Nokias Intro:

Headquartered in Espoo, Finland, Nokia has enjoyed its niche in some of the worlds
most competitive markets by holding at least 40% of the global device market by the
end of 2008. It emanated its operations in 150 countries and had more than 117, 000
employees including NSN (a Nokia-Siemen merger) as of late 2008 (Willigan, 2009) [12].
The company strategies have been overhauled multiple times since its inception as a
paper mill in 1800s. The company first started contemplating the revamp of the
conglomerate in the 90s with the advent of Jorma Ollila as CEO. Nokia thrived as the
technology and marketing leader with its new focus on telecommunications, expanding
from Europe to North America with tens of developing countries. In 2006, the company
welcomed its new CEO, Olla Pekka, to go through some major changes successfully and
revise its strategies from selling mobile devices to devices, services, and software.
Samsung Intro:
Known for selling televisions, smartphones, memory chips and myriad of other
electronics, Samsung has carved and celebrated its mark in the global market in less
than two decades of its emergence. Established in 1991 to provide training for overseas
trade, the company has made significant successful transitions to acquire the credo of
Worlds Largest Technology Firm by Revenue.
Samsung has recently been alleged of abusing its monopoly power by cloning some
salient features of Apple Inc [13]. The company has lost over $1 Billion and a great deal
repute after the jury passed the verdict against it. The groups hierarchical structure and
decision making process are severely ostracized for stifling creativity. The sense of
crises and urgency that to catch Apple drove Samsung designers and engineers to opt
for a concept that best matched the look and feel of the iphone(Kim, 2012)[14].
Nokia Org Cultures and Values:
Nokia experienced a gradual organizational cultural metamorphosis from competitive to
a cusp between innovative and collaborative. Nokia has always defined its set of values
(unaltered for decades) for both its employees (Nokians) and stakeholders that
necessarily align the emotional energy of the employees and provide them with
guidelines to do the job. Nokia has always faced a challenge to intellectually engage
the employees for the sake of open communication and better collaboration. The
company eventually proposed the World Cafe methodology which in turn, allowed the
employees to have an online dialogue. The concept is to represent the subset of
Nokians across the globe to discuss the values and transforming strategies as if they
were to regenerate the company on Mars. The strategy was named, Trip to Mars and
was held in 16 cafs to redefine Nokias values and culture. Nokias new values gave
rise to a collaborative culture for the employees and included aims like; achieving
together, engaging the stakeholders, enthusiastic innovation, and remain being human
(Willigan, 2009)[12].
Samsungs Org Cultures and Values:
Samsung is appreciated for its Creative Development Research Institution for employees
(Samsung Men) to provide them with options to evaluate their propositions and
innovations. The new initiative encourages employees to be more entrepreneurial in
developing creative ideas that can become new businesses (Samsung, 2012)
[15]. Samsung bears a creative organizational culture and is a proud promoter of values
like; work-life balance, flexible time frame, equal employment policy, and welfare

programs (Samsung, 2009)[16]. Samsung Electronics believes the tradition of valuing

People is the key to building a creative corporate culture. People are the most
valuable asset as we carry out our business activities based on the principles of human
respect (Samsung, 2009) [16].
Nokias Decision Making:
Nokia was worlds largest mobile selling company in 1996 and presumed its place as
number one till 2010. Its title of worlds largest mobile selling company was taken away
in year 2011 with the advent of competitors like Apple, Samsung, and Google Android,
etc. During 2010 - 2011, its sales declined from 38.1% to 15.2% [17]. Nokia
collaborated with Microsoft to present its first Windows phone; Nokia Lumia 710 and
800, launched in October 2011. Unfortunately, with Samsung and Apple owning a 54.7%
of the smartphones market share, Nokia seems to have a rough track to take back its
title. The situation vividly depicts Nokias inability to come up with a timely decision to
replace Symbian and MeeGo with Microsofts Windows Phone operating system [18]. It
took the company over four years to take effective decision and is now facing alarming
competition by rival companies. The whole situation represents a weaker and ineffective
management with limited knowledge of strategic decision making skills.
The decision making strategies at Nokia take the Cost and Benefit approach, conform to
the economic environment but appear conduct a limited market research and endure a
repressed drive to compete. [19]
Nokias smart phone revolution was an anticipated change, concluding a technological
epoch of the company. Nokia perceived the emerging need of the surrounding
ecosystem but had its struggle with multitasking (from manufacturing to hardware
design to operating systems to application to marketing and a lot more). Nokias
strategic decision of switching to Microsoft Windows Phone was mainly driven by the
need of competitive, viable, and sustainable ecosystem as put by Stephen Elop,
President and CEO of Nokia, In the war of Ecosystems, clearly there are some strong
contenders already on the field and with Lumia, we have demonstrated we belong on
the field.[20]
Samsung's Decision Making
Samsungs competence strategies have recently turned into aggressive chasing by
responding quickly to Apple launches. The Apple vs. Samsung ruling puts an
exclamation mark to Samsungs values of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), towards
its stakeholders. Within Samsung, where some designers feel the overlooked and
undermined, there are calls for a change of tack (Kim, 2012)[14]. A Samsung designer
who didnt wish to reveal his identity quoted, Designers have lots of unique and
creative ideas, but these have to be loved by the top decision makers. The problem was
because they were so fascinated by Apple design, these ideas werent really satisfactory
to please the top leave (as quoted by Kim, 2012)[14]. Samsung executives that refer
the issue as crises of design seem to move on rationally.
The decision making at Samsung appears to be quick, responsive to the demands of
market, flexible and meeting the needs of the hour [18]. Samsungs mobile chief Shin is
optimistic about the future of the company as he guaranteed to proffer extra-ordinary,
innovating, and unique products in future at Europes biggest electronics show. Shin also
credited Samsungs extraordinary, elite workforce by calling them diligent and
exemplary (Kim, 2012)[14].
Conclusion:

The two discussed organizations are idiosyncratic in their journeys. Nokia has a stronger
and richer history while Samsung was an upstart not too long ago. Nokia has gone
through vivid transitions and is blamed of dozing off while the market was preparing to
sell some of the revolutionary electronics. Samsung, on the other hand, went through a
contrasting issue of hasting its way to success at the cost of its credibility. Both
companies share an overlapping organizational culture accompanied by similar values.
For Nokia, the strategy to reverse its fortunes, abandoning its own Symbian smartphone
software in favor of a largely untested alternative from Microsoft has limped from
setback to setback (Vassinen, 2012) [21].
Samsungs chairperson mentioned in his 1997 book that a successful organization
needs a heightened sense of crises to be able to best respond to changes. Samsung
has attested to its words by letting the constant crises assist the companys
competence by taking over Japanese brands like Sony, Sharp, and Panasonic, in chips,
TV, and displays, putting an end to Nokias supremacy in handsets, and overtaking
Apple in smartphones (Kim, 2012). [14]
The two companies struggled with decision making at strategic and management levels
and one of the two has managed to overcome the impasse by effective decision making
in time. Samsung has excelled in its path by allowing itself to abide the process of
change and managing its talent aptly by propagating a culture of trust in its employees.