The Sunset of Mighty Nokia Mobile Market - An Analytical Investigation

The History of Nokia

The organization has been in operation for over 150 years, enduring two global conflicts and persevering through them. It provided aid to Finland during difficult times, and by the year 2000, its contributions accounted for an impressive 4% of Finland's gross domestic product. The corporation explored several fields, such as rubber, paper, cables, electronics, and telecommunications. It expanded significantly by concentrating on electronics and telecommunications, eventually establishing itself as a globally recognized brand. Despite its remarkable accomplishment of securing 49.4% of the market share in 2007, a feat that many companies aspire to, the corporation also experienced disappointment in the mobile phone industry (Verma, 2022).

Birth of Nokia in 1865

Fredrik Idestam founded a paper mill in southern Finland in 1865 and another in Nokia three years later in 1868. In 1871, Fredrik established a joint company named Nokia Ab with his companion Leo Mechelin. After Fredrik Idestam's retirement, Leo Mechelin took over as the company's chairman in 1896. Following the retirement of his associate, Leo Mechelin extended the operations of Nokia Ab by adding electricity generation in 1902, despite Fredrik's disapproval. Nevertheless, the expansion of the company's operations continued. Due to the impact of World War I, Nokia Ab faced financial difficulties in 1922 and was on the brink of bankruptcy. To rescue the company, Finnish Rubber Works took over Nokia and also obtained Finnish Cable Works, known as Suomen Kaapelitehdas Oy.

In the 1930s, Finnish Rubber Works relocated to the Nokia area to capitalize on the available electrical power and other amenities, leading to its rapid expansion. Additionally, Nokia was involved in the production of respirators for both military and civilian use from the 1930s until the early 1990s (Verma, 2022).

Nokia underwent a transformation in 1967 when Finnish Rubber Works, Kaapelitehdas, and Nokia Ab merged to form the current-day Nokia Corporation. They started producing communication devices and gradually shifted their focus towards the telecom industry. Kari Kairamo became CEO in 1977 and made several acquisitions, including Mobira, which paved the way for Nokia's golden age. They launched their first mobile phone, the Mobira Senator, in 1982, but Kairamo passed away in 1988, and Simo Vuorilehto took over as CEO. (Verma, 2022).

Nokia's Rise and Fall

As a result of Finland's early deregulation of telecommunications in the 80s, Nokia was able to develop innovative telecommunication technologies and make first experiences in telecommunication commercialization. In the new cellular technology, the handsets and networks are primarily responsible for the development. It is the operator who purchases the infrastructure, and it is the user who purchases the handset. These products were designed, manufactured, and marketed successfully in Finland by Nokia. In general, Nokia's image is dominated by its mobile phone marketing, but its infrastructure business has also been successful. As telecommunication deregulation spread to other European and American countries, Nokia had already the latest technology and introduced it internationally. In 1991, Nokia launched the first GSM network in Finland. The Nokia GSM system was supplied to 59 operators in 31 countries in the mid-1990s and was available in every cellular standard. From 1992-2001, there were approximately 506 million cellular subscribers (Leinbach & Brunn, 2002).

In addition to pioneering 3G and LTE (Long Term Evolution) technology, Nokia continued to launch gadgets that delivered a better user experience than its rivals It is understandable for those who used the Nokia 7650 in 2001, Nokia's first camera-equipped phone. The popularity of Nokia phones grew, but the Finnish company couldn't keep up with the demand, despite its mass production. Consequently, Apple and Samsung had a market gap to fill. In the middle of the 1990s, Nokia had to restructure its supply chain systems and procedures in order to increase its market share. From 1996 to 2001, its revenue increased from $6.65 billion to $31.72 billion. As the global leader of mobile phones in 1998, Nokia commanded the largest share of the market (Subramanian & Abdulla, 2014).

Until 2007, it dominated the global market with a 50% market share. Nokia's spectacular decline began in 2007, the apex year of its existence. The top management of the company changed in 2006. Nokia was busy producing its traditional phones instead of investing in innovations that would keep them ahead of the competition. Nokia's Symbian OS phones are no longer as advanced as those powered by Apple's and Google's iOS and Android operating systems. Several factors contributed to Nokia's downfall. There was a destabilizing effect on its monopoly due to its internal and external environments (Lamberg, 2021).

Literature Review

According to Borhanuddin and Iqbal (2016), Nokia is a Finland based company that was established in 1868 by Fredrik Idestam in Finland. Currently, the company is a publicly traded company that operates in extensive telecommunication infrastructure business and is also involved in virtual reality. Before Microsoft acquired its mobile phone business, Nokia was a significant player in the mobile phone market. However, following its decline and acquisition, various scholars have conducted extensive research to investigate the reasons for its failure. This paper will examine some journal articles that explore different models and theories used in these research studies. It will critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these concepts, and analyze and debate the findings presented in these articles.

Nagpal and Lyytinen (2013) demonstrated in their research investigate the early years of the mobile phone industry by analyzing major mobile phone companies and their partnerships with key technology vendors. To understand these alliances and firm strategies, the researchers utilize Actor Network Theory (ANT) as a framework and gather historical data on the mobile phone and related industries. The period from 1994 to 2003 is considered the era of feature phones, during which mobile phone sales grew by 20% per year and reached 520 million units in 2003. This growth was driven by both first-time buyers in emerging markets and replacement demand in developed markets. The study of this era is significant for understanding later stages of the market, particularly the smart phone era that followed. In more recent times, there have been new developments in the industry that involve greater complexity and integration of hardware and software, with companies like Google and Microsoft offering their own hardware devices and operating systems for mobile phones.

The existing focus on firm-level analyses, such as the resource-based view, has overlooked the importance of alliances in the mobile phone industry. Slind, B. G. a. M. (2014, August 7). Shared the facts i.e. This study aims to fill this gap by examining the role of strategic alliances in the industry using Actor Network Theory as a framework. The research question is centered around the key actors and actants in the industry and how their alliances have impacted their success or limitations. To answer this question, historical data on alliances involving leading mobile phone companies and other related industries is analyzed. The paper is structured in the following manner: background information on the industry and Actor Network Theory, analyses of specific companies and consortia, and a conclusion that includes a discussion of restrictions and ideas for next studies.

The focus of this article is on mobile phone providers and IT suppliers as it tracks the affiliations in the actor network. In addition to their observations on the individual companies, they synthesize the results in this section. First, success of Nokia has been linked to many factors, over and above its size. It had a privileged position to shape the actor network due to its leadership of Symbian. It kept an eye out for competition in "related" technologies, and by bringing Palm into the alliance, it bolstered Symbian.

According to the other article that published by Jia and Yin in 2015 they examine the decline of Nokia in the technology market from a marketing standpoint, tracing the company's journey from its previous success to its eventual acquisition by Microsoft in 2013. The paper provides an analysis of the marketing-related factors that contributed to the acquisition. This paper is particularly relevant for this review as marketing is a fundamental aspect of any business and serves as its lifeline. Approaching Nokia's decline from a marketing perspective allows for a comprehensive understanding of all the possible factors that could have influenced the company's trajectory throughout its development.

Furthermore, Alibage and Weber (2018) focuses on the primary research problem of Nokia's decline in the mobile phone business. The introduction of the paper provides an overview of the research problem, highlighting its different components. The research problem is divided into three sections: the developmental process of Nokia, the period of transition, and the peak and decline period. The paper examines the reasons behind Nokia's failure in three parts: the company's executive management of the market, its business strategy, and its cooperation with other entities. Additionally, the paper provides an analysis of Nokia's relevance to present-day enterprises from the current market perspective.

While the research article lacks a comprehensive presentation of its methodology, which is a crucial component of any research, it makes up for it by utilizing other literature and research journals to support its arguments. The article refers to 11 research papers that meet the required standards and focus on Nokia's transition and eventual acquisition, highlighting various marketing failures that impacted the mobile phone company's business. The literature review of these journal articles is logically consistent and relevant to the research topic. The review starts with an introduction providing information about the subject matter and later provides an overview of the reviews based on the research problem.

The paper, although well-suited for the topic at hand and of significant importance, lacks certain important aspects of a research study. While it extensively analyzes the literature and provides insights into what went wrong with Nokia and how the company's management failed to adapt to changing market needs, it has some limitations. One of the primary limitations is that it does not suggest potential avenues for future research. While it offers solutions on how Nokia could have better addressed the changing marketing needs during the technology revolution era, it does not provide suggestions for areas of future research. This could have been valuable for other businesses in the smartphone industry, as Nokia's experience could serve as an important lesson for future ventures.

In the case of Nokia, the aim of the other research that is the Nokia corporation and the loos of market dominance in mobile phone, examine the reasons behind Nokia Corporation's failure to respond effectively to the challenges posed by Apple and Google in the smartphone industry. In this case study, analyze the choices made by Nokia in terms of technology and organizational design that contributed to the failure of its mobile phone business. Rather than focusing on individual attributes such as fear or hubris, they emphasize the importance of understanding the decision-making process. This research contributes to the field of strategic failure studies and highlights the value of oral history methods and the philosophy of history as useful approaches to such investigations. The objective of this article is to present a more analytical and logically sound account of the reasons behind Nokia's decline in the mobile phone market. Hence, this research holds considerable importance (lamberg at al., 2021).

The research paper by Laamanen, Lamberg and Vaara, (2015) focuses on how the narrative attributions of success and failure have evolved in the history of a company, emphasizing the role of storytelling in shaping corporate performance. Specifically, it examines how Nokia was initially viewed as successful and later as a failure, and how various actors constructed narratives to explain these performances. The study found that both success and failure were portrayed in a simplistic manner, leading to the institutionalization of Nokia's metanarratives. Additionally, the study identified several discursive attributional tendencies, highlighting the potential cognitive and politically motivated biases in management literature. The reason why the article was chosen is because its subject matter is directly related to the topic being discussed.

According to other papers that discussed How fear of change, lack of innovation led to Nokia’s failure? It uses Nokia as a case study to investigate the reasons for business failure in the mobile manufacturing sector, which is considered the most interesting and innovative sector in the Information and Communications Technology industry. The research aims to provide a better understanding of the causes and effects of Nokia's market failure using an explanatory conclusive research design. Nokia was once a dominant company in the market until it failed due to its complacency, fear of change, lack of innovation, and slow decision-making process in response to the emergence of the iPhone. The paper provides an analysis of the reasons for Nokia's failure and the characteristics of the mobile manufacturing industry, supported by a literature review, and concludes by offering advice to business makers (Barack, 2023).

According to the Khan et al., (2017) they review the failure of Nokia. In this paper they explain how Nokia had established itself as a dominant player in the mobile phone industry, with its devices being a popular choice among consumers. However, their success was short-lived, as they faced a decline in sales during a crucial period between 2007 and 2010. This period was marked by the introduction of iOS and Android, which posed stiff competition to Nokia's products. Furthermore, Nokia's lack of innovation and inability to keep up with the changing market trends and consumer preferences further contributed to their downfall. Despite its previous success, Nokia's decline in the mobile phone industry forced the company to make changes in its strategy. One such change was partnering with Microsoft for software. However, this attempt at recovery failed to bring about the desired results, and Nokia continued to struggle. What is perhaps most surprising about Nokia's downfall is how quickly the company lost its top position after having been the dominant player in the mobile phone industry. Within a short span of just five years, Nokia was sold to Microsoft, marking the end of an era for the once-popular company. The fall of Nokia serves as a cautionary tale for businesses, highlighting the importance of staying up-to-date with changing market trends and consumer preferences, as well as being innovative in order to keep a leading position in the sector. The manuscript meets certain criteria to be considered for our assessment.

Background

               A leading mobile-phone maker falls out of step with its market — and struggles to catch up (Groysberg and Slind, 2012). Over the course of more than a decade, Nokia maintained its position as the mobile phone manufacturer with the highest market share in the whole world. Nokia's early success was mostly the product of visionary and brave management decisions that utilized the company's revolutionary technology at a time when digitalization and deregulation of telecom networks rapidly extended throughout Europe. Nokia's early success was primarily the result of a youthful, unified, and energetic leadership team at the head of the company.

            During the late 1990s and early 2000s, the Nokia Corporation saw a stratospheric ascent in the telecommunications sector, dominating the mobile phone market with its popular, very durable handsets (Barack, 2023). However, the company's precipitous downturn and final death in 2011 left many puzzled and asking what occurred. Nokia's downfall was caused by several issues, including its tardy adoption of touchscreen technology and the arrival of the iPhone.

            The telecoms and digital infrastructure industries were both led by Nokia at one point. In 2012, it was the company that sold the most mobile phones everywhere in the globe (Barack, 2023). The value of a corporation that was previously estimated at $250 billion is now only estimated at $14 billion. In 2007, this firm was responsible for the shipment of 463 million mobile phones all over the globe. However, they only barely sent 4.4 million in 2013. The first Nokia smartphone with a GPS receiver, Wi-Fi connectivity, stereo speakers, and a 5-megapixel camera was made available in 2007. Nokia steadfastly refused to accommodate the developments and endeavors of other mobile phone manufacturers to advance the capabilities of smartphones. To maintain its competitive edge, the company was unable to adapt quickly enough to the shifting preferences of its customers.

            The company came up with completely new models that were sold under different names even though Nokia's marketing plan bombed. Since this wasn't the case, consumers couldn't make educated purchases and it failed miserably at communicating any sort of brand message. The adoption of an umbrella branding strategy would have made expanding Nokia's market share a lot less difficult. The company's demise started when it stubbornly refused to adapt to the times and instead insisted on maintaining business as usual. It failed to understand that people who had wanted to buy a feature phone no longer did so. Smartphones with more features than merely making and receiving calls and texting are in high demand.

            Nokia greatly miscalculated the significance of software in the mobile industry. It has been a worldwide brand since 1997 and is the world's largest maker of smartphones. Until 2007, it had the highest market share of any brand, accounting for 39% of the market (Barack, 2023). Nokia was unprepared for the arrival of smartphones and failed to recognize shifting client demands.

            There is not a one cause that can be pinpointed as being solely responsible for Nokia's falling market share in the mobile phone industry. Instead, the inability of the corporation to perceive the transition in rivalry from product-based competition to platform-based competition was driven by a mix of managerial choices, inefficient organizational structures, expanding bureaucracy, and severe internal rivalries inside the company.

Problems of Nokia

                The pioneer in cell technology formerly was Nokia. But they were unable to ignore their heritage. They had a steady decline in their agreements from 2007 to 2010. 

• Delay in Smartphone Evolution: Nokia was unable to jump on the Android train. Nokia resisted changes even as other mobile phone makers were hard at work enhancing and developing their handsets. Samsung soon released a line of affordable, user-friendly smartphones with Android operating systems. The management of Nokia believed that consumers would reject touch screens and stick with the QWERTY keyboard design. Its demise began with this misunderstanding. Nokia never viewed Android as a development, and the firm had no interest in adopting it. Nokia released the Symbian operating system after understanding market trends. However, Apple and Samsung had already established their positions at that moment, so it was too late. Operating system Symbian struggled to gain traction.
• The Microsoft Agreement: The bad timing of the transaction with the tech behemoth Microsoft was another factor in Nokia's demise. When the software giant suffered losses, the corporation sold itself to Microsoft. Nokia's sales clearly indicated the company's incapacity to stand on its own. Samsung and Apple made substantial advances in innovation and technology in the same period. It was already too late for Nokia to adjust to the rapid and severe market shifts. One of the worst mistakes in recent history was Microsoft's purchase of Nokia, which proved unsuccessful for both parties.
• Nokia's Miserable Marketing Approaches: Nokia had the typical startup failure brought on by a poor marketing plan. The business's attempt to market itself as an umbrella firm failed. Apple was the first business to use the iPhone as the centerpiece of its umbrella branding strategy. It kept adding new models to its lineup as it expanded its canopy each year. Nokia neglected to take inspiration from Samsung, who launched the Samsung Galaxy series after the same (Alibage & Webe, 2018).

Nokia was quickly losing the user confidence it had earned over the years. The company's distribution and sales strategies were poor. After realizing the mess, Nokia decided to develop some exciting hardware and software improvements. This lacked originality and had already been published by Nokia's competitors. Nokia's marketing and distribution tactics fell flat (Wang, 2022).

• Going Too Slow Compared to the Industry:  With evolving technology and trends, Nokia was never able to keep up. Nokia has long been recognized for its hardware and hasn't given much effort to its software range. To avoid the dangers of introducing innovation to phones, the corporation first ignored technical developments (Cooper et al., 2001).

When Nokia understood the need for a distraction, it was already too late. Instead of being one of the early adopters, Nokia made the switch after practically all of the big brands had already started making fantastic phones.

• The power Overestimation: Nokia overestimated the importance of its brand. The company believed that despite the lateness of the debut of its smartphones, customers would still throng to merchants to purchase Nokia-branded products. A misunderstanding! People continue to expect that Nokia will maintain its position as the industry leader if it employs stronger software as its foundation. As we can see now, this is a long cry from reality.

The business was forced to continue using a software system recognized for having several faults and clunks. Nokia thought that regaining its past glory would assist to address all issues. Sadly, it wasn't how things actually worked out.

• Failure to innovate new product: Nokia's problems were further worsened by the absence of innovation in its products. Nokia only offered a Windows phone with basic features, whereas Samsung and Apple consistently introduced phones with new features. Even the Nokia Lumia series, which served as a spur-of-the-moment intervention, failed for lack of creativity. The monotonous and unappealing features didn't help. In the 4G era, Nokia didn't even provide phones with 3G capabilities. Nokia also introduced the Asha series, but it was already too late (Sulopuisto, 2013).
• Organizational Structure Modification: Nokia switched to a matrix-style organization. It was a swift change that was made to increase agility. Many stakeholders were angry, and key management members quit the business. The individuals who contributed to Nokia's success were no longer employed by the business. This is one of the factors that contributed to the company's impact from internal working (Cooper et al., 2001).

SWOT Analysis

A SWOT analysis, which stands for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats, is a method used in business planning to assess how an organization compares to its competitors (Humphrey, 1960).

 

(“Nokia Corporation - Financial and Strategic Analysis Review,” 2022)

Nokia Corporation
Strengths	Weaknesses
R&D Diverse Customer Base Manufacturing Network	Huge Debt Slow Entry
Opportunities	Threats
Global Cloud Computing Market Mobile 5G Commercialization Market Smartphone Revolution Partnerships	RoHS, and WEEE Regulations Intense Competition Foreign Exchange Risks

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SWOT Analysis Overview

Nokia Corp (Nokia) could be a supplier of arranged frameworks and portable communication administrations. R&D, client base, and fabricating arrangement are the major qualities of the company, though colossal obligation remains a major cause for concern. Worldwide cloud computing showcase, versatile 5G commercialization, and key organizations are likely to offer development openings for the company. Be that as it may, controls from Restriction of Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment (RoHS) and Waste from Electric and Electronic Equipment (WEEE), strong competition, and outside trade dangers might influence its commerce operations. 

• Strengths: Recognize Nokia's qualities that can offer assistance to the company to overcome the delay within the smartphone insurgency and make strides in its showcase position. For case, Nokia includes a solid brand notoriety, a history of development within the portable phone showcase, and a gifted workforce. Recently, Nokia has already spent a huge amount on the R&D department. An expanded client base protects the company from the effect of a downturn in any specific division. The company offers versatile phones and Wi-Fi arrangements. 
• Weakness: The corporation is still concerned about the enormous commitment. The increase in obligation indicates that Nokia will probably result in increased interest expenses, which would affect profit. Identify Nokia's shortcomings that may have contributed to Nokia's slow entry into the smartphone market. Cooperation with Microsoft in the development of the Windows Phone operating system also ended in failure. 
• Opportunities: Recognize the conceivable outcomes Nokia may utilize to defeat the smartphone revolution's delay and reinforce its advertising position. For occurrence, Nokia may reenter the smartphone industry with unused items that offer to a bigger group of onlookers by utilizing its strong brand acknowledgment. The trade can collaborate with other tech firms to form unused innovations or develop existing ones. Nokia gives cloud-based items and administrations to assist businesses turn into computerized businesses. Undertakings may promptly scale up their operations, oversee request varieties, and get to frameworks and administrations through an extent of gadgets at a cheaper taken a toll by utilizing cloud-based operations. The inventive arrangement empowers administrators to convey 5G virtual private organize administrations on 4G and 5G open systems as well as unused administrations to corporate clients by combining a virtualized RAN-Transport-Core-corporate organize with a conveyed cloud center introduced at a client area. 
• Threats: Decide the perils that Nokia stands up to and how they can anticipate it overcoming the robbery within the smartphone insurgency and fortifying its advertising position. On occasion, Nokia fights with furious competition from other IT firms, which can make it challenging to draw in modern clients. Besides, adjustments in client tastes and innovative progressions may render Nokia's current merchandise obsolete. Duty within the particular collection, reusing, treatment, and transfer of past and future secured things by the firms is required beneath the unused Restriction of Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment (RoHS) and Waste from Electric and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) rules situation. The money-related execution and commerce operations of the enterprise might be affected by such an administrative environment. Nokia could be a around the world company that's affected by changes in cash trade rates. The enterprise might lock in remote trade support by entering into outside trade forward contracts to diminish dangers from cash swings. 

We may make a technique based on the SWOT investigation to help Nokia in overcoming the smartphone revolution's delay and reinforce its advertising position. Nokia, for occurrence, may concentrate on making novel, cutting-edge merchandise that offers to a bigger showcase and can explore joining forces with other tech firms to improve its mechanical offers. The commerce might too upgrade its promoting activities to superior target its target advertisements. Nokia can seize chances and overcome challenges to realize productivity within the smartphone industry by utilizing its qualities and settling its confinements.  

Cost-Benefit Analysis

When both the costs and benefits of an intervention are described in monetary terms, cost-benefit analysis can be used to compare them (Jules Dupuit and the Early Theory of Marginal Cost Pricing on JSTOR, n.d.).

Nokia seems to assess the potential costs and benefits of different vital alternatives and select the foremost fiscally reasonable course of activity by utilizing cost-benefit investigation (CBA), a powerful decision-making method that can assist organizations like Nokia to assess the potential costs and benefits of different key choices. 

Nokia might utilize CBA to analyze the points of interest and costs of elective activities in arrange to halt losing cash and turn a benefit. Nokia, for occurrence, may weigh the focal points and impediments of raising deals, growing into modern ranges, or bringing down generation costs. Nokia can distinguish which strategies are most likely to deliver benefits by deliberately weighing the costs and points of interest of numerous approaches. 

Analyzing the conceivable preferences and impediments of moving its operations to more reasonable places is one way Nokia may utilize CBA. Lower work and fabric costs would be one advantage of this strategy, but the fetching would be related to moving workers and gear. Nokia might decide whether or not this arrangement is monetarily attainable by weighing its costs and focal points. 

Below are the particular steps for performing a cost-benefit investigation (CBA) to assist Nokia halts losing cash and begin making cash:

• Define the Decision-Making Issue:  The primary organization is to characterize the issue or choice that Nokia is going up against. For illustration, Nokia may be battling to gain a benefit and must consider a few measures to make strides in the circumstance. 
• Determine substitutes: Following, list the different choices or approaches Nokia may investigate to illuminate the issue. Nokia may think almost raising deals, cutting costs, or growing into unused regions, for occurrence. 
• Establish Expenses: Calculate the costs related to each elective when the choices have been found. This could be moving costs for staff and gear, showcasing costs, or other costs vital to actualizing the arrangement.
• Establish Advantages:  The advantages of each choice must be determined. For example, benefits might include more revenue, lower costs, or higher customer satisfaction. 
• Calculate the Expenses and Rewards: Afterward, figure out the costs and benefits of each option. This involves giving each item a monetary value so that it can be easily compared. 
• Compare the Expenses and Rewards: To choose the most financially sound plan of action, weigh the pros and cons of each option. Think about the net present value (NPV) of each option, which represents the time value of money. 
• Select the best Choice: Finally, based on the findings of the ABC, choose the best option. This involves looking at the potential financial viability of the option alongside other factors such as risk and practicality. 

All things considered, CBA can be a useful tool for Nokia to weigh the costs and benefits of different strategic options and decide which is most likely to be profitable. Nokia can overcome losses and move towards a prosperous future by making the right decisions. 

Force-Field Analysis

The decision-making method known as Force Field Analysis (FFA) helps organizations identify factors for or against the proposed change. It involves locating and evaluating many factors, both internal and external, that influence a given choice (Kurt Lewin, 1940).

 

(Lewin’s Force Field Analysis Explained, n.d.)

Finding out what drives an organization toward its current organizational structure and the forces that prevent it from changing is the goal of force field analysis. For example, in the Nokia example, a desire for stability, efficiency, and control might be the driving factors behind a hierarchical organizational structure, while a lack of collaboration and communication between departments might be limiting factors. 

The organization can then create plans to modify the organizational structure to make it more conducive to innovation once these drivers have been recognized. For example, Nokia could have created cross-functional teams or more collaborative work to foster employee engagement, innovation, and creativity. 

Here are the steps Nokia can take to apply the Force Field Analysis technique to overcome from Miserable Marketing Approach and the power of overestimation:  

• Define the Issue:  Clearly identifying the problem Nokia has is the first step. The problem is that the company is not capable of inventing new items in this situation, even though the market changes and customer needs change. 
• Determine the Motivating Forces: The following step is to find the motivations for change. The need for new and innovative products, the need to attract and retain consumers, and the need to remain competitive in the marketplace can all be driving forces behind Nokia. 
• Determine the Restraining Forces: The third stage is to identify constraints that impede the transition. Nokia's current organizational structure that restricts creativity, lack of a strong innovation culture, and insufficient funding for R&D can all be limiting factors. 
• Review the Forces: The driving forces and resistance forces will then be analyzed to determine their respective strengths. This can be done by applying a simple rating system, such as a 1 to 5 scale, where 1 is a weakness and 5 is a strength. The overall strength of the forces can then be calculated by Nokia by adding scores for each force.
• Create a Plan of Action: Nokia can then create a research-based action plan to reduce limiting forces and increase driving forces. This can involve investing in research and development, changing organizational structures to encourage innovation, and creating a culture of innovation within the company. 
• Execute and keep an Eye on the Action Plan: Then Nokia should put the action plan into action and track its success. Regular evaluation is required to see if the strategy is working and if changes are needed. 

Nokia could have improved innovation drivers and overcome constraints by using force field analysis to influence changes in its organizational structure. In turn, this may have helped the company create new innovative products that meet the ever-changing needs of its customers and keep the company competitive in the marketplace.

Delphi Technique

Group decision-making and different types of qualitative research all use the Delphi method. It involves assembling a group of experts, asking them to anonymously respond to a survey or questionnaire, and then sharing the results with the group for discussion and feedback. The procedure is repeated and new questions are posed to each expert. It is expected that all views will eventually agree on a common agreement (Gupta & Clarke, 1996).

Nokia might use the Delphi method by enlisting the assistance of market research, product development, and branding to solve the problems of overestimation and a poor marketing strategy.

The experts can be questioned on the causes of Nokia's overestimation and marketing flops in the first round. The experts may be invited to examine and improve their initial comments in subsequent rounds in light of input from additional experts. Nokia was able to pinpoint the underlying causes of its issues through this iterative approach and create a more potent solution.

The Delphi technique might also be used by Nokia to get professional advice on prospective tactics or solutions for enhancing its marketing strategy. This might involve suggestions for market research, branding, advertising, and product design. Nokia might gather insightful information and get a more thorough grasp of the problems by interacting with a varied range of specialists.

Here is a step-by-step guide on how Nokia can use the Delphi method to solve the issues of overestimation and a miserable marketing approach:

Step 1: Identify the issue Nokia must describe the issue it is attempting to tackle in detail. In this instance, the issue is an inflated perception of market demand and a subpar marketing strategy that resulted in a drop in sales.

Step 2: Choose the specialists Nokia must find professionals with expertise and training in market research, product development, and branding. These specialists may be internal staff members or outside consultants.

Create the questionnaire in step three. Nokia must create a survey that requests the thoughts of the experts on what led to the overestimation and the subpar marketing strategy. Additionally, questions on prospective remedies and enhancement techniques have to be included in the survey.

Step 4: Construct the initial Delphi study iteration. The questionnaire should be given to the experts, who are then requested to reply in an anonymous manner. To determine the main themes and topics, the replies should be gathered and examined.

Step 5: Offer criticism The experts should be given feedback from the replies of the other experts after the initial round. Their thoughts and reactions ought to be improved in light of this criticism.

Step 6: Carry out more Delphi research iterations. Nokia should perform more iterations of the Delphi research, building on the knowledge gleaned from the prior iteration. The experts should be encouraged to keep improving their comments in light of the offered feedback.

Step 7: Examine the outcomes. Nokia should examine the findings after the Delphi survey is finished to pinpoint the most critical conclusions and insights. A thorough strategy should be created using the analysis to solve the problems of overestimation and a poor marketing strategy.

Step 8: Put the plan into action. Nokia should finally implement the plan created using the knowledge acquired from the Delphi research. It is important to monitor and assess the implementation to ensure the intended results are attained.

Nokia was able to learn some profound lessons and gain a deeper understanding of the problems it faced by talking to various experts.

Nominal Group Technique (NGT)

The term "nominal group technique" (NGT) refers to an organized approach to brainstorming in groups that stimulates individual contributions and speeds up consensus on the relative importance of topics, problems, or solutions (McMillan, King, & Tully, 2016).

Therefore, we designed a questionnaire that contains 13 questions to collect the opinions of people who had a history of using Nokia products, which includes a survey of customer satisfaction, the reasons for Nokia's failure and lagging in the mobile market, as well as solutions and suggestions that can be considered for the revival of the company. This questionnaire was sent to 40 people, and 31 people responded to it, which is equal to a participation rate of 77.5%. Below you can see a report based on the responses received from the contacts.

 

Question 1 response graph.

 

Question 2 response graph.

 

Question 3 response graph.

Question 4 response graph.

Question 5 response graph.

Question 6 response graph.

Question 7 response graph.

Question 8 response graph.

Question 9 response graph.

Question 10 response graph.

Question 11 response graph.

Question 12 response graph.

Question 13 response graph.

 

Interesting points that can be taken from this survey are as follows:

• Around 81% of people expressed satisfaction with their mobile phones, highlighting Nokia's strength during its peak (Question 3).

• Figure 5 shows that 92% of respondents believe brand credibility directly influences their purchasing decisions, which could be promising for Nokia. With an 81% credibility rating (Question 3), a slight shift in macro policies could enable the company to regain a foothold in the mobile market.

• Approximately 70% of people attribute Nokia's decline in the mobile market to a lack of innovation in new phone models and its inability to compete effectively with rivals (Question 6).

• Interestingly, 45% of respondents remain loyal to the brand and would consider buying Nokia products if the company successfully reenters the market. An additional 36% hold a neutral stance, suggesting potential for Nokia to convert this group into actual customers (Question 8).

• Over 60% of people believe Nokia could re-enter the competitive market by enhancing creativity and redesigning its brand (Question 9). Innovations in areas such as battery life, processing speed, camera quality, and screen size could drive this resurgence (Question 7).

• 49% of people point to Nokia's inability to adapt to technological changes as a major factor in its loss of competitiveness. However, 51% believe that increased investment in research and development could help the company reverse its decline (Question 11).

• A particularly promising finding is that 58% of respondents believe Nokia has the potential to return to the competitive market (Question 12). This continued trust in the brand, despite its absence, offers encouraging news. Furthermore, 61% suggest that focusing on innovative product development could help Nokia regain its market position (Question 13).

Conclusion

To conclusion, the Nokia debacle serves as an example of how even major corporations may lose market share if they can't adjust to changing conditions and keep an eye on their competitors. Importantly, although Nokia's strategies to innovate, develop, and release so many models each year were seen as successes because Nokia was eager to meet the needs and wants of various customer segments, this was seen as a lack of focus on the one product that can attract the majority of customers and compete flawlessly with the products of rivals.

In the end, referring to all the points raised, it can be concluded that the wrong policies and the wrong understanding of the needs of Nokia's customers led to the point where the company was removed from the competition cycle with its greatness and prestige. This risk threatens all businesses, even with credit and market share, to be removed from the competition scene if they do not have creativity and accurate needs assessment. But the point obtained from the reports is that the good memory of Nokia is always in the minds of different people and many even hopes that Nokia will return to the competition. But it is very important that if there is a revival of this market in Nokia's plan, they have a limited time, because after a while the generation that had memories with Nokia will no longer exist and the new generation is completely unfamiliar with the brand. So, if Nokia wants to come back, it should take basic measures from now on to be able to monopolize the competition market again like in the past.

References

Alibage, A., & Weber, C. (2018). Nokia Phones: From a Total Success to a Total Fiasco. Portland State University. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328157505_Nokia_Phones_From_a_Total_Success_to_a_Total_Fiasco

Barack. (2023, February 4). Exploring The Reasons Behind Nokia’s Failure: What Can We Learn from Their Demise? – CodeLifter. https://www.codelifter.com/exploring-the-reasons-behind-nokias-failure-what-can-we-learn-from-their-demise/

Borhanuddin, B., & Iqbal, A. (2016). Nokia: An Historical Case Study. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311493358_Nokia_An_Historical_Case_Study

Brand Minds. (2018, Jul 24). Why did Nokia fail and what can you learn from it?

            medium.com. https://medium.com/multiplier-magazine/why-did-nokia-fail-   

             81110d981787

Doz, Y. L. (2023, January 19). The strategic decisions that caused Nokia's failure. INSEAD Knowledge. https://knowledge.insead.edu/strategy/strategic-decisions-caused-nokias-failure

Erica, S. (2023). The Real Reason Nokia Failed Spectacularly. history-computer.com. https://history-computer.com/the-real-reason-nokia-failed-spectacularly/

Exploring the reasons behind Nokia’s failure: What can we learn from... (n.d.). https://www.codelifter.com/exploring-the-reasons-behind-nokias-failure-what-can-we-learn-from-their-demise/

Jia, I, & Yin, Y. Analysis of Nokia’s Decline from Marketing Perspective. Vol. 3(04). Open Journal of Business and Management, 2015

Lamberg, J. A., Lubinaitė, S., Ojala, J., & Tikkanen, H. (2021). The curse of agility: The Nokia Corporation and the loss of market dominance in mobile phones, 2003–2013. Business History, 63(4), 574-605.

McMillan, S. S., King, M., & Tully, M. P. (2016). How to use the nominal group and Delphi techniques. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, 38, 655-662. doi:10.1007/s11096-016-0257-x

Nagpal, P., Lyytinen, K. 2013. Key Actors in the Mobile Telephone Industry: Feature Phone Years and the Rise of Nokia. Review of Business Information Systems Fourth Quarter, Vol. 117, No. 4, 2013

Nokia and Microsoft Sign Definitive Agreement Ahead of Schedule - Stories. (2011, April 21). Stories. https://news.microsoft.com/2011/04/21/nokia-and-microsoft-sign-definitive-agreement-ahead-of-schedule/

Parth Verma. (2022). The History of Nokia. From https://www.feedough.com/the-history-of-nokia/

Pepper, T. (2022). How and Why Did Nokia Fail?. Peppercontent.io. https://www.peppercontent.io/blog/how-and-why-did-nokia-fail/

Slind, B. G. a. M. (2014, August 7). The Silent Killer of Big Companies. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2012/10/the-silent-killer-of-big-companies

The Strategic Decisions That Caused Nokia’s Failure. (2017, November 23). INSEAD Knowledge. https://knowledge.insead.edu/strategy/strategic-decisions-caused-nokias-failure

Verma, Parth, et al. “Why Did Nokia Fail?” Feedough, 20 Feb. 2023, https://www.feedough.com/why-did-nokia-fail/

Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., and Sapienza, H. J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management

                        Journal, 22(6-7), 587-613.

Nokia Corporation - Financial and Strategic Analysis Review. (2021). studylib.net. https://studylib.net/doc/8371622/nokia-corporation---financial-and-strategic-analysis-review

Nokia Corporation Financial Report for Q4 and full year 2022 | Nokia. (2023, January 26). Nokia. https://www.nokia.com/about-us/news/releases/2023/01/26/nokia-corporation-financial-report-for-q4-and-full-year-2022/

Lewin’s Force Field Analysis Explained. (n.d.). Change Management Coach. https://www.change-management-coach.com/force-field-analysis.html

Burnes, B., & Cooke, B. (2012). Kurt Lewin’s Field Theory: A Review and Re-evaluation. International Journal of Management Reviews, n/a. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2012.00348.x

Shafaghat, T., Zarchi, M. a. K., Nasab, M. S. E., Kavosi, Z., Bahrami, M. A., & Bastani, P. (2021). Force field analysis of driving and restraining factors affecting the evidence-based decision-making in health systems; comparing two approaches. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 10, 419. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_1142_20

Sunstein, C. R. (2005). Cost‐Benefit Analysis and the Environment. Ethics, 115(2), 351–385. https://doi.org/10.1086/426308

Talvitie, A. (2018). Jules Dupuit and benefit-cost analysis: Making past to be the present. Transport Policy, 70, 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.01.013

Jules Dupuit and the Early Theory of Marginal Cost Pricing on JSTOR. (n.d.). https://www.jstor.org/stable/1829307

Thangaratinam, S., & Redman, C. L. (2005). The Delphi technique. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist, 7(2), 120–125. https://doi.org/10.1576/toag.7.2.120.27071

Gupta, U., & Clarke, R. (1996). Theory and applications of the Delphi technique: A bibliography (1975–1994). Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 53(2), 185–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0040-1625(96)00094-7

Nasa, P., Jain, R. K., & Juneja, D. (2021). Delphi methodology in healthcare research: How to decide its appropriateness. World Journal of Methodology, 11(4), 116–129. https://doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v11.i4.116