UNIVERSITY POLYTECHNIC
Faculty of Engineering & Technology
Jamia Millia Islamia
New Delhi-110025
ICT MANAGEMENT &
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
DEVELOPMENT (DCO-608)
Assignment-1
Case Study on Nokia
Submitted By: Submitted to:
Md Rasidalam (23DCS030) Motasim Sir
Md Saquib Khan (23DCS031)
Md Sajid (23DCS032)
Md Zafar Malik (23DCS033)
Md Arquame Farooque (23DCS034)
Introduction to Nokia
Nokia is a multinational technology company that originated in Finland. It was founded in
1865 as a paper manufacturing company and gradually diversified into rubber products,
cables, electronics, and finally telecommunications. By the late 1990s and early 2000s, Nokia
had transformed itself into the world’s largest mobile phone manufacturer, becoming a
symbol of reliability, durability, and innovation.
During its peak period (around 1998–2007), Nokia dominated the global mobile phone
market. Its phones were known for:
• Strong battery life
• Simple and user-friendly interface
• High durability
• Wide availability across both developed and developing countries
Models like the Nokia 1100 and Nokia 3310 became iconic, selling hundreds of millions of
units worldwide. At one point, Nokia controlled over 40% of the global mobile phone market,
far ahead of competitors.
Nokia’s Business Model Before the Crash:
Before smartphones became mainstream, Nokia’s success was based on:
1. Hardware excellence – strong build quality and radio technology
2. Symbian OS – Nokia’s in-house operating system for smartphones
3. Scale advantage – massive global distribution and manufacturing
4. Brand trust – especially strong in Europe, Asia, and emerging markets
This model worked extremely well in the feature phone era, where software complexity and
app ecosystems were not critical.
The Turning Point (Beginning of the Problem):
The real challenge for Nokia began after 2007, when the mobile phone industry shifted from
hardware-centric devices to software- and ecosystem-centric smartphones.
Two major changes reshaped the market:
• Touchscreen smartphones
• App-based ecosystems
Competitors adapted faster, while Nokia continued to rely heavily on its old strengths.
This marked the beginning of Nokia’s decline, which later resulted in a massive market crash.
In 2013, Microsoft purchased the mobile phone (Devices and Services) business of Nokia for
about €5.4 billion, after Nokia lost its dominance in the smartphone market. The deal was
completed in 2014, and Microsoft took over Nokia’s phone manufacturing, Lumia
smartphones, and many employees, while Nokia kept its telecom network business and
patents (licensed to Microsoft). Microsoft tried to revive the business using Windows Phone,
but it failed to compete with Android and iOS due to poor app support and low consumer
demand. By 2016, Microsoft shut down the Nokia phone business, wrote off large losses, and
Nokia continued as a separate company focusing on telecom infrastructure and network
technologies.
Where the market crashed:
In developed markets (North America, Western Europe) where touch/app ecosystems
mattered most. Nokia retained pockets of strength in low-cost feature-phone segments and
some emerging markets for a time, but its high-margin smartphone business collapsed. The
competitive collapse was strongest where app ecosystems determined buyer choice.
Root causes — what went wrong (with evidence):
1. Platform & ecosystem failure (product architecture mismatch).
Nokia’s device-centric OS (Symbian, later attempts like MeeGo) could not compete
with integrated software+services ecosystems (iOS, Android). Market shifted from
“device-to-device” competition to platform-and-app competition; Nokia lagged in
developer support, app stores, and unified UX.
2. Strategic choice: Windows Phone over Android.
The 2011 decision to make Windows Phone the primary smartphone platform reduced
Nokia’s addressable market and delayed product-market fit. Windows Phone had
limited developer support and lower consumer mindshare compared to Android/iOS,
so Nokia traded software flexibility for a tightly bound but small ecosystem.
3. Organizational inertia and internal dysfunction.
Nokia was slow from inside. Nokia had too many departments and layers of
management. Decisions took a lot of time because approvals had to pass through
many levels. Different teams (software, hardware, R&D) did not work properly
together. While competitors like Apple and Android companies were moving fast,
Nokia was stuck in internal problems.
The CEO Stephen Elop wrote an internal message called the “burning platform” memo,
saying:
“Nokia is standing on a burning platform and must jump or die.”
➔ This memo showed that Nokia itself knew it was in serious trouble.
➔ When the memo got leaked to the public, customers and investors lost confidence
in Nokia.
➔ People stopped buying Nokia phones because they felt the company was failing.
4. Marketing/brand & the “Osborne effect(When a company talks too early about
a new product, people stop buying the old one).”
Publicly signaling a major platform change before a competitive Windows Phone
product line was widely available (and while older Symbian phones remained inferior
to iPhone/Android alternatives) depressed sales of interim products and accelerated
share loss. Analysts compared this dynamic to the Osborne effect (announcing future
products kills present sales).
5. Missed timing and execution: MeeGo underprioritized.
Nokia had an alternative (MeeGo) that had technical promise but was not brought to
market with sufficient speed or marketing; resources shifted to the Microsoft
partnership instead. This squandered a plausible independent route.
How it could realistically have been stopped (what Nokia could have done
at the time):
Note: these are plausible alternate strategies based on hindsight and business analysis — not
guarantees. Each has trade-offs.
1. Nokia should have adopted Android early
Instead of choosing Windows Phone, Nokia could have used Android OS.
Why this would help:
• Android already had many apps and developers.
• Customers preferred phones with more apps and features.
• Other companies like Samsung succeeded by using Android.
What Nokia would gain:
• Strong app ecosystem
• Faster market recovery
• Better competition with Apple
2. Nokia should have fully supported MeeGo (its own OS)
MeeGo was Nokia’s own modern operating system.
What Nokia should have done:
• Launch MeeGo phones faster
• Invest more money in development and marketing
• Improve MeeGo instead of abandoning it
Why it mattered:
• MeeGo was better than Symbian
• It could keep Nokia independent
• The Nokia N9 (MeeGo phone) received positive reviews
3. Nokia should not have announced changes too early
Nokia told the world too soon that:
• Symbian would end
• Windows Phone would replace it
This caused:
• Customers to stop buying Nokia phones
• Dealers to cancel orders
• Loss of trust
What Nokia should have done:
• Keep plans internal
• Launch new phones first
• Announce changes after success
4. Nokia needed faster decision-making
Nokia was too slow inside the company.
What should have been improved:
• Fewer management layers
• Faster approvals
• Better teamwork between departments
Why this mattered:
• Apple and Android companies were moving very fast
• Nokia lost time in internal discussions
• This could have stopped Osborne effect
References:
1. Harvard Business Review — “The Real Cause of Nokia’s Crisis” (analysis of
strategic causes).
2. INSEAD Knowledge — “The Strategic Decisions That Caused Nokia’s Failure.”
3. Microsoft press release — Microsoft to acquire Nokia’s devices & services business
(3 Sept 2013).
4. Guardian / Wired / BusinessInsider — Stephen Elop “burning platform” memo
(Feb 2011) and contemporary reporting on its impacts.
5. Market-share analyses / academic case studies — multiple case studies that
document Symbian’s fall and Android’s rise.