October 23, 2006
Not Polite Conversation but Law Firms Should Follow Apple's Strategy
One of the first things we learned at our mother’s knee is that one should never discuss politics or religion in a social setting. It was not considered polite conversation.
Things have gotten much more serious. In the past, bringing up politics or religion with casual acquaintances might have resulted in fewer invitations. Today, the wrong comment can get you killed or start a riot. The list of things to avoid is also growing. For example, unless you want to derail a conversation, never refer to work/life balance as a gender issue. Use gender and work/life balance in the same paragraph, or even worse, in the same sentence, and you can expect an avalanche of emotional rebuttals. Now, we have learned that discussing Apple® computers must be added to the list of taboo topics. By now I’m sure that everyone in the blogging community is aware of the perils of Larry Bodine after penning an article in Law Technology News relating his not-so-happy experience with an Apple.
Apples are great for Apple-minded people. Creative team members at Juris are Apple folks. They live happily, surrounded by a sea of PCs, all the time producing ads, product sheets, direct mail pieces, and delivering on our advertising and marketing needs with talent and speed. My first encounter with a personal computer was with an early Apple. My wife learned to tolerate the age of technology with an Apple. She has never completely adapted to her later PC replacements.
It is like left-brain and right-brain differences in people or the “Women are from Venus and Men are from Mars” issue. Your brain just gets wired differently depending on which world you operate in—Apple or PC. I know there will be people who say they use both with no problem. There are professional baseball players that bat left-handed and right-handed—but I never could. Most other people can’t.
Frustrated by the “Mac Attack” from Mac fans furious over his LTN article, Larry wrote “…Mac users are just realizing that they have bought orphan technology."
Actually, Apple's strategy has proven to be sound when examined with hindsight. It is a strategy that ambitious midsized law firms would be wise to consider.
As the PC industry developed, Apple chose to be different rather than adopt the "me too" strategy of Compaq and other IBM wannabees. In a "me too" world, only the low cost producer can survive in the long run. IBM's strategy of a “universal” machine with mix and match components cost IBM its market leader role when others were able to operate at lower cost points.
Apple has been able to survive and profit without relying on price or distribution channels for its competitive advantage. The low cost producer is always at risk that someone else will build a device that meets the needs of 80 percent of its market but at a significantly lower cost point. Niche players are less attractive competitive targets and it is much more difficult to one-up their value proposition.
While Apple only holds a 4.8 percent share of the U.S. market, they have 100 percent share of the Mac fan market, and they hold that more securely than Dell holds its market. Besides, 4.8 percent of the U.S market isn’t all that bad.
Morepartnerincome.com is sponsored by Juris, Inc. For information about Juris® products and services for increasing law firm performance and partner income, go to www.Juris.com.
Related posts
Filed under Planning by Tom Collins