Q5

Each half page with two references Q1Nokia is—or rather, was—a household name for many years. In fact, to many it was synonymous with mobile telecommunication. They were the market leader for cell phones for many years, until eventually they fell out of favor and lost considerable ground in the mobile phone market (Sulphey, 2019). Nokia, said Willigan (2009) expounded upon four specific values in their heyday: achieving together, engaging you, passion for innovation, and very human. These values were what Nokia intended to achieve but is also emblematic of the successes they were already making at the time: in a word, they are aspirational but also affirming. The values were derived from what Willigan (2009) denotes the “World Café methodology.” This method is all about engaging the employees in dialogue without the logistical nightmare that is engaging every employee directly. The values emerged from the conversations that representatives had, starting from scratch to determine what the company’s values have always been and should be in the future. While this is an attempt to explore the notions Sulphey (2019) argued are crucial—that is, exploring and exploiting—ultimately the initiative failed as the company “fell from grace.”It would seem, based on a surface level analysis, that the communicative strategies should have been successful for Nokia. Mills-Senn (2020) asserted that “flexing” one’s communication is crucial. What this means is being willing to adapt and listen more than simply speak is imperative for good leadership. Nokia did just this: by allowing employees to derive the values, the company sat by and listened rather than spoke. Johnson (2017) added that the direction of the company, rather than mere tasks, is what should be emphasized in communications. Again, Nokia did this:  by focusing the conversation on values, the firm is following this piece of advice. Where the issue comes up is that, per Johnson (2017), leaders should communicate why change is needed and to what extent. Based on Sulphey’s (2019) analysis, this simply did not occur. Given that the values also only embody what was already being done indicates that no real change was planned to occur at all. Sulphey (2019) noted that the “dominant leader” style the firm adopted generally did not help matters; despite the inclusion of so many voices, the reality is that the authoritative leader was who was driving the operation. Wright (2018) reminded us that as leaders “we can’t do everything” (para. 2). This all amounts to the issue in strategy: failure to adapt to the market. Given that the mobile phone market was focusing entirely on something that Nokia was not producing nor even reacting to effectively, it should come as no shock that Nokia did not succeed in this technological ecosystem: consumer demand continued to change while Nokia remained stagnant. Simply put, competitive advantage is not dead, and Nokia failed to realize this fact as others took hold of advantage in the markets (Bungay, 2019).As a consultant, I would advise Nokia in many ways. Firstly, although “very human” in some way encompasses what the consumer wants, to me it would seem that, despite values that are inherently consumer-centric, the reality is that the strategy did not speak in this way. By experiencing innovative tunnel vision through focusing on improving features that no one was all that interested in in the first place, Nokia lost sight of the vision. By reminding the firm and its leaders to always ask about the value proposition and analyzing more deeply consumer trends in the markets, Nokia could have at the very least avoided some financial embarrassment. Second, the firm needed to be more agile. Yes, Bungay (2019) is correct in stating that agility is not enough on its own, but Nokia definitely could have afforded to be more flexible, especially in the face of so many red flags. Third, Nokia certainly should not have divested itself of so many valuable assets that could have counterbalanced some of the losses; if only the firm was aware of the value it possessed, it would have been less likely to cast it off (Sulphey, 2019). Communicating what the firm already has and what can be exploited positively was definitely missing here. Fourth, despite the interest in “achieving together, engaging you, and being very human,” Sulphey (2019) added that many employees complained about working conditions and never felt quite secure in their positions. This is rather contradictory and speaks to the inauthenticity of the vision. Leaders need to live out what they are communicating (Johnson, 2017). Fifth, to speak to their point about innovation, the firm should have incentivized it more, as the firm became more and more blinded to alternatives to their ill-fated operating system and products (Sulphey, 2019). If innovation were truly closer to company culture in deed and not just word, then new alternatives could have potentially been derived, thus sparing the company (Giacoman & Eberhardt, 2020).In short, any consultant would boil the points down to this: the company must lead in the way that the values indicate. If the firm has developed these values through participation and collaboration but the firm fails to act on them, then the company is seen as inauthentic. Furthermore, in an ironic twist, had the firm focused on these values and explored other options while exploiting their current assets—e.g., been organizationally ambidextrous (Sulphey, 2019)—then perhaps Nokia would be at the forefront battling it out with Apple and Samsung for first prize.  Q2In the early 90’s Nokia was the biggest or one of the biggest mobile phone companies in the world. The company originated in Finland. Nokia knew it had to make changes and they decided to do this by gathering people around the world in small groups and getting suggestions. The people didn’t want to make the suggestions in a presentation but wanted to act them out and give a visual performance to the company leaders. Nokia came up with four new values that were important and redirect the direction of the company. The values were achieving together, engaging you, passion for innovation, and very human. Achieving together is more than collaboration and partnership. As well as trust, it involves sharing, the right mind-set and working in formal and informal networks. n engaging You. For us, ‘engaging you’ incorporates the customer satisfaction value and deals with engaging all our stakeholders, including employees, in what Nokia stands for in the world. n Passion for Innovation. Passion for innovation is based on a desire we have to live our dreams, to find our courage and to make the leap into the future through innovation in technology, ways of working and through understanding the world around us. n Very Human. Being very human encompasses what we offer customers, how we do business, how we work together, and the impact of our actions and behavior on people and the environment. It is about being very human in the world—making things simple, respecting and caring. In short, our desire is to be a very human company (Willigan, 2009). 
As a consultant I would have persuaded the company to focus on innovation. At this time motorola, samsung and apple were working on phones that would change the mobile industry forever. I would have consulted Nokia to keep improving their phones and communication of the phones to keep their customers. I would have also consulted them to improve their marketing and customer service for when they do come up with their next great phone. Customers want to see the new cool innovated phone and keep up with the trends. I would have consulted Nokia to create a phone that has all the same functions as a computer, but apple and samsung beat them to the punch. Q3The slogan “Connecting People” with the two hands was very popular and familiar to many people because the company occupied the mobile market for many years. The company, Nokia, began as a paper mill and ended up focusing on mobile phones and telecommunications. Soon after, the company was a leader in the industry which had about 40% of the market share. However, being a leader was not easy, the company had encountered many challenges such as competitors and the growth of technology. With these challenges, the company had the ideas to transform the culture and values to get all Nokians intellectually engaged. Because having clear company values helps the company ensures that all employees are working towards the same goals. Nokia created a trip to Mars which randomly invited some of the employees across the whole company to exchange ideas regardless of positions then uploaded on the website which allowed other employees can give comments, called “The world’s café”. As a result, it created four new Nokia’s values; achieving together, engaging you, passion for innovation, and very human. Leaders noted that the values need discussions which shows the communication is the most important to make everyone clear and achieve the same goals.As a consultant, I would suggest that Nokia should apply more styles of communications which will make every clearly understand what pages the company is going forward. Senn (2020) indicates that “It’s not only what you say; if you want to be heard, how you communicate matters, too” In my opinion, the concept of the world café that Nokia used is some sort of assertive communication which allows others to express the ideas while listening to others. It is a good idea to get a lot of input, but it sometimes makes no one make decisive decisions due to being considerate of each other. Therefore, the directive style should have applied in the communication to direct what directions the company wants to head to. Also, I would suggest that Nokia should focus on software updates rather than redesign them frequently, as Nokia has produced a number of models that essentially change its appearances, but the software still remained the same.