3026458
Nokia’s Failure
Due to the importance of organisational change, its management is becoming a highly required managerial skill (Senior, 2002). Since the need for change often is unpredictable, it tends to be reactive, discontinuous, ad hoc and often triggered by a situation of organisational crisis
(Burnes, 2004; De Wit and Meyer, 2005; Luecke, 2003; Nelson, 2003). Although the successful management of change is accepted as a necessity in order to survive and succeed in today’s highly competitive and continuously evolving environment (Luecke, 2003; Okumus and Hemmington,
1998), Balogun and Hope Hailey (2004) report a failure rate of around 70 per cent of all change programmes initiated. (R Todnem By, 2005)
Reasons for changes and barriers …show more content…
Another opinion might be that they failed to develop the necessary technologies. But that would be totally wrong. Because Nokia had a prototype touchscreen before the Iphone was launched, and technologically Nokia smartphones were superior to Apple,
Samsung or Google during the late 1990s. Also we can’t say that Nokia didn’t recognize that the basis of competition was moving from the hardware to the “ecosystem”. Because in the early 2000s
3026458
Nokia together with Ericsson, Motorola and Psion created Symbian as a platform technology that would keep Microsoft at bay.
Although the people at Nokia were aware of the changes going around them, and they always tried to be innovative and always had clever marketers, the reason they struggled was in covering awareness into action. The company could not implement a change in a decisive and committed way.
Usually the failure of big companies to adapt to changing environment is one of the main problems in the world of business. Usually the changes are not so occasional, especially in …show more content…
Sp what’s the problem? A failure to implement already invented technologies in action, disregard of customer demands, which changes quite in short period of time, and a superior attitude towards new competitors – all these problems Nokia really faced as a leader on a market.
In such cases, all the responsibilities for failure come up with CEO. But as we see, this kind of failures might be avoidable, so it become clrea that CEO cannot do it alone. People from the whole organization must be open to changes in their business and take responsibility to push their new ideas and try to challenge existing ways of working. Obviously this is not easy, but if more people is aware of company’s problems and feels responsibility, then the chances for improvement are higher.
So what are the barriers for the company for being not flexible to changes?! Now I want to mention inertia. As a company grows, it develops all kinds of engagements with its suppliers, its investments, and its own worldviews. Structural inertia is a symptom of success. Everything seems to go well so the company does not reevaluate the situation.
Nokia worldview was that people needs a reliable, strong, high-quality mobile, but
Nokia’s Failure
Due to the importance of organisational change, its management is becoming a highly required managerial skill (Senior, 2002). Since the need for change often is unpredictable, it tends to be reactive, discontinuous, ad hoc and often triggered by a situation of organisational crisis
(Burnes, 2004; De Wit and Meyer, 2005; Luecke, 2003; Nelson, 2003). Although the successful management of change is accepted as a necessity in order to survive and succeed in today’s highly competitive and continuously evolving environment (Luecke, 2003; Okumus and Hemmington,
1998), Balogun and Hope Hailey (2004) report a failure rate of around 70 per cent of all change programmes initiated. (R Todnem By, 2005)
Reasons for changes and barriers …show more content…
Another opinion might be that they failed to develop the necessary technologies. But that would be totally wrong. Because Nokia had a prototype touchscreen before the Iphone was launched, and technologically Nokia smartphones were superior to Apple,
Samsung or Google during the late 1990s. Also we can’t say that Nokia didn’t recognize that the basis of competition was moving from the hardware to the “ecosystem”. Because in the early 2000s
3026458
Nokia together with Ericsson, Motorola and Psion created Symbian as a platform technology that would keep Microsoft at bay.
Although the people at Nokia were aware of the changes going around them, and they always tried to be innovative and always had clever marketers, the reason they struggled was in covering awareness into action. The company could not implement a change in a decisive and committed way.
Usually the failure of big companies to adapt to changing environment is one of the main problems in the world of business. Usually the changes are not so occasional, especially in …show more content…
Sp what’s the problem? A failure to implement already invented technologies in action, disregard of customer demands, which changes quite in short period of time, and a superior attitude towards new competitors – all these problems Nokia really faced as a leader on a market.
In such cases, all the responsibilities for failure come up with CEO. But as we see, this kind of failures might be avoidable, so it become clrea that CEO cannot do it alone. People from the whole organization must be open to changes in their business and take responsibility to push their new ideas and try to challenge existing ways of working. Obviously this is not easy, but if more people is aware of company’s problems and feels responsibility, then the chances for improvement are higher.
So what are the barriers for the company for being not flexible to changes?! Now I want to mention inertia. As a company grows, it develops all kinds of engagements with its suppliers, its investments, and its own worldviews. Structural inertia is a symptom of success. Everything seems to go well so the company does not reevaluate the situation.
Nokia worldview was that people needs a reliable, strong, high-quality mobile, but