Nokia Company: Change from Mobile Manufacturer to Networking Equipment (Term Paper Sample)
Due Dec. 20, 2018.14 days is not an option.
In today's fast-paced and global community, most organizations are faced with constant change. Research contemporary organizations that are currently responding to a significant change within the industry, such as disruptive technology; state, government, or industry regulations; environmental constraints; judicial or legislative rulings; etc.
Choose one organization from your research that has recently responded to major change, or is currently responding to change. Write a paper (1,250-1,500 words) discussing how well the organization is responding to the change dynamics. Include the following:
Describe the organization and the change to which it is responding.
Discuss the degree to which the change has been disruptive and how the organization has responded to the dynamics created by this change.
Evaluate the strategies the organization used in its change plan and determine the level of success the organization experienced with the strategies.
Determine the effect the change had on stakeholders, and to what degree stakeholders have resisted. Assess how well stakeholder resistance was addressed.
Evaluate the overall implications the change had on interdepartmental collaboration.
In your opinion, how well did the leaders of the organization respond and prepare for the change? What worked and what did not work with the strategies they implemented?
What modifications would you suggest the leaders of the organization make in order to better address the change dynamics? What additional strategies would you recommend to assist the organization through this change?
Contemporary Organization Evaluation
10.0 %Contemporary Organization (Description of Organization and Responding to Change)
A detailed description of a contemporary organization is presented; all relevant details are included and description provides insight into the organization. The description of the current change to which the organization is responding is well developed and contains relevant detail.
10.0 %Effects of Change (Discusses Effects of Change, Organizational Response and Strategies Utilized)
A well-rounded discussion on the effects of change on the organization and its response to the change is presented. The discussion is detailed and strongly supported by documented facts.
10.0 %Stakeholders (Determine Effects of Change and Response to Change)
The effect of change on stakeholders is discussed in detail. Stakeholder response/resistance to change is presented with accurate and relevant examples. Well-developed recommendations are provided in responding to stakeholder resistance. Strong evidence or rationale is provided for claims made, and strategies relevant to the organization and stakeholders are offered to help stakeholders overcome resistance.
10.0 %Effects of Change on Interdepartmental Collaboration
A detailed evaluation of the effects of change on interdepartmental collaboration for the organization is presented and provides insight into the situation. The evaluation is supported with strong detail, facts, support, and rationale.
15.0 %Evaluation of the Response of the Leaders to Change and the Strategies Presented by Leaders
Evaluation of the response of the leaders to change is presented with sufficient detail and supporting information vital to understanding the involvement of the leaders. Strategies presented by leaders in response to change are clearly addressed and provide insight into the outcomes the organization experienced in responding to change. Overall, leadership response to change is clear and contains significant information or details that describe the extent of leadership involvement and the degree to which leadership involvement was influential.
15.0 %Recommendations (Suggestions to Better Address Change Dynamics, Additional Strategies)
Well-supported recommendations to address change dynamics are clearly presented. Additional strategies are offered, with strong rationale or a clear plan to illustrate that the recommendations are relevant and would indeed support a better change option in response to change.
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
All format elements are correct
5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
100 %Total Weightage
Change at Nokia
Change at Nokia
Nokia Company: Change from Mobile Manufacturer to Networking Equipment
Around the year 2000, Nokia was among the largest suppliers of mobile phones across the globe. Started in the year 1865 in Finland, the company expanded its reach to other areas in the globe by the year 1980. Over the years, the company has been able to realize success in several sectors including cable, rubber boots, telecommunication infrastructure, mobile devices et cetera. The success of the company saw its shares sell at $60 at the turn of the millennium. However, the smartphone technology boom came as a rude shock to Nokia. By the year 2007, the shares of Nokia were trading at $40. The situation got worse for Nokia when the shares plunged to $2. This was a significant fall for Nokia. Their phones lost relevance in the face of increasing supply of smart phones (Cord, 2014). Nokia never took the opportunity to be a leader in the revolution of smart phones. The company then decided to sell the phone division to Microsoft. Realizing their failure to take advantage of the smartphone revolution, the company changed the focus of their operations.
Nokia decided to make networking equipment the core of their business (Kreutzer & Land, 2015). At the time, the company already had a partnership with Siemens. The company thought it best to pursue networking equipment as their core business strategy rather than continuing with phone manufacturing. As a result, the management bought out Siemens. They had to revamp and this forced them to come up with a new portfolio strategy, capital structure, business plan, corporate structure, and management team. Nokia failed to take advantage of the smartphone revolution, missing out on a great opportunity. But just like they have done in the past, the company has been able to relaunch and make a significant recovery.
Nokia's Change Plan Strategy and its Success
The case of Nokia is considered a sad one. The failure of the company to take advantage of the smartphone revolution was a major laxity on the part of management. But the company accepted the fact that they could not recover from the disruptions that they had experienced as a result of the smartphone revolution. They needed to change going forward and they started with the management. The management team that had refused to undertake the smartphone idea in the year 2004 was struck out. The new management team instead of following suite in the smartphone production, decided to sell of the mobile phone production and change to networking equipment and other mapping technologies (Alcacer,Khanna&Snively, 2014). The company changed almost everything, including their portfolio strategy and business plan. The change in focus of operations is starting to work well for Nokia. Their share prices have increased from $2 to $6, nearly a 300% increase. The value of Nokia has also grown from where it stood in the year 2012. The company has been able to arrest recent slump and returned billions of dollars to its shareholders. Once again, the company has weathered the storm to become the biggest company in Finland. The new management team was intelligent in understanding that there was no way Nokia phones were going to remain relevant in the market. But the management was aware of where the market was heading. They restructured well, got the right people and executively transitioned to making new devices and remaining relevant.
Stakeholders Resistance to Change
The changes at Nokia did not go well with key stakeholders. The first resistance came when a new manager, a Canadian called Elop, was appointed. Never in the history of the company had
- Management Term Paper On Collaborative Strategic SourcingDescription: Getting internal customers involve with the strategic process can help different areas in the company such as finance, accounting, engineering and etc...21 pages/≈5775 words | 5 Sources | APA | Management | Term Paper |
- Creating Training Tools: Analyzing Different Strengths Description: Determine how the process might be approached differently for each employee to produce the best results. Use scenarios to convey your idea....3 pages/≈825 words | No Sources | APA | Management | Term Paper |
- Change Initiative: Implementation, Evaluation, and SustainabilityDescription: Effecting change in the hospital will require the participation of various agents that will lead through the process to ensure the bonus initiative based on performance is implemented efficiently....6 pages/≈1650 words | 10 Sources | APA | Management | Term Paper |