Introduction

Apple is ranked position three in the Fortune 500 list and appear in the list of the most influential in the world. Known for its innovation, the company feature a highly unique and market strategy enabling the company to remain relevant in the market(Lee, Hwang, & Lee, 2006). Apple has earned itself a considerable large number of loyal customers who have establishes trust in the company products. The company recognizes and apply direct investments which have enabled it to exploit research and development to foster innovation in its products.Technology has been at the heights of the company success ensuring that every new product introduced in the market is superior to similar products provided by its competitors. The extensive application of technology in the company coupled with the current advancement in technology leaves the company with no option but to adapt to organizational changes that frequently occur as a result of changes in technology. This paper discusses the concept of organizational changes in Apple including the impact of the changes on both the inner and outer context of the organization.

The content, inner and outer context of Apple

The aspect of organizational change in Apple company is based on the contents manufacture such as the switch to a more effective configuration and manufacture process. The company has switched to an adaptive mode of manufacture. Organizational changes witnessed in Apple majorly involve the linkages between the organization’s inner and outer environment. In business terms, adopting such an organizational change is thought to impact both internal and external context(Pettigrew, 1987). The ability of an organization to resist organizational change can be described the application of change theory which suggests that the ability of an organization to resist changes is founded on its institutional and technical structures and both its inner and outer context(Armenakis & Bedeian, 1999).

Apple as an organization has both external and internal environments consisting of the fundamental components that ensure the existence of the business. Business environment defines the foundations upon which it is laid and predicts the success of the industry in the market.Growth in Apple is another trigger for organizational change(Linzmayer, 2004). When Apple expands and established branches overseas, there will need to change the company’s organizational structures by introducing branch managers. Branch managers will be responsible for manning Apple’s branches in other countries. It is evident that the growth of the company inevitably introduces irresistible organizational changes.Thus, the internal environment of Apple comprises factors such as Employees, management and business culture. All these elements are affected when an organization undergoes significant changes.

On the other hand, the external business environment for Apple comprises elements such as customers, competitors, the government among others(Linzmayer, 2004). Competitors form an essential aspect of the external business environment since can potentially cause organizations to change their strategies to keep up with the competition in the market. When new entrants venture into the same line of business like Apple, the company will be forced to change its strategies to neutralize the effect of the new entrants. This phenomenon describes how organizational changes can occur in response to the external environment. Additionally, the government can change business policies or put in place newregulations including tax regulations forcing the organization (Apple) to change.

The change process

A typical example of the organizational change in Apple Company is based on the leadership changes that have been witnessed in the company over the years. For instance, the company was used to the former CEO of the company, Steve Jobs leadership which was based on excellence ad unconventional leadership. Steve Jobs as a leader was able to rally stakeholders in the company behind his visions for the company(Bergman et al., 2014). Enabling Steve to deliver excellent leadership with excellent staff supporting his leadership style(Jagd, 2011).Harrison’s culture model defines Steve Job’s leadership and organizational culture as a power culture(Altman & Baruch, 1998). According the Job’s organizational structure, he preferred to center the decision making powers to himself as the organization’s Chief Executive. During his leadership, Steve Jobs believed in continual improvement of employee performance. The visionary leadership provided by Steve had both goods and downside. For instance, the success achieved by the company so far is attributed to Steve’s leadership during his tenure as the CEO. His creativity, self-motivation, and intuition enabled him to offer competent leadership.

Thus looking at the company’s inner context, the company leadership is one of the internal environment which has undergone tremendous organizational change(Kaplan, Robert, Davenport, Kaplan, & Norton, 2001). To a more significant extent, the management structure of the company has changed since the death of Steve Jobs and the assumption of the CEO position by Tim Cook. Not only did the transition of leadership from the former CEO, Steve Jobs to the Tim Cook affect the leadership of the company but also the entire organization including the organizational culture adopted by Apple. During Steve’s tenure, the dominant organizational culture was the power culture which created fear among employees. Since Job was focused on delivering the best performance, he hired the best employees and paid them pretty well. This leadership culture enabled Job to maintain high-level secrecy, innovation, and excellent performance. However, the culture seemed to oppress the employees(Kaplan et al., 2001). The culture was not employee centered creating fear and pressure among the employees.

With Tim Cook at the helm of power at Apple, organizational culture has started drifting. He has begun focusing on creating a more balanced work environment for his employees ensuring that employees are less pressurized and they also get fun at work.Despite the changes, the culture of innovation and creativity has remained at the heights of the company’s performance. The company has been able to achieve product differentiation through manufacturing high-quality product with distinguishedfeatures from the competitor’s products.

Some of the significant aspects of organizational change are internal to organizations with the transition of leadership being top on the list(Duhigg & Kocieniewski, 2012). The role of the new leader/incoming leaders in an organization determines the extent of organizational change to a larger extent.For instance, the exit of Steve’s leadership and the commencement of Tim Cook’s leadership demonstrated profound organizational changes in Apple. In addition, the leadership approach adopted by the incoming leaders most frequently differs from the strategies adopted by the previous leaders causing major changes in organizations with respect to organizational culture. Another aspect of regulatory changes that were witnessed in Apple is the organizational resources. The resources owned by Apple have however not changed much as a result of the transition of leadership from Steve to Tim Cook.

The impact of change on content

Steve Job’s declining health status prompted Apple to appoint Tim Cook as the new CEO in the year 2011. Since the departure of Steve Job from the leadership of the company, Apple has faced some profound issues in regards to organizational culture. According to Harrison’s model of organizational culture, the power culture previously adopted in the organization by Steve bears some drawbacks(Mohr, Webb, & Harris, 2001). The organization (Apple) under the power culture was risking a drop in performance if the leader lacks competence. The employees are demoralizing under the power model since power in the organization is centralized with only the top leadership having the power to make decisions. In this organizational culture, employees are not free to criticize the leaders implying that whatever the decision is reached at by the leaders cannot be amended with suggestions from the employees and must be implemented as they are(Mohr et al., 2001). Thus great ideas that can help the company to grow can be missed since employees are not allowed on the decision-making table.

Upon ascending to power in 2011, Tim Cook took a more different path in his leadership of Apple. He introduced a different organizational culture that essentially was more inclusive, balanced and allowed the employees to contribute to the decision-making table. This kind of leadership is more adaptable to all stakeholders within Apple and reduced the pressure on employees. With this kind of leadership, employees freely discharge their duties and are free to contribute to critical decision making. The current organizational culture adopted by Apple empowers employees allowing them to participate in the technological innovations embraced by the company entirely. Thus a significant impact of the organizational change in Apple was felt by the employees who now feel free to work without pressure and can take their time to contribute to creativity and innovation(Reilly, Brett, & Stroh, 1993). In turn, the leadership style adopted by Tim Cook has resulted in improved productivity and innovation.

However, there are concerns that the current CEO at Apple is yet to prove his strategic management skills and show the value that he brings into the business. The CEO had to explore more opportunity to expand the company’s prospects.Steve Jobs demonstrated the highest level of leadership skills which kept the company at the pinnacle of success during his time despite critics complaining that he used a crude leadership culture, power culture.

            Improved employee creativity and innovation, as well as increased employee input in decision making, have been achieved since the beginning of Tim Cook’s leadership. The change in leadership strategies at Apple has yielded positive outcomes, particularly in employee inclusion and participation. When employees feel included in the management of the company, it is likely that the company’s productivity increases thus improving its performance in the market. One of the company’s goals is to ensure product differentiation through innovative and quality product. Distinguishing the company’s product from the other competitors enables Apple to take the lead in the competition(Reilly et al., 1993).  Therefore, cultivating the culture of employee participation in decision making is set to improve both company performance and customer loyalty.

Contrary to Steve’s leadership strategy, the reduced pressure on employees is a potential risk to the company’s reputation which was maintained during Steve Job’s leadership through power culture.Steve ensured excellence in the company by focusing only on excellence which seemed to exert pressure on the employees. The leadership style adopted by Tim Cook places less emphasis on excellence, a strategy that may hurt the company’s reputation in the long run. Diminishing the company’s reputation will only imply that the company’s product quality may be compromised resulting in loss of customer loyalty(Reilly et al., 1993). Customers being an essential component of the outer context, this organizational change in terms of leadership style may significantly affect the company.

Applying the theory of change on Apple organizational change scenario

The theory of change helps an individual/organization to prepare and put in place strategies necessary to deal with anticipated change. The theory suggests that the stakeholders are required to perform a proper assessment and evaluation of the anticipated change. The outcome of such assessment guides the stakeholders on the necessary path to take to counter the consequences of the change. An essential aspect of the change theory is that it defines both the short-term and long-term measure that can be made to counter the challenges that accompany the change(Connell & Kubisch, 1998).

In the context of Apple Company, the anticipated change in leadership was an indicator for the company to prepare for the consequences of the change. For instance, there was a need for the company management would prepare for the change by mentoring other upcoming leaders within the company(Connell & Kubisch, 1998). By preparing a new leader to take over the leadership position left by Steve Jobs would help the company to navigate through the change in company leadership as well as the change in organizational culture.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Apple is constituted by various components including both inner and outer context. The inner context coincides to the business internal environment that is the core of every business. The internal environment of Apple includes the employees, management and resources owned by the company. On the other hand, the external business environment is the outside factors that affect business such as the government, customers and the community in which the business operates.Organizational change identified within Apple includes a range of factors ranging from changes in leadership, changes in organizational culture, changes in business performance and changes in the executive board of the company. The demise of Steve Job caused a series of organizational changes in Apple company some of which were positive and others negative.

Reference

Altman, Y., & Baruch, Y. (1998). Cultural theory and organizations: analytical method and cases. Organization Studies, 19(5), 769–785.

Armenakis, A. A., & Bedeian, A. G. (1999). Organizational change: A review of theory and research in the 1990s. Journal of Management, 25(3), 293–315.

Bergman, E., Englund, T., Cashman, L., Watkins, T., Weight Taylor, K., Shaw, E., … Schepman, S. B. (2014). The Effects of the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act on School Lunch. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 114(9, Supplement), A60. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2014.06.195

Connell, J. P., & Kubisch, A. C. (1998). Applying a theory of change approach to the evaluation of comprehensive community initiatives: progress, prospects, and problems. New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives, 2(15–44), 1–16.

Duhigg, C., & Kocieniewski, D. (2012). How Apple sidesteps billions in taxes. The New York Times, 28, 1–5.

Jagd, S. (2011). Pragmatic sociology and competing orders of worth in organizations. European Journal of Social Theory, 14(3), 343–359.

Kaplan, R. S., Robert, N. P. D. K. S., Davenport, T. H., Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). The strategy-focused organization: How balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. Harvard Business Press.

Lee, S., Hwang, T., & Lee, H.-H. (2006). Corporate blogging strategies of the Fortune 500 companies. Management Decision, 44(3), 316–334.

Linzmayer, O. W. (2004). Apple confidential 2.0: The definitive history of the world’s most interesting company. No Starch Press.

Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., & Harris, K. E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 45–72.

Pettigrew, A. M. (1987). Context and action in the transformation of the firm. Journal of Management Studies, 24(6), 649–670.

Reilly, A. H., Brett, J. M., & Stroh, L. K. (1993). The impact of corporate turbulence on Managers’ attitudes. Strategic Management Journal, 14(S1), 167–179.

Do you need high quality Custom Essay Writing Services?