db3 Org

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 3

In the 1990s what lifecycle stage was IBM in?

Please critique what life cycle characteristics (as


discussed in the readings) were present at IBM, and what did IBM do to reset its lifecycle stage.

In the 1990s IBM was in a decline stage. The organization had a history of early success,

and around 1990s, there was inability to recognize new realities of poor performance. The

organization seemed to have a considerable amount of commitment to old strategies[CITATION

Lus022 \p 91 \l 1033 ]. This stage costed IBM in that huge amounts of revenue was lost, and the

organization could not move past the stage. This stage in an organization’s lifecycle is not new

as every organization, just like humans, do experience identifiable stages in their

evolution[CITATION Lus022 \p 88 \l 1033 ]. It is up to leaders to assess the organization and identify

weakness and strengths in order to trigger a rebirth. During these years, IBM as a company was

written off by many Wall Street analysts due to its stock price being at lowest since 1983. By

1992, IBM lost more than 60,000 employees despite efforts to transform the company by then

CEO John Akers[CITATION Har07 \p 21 \l 1033 ].

To survive this misfortune, IBM had to use a different strategy in executing its plans.

Strategy is a process by which plans for allocating resources are developed and the actions

required to achieve their goals are identified[CITATION Har07 \p 22 \l 1033 ]. Luo Gerstner who

was appointed CEO after the resignation of John Arkers revealed that the company didn’t lack

smart, talented people. Its problems were fundamentally technical in nature[CITATION Har07 \p

26 \l 1033 ]. This revelation pointed to the fact that the organization had strategies in place but

could not fully execute them due to their commitment to old strategies. Leaders were unable to

recognize new realities of poor performance because they were not directly involved in the

planning process as the company had more than 400 strategic planners who primarily poked

holes in the thinking of leaders[CITATION Har07 \p 27 \l 1033 ]. The company had to make changes
and involved responsible leaders in the strategic planning process that would reflect the realities

and complexities of the business and help in sensing the environment and seizing

opportunities[CITATION Har07 \p 28 \l 1033 ]. IBM changed its focus by bringing together experts

to solve customer problems and not simply sell products or services[CITATION Har07 \p 27 \l

1033 ]. This approach changed the organization as managers were now directly involved in

planning and making sure strategies were executed in order to remain relevant and profitable.

These changes gave a rebirth to a new IBM that has now moved from a technology company to a

broad-based solutions provider and an exemplar of the new world of open systems and on-

demand capabilities[CITATION Har07 \p 21 \l 1033 ].

References
Harreld, B. J., O'Reilly III, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2007). Dynamic Capabilities at IBM:
Driving Strategy into Action. Carlifornia Review Management, 21.
Lusthaus, C., Agrien, M.-H., Anderson, G., Plinio, G., Carden, M., Rey de Marulanda, N., &
Smutylo, T. (2002). Organizational Assessment: A Framework for Improving
Performance. International Development Research Centre.

You might also like