Where Nokia was able to successfully identify and adapt to changes, it was also seen that Nokia was also challenged in raising the bar on change management in other contexts. Nokia with time seemed to have lost the momentum to initiate and sustain changes based on dynamically changing external forces (Senge, 2014).
The company’s position had been eroded. The company had intense competition and this was a key driver of change. At the top end of the market the Apple iPhone, Research in Motion’s Blackberry and phones using Google’s Android operating system had taken market share. This led to a gradual decline of the market value that Nokia held. It was seen in 2009 Nokia had as much as 40 percent share of the smart phone market. This was the result of the strategic steps that it took with respect to telecommunication development in the late 1990’s. However, by 2011 this had decreased to 24 percent, in comparison to Android’s 32 per cent. In addition, Nokia faced stiff cost competition from Chinese ‘white box’ manufacturers, which could undercut the price for standard mobile handsets (Case Study). This external force needed Nokia to drastically change the way that it approached the Smart Phone industry.
Lack of Innovation
“Nokia had previously led innovation in the industry but the innovative pre-eminence had now shifted to North America, and the Nokia operating system, Symbian, was acknowledged to be ‘a bit crufty” (Case Study, citing Arthur, 3 2011b). Here crufty could be taken to mean that it posed larger problems when it came to operation and maintenance. There was not much development support for programmers. Also since Nokia was mostly hardware related, software developers and business developers could not connect to the crufty Symbian. The lack of innovation was more of a driver towards revolutionary change for the organization.