In contrast to Apple's success, Nokia, a Finnish multinational corporation with a 150-year history, was once one of the most prominent mobile phone manufacturers. However, it was unable to keep up with the rapidly changing market and subsequently lost most of its market share. One of the main causes of Nokia's downfall was a lack of innovation. Despite being a pioneer in mobile phones in the early 2000s, the company failed to maintain innovation as a core value. Unlike Apple, whose products remain highly competitive due to consistent innovation, Nokia's late adoption of touchscreens and smartphones contributed to its decline. Additionally, Nokia's operating structure was also a significant factor, with several different operating systems and a lack of unified vision for the company.

Nokia's organizational structure consisted of several independent units with varying levels of autonomy, which hampered coordination and communication. Its global reach and workforce of over 100,000 employees made it challenging for management to implement quick and effective change. As a result, Nokia experienced difficulties in adapting to the changing market, leading to its failure to keep up with rivals such as Apple and Samsung.

Recommendations

Based on the comparative case study of Apple and Nokia, some recommendations can improve organizational behavior and human resources practices within a company. Firstly, building an effective strategy that highlights innovation and facilitates employee development is crucial. Ensuring employees' mental and physical well-being is also essential to maintain employee satisfaction, ultimately leading to increased performance.

Moreover, having a centralized, flat organizational structure facilitates effective communication and faster decision-making. Managers with deep expertise and immersion in their functions help ensure a coordinated approach to decision-making, resulting in agility and innovation. Finally, building a culture of diversity and inclusion promotes employee engagement and retention, as well as attracting potential employees from a wide range of backgrounds and perspectives.

Conclusion

The comparative case study of Apple and Nokia highlights the importance of innovation, effective organizational structure, and employee development. Apple's success reflects the benefits of a centralized, flat structure where a culture of innovation and employee development is prioritized. In contrast, Nokia's lack of innovation and a disorganized, hierarchical structure contributed to its decline. Companies must adopt organizational behavior and human resources practices that prioritize agility, innovation, and employee development to remain competitive in a rapidly changing market.

References

Apple. (2021). Apple inc. [Online] Available at: https://www.apple.com/ [Accessed 9 December 2021].

Harvard Business Review. (2020). Apple Inc.’s Organizational Structure & Its Characteristics – Panmore Institute. [online] Available at: https://panmore.com/apple-inc-organizational-structure-characteristics [Accessed 9 December 2021].

McShane, S. L., Olekalns, M., & Travaglione, T. (2020). Organisational Behaviour on the Pacific Rim. McGraw-Hill Education (Australia).

Poldony, J. M., Hoenig, S. (2020). Organizational Behavior. Flatworld.

Tasnim, R. (2018). Apple’s Organizational Culture: Advantages & Disadvantages. Panmore Institute. [online] Available at: https://panmore.com/apple-organizational-culture-advantages-disadvantages [Accessed 9 December 2021].

When Stephen Elop became CEO of Nokia, the Finnish company faced issues with their stakeholders due to cultural shock. As a result, the organization faced resistance to changes, lost share price in the market, and leadership members resignations (Khan et al. 2017). The complicated organizational structure made it difficult to make timely decisions that affected its responsiveness to the rapidly changing mobile market (Lam, 2013 cited by Khan et al. 2017). According to Doz (2017), it was a series of bad decisions, wrong assumptions, and a dose of overconfidence that brought many complications to Nokia.

In 2020 Nokia adopted Apple's structure, dividing into 4 P&L responsible groups: Mobile Networks, IP and Fixed Networks, Cloud and Network Services, and Nokia Technologies. Nokia has recognized its weakness and is working hard to regain its position in the market by focusing on strengthening technology leadership, investing in 5G R&D, and digitalizing processes and tools across the value chain (Nokia, 2021).

In conclusion, while both Apple and Nokia are focused on innovation and technology, they have negative points. For Nokia, changing the organizational structure may help the company put itself back in a position of impact in the technology business. Meanwhile, Apple must pay special attention to the pressure it puts on its teams and the impact on the environment. In both cases, employees are crucial to the company's success or failure, and giving the right conditions to them will define the future (Trivedi, 2019).

The following paragraph contains a list of sources related to Nokia, Apple, and organizational behavior that have been retrieved from various websites. These sources cover a range of topics such as Nokia's strategic decisions, resistance to change, Apple's organizational structure, and personal and management skills development in Apple Inc. They have been written by different authors and entities, including academic research journals, news releases, and professional networking websites. The links provided can be used to access the full content of these sources.

Nokia has recently announced its plans to reset its cost base and invest in future capabilities. According to their statement, the company intends to undergo changes to their operating model and group Leadership Team as part of their new strategy. In contrast, Doz (2018) writes about the strategic decisions that led to Nokia's failure. The author provides insight into the company's shortcomings and how they led to the fall of one of the most prominent technology brands in the world.

Apple's 2021 ESG Report (Inc., 2021) provides a detailed overview of their environmental, social, and governance performance. Meanwhile, Poldony and Hansen (2020) analyze how Apple's organizational structure promotes innovation. They assert that Apple's success can be attributed to their prioritization of a vision-driven culture over a strategy-driven culture.

In their research, Khan, Raza, and George (2017) investigate resistance to change in organizations through the case studies of General Motors and Nokia. On the other hand, McShane, Tasa, and Steen (2021) provide a comprehensive overview of Canadian organizational behavior.

Finally, Trikawala (2021) writes about the failure of Nokia, while Tasnim (2018) analyzes Apple's organizational structure. Trivedi (2019) investigates the development of personal and management skills in Apple Inc. These sources cover important topics regarding Nokia, Apple, and organizational behavior and can provide valuable insights for individuals and organizations alike.