What We Can Learn About Business Acumen From Kodak’s Bankruptcy

Another once-dominant company, Kodak, declares bankruptcy, and the stories start flying—mismanagement, lack of vision, lost opportunities.

After all, Kodak invented the digital camera in 1975 and did nothing with it for 15 years. How could they not see how this would eventually destroy their core business?

A More Nuanced Look at Kodak’s Fall

I liked Rick Newman’s article in U.S. News & World Report. It takes a more even-handed approach than most. His conclusion?

Maybe there wasn’t anything Kodak could have done to prevent its long decline.

Kodak projected the rise of digital photography and tried to time their entry into the market to avoid damaging film sales before the technology matured.

They also tried:

• Diversification into pharmaceuticals and medical diagnostics, leveraging their expertise in chemicals and imaging.
• Bringing in CEOs from other industries to inject fresh leadership.

Each of these moves is typically seen as a smart business strategy—but none of them worked.

The Kodak vs. Fujifilm Question

A piece in The Economist compares Kodak and Fujifilm, asking why Fujifilm is thriving while Kodak collapsed.

Their stories are strikingly similar:

• Both had near-monopolies in their home markets.
• Both recognized that film would become obsolete.
• Both saw that digital photography would never be as profitable as film.
• Both tried to diversify.

Yet Fujifilm adapted successfully, while Kodak failed.

Why Did Kodak Decline?

There are many theories:

• Too slow to respond to market changes.
• Focused on perfection instead of launching quickly and improving later.
• Frequent leadership changes created inconsistency.
• Complacency from decades of market dominance.
• Overconfidence in their brand power and marketing expertise to drive new ventures.

The reality is that Kodak was never going to match its 1976 success, when it held 90% of the film market and 85% of camera sales in the U.S..

Why There’s No Simple Answer

Business analysis often seeks clear-cut explanations—a single rule or lesson that can predict which companies will thrive and which will fail.

But real-world business challenges are too complex for simple rules. That’s why we designed Income|Outcome, our business simulation, to be open-ended—allowing teams to explore different strategies without favoring one approach over another.

How Income|Outcome Helps Teams Learn Strategy

In an Income|Outcome workshop, teams:

• Compete to create the most successful business.
• Learn to analyze financial data, create budgets, and develop strategies.
• Adapt their plans in response to market changes and competitors.

Some companies thrive, others struggle—but every participant gains insights from both their own decisions and the strategies of their competitors. Just like in real life.

Learn More About Income|Outcome

If you're interested in business simulations that teach real-world decision-making, visit us at www.income-outcome.com.

‍