefully revolutionize personal computing.

They began to work on the Macintosh. It was their first computer that supported GUI or Graphic user interface, which allows the user to communicate with the computer in graphical mode. Launched the Macintosh in 1980 and this began the winning strike for apple.

It was in 1983 when Steve Jobs famously asked Pepsi CEO John Sculley to be Apple’s next CEO or if he wanted to “sell sugared water for the rest of his life or change the world? ” The relationship went bad later.

To remove him, Steve initiated a move that backfired and ended up removing himself from the board. The company saw good growth under the leadership of Sculley until he was removed because of some failed products.

Later Apple bought ‘Next ’ which was founded by Steve Jobs bringing him back as an advisor. He immediately trimmed most of the product density in Apple and made the company as slim as possible and launched new sleek products.

He worked secretly on the first iPhone and launched it in 2007. It was an instant hit. Since then, iPhones have been the most popular phones in the world. A major part of Apple's revenue comes from them.

The Samsung that we know today, wasn’t this when it started. It has gone through enormous shifts. Surprisingly, the company was not even in the technology business at its inception in 1938. It was a small company dealing in fried fish and noodles. In the 60s it entered the smartphone segment and today is the largest manufacturer of smartphones , televisions, and memory chips in the world.

In 1938, Lee Byung-Chul dropped out of college and founded a small business he named Samsung Trading Co. The initial corporate logo had three stars and was based on a graphical representation of the Korean Hanja word Samsung. It operated with the same Japanese culture as every corporate body, the employees did as they were told.

Soon with a good culture and with government assistance it entered domains like sugar refining, media, textiles, and insurance and became a success. So at this time, it was in good economic condition.

After the succession of third heir Kun-hee, the company saw an opportunity in technology and he invested heavily in semiconductor technologies and transformed Samsung from a manufacturer into a global technology powerhouse.

After Kun’s death, his easy-going son succeeded to the throne and began investing more in smartphones and more in tech. Later the company saw the most profits from smartphone sales. The most famous Samsung phones are Galaxy, after the first launch in 2009. During the third quarter of 2011, Samsung surged past Apple to the number one spot among phone manufacturers, based on shipments.

Samsung, as it saw handsome revenues in the smartphones segment, mocked Apple in many ways. You can still see those commercials on YouTube . So did Apple. They released commercials that defame other pioneer brands openly. This makes the rivalry public and leads to polarisation in the market. Let us discuss it in further detail.

The Rivalry Inception of Samsung and Apple

As the smartphone market and the hype around this continues to grow, smartphone leaders fight for greater dominance in this segment of the product. Behemoth organizations Samsung and Apple are the pioneers in this segment and one of the most famous rivals in the world. They not only fight for a greater market share but the main rivalry is a little off topic, it is a long legal battle into dark plagiarism.

Samsung not only competes with Apple in the notebook, tablets, and smartphones market, It also supplies Apple with crucial items for iPhones like OLED display and flash drive memory chip for storage. The Samsung we know today has not been constant as we consider its long history.

In the 80s the company was primarily focused on the semiconductor business . Apple was one of Samsung's largest buyers, ordering billions of dollars of parts for electronic devices. Its CEO at that time did meet several times with Steve jobs for advice or negotiations. The two companies had friendly relations with each other. Until something happened.

In 2007 the first iPhone was unveiled to the world. Two years later, in 2009 Samsung came up with a touchscreen device for their market running on Google's android system. Apple CEO Steve Jobs called Samsung a Copycat. ‘POOF’. Apple filed a lawsuit against Samsung. The rivalry began.

How Samsung and Apple Turned From Friends to Foe

According to Walter Issacson, Steve’s biographer, He wanted to start a thermonuclear war against Android in this case of plagiarism and copying apple’s authenticity. From that event, Samsung dared from being a supplier of technological equipment to a competitor in market share. It went from being an ally to a fierce enemy.

Apple was extremely infuriated with this and dragged the matter into court, showcasing that the company is super sensitive about this issue. It filed a lawsuit against Samsung in serious violations of patents and trademarks of Apple’s property rights.

However, the court case wasn’t the first guard of Apple against Samsung. Both the companies Apple and Samsung had a long history of cooperation, so Apple first thought of talking the matter out rather than taking the case to court.

Apple proposed a licensing deal for Samsung for the patents and trademarks. The document stated that Samsung will pay 30$ on selling every smartphone and 40$ on every tablet.

Samsung ofcourse declined the offer, stating that the company hasn't done anything wrong and is not involved in copying Apple or violating any of the trademarks mentioned in the lawsuit. Not only this, Samsung reversed the licensing agreement onto Apple stating that they are the ones who are copying. This began the row of court cases by these tech hulks against each other.

The lawsuit filed by Apple was specific about the number of patents and the type of patents Samsung violated, let us discuss a little about the violations Apple mentioned.

The Billion Dollar Samsung Apple Lawsuit

The first lawsuit demanded 2.5 billion dollars in damages from Samsung. So we can assume it wasn’t a normal lawsuit. Apple was very serious about their smartphone launch and now with this case too. Samsung however seemed like it was ignoring Apple’s claims of plagiarism and trying to put the burden on Apple themselves.

Trade Dress

It is a visual form of patent, that deals with the visual and overall look of a product. Sometimes companies copy some famous brand’s product look and hope to generate sales. As people tend no not to look about details of a product, rather they just pick up based on the appearance of something. It instills confusion in consumers. Samsung Galaxy phone was the first touchscreen phone in the Samsung product line and it looked mostly the same as the newly launched iPhone.

Trademark Infringement

While Samsung could argue on the physical appearance being similar with iPhone but another thing the lawsuit included was trademark infringement. The icons on the iPhone were strikingly similar to those in Samsung’s phone. This turns the eyebrows up for Samsung. As there can be thousands of ways of designing icons and GUI effects, Samsung chose in most cases icons similar to that of the iPhone.

Other than these the lawsuit also concluded the methods of copying of the home screen, the design of the front button, and the outlook of the app's menu. All these were some specific irks for Samsung.

The Court Rule and Afterwards

The case began in 2011 and went on to go worldwide. By July 2012, the two companies were still tangled in more than 50 lawsuits around the globe, with billions of dollars in damages claimed between them.

Hearing both sides, the law court ruled in the favour of Apple. The basis was their legitimate concerns about their product being copied in the open market. Samsung paid $1 billion in compensation to the iPhone designer .

“I am talking to you on a phone right now that Apple just copied,” said Brian Wallace, Samsung’s former vice president for strategic marketing. “It’s a giant phone that Steve Jobs made fun of. Who was right? Samsung was right.”

After this and all the cases in between this first court case, Samsung didn’t stay shut. It widely talked against Apple and filed lawsuits claiming infringements of their company policies and patents. These behemoths fought each other like wild animals. Suffering millions on each side, Tore each other apart in claims.

Apple claimed that Samsung had copied the iPhone, leading to a long-running series of lawsuits that were only finally resolved in 2018, with Apple being awarded US$539 million. Issues between the two companies continue. They are now perhaps best described as ‘frenemies’.

While tech hulks like these two fight for global dominance and the crown of the most innovative technology pioneer, it is sure that smartphones are a hot topic. It seems like everyone wants the latest phone to set a trend. From the latest Samsung foldable phone to the iPhones sold as a jewel. This market kind of seems like a fashion innovation.

Apple and Samsung will most probably rule until someone innovates in between. Whatever it will be, humans are fascinated and the future is exciting.

Who won the Samsung Apple lawsuit?

Apple won the patent dispute against Samsung and was awarded $1.049 billion in damages for 6 of the 7 patents brought to bear.

Why did Apple sue Samsung?

Apple initially sued Samsung on grounds of patent infringement.

Who launched first smartphone Apple or Samsung?

Apple iPhone was launched in 2007 and two years later, in 2009, Samsung released their first Galaxy phone on the same date.

Must have tools for startups - Recommended by StartupTalky

• Convert Visitors into Leads- SeizeLead
• Manage your business smoothly- Google Workspace
• International Money transfer- XE Money Transfer

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for Startups in the Dairy Industry: Why It Matters and How to Get Started

This article has been contributed by Ravin Saluja, Director with Sterling Agro Industries Ltd. (Nova Dairy Products) Recently, it is quite clear why corporate social responsibility (CSR) was born and what it stands for. Companies are expected to act ethically and sustainably so that consumers, stakeholders, and communities can agree

The Rise of Minimalism in Consumer Behavior

This article has been contributed by Sajju Jain, Board Member, Entrepreneur, Harvard Alum. Do you like to buy fewer but higher quality things? You don't buy new things unless they're absolutely necessary? Do you like to repair something instead of purchasing new ones? You might be

The Government Is Planning to Extend the Current Import Authorization Regime for It Hardware Products

According to a news agency that cited an official source, the government is likely to extend the current import management system for imports of specific information technology hardware products, such as laptops and tablets, for an additional three months. The review of the deadline is scheduled to take place on

Amazon Raises Content Creator Commission During the Festive Sale

The online retailer Amazon has revealed an increase in its normal commission earning rates for select categories within its network of over 50,000 influencers ahead of the festive sale. According to its site, for active creators who collaborate with Amazon, the updated commission structure offers influencers a significant rise

• Free Case Studies
• Business Essays

Write My Case Study

Buy Case Study

Case Study Help

• Case Study For Sale
• Case Study Services
• Hire Writer

STEEPLE Analysis of Samsung

The STEEPLE analysis of the business environment of Samsung is part of the company’s strategic analysis for the medium and long term. The goal of this study is to assess the prospects of Samsung.

Samsung is a global company in the consumer appliances and gadgets market. It started as a South Korean family-owned business but has earned acceptance around the globe now. Samsung is not happy with operating in the leading markets only. The recent expansion into new markets shows that it wants to cover as many countries as possible.

We Will Write a Custom Case Study Specifically For You For Only $13.90/page!

STEEP analysis provides concentrated information which covers various aspects of the external environment. Like PEST and STEEP, it creates a snapshot of current socio-political reality. It also gives a better idea of the existing trends.

The analysis below will give you an outline of Samsung’s overall situation. Samsung would consider all of these factors before taking a decision.

The key focus of this article is on the external environmental drivers. The STEEPLE analysis will focus on the following 7 factors: Social, Technological, Economic, Environmental, Political, Legal, and Ethical. The initials for these make up the acronym STEEPLE.

S for Social

As I mentioned already, Samsung is a South Korean Chaebol. This means it is a family-owned multinational. Despite its global image, the firm still operates as a Korean company from within. For this reason, they change many aspects of global operations according to the local conditions. In simpler words, global company Samsung has had to act locally in many emerging markets.

Moreover, Samsung had to change its products to match the rapidly changing consumer preferences in certain markets. Samsung operates in a market niche influenced by the consumers’ lifestyle preferences. Socio-cultural factors vary in each country. So, it has to reorient itself accordingly.

T for Technological

Samsung is among the world’s leading innovative companies. The company has an advantage in using the power of technology. It can drive innovation for sustainable business advantage. They have made this an obsessive mission to maintain leading position. The aim is to always stay ahead of the technological and innovation curve. They aim to dominate competitors by being the first to offer latest products to the market.

Yet, this has led the company to some problems. Legal and regulatory scrutiny hovered over the company when Apple accused it of imitation of product design. The incident taught Samsung that doing the basics right is still the key to success.

E for Economic

This factor is very critical for Samsung. The opening up of some developing markets meant it had to re-think the economic factor. While the company could expand its global footprint, it also had to worry about the ongoing global economic crisis. The reduced purchasing power of buyers in many markets forced to find a profitable solution.

The macroeconomic environment in which Samsung globally operates is beset with uncertainty and volatility. The company has to reorient its strategies.

It seems that the saving grace for the company is that adjusted well to the lowering the consumer disposable incomes in developed countries. Samsung did this by expanding to the emerging and to the developing markets. This is perhaps the reason Samsung started an aggressive push into the new markets. It hopes to make up for the lost business from the developed world.

E for Environmental

All businesses impact its environment. Some have a positive impact while others have a negative effect. The degree of impact varies too. Samsung must keep pollution or waste in mind. It can also have a positive impact on the environment by processing and cleaning waste. These factors will affect the company, but they will not have an immense toll on its trade and profit generation. This is because environmental factors have a direct effect on agricultural businesses only.

P for Political

In most markets, the political environment is favorable to Samsung’s operations. Still, there are minor problems in some of the foreign markets. India is an example. Overall, Samsung operates in markets with benign political factors. Recently, it faced weighty political headwinds South Korea. The reason behind this problem is tensions with North Korea.

Samsung had to consider not only political instability. It worried that war would break out in the Korean Peninsula. Samsung also faces political pressures in many Latin American and African countries. The political environment is unstable in these locations. They are prone to frequent changes in governing structures.

This is such a serious issue yet as Samsung has factored the political instability into its strategic calculations.

L for Legal

Like I mentioned earlier, Samsung had to pay heavy penalties for charges that it imitated the Apple’s iPad and iPhone. This accusation led public perceptions of the company to worsen. The consumer approval of its strategies was also hampered.

Everyone waited how the start-up would squeeze out of the legal maze. There were concerns that the event hampered Samsung’s reputation permanently. Many even concluded that the team expanded to new markets because of the range of lawsuits.

E for Ethical

The number of ethical consumers who want brands to make products in a responsible manner, both socially and environmentally, has increased. In such a situation, Samsung must be aware of the need to make products in a way which satiates the ethical consumer.

This means it has to make sure it does not compromise on the employees’ working conditions or on their wages. It must take good care of the labors that make the final product. It should also give importance to other ethical factors.

In conclusion from the above analysis, I can say that Samsung has all its tasks aligned. The company has prepared well to navigate the global consumer market. It is true that as the company prepares for expansion, the stakes are higher in a recessionary era. The extremely competitive technological market landscape adds to the difficulty.

To be in a better position than competitors like Apple, Samsung needs to consider these factors.

Image “Samsung Galaxy S4 – gap with dust” by Karlis Dambrans is licensed under CC BY 2.0

Related posts:

• Marketing Strategy of Samsung Mobile
• Difference between STEEP and STEEPLE Analysis
• Difference between SWOT, PEST, STEEP and STEEPLE Analysis
• Samsung product development Case study
• Samsung Case Analysis
• SWOT analysis of Samsung
• Samsung – Competitive Analysis

Quick Links

Privacy Policy

Terms and Conditions

Testimonials

Our Services

Case Study Writing Services

Case Studies For Sale

Our Company

Welcome to the world of case studies that can bring you high grades! Here, at ACaseStudy.com, we deliver professionally written papers, and the best grades for you from your professors are guaranteed!

[email protected] 804-506-0782 350 5th Ave, New York, NY 10118, USA

Acasestudy.com © 2007-2019 All rights reserved.

Hi! I'm Anna

Would you like to get a custom case study? How about receiving a customized one?

Haven't Found The Case Study You Want?

For Only $13.90/page

Evaluation of sediment transport estimates using Sediment Routing Analysis (SRA) model: study case of Rawa Pening Lake

• Original Article
• Published: 26 September 2024

Cite this article

• Hanggar Ganara Mawandha   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0001-9093-0775 1 ,
• M. Eka Bimantara Putra 2 ,
• Issiami Nursafa 1 ,
• Krisnadi Cahyo Yuliardi 1 ,
• Lalu Marhayani Kesuma 3 &
• Dewi Shinta Rulisyani 4  

This study investigates sediment transport dynamics and the effectiveness of sediment control structures in Rawa Pening Lake and its sub-catchments using Sediment Routing Analysis (SRA) model. By analyzing sediment characteristics ranging from mud to gravel, the research highlights significant sedimentation rates that have led to an average loss of 12.65 million cubic meters in the lake’s effective storage volume. Both quasi-unsteady and unsteady sediment transport models were employed, with the unsteady model demonstrating superior predictive capabilities. The empirical Ackers-White (A-W) equation surpassed the Meyer-Peter and Muller (M-P&M) equation, particularly in accurately representing the sediment characteristics and transport processes in Rawa Pening. This superiority is evidenced by a closer alignment between the A-W model’s predictions and observed bathymetric measurements. The use of HEC-RAS software facilitated detailed simulations under various flow conditions, emphasizing the role of hydraulic parameters and topographic data in model accuracy. Sediment routing simulations reveal that while check dams effectively reduce sediment concentration, diversion structures, particularly Div-2, achieve up to a 91% reduction in sediment loads entering the lake. This highlights the critical importance of selecting appropriate sediment control structures based on their design and hydraulic conditions to optimize sediment management. Using SRA modelling developed in this study, the accuracy and robustness of the sediment deposition zone and the appropriate sediment control structures for practical engineering applications could be defined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price excludes VAT (USA) Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Data availability

Raw data were generated at Land and Water Resource Engineering Laboratory, Department of Agricultural and Biosystem Engineering, UGM. Derived data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, H.G.M., on request.

Agarwal S, Suchithra AS (2020) IDF Curve Generation for Historical Rainfall Events. Proceeding of National Conference on Emerging Trends in Civil Engineering 898–907

Allali H, Elmeddahi Y, Moudjeber DE et al (2022) Utilizing hydrograph transform methods and a hydrologic modeling system in rainfall-runoff simulation of a semi-arid watershed in Algeria in north-west Africa. Desalin Water Treat 255:220–228. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2022.28344

Article   Google Scholar  

AlQasimi E, Mahdi TF (2020) A new one-dimensional numerical model for unsteady hydraulics of sediments in rivers. SN Appl Sci 2:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-03284-y

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Amarnath CR, Thatikonda S (2020) Study on backwater effect due to Polavaram Dam Project under different return periods. Water (Switzerland) 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12020576

Amorim RS, Osorio ALNA, Creech (2020) Qualitative Assessment of changes in Sediment dynamics due Dredging and Rock removal into a Backwater Influenced Site. XIV Encontoro Nacional de Engenharia de Sedimentos, pp 1–8

Andualem TG, Hewa GA, Myers BR et al (2017) Erosion and sediment transport modeling: a systematic review. J Psychiatr Res 94:36–46

Google Scholar  

Ardıçlıoğlu M, Kuriqi A (2019) Calibration of channel roughness in intermittent rivers using HEC-RAS model: case of Sarimsakli Creek, Turkey. SN Appl Sci 1:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-1141-9

Baggio T, Mergili M, D’Agostino V (2021) Advances in the simulation of debris flow erosion: the case study of the Rio Gere (Italy) event of the 4th August 2017. Geomorphology 381:107664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2021.107664

Baux N, Murat A, Poizot E et al (2022) An innovative geostatistical sediment trend analysis using geochemical data to highlight sediment sources and transport. Comput Geosci 26:263–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10596-021-10123-5

Bawias YA (2012) Effect of Sand Mining activity on the Sediment Control System (a case study of Sombe-Lewara River, Donggala, Indonesia). Journal of the Civil Engineering Forum XXI

da Silva RM, Santos CAG, dos Santos JYG (2018) Evaluation and modeling of runoff and sediment yield for different land covers under simulated rain in a semiarid region of Brazil. Int J Sedim Res 33:117–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsrc.2017.04.005

Damte F, G_Mariam B, Ayana MT et al (2021) Computing the sediment and ensuing its erosive activities using HEC-RAS to surmise the flooding in Kulfo River in Southern Ethiopia. World J Eng 18:948–955. https://doi.org/10.1108/WJE-01-2021-0002

Debnath S, Ghoshal K, Kumar J (2021) Unsteady two-dimensional suspended sediment transport in open channel flow subject to deposition and re-entrainment. J Eng Math 126:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10665-020-10070-7

Dingle EH, Kusack KM, Venditti JG (2021) The gravel-sand transition and grain size gap in river bed sediments. Earth Sci Rev 222:103838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103838

Duan JG, Yu C, Ding Y (2022) Numerical Simulation of Sediment Transport in Unsteady Open Channel Flow. Fluid Mech 15:399–416. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003315117-15

Ezzaouini MA, Mahé G, Kacimi I, Zerouali A (2020) Comparison of the MUSLE model and two years of solid transport measurement, in the Bouregreg Basin, and impact on the sedimentation in the Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah Reservoir, Morocco. Water (Switzerland) 12:. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12071882

Faiza N, Rahman A, Mohammed L et al (2022) Modeling of 1D sediment transport in the langat river using quasi-unsteady HEC-RAS. J Biol Stud 5:378–387

Faradiba (2021) Analysis of intensity, duration, and frequency rain Daily of Java Island using Mononobe Method. J Phys Conf Ser 1783. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1783/1/012107

Feyissa Negewo T, Kumar Sarma A (2021) Spatial and temporal variability evaluation of sediment yield and sub-basins/hydrologic response units prioritization on Genale Basin, Ethiopia. J Hydrol (Amst) 603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.127190

Garcia M, Juan A, Bedient P (2020) Integrating reservoir operations and flood modeling with HEC-RAS 2D. Water (Switzerland) 12:. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12082259

Gary Brunner PE, Gaurav Savant PhD DWREMA, Ronald PE, Heath E (2020) Modeler Application Guidance for steady versus unsteady, and 1D versus 2D versus 3D hydraulic modeling TD-41. Hydrologic Engineering Center, Vicksburg

Gibson S, Comport B, Corum Z (2017) Calibrating a Sediment Transport Model through a Gravel-Sand Transition: Avoiding Equifinality Errors in HEC-RAS Models of the Puyallup and White Rivers. In: World Environmental and Water Resources Congress. pp 179–191

Haddadchi A, Hicks M (2021) Interpreting event-based suspended sediment concentration and flow hysteresis patterns. J Soils Sediments 21:592–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-020-02777-y

Hamzeh Haghiabi A, Zaredehdasht E (2012) Evaluation of HEC-RAS ability in erosion and sediment transport forecasting. World Appl Sci J 17:1490–1497

Han Z, Su B, Li Y et al (2020) Modeling the progressive entrainment of bed sediment by viscous debris flows using the three-dimensional SC-HBP-SPH method. Water Res 182:116031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2020.116031

Heckmann T, Cavalli M, Cerdan O et al (2018) Indices of sediment connectivity: opportunities, challenges and limitations. Earth Sci Rev 187:77–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.08.004

Hummel R, Duan JG, Zhang S (2012) Comparison of unsteady and quasi-unsteady Flow models in simulating sediment transport in an Ephemeral Arizona Stream. J Am Water Resour Assoc 48:987–998. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2012.00663.x

Idfi G, Wahyono ID, Yulistyorini A, Khomsiati NL (2019) The comparative study of flood modelling with the unsteady and the steady flow on Ngotok river. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 669. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/669/1/012018

Ikhsan J, Kurniati R, Harsanto P, Nursetiawan (2020) Analysis of sediment transport on the upstream code river. Indonesia Civil Eng Archit 8:475–482. https://doi.org/10.13189/cea.2020.080410

Ishak MG, Sutapa IW, Kamaria U (2020) Analysis of River Sloping towards the Sediment Transport Potential of Mentawa River-Banggai Regency. ARPN J Eng Appl Sci 15:1711–1718

Issakhov A, Zhandaulet Y, Abylkassymova A (2022) Numerical Study of the Water Surface Movement during a dam break on a slope with Cascade Dike from Sediment. Water Resour Manage 36:3435–3461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-022-03180-7

Javad M, Rasoul V, Abbas M et al (2024) Modeling of daily suspended sediment load by trivariate probabilistic model (case study, Allah River Basin, Iran). J Soils Sediments 24:473–484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-023-03629-1

Jokowinarno D, Banuwa IS, Yuwono SB et al (2021) IDF (intensity-duration-frequency) curve and unit hydrograph as signature of characteristic changing of Way Kuala Garuntang Watershed. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 739. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/739/1/012023

Joshi N, Lamichhane GR, Rahaman MM et al (2019) Application of HEC-RAS to study the sediment transport characteristics of Maumee River in Ohio. World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2019: Hydraulics, Waterways, and Water Distribution Systems Analysis - Selected Papers from the World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2019 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784482353.024

Juniati AT, Sutjiningsih D, Soeryantono H, Kusratmoko E (2019) Estimating water availability using the SCS-CN method based on long term hydrologic simulation and the geographic information system. Int J Technol 10:876–886. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v10i5.2716

Kang M, Yoo C (2020a) Application of the scs–cn method to the hancheon basin on the volcanic jeju island, korea. Water (Switzerland) 12:. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12123350

Kang M, Yoo C (2020b) Application of the scs–cn method to the hancheon basin on the volcanic jeju island, korea. Water (Switzerland) 12:. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12123350

Kang H, Shin S, Paik K (2020) Power laws in intra-storm temporal rainfall variability. J Hydrol (Amst) 590:125233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125233

Klik A, Haas K, Dvorackova A, Fuller IC (2015) Spatial and temporal distribution of rainfall erosivity in New Zealand. Soil Res 53:815–825. https://doi.org/10.1071/SR14363

Lai YG (2020) A two-dimensional depth-averaged sediment transport mobile-bed model with polygonal meshes. Water (Switzerland) 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/W12041032

Lee S, Chu ML, Guzman JA (2021) Sediment fate and transport: influence of sediment source and rainfall. J Hydrol (Amst) 594:125980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.125980

Legleiter CJ, Overstreet BT (2012) Mapping gravel bed river bathymetry from space. J Geophys Res Earth Surf 117. https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JF002539

Lescanoa GCA, Mayorga AMM, Martìnez-Gomez J (2021) Characterization of River Sediments in Loja-Ecuador. Int J Adv Sci Eng Inf Technol 11:746–754. https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.11.2.13672

Li HY, Tan Z, Ma H et al (2022) A new large-scale suspended sediment model and its application over the United States. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 26:665–688. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-665-2022

Liu SW, Zhang XF, Xu QX et al (2019) Variation and driving factors of water discharge and sediment load in different regions of the Jinsha River Basin in China in the past 50 years. Water (Switzerland) 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11051109

Lukman M, Tanan B, Saing Z (2020) Transport sediment analysis using bed-load: case study bilibili reservoir. Civil Eng Archit 8:456–465. https://doi.org/10.13189/cea.2020.080408

Mahdi ES, Mohamedmeki MZ (2020) Analysis of rainfall intensity-duration-frequency (IDF) curves of Baghdad city. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 888. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/888/1/012066

Mancini G, Briganti R, Ruffini G et al (2020) Analysis of the Performance of Different Sediment Transport Formulations in Non-Hydrostatic Xbeach. Coastal Engineering Proceedings 35. https://doi.org/10.9753/icce.v36v.papers.35

McGlue MM, Smith PH, Zani H et al (2016) An integrated sedimentary systems analysis of the Río Bermejo (Argentina): Megafan character in the overfilled Southern Chaco Foreland basin. J Sediment Res 86:1359–1377. https://doi.org/10.2110/JSR.2016.82

Mustafa AG, Murniningsih S, Sutjiningsih D (2020) Analysis of the influence of river flow engineering upstream areas on sediment transport in the downstream areas. Civil Eng Archit 8:515–524. https://doi.org/10.13189/cea.2020.080415

Natarajan S, Radhakrishnan N (2019) Simulation of extreme event-based rainfall–runoff process of an urban catchment area using HEC-HMS. Model Earth Syst Environ 5:1867–1881. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-019-00644-5

Obialor CA, Okeke OC, Onunkwo AA et al (2019) Reservoir sedimentation: causes, effects and mitigation. Int J Adv Acad Res 5:92–109

Pähtz T, Clark AH, Valyrakis M, Durán O (2020) The Physics of Sediment Transport Initiation, Cessation, and Entrainment Across Aeolian and Fluvial environments. Rev Geophys 58. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000679

Psomiadis E, Soulis KX, Efthimiou N (2020) Using SCS-CN and earth observation for the comparative assessment of the hydrological effect of gradual and abrupt spatiotemporal land cover changes. Water (Switzerland) 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/W12051386

Ramirez JA, Mertin M, Peleg N et al (2022) Modelling the long-term geomorphic response to check dam failures in an alpine channel with CAESAR-Lisflood. Int J Sedim Res 37:687–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsrc.2022.04.005

Saleem N, Enamul Huq M, Twumasi NYD et al (2019) Parameters derived from and/or used with digital elevation models (DEMs) for landslide susceptibility mapping and landslide risk assessment: a review. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 8(12):545. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi8120545

Shabani A, Woznicki SA, Mehaffey M et al J Flood Risk Management – 2021 - Shabani - A coupled hydrodynamic HEC-RAS 2D and water quality model WASP for.pdf

Shojaei S, Kalantari Z, Rodrigo-Comino J (2020) Prediction of factors affecting activation of soil erosion by mathematical modeling at pedon scale under laboratory conditions. Sci Rep 10:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-76926-1

Soltani P, Askar MB, Bahrami H, Pour SH (2017) Evaluation of Sediment Transport in the Naiband Gulf Area using Mike21. Open J Geol 07:182–192. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojg.2017.72012

Sulistyono BA, Wiryanto LH (2018) An analysis of the influence of variability rainfall on Flow Rate based on the Watershed characteristics. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 124. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/124/1/012001

Syafri RR, Hadi MP, Suprayogi S (2020) Hydrodynamic modelling of Juwana River flooding using HEC-RAS 2D. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 412. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/412/1/012028

Szabó JA, Centeri C, Keller B et al (2020) The use of various rainfall simulators in the determination of the driving forces of changes in sediment concentration and clay enrichment. Water (Switzerland) 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12102856

Tang Jbo, Lin Pzhi, Cui P (2022) Depth-resolved numerical model of dam break mud flows with Herschel-Bulkley rheology. J Mt Sci 19:1001–1017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-021-7218-0

Tao W, Wu J, Wang Q (2017) Mathematical model of sediment and solute transport along slope land in different rainfall pattern conditions. Sci Rep 7:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep44082

Wallwork JT, Pu JH, Kundu S et al (2022) Review of Suspended Sediment Transport Mathematical Modelling Studies

Wang L, Cuthbertson A, Pender G, Zhong D (2019) Bed Load Sediment Transport and morphological evolution in a degrading uniform Sediment Channel under Unsteady Flow Hydrographs. Water Resour Res 55:5431–5452. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR024413

Wenjie L, Danxun L, Xingkui W (2011) An approach to estimating sediment transport capacity of overland flow. Sci China Technol Sci 54:2649–2656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-011-4506-x

Wilk P, Szlapa M, Hachaj PS et al (2022) From the source to the reservoir and beyond — tracking sediment particles with modeling tools under climate change predictions (Carpathian Mts). J Soils Sediments 2929–2947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-022-03287-9

Wohl E, Rathburn S (2003) Mitigation of sedimentation hazards downstream from reservoirs. Int J Sedim Res 18:97–106

Zhi-xian C, Hu P, Pender G, Huai-han, Liu (2016) Non-capacity transport of non-uniform bed load sediment in alluvial rivers. J Mt Sci 13:377–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-015-3710-8

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors express their gratitude to the relevant parties at the Central River Region Pemali Juana of the Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing for their support and cooperation in providing the necessary data for this study. Additionally, the authors acknowledge the financial support provided by the Directorate of Research and Community Services Universitas Gadjah Mada through the Doctoral Competency Improvement Program Universitas Gadjah Mada Number 7743/UN1.P.II/Dit-Lit/PT.01.03/2023.

This work was supported by the Central River Region Pemali Juana of the Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing and funded by Directorate of Research and Community Services Universitas Gadjah Mada through the Doctoral Competency Improvement Program Universitas Gadjah Mada (Grant numbers 7743/UN1.P.II/Dit-Lit/PT.01.03/2023).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Agricultural and Biosystem Engineering, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia

Hanggar Ganara Mawandha, Issiami Nursafa & Krisnadi Cahyo Yuliardi

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Technology Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, 55285, Indonesia

M. Eka Bimantara Putra

Engineer Professional Study Program, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia

Lalu Marhayani Kesuma

Central River Region Pemali Juana, Ministry of PublicWorks and Public Housing, Semarang, 50191, Indonesia

Dewi Shinta Rulisyani

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, H.G.M., L.M.K., and D.S.R.; methodology, H.G.M., L.M.K., and D.S.R.; software, H.G.M. and M.E.B.P.; validation, H.G.M. and M.E.B.P. formal analysis, H.G.M., M.E.B.P., I.N., K.C.Y.; investigation, H.G.M., M.E.B.P., and L.M.K.; writing—original draft preparation, H.G.M. and I.N.; writing—review and editing, H.G.M. and I.N.; funding acquisition, H.G.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hanggar Ganara Mawandha .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

All authors have seen and agreed with the contents of the manuscript.

Consent to participate

All authors gave explicit consent to participate in this work.

Consent to publish

All authors gave explicit consent to publish this manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Mawandha, H.G., Putra, M.E.B., Nursafa, I. et al. Evaluation of sediment transport estimates using Sediment Routing Analysis (SRA) model: study case of Rawa Pening Lake. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-024-02163-4

Download citation

Received : 27 March 2024

Accepted : 13 September 2024

Published : 26 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-024-02163-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Sedimentation
• Ackers-White
• Quasi-unsteady
• HEC-RAS 1D-2D
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research