Skip to main content

Nokia Layoff 2011 - They are simply irrational

Competition is healthy, but then when one competitor is down and shows lack of character or courage and looses faith in its own men (like laying them off) competition can take an ugly or stupid turn. Nokia has been loosing market share to many of its competitors and most prominently Apple. The brand cult around Apple has shown the world that "the power of people" can overthrow regimes, big businesses and big money.
Unfortunately, Nokia seems to have given up. Despite seemingly clear strategy of Apple of "Unique" stuff with "premium" prices and a visionary leader, Nokia is looking to "cut costs". I'd simply call it irrational and here is why.
Cutting costs is a good move, but the manner of cutting costs is what determines its success or failure. I recently read a report that Nokia was helping the employees affected by layoffs find a better job. Unless this is a gimmick to avoid mass resistance, its again "irrational". So you layoff your employees, get rid of their valuable services (which you no longer value), then you spend some money to help them find a job, which is most likely to be with your competitor. You are giving away talent on which you spent money for training, gave them resources and now they are you competitor's human resource asset. Sensing your irrational behavior, your competitor will get this talent at a much price lower than what they deserve and make them work "against" you in the market. This again does not help your market share. Market share is not always a zero sum game. So for you to gain market share there won't be a person loosing market share. If Micromax gave Nokia a "KO" in the low priced market and brands like Apple and Blackberry fisted you in the upper segment, darling its because you  forgot to explore these segments. They created segments for themselves to survive and now they are the kings of their segment. You've gotta create a segment rather than competing in segments "they created". Another major problem is that every one wants a piece of Apple. Why not join hands with what consumer wants. Rather you've chosen to join hands with "Microsoft". 
Nokia simply lacks focus. Stephen Elop, the CEO at Nokia needs to rethink and innovate rather than following a text-book rule like layoff. The crisis at Nokia is similar to the one that haunted Apple before Steve Jobs came in. Stephen Elop can be compared to Gil Amelio, its just they don't have a person like jobs as a founder who can come in later. Nokia announced on March 11, 2011 that it had paid Elop a $6 million signing bonus, “compensation for lost income from his prior employer," on top of his $1.4 million annual salary.Isn't that similar to what Amelio got when he joined Apple.
In the short run the Layoffs will help Nokia since cutting costs is a good sign for investors. In this short span I can see Nokia's share price rising as the reports of next quarter arrive. But in the long run this behemoth will have to change and mend its ways or else I have serious doubts on their success and survival.

Popular posts from this blog

Giving the finger to a scripted life!

It's crazy to take jobs just because they look good on your resume. That's like saving sex for your old age. ~ Warren Buffet. You have plans for your life, career etc. You've built an entire script but what is this based on? Scott at Ted talks about how almost 80% of the people around the world don't like the job they do. In his career, he found one day that most of the job he did was automated by his competitors. Building the resume was clearly not way forward. It was during that time he he heard the quote by warren buffet, " It's crazy to take jobs just because they look good on your resume. That's like saving sex for your old age ". This was when he left his job. While there are know universities, which talk about finding your passion, Scott talks about a lens that can help in finding the job we love.

Twitter and the world of hate - Delhi Gang Rape

Common wisdom says that venting out reduces frustration. Twitter, Facebook, and blogs help us achieve the same. While what normally starts as a "venting out" experience, I suspect is turning out to be an anguish enhancer. When I look at trending topics on twitter all what I see is a world of "Hate". Small pieces of hate messages turn out to be a big collective bunch of hate. Take the case of Delhi gang rape and some ill-minded comments of politicians and spiritual gurus. What started as scattered bickering remarks against a comment made by "Asaram" has now become a full fledged ball of rage. This rage was "non-directional", had no agenda and was oriented towards sarcasm and wit. While Delhi gang rape highlights poor governance, societal problems and problems of law and order, venting out on a forum that accumulates the frustration by many such people only adds to the low well-being. It is time we use some discretion and post messages that...

Twitter vs. News - Effectiveness in building relations

Social Media has been termed as an effective way to build relationships. Brands are trying to harness this capability by building social presence on this new media. Celebrities today account for the maximum amount of followers on the web with twitter being a fine example for this. But is this new media effective in creating relationships with this vast list of followers, which celebrities often tend to have? In an interesting research by Lee and Jang , they explore the effectiveness of celebrities in building social presence on new media. They compare twitter and a news website to check the relative effectiveness of enhancing social presence. While the traditional PR machinery used by celebrities might give them news coverage, they contend that their tweets can reduce the barrier of relational development as compared to a news website. Their findings are counter-intuitive and very interesting.