Forrester CEO: Apple will decline in the post Steve Jobs era

71 Comments

“Apple will decline in the post Steve Jobs era,” George Colony blogs for Forrester.

“Sociologist Max Weber created a typology of organizations in his 1947 book The Theory of Social and Economic Organization,” Colony writes. “Charismatic organizations are headed by people with the ‘gift of grace’ (charisma from the Greek). ‘He is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities.’ Followers and disciples have absolute trust in the leader, fed by that leader’s access to nearly magical powers. ‘Charismatic authority repudiates the past, and is in this sense a specifically revolutionary force.'”

“Sound familiar?” Colony asks. “When Steve Jobs departed, he took three things with him: 1) singular charismatic leadership that bound the company together and elicited extraordinary performance from its people; 2) the ability to take big risks, and 3) an unparalleled ability to envision and design products. Apple’s momentum will carry it for 24-48 months. But without the arrival of a new charismatic leader it will move from being a great company to being a good company, with a commensurate step down in revenue growth and product innovation. Like Sony (post Morita), Polaroid (post Land), Apple circa 1985 (post Jobs), and Disney (in the 20 years post Walt Disney), Apple will coast, and then decelerate.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: iCal’ed. We’ll check back in 48 months to see if the decline has begun or not.

71 Comments

  1. But for all of his inventions — “among them all, I actually think his greatest work was Apple itself.” – Al Gore

    24 months and counting. They will be disappointed.

    Reply

  2. Disney, Henson, Polaroid, Sony – yeah thought I about that too however one thing that is very different for APPLE is the passion goes far BEYOND the Apple campus and right to the hearts of every consumers unlike ANYTHING ELSE ever has.

    Reply

    1. There is nothing about Apple that is any different than those other companies. Each was the biggest in their field at the apex of their rise to stardom.

      Disney is probably the best comparison of all. That company was so intermeshed with their boss and his philosophical way of doing things, they never recovered. But, the same won’t apply to Apple because Tim Cook is well prepared to lead Apple for at least another five-years.

      Reply

    1. Apple needs Cook… but it also needs a visionary for new products too. Basically Apple has 5 products. Look at the Apples site and the menu bar, categorized products amounts to?

      – Apple TV
      – iMac (includes the laptops and minis and pros)
      – IPad (includes iPod touch and all the MP3 players)
      – iPhone
      – Accessories
      (includes mouse / keyboards / routers / software and online store)

      Reply

        1. Yes, there is something absolutely wrong with that.
          The filtration of crappy products and focus on what matters was a requirement for Apple during the come back years for Jobs. His vision to simplify the line of products was well needed to balance the economic situation Apple had – as Apple was in it’s all time low.

          Simplification of complex things is the beautification.
          For those whom simply regurgitation the Buddhism values to KISS – (keep it simple stupid) are blinded and merely lemmings. There is a degree and purpose and timing to Simplification. I agree with the philosophy that “less is more” but in hands that kindle the spirit of PROFIT – FOCUS – FUN I can clearly say you lack comprehension or perhaps it is that you lack experience on the topic.

          Profit is not what drives Apple. Stocks and money are important but not the only things Apple does well at. Its not the DNA in Apple to focus and enjoy the profits.

          Focusing only on the products at hand will not last either. Definitely not for a decade. Convergence and growth of existing products through innovation and technology advancements will keep them alive but will face a time for change – that i sweat to focus on – the future and staying ahead of the competition.

          Fun, well any Apple employee who loves their job is having a blast working on advancements and designs. It keeps them busy and they love providing us (the consumers) with these updates, tools and new things.

          The point was Apple needs to continue to innovate and create new products. Not just retina screens. They never invented it they pushed for it. And not that a new product implies complexity of the product line by adding to it – no. Nor does that bring complexity to the line. There is definite room for new products and also signs that some products have grown old and less useful – that those should be discontinued. Products do die off and those which are no long appealing should be left behind.

          Change is always a big deal. And it is through change that simplifies and reorders the universe of all things. Don’t over simplify ‘simplicity’ with a blanketing statement.

          – peace

        2. I agreed completely… Until you pulled the BS “lemmings” card. I honestly dont see anything bad with either side (right or left) they have different beliefs like religions do. You can follow as much of either as you want it does not mean that you agree with all of their ideas.

          I can also guarantee that no one in the US (most likely) wants a communist government. I am sorry if this wasn’t what you meant in your statement I just don’t understand all the political hate that goes on here.

        1. New products and innovation is what defined Apple.
          It will continue to resonate in Apples DNA.

          Knowing that, you KNOW what is stated above is enough said.

          People come. People go. Jony Ivys is a fantastic Industrial Designer; who is to say he will stay onboard for the long ride. Kind of makes your point basically worth what… on a stick?

        3. Spitter, your point is interesting but your condescending attitude toward others does nothing to persuade. Yes, all things change, there are cycles… You can clearly say that others lack your level of comprehension or experience… Really? That’s kind of funny. Anyway, of course Apple must innovate to keep from declining. And yes, eventually people move on, die, lose their edge. You and I will also wither and die. It does not diminish our accomplishments nor the accomplishments of Apple. Your comments diminish both…. on a stick. Lighten up and enjoy innovation, art, and ideas. Life is too short to dwell on the apocalypse 😉

        4. TSS Yea, and the world could end, the republications win the white house again,,, etc.

          It is strongly rumored that Steve J. left Jony Ive with much power in design and maybe function efforts, more so than the rest of the team. As for my point being worth… well, at least its a point while you just ramble.. My opinion. 🙂

          Ps anyone trying to guess out 10 years is just pulling crap from the air. My opinion.

          en

    2. Think back a few years, all the analysts, pundits, and bloggers couldn’t quit criticizing Jobs, how he was a loose cannon, didn’t know how to run a company, wasn’t as smart as Gates, and how he was doing everything wrong. These guys are blind, and if they’re ever right it’s by accident. While you can’t replicate Jobs, one of his greatest creations was his management team.

      Reply

    1. Thanks, bjb, for the link. I didn’t read that edition of Roughly Drafted when it first came out. It certainly makes clear that Forrester’s connections to facts or the truth when it comes to Apple is exceedingly tenuous.

      Reply

  6. The article is right. When Jobs was around, I knew, almost for certain, that Apple would create something magical and it was waiting to be deployed just around the corner. Not to dismiss Cook’s abilities but attitude, foresight, passion, inhuman determination lead to where Apple is today. I also expect a decline but actually lower angle of incline.

    Reply

      1. You over simplify everything.

        Apple is a team.

        It takes many brilliant people to come together and struggle with materials and deadlines and ideas – all converging to create a product as planned. Then it takes a great number of other people to actually produce the product.

        Its called team work.

        Without Jobs Apple would perhaps never brought in Ives.
        Everything ties to the team. I am an industrial designer and I respect Jony Ives… yet he is not Apples second coming. He is a brilliant designer and part of the Apple Team.

        Reply

  10. I don’t think the George Colony has ever said anything he wasn’t paid to say.

    And I don’t think he’s read Weber, but, perhaps, had an assistant doing some “research.”

    Reply

    1. Apple is far more ‘prepared’ than MS ever was.

      Even if all things were technically equal between OS X and Windows, apple at the least follows sane end user ‘best practices’ when it comes to security. You can’t easily create an admin or root account in OS X by accident.

      XP was a mine field due to more than just MS’s EPIC buffer exploits etc. There was a time when almost every major OEM shipped XP with Administrator Accounts for new users set as the default account type.

      You had permission to change any file/folder/setting or registry key by default on your brand spankin’ new HP. Before Service Pack 2 they even shipped a free copy of IE swiss cheese premium ultimate edition.

      I think we’ll see more malware on OS X but it will never be like the wild west that was Windows XP. Never. Humanity couldn’t survive a round two.

      Reply

        1. Agreed.

          Kaspersky is a trusted security organization, at least their analysts are solid, I just can’t agree with their statement that Apple is 10 years behind. MS never followed security principals and practices that were set in stone over 30 years ago until the release of Vista, and then they progressed a bit with Windows 7.

          Apple may have not been security focused but they didn’t piss all over the basic security architecture of UNIX when they built OS X so they are already ahead of the game in my opinion.

          If the best malware we’ve seen so far is nothing more than a trojan that tries to trick a user they are doing pretty damn good.

          I’m with you, I think Kaspersky is hoping there is a new green pasture awaiting them now that Windows has peaked and the coming floods of Windows 8 wash away the already eroding platform. They want there to be somewhere new to go. I don’t think they’ll find as lucrative of a business on Apple operating systems.

  13. Actually this was the point of Apple University… to school executives in the way of Jobs. None of those other companies had an institution set in place that would instill the merits and qualities that got that company to where it was. It wouldn’t be hard to demonstrate how and why Jobs made the decisions he did, because Jobs himself explained all of this before he died. Having a reference to look back on whenever you feel like your losing your way is an excellent way to re-inspire yourself.

    Reply

    1. Quantum Computing.

      It’s like Cold Fusion.
      It’s like the Improbability Drive.

      Just imagine the probability of the existence of a quantum computer, stuff that number into a quantum computer and wham, you have invented the quantum computer.

      Reply

        2. You too. I thought it was these damn high resolution screens.
          Or maybe I it’s time for bifocals? Nah, its the glare of course from the glass screens. A computer a millimetre in length… I could have 300 million inside the foot print of my iMac.

          Damn wheres my pink lens – yup when you are right you’re right… its my dyslexia.

          tanks 4 da link

        3. As I said, cold fusion. Not “impossible” but those who say they did it… NOT… There is no practical problem to stuff into a quantum computer for it to solve and hence also no practical storage device to contain all the data gathered during the experiment.

          At this point it’s a lot of money spent on experiments to justify putting a few words together. Scientists “calculate” that their crystal matrix, “not quantum computer,” if it were operating as a quantum computer, would be more powerful than a conventional computer the size of the universe.

          This is utter nonsense. it’s poop words, because they might as well say they saw God. It requires you to just believe in it, rather then empirically showing us a working model. And well even if it was working, they can’t prove that it worked because there is no practical way to verify the results.

        4. NO – it was stated that 10 to the exponent 80 — would represent the number of todays computers to match the power of a quantum computer.

          “We’ve surpassed the computational potential of this system relative to classical computers by something like 10 to the [power of] 80, which is 80 orders of magnitude, a really enormous number,” the University of Sydney’s Dr Michael Biercuk told AM.”

          ion crystal, which is made up of just 300 atoms…

          http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-26/tiny-super-computer/3973176

        5. How far down the rabbit hole do you wish to enter?

          And yet… Siddhartha Gautama saw all this – all the plains of energy, the dimensions of the universe, time space and all it’s hierarchy – and it then was philosophized – the ideas were written and recorded.

          Funny, there still is no practical way to dispute the philosophy or ideas that have resulted from that either. How old is Buddhism?

          http://www.whatthebleep.com/

        7. I am an observer. However, carefully not implying that I am even like Einstein, he was just an observer, while laying down the foundations which help describe our modern universe. Also absolutely unlike Einstein, I do not have the skills to write down and mathematically prove my observations. In other words, I am not an idiot; I can think; I can make logical conclusions.

          I appologize for using the word poop, even though I believe we are being fed a story.

          Regarding quantum computing, I say we are working backwards, mathematically proving the probability of the existence of a system, without observing it’s existence.

          Here is the kicker, what really makes me think, while i say most everything we have observed and also mathematically proven, has occurred in nature, from black holes to quantum particles, from fusion reactors to ice crystals. Naturally, quantum systems, computers or like, must also exist in nature, without our help. If there was any chance of humanity being able to build one.

          Again, I am just an observer, but I believe that doesn’t prevent me from accurately identifying situations that are fundamentally futile. I propose as a mater of observation, that quantum computing is at least as difficult to manufacture as cold fusion, but more likely towards the end of an imprabality drive than a fusion reactor. What I am saying is ridiculous, but it’s supposed to be. I would like to see all three exist.

          I propose that we would or should be able to observe quantum logic systems in nature, if it were at all possible. We have at least seen not cold but hot fusion reactors, so why not quantum computers?

          Now maybe, just maybe quantum computers exist in nature, but we simply overlook it. Maybe our brains contain quantum computers, maybe, when we create a neural net we will see and understand that. But that’s just an observation. 🙂

        8. Reguarding the video, that’s supposed to be Steven Spielburg, right? If you want to call, the quantum effect of matter acting like a wave and a particle, a quantum computer, I suppose you could say that as a single bit, as much as 1 volt is a digital bit.

          Let’s get esot

        9. My post was flubbed…

          Esotericly, let’s say we are holograms, everything in space is connected, because in super reality we only exist in one or maybe two dimensions. We just think in terms of three or more. The quantum effect is nothing more than a symptom of an unobservable effect of our true existence, but having an observable effect in our imagined three dimensional holographic existence. Here is another idea. As matter flows travels through space, it creates a shockwave that impacts the surrounding environment. It’s like tossing a stone on a smooth surface of water.

          Is this worth discussing, or am I just not getting it?

  16. I actually hold Wozniak in higher reverence than Steve Jobs. Is Woz able to run Apple? No, but that’s not the point. Apple, is cool, was cool, and will be cool. I fell in love with their computers. I didn’t buy a Steve Jobs’ computer. I bought an Apple Computer.

    So there, stuff that in your pipe and smoke it.

    Second, I have watched my fair share of Steve Jobs’ key notes. I have seen a fair amount of key notes from others as well, Steve ‘s key notes are not all that great. I just think people, star struck, aren’t paying all that much attention. This is what sucks the most. No one pays attention and then they say all this poop as to what happened. Sure did Steve speak better than Cook, yeah. Can Cook speak better than Steve, yeah. (get a personal trainer, speech coach, take acting lessons, (like Reagan) Put some effort into this and you can learn to present your self better. Watch the King’s Speech. I didn’t, but I am sure there is something to learn from it.

    But no one will pay attention to Cook speak, because they weren’t paying attention to Jobs. They were paying attention to the Mythical Jobs, and still are… Rest In Peace, on Mt Olympus.

    Reply

    1. Hold Wozniak in more reverence because he’s more likable on a personal level? More approachable?

      It’s hard to pick out the point you are trying to make but you clearly have.no basis in reality for saying Jobs presentations aren’t all that great. Sure you are entitled to that opinion but since when have you sold thousands of dollars worth of tickets to have people wait in long lines at the crack of dawn flying in from all over the world to struggle to get a distant seat far away from you to watch you on a monitor giving a presentation that people could read about the same day online?

      Have you ever said anything in front of anyone and been recorded and watched on YouTube years later and quoted in dozens of newspapers and written about in hundreds of blogs and thousands or hundreds of thousands of tweets?

      Even world leaders do not get the attention and admiration that Jobs got, nor are people going to carefully study them for decades like they will with Jobs.

      Admire who you like, but don’t expect many to agree with you when you day that Jobs presentations weren’t great. If his wrent great than no speech ever given by any human being anywhere on the planet at any point in history was great.

      His presentations defined what great presentations are, and all great presentations ever given from here forward will be judged against them.

      Reply

      1. I don’t want to go too far without saying or agreeing that Steve Jobs is a great man, and worthy of all attention given to him. However, I do believe that many many people have been greater presenters and oritators that he was, in the past, present and future. Standing on it’s own laurels, Steve’s key notes did not make him, and frankly they were simply ordinary.

        Do I give speeches, cook, make movies, write and or play music? No, but I certainly can tell you when, a speech, meal, film, or song is hands down outstanding, mediocre, or lousy.

        I can judge what he has said, shown us, sold us, without undermining his accomplishments and state without any doubt and accurately say, he could have done better. He, him, Steve, could have done better. I am not saying it was easy or it’s something I could have done, but if you examine great speeches in history I think it’s aparent he flubbed on stage as anyone could. I suppose anyone or everyone could ignore this, keep their star struck eyes and just believe. I didn’t.

        I still bought, loved and believed. My main point above, I am more committed to Apple, than the person, the ethos is with Apple, and that is what I am trying to get acrossed.

        As far as what I like about Wozniak, he is the most down to earth person I know, coming from where he as been, a truely unique person the world needs to duplicate over and over again. I like that he stands in line with the rest of us, he can sit in the audience with the rest of use, yet stop Steve Jobs in his tracks and get a nod of acknowledgement. If you walk up to him, please don’t, you probably will get a chance to talk his ear off. So as you listed, all the above.

        Between you and me, I don’t intend any disrespect. I just have this feeling that people tend to over state Steve Jobs presentations.

        Reply

  17. There is hardly ever talk about the second most powerful person at Apple when Jobs was CEO.

    It wasn’t Cook but according to Jobs, it’s Jonny Ive. I’m sure not much has changed regarding that. He’s allowed to be involved in anything he wants, and nobody is allowed to tell him to butt out.

    Reply

  18. I can’t wait to see the three stooges of tech with their typical follow up stories. You know who. Moe – Thurrotedhead, Larry – Magid, Curly – Dvwhorerack and bonus Stooge Shemp – Enderlenutjob!

    Reply

  20. Forrester has been wrong so many times that there is no point really in iCaling them. Much like Apple itself, Forrester research has defied the laws of statistics. Unfortunately, instead of being right they have defied statistical possibilities in being so wrong, so many times. By the way, looking at any of their numbers is pointless, because they are never, ever correct. MDN should call up every topic they have ever done on Forrester and check the outcome of their prognostic skill.

    Reply

  23. He’s not wrong.
    Like it or not Apple was Steve Jobs in corporate form, therefore the Apple we know today is gone.
    Our only hope is that Mr. Cook can cut a path for Apple that we will want to follow.
    As a pro I sincerely trust that he includes me on that journey.

    Reply

  24. Reguarding the video, that’s supposed to be Steven Spielburg, right? If you want to call, the quantum effect of matter acting like a wave and a particle, a quantum computer, I suppose you could say that as a single bit, as much as 1 volt is a digital bit.

    Let’s get esoteric, let’s say we are holograms, everything in space is connected, because in super reality we only exist in one or maybe two dimensions. We just think in terms of three or more. The quantum effect is nothing more than a symptom of an unobservable effect of our true existence, but having an observable effect in our imagined three dimensional holographic existence. Here is another idea. As matter flows travels through space, it creates a shockwave that impacts the surrounding environment. It’s like tossing a stone on a smooth surface of water.

    Is this worth discussing, or am I just not getting it?

    Reply

  25. Everything that goes up eventually comes down, everything (and everyone) that is young grows old. That’s the inevitable law of nature and borne out by history. Apple will one day start a downward descent as the world changes.

    But it doesn’t seem likely any time soon. Heck, they’ve just scratched the surface in China! That market alone will sustain Apple – provided of course it keeps its own house in order by constantly innovating and staying excellent in every aspect – for decades to come.

    It’s an odd, no-brainer prediction by Colony just after Apple once again embarrassed a whole bunch of doomsayers with its results.

    Reply

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,