澳洲论文代写:诺基亚变革管理

20 8月 澳洲论文代写:诺基亚变革管理

澳洲论文代写:诺基亚变革管理

在诺基亚能够成功地识别和适应变化的同时,也看到诺基亚也在其他情况下提高了变革管理的门槛。诺基亚的时间似乎已经失去了势头,启动和维持基于动态变化的外部因素的变化(圣吉,2014)。
竞争
公司的地位已被削弱。该公司竞争激烈,这是变革的关键驱动力。在高端市场上,苹果iPhone、移动黑莓的研究以及使用谷歌Android操作系统的手机占据了市场份额。这导致诺基亚持有的市场价值逐渐下降。2009的诺基亚在智能手机市场占有40%的份额。这是1990年底电信发展所采取的战略步骤的结果,然而,与Android的32%相比,这一比例下降了2011,达到了24%。此外,诺基亚面临来自中国“白盒”制造商的激烈成本竞争,这可能会削弱标准手机的价格(案例研究)。这种外部力量需要诺基亚彻底改变它接近智能手机行业的方式。
缺乏创新
“诺基亚此前在产业主导的创新而创新卓越现在已经转移到了北美洲,和诺基亚的操作系统,Symbian,被公认为是一位“混沌”(案例研究,引用亚瑟,3 2011b)。这里已经可以采取意味着它所带来的更大的问题的时候,操作和维护。程序员没有太多的开发支持。同时由于诺基亚主要是相关的硬件,软件开发者和企业开发者无法连接到混沌的Symbian。缺乏创新更像是推动组织变革的驱动力。

澳洲论文代写:诺基亚变革管理

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).
Competition
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.