To analyze the reasons for the collapse of Nokia is a common practice and interesting from a journalistic point of view and business. The media want to identify narratives, and academics want to correct their best practices.
in other times the case since the dome. O. recently Timo Vuori and Quy Huy N., academics published a extenso paper dedicated to the event [PDF] which includes a thorough analysis of the situation extracted from academic research and interviews with 76 workers and former workers of Nokia, senior managers, mid-level engineers and range .
Their conclusion: Nokia lost the battle for smartphones due to lack of cohesion objectives between division leaders and middle management This created an ineffective unable inertia. responding to the new reality post iPhone .
The launch of the iPhone in mid-2007 and Android later that year, which would be main agent of exogenous change between 2009 and 2010 culminated more visible way Samsung terminals, especially the first and second “Galaxy S” and the first Nexus.
The paradigm shift between 2007 and 2010 was completely transcendental The unstoppable advance until 2010 BlackBerry itself, the rudder of Microsoft, also alerted the company of Espoo. Or if they warned could not be demonstrated in the final product.
Among the Nokia N95, launched in 2007 and N8, hurriedly launched in 2010, Nokia lacked a capacity to adapt as little has been in the global industry.
It was somewhat understandable way, the paradigm shift those three years was momentous. Mobile phones were no longer to become small computers. Nokia had no experience in this area, but had the ability to acquire the experience and not take it.
The paper of Huy and Vuori continues to explore the relationships between the different layers of Nokia employees.
The address used intimidation to hold off middle management, wanted quick results, they were too optimísticos but did not make the changes needed to adapt.
They wanted an answer to the iPhone, but also wanted to continue with their current lines of business to date. This is incompatible discovered as the years progressed .
inertial Comfort at first, followed by a period of pressure and fear culture Middle management, in a typical case of strata behavior, began to fight for resources in the form of great promises to address. They admitted pressures direction that should have been actively rejected as impossible. Leading to lower quality products having been cut your preparation time .
MeeGo was not ready, but was prevented angry to the address . After losing three years in this direction, the jump to Windows Phone was shown late, futile and costly.
Respondents in this stratum spoke of lack of engineering skills in management, another common failure in similar situations .
This divergence of objectives created a blindness in direction, which in turn caused a dysfunction from top to bottom. Nokia leaders were not able to feel or treat employees.
The initial comfort cut the reaction time, which he did when he arrived in the form of corporate fear and lacking answers and direction.
Ozo, cameras spherical video are a clear commitment to virtual reality, and I have no doubt that Nokia will be among the next members of the market position across the VR market with some kind of player.
While the continue licensing its brand pair creation by others get a ball financial oxygen the duration of the pivot.
The future is distributed computing and telecommunications criticism. Nokia, now Lucent has much made to be there when the popularization .
Perhaps Nokia in the coming decade is further from the average user, but less will be more focused than the current decade.
December 3, 2015
- ← A Jennifer Lawrence does not like his voice dubbing in Spanish
- Amantes higiene: Kyocera lança móvel que pode ser lavado com água e sabão →