Case Study Analysis – Change Leadership at Apple Inc.

[Name of the Student]

[Name of the Institute]

1.0- Introduction

This report is aimed to evaluate and analyze the case study of Apple Inc. to understand

the leadership style and the changes done by Steve Jobs and Tim Cook so that the underlying

perspectives of the Apple’s success could be understood and identified.

2.0- Situational Analysis

The situation of the Apple Inc. is analyzed by using the force field analysis. A force field

analysis is used to identify the factors and forces that drive the change to happen (Thompson et

al. 2015).

2.1- Driving Forces

The driving forces that convinced Jobs to bring changes in the business strategies include

the increasing demand for innovative devices, competitors were launching mobile devices more

rapidly and the declining annual revenues before 1997. When Jobs took over as the CEO of the

company, then he felt the need of changing the technological compatibilities of the business to

catalyze the profit and growth of the company (Heracleous & Papachroni, 2016).

On the other hand, when Tim Cook took over the charge of the company, the most

significant driving force that pushed him to bring change was the perception of the people that

now the company’s profile will decline due to the absence of Jobs’ leadership qualities and lack

of trust on Cook’s capabilities. On the other hand, Cook also felt the need of changing the

organizational corporate culture because the iOS systems were becoming difficult to use for the
customers as Samsung and Google were launching free android digital products and services

(Heracleous & Papachroni, 2016).

2.2- Resisting Forces

The resisting forces for Jobs during the change at Apple Inc. include the lack of

technological expertise and the research sector in the company (Shrivastava, Shrivastava &

Ramasamy, 2017). Also, the employees of the company were familiar with the traditional setup

and were not ready to follow Jobs’ instructions during the initial phase of his charge.

The resisting forces for Tim Cook were different from those which were faced by Steve

Jobs. These include the well-developed corporate managerial culture and influence of the

suppliers and marketers (Thompson et al. 2015). Moreover, another force that resisted in the

Cook’s leadership for change is the involvement of those managers who were the right hand of

Jobs and were not ready to support Cook’s decisions and opinions (Shrivastava, Shrivastava &

Ramasamy, 2017).
 The diagram of force field analysis of Apple Inc. is showing the driving and resisting

forces for both Jobs and Cook.

3.0- Need for Change

The need for change at Apple Inc. was influenced by the driving and resisting forces that

are discussed in the previous section. However, the need for change is evident by the financial

data which shows that Steve Jobs needed to bring change in order to sustain the company in

terms of the market share and profitability. On the other hand, the need for change is also evident

from the rapidly changing digital and mobile industry due to which the competition was

becoming intense for the company (Heracleous & Papachroni, 2016).

When Tim Cook started to lead the company after Jobs, the need for change is

characterized by the expensive Apple products as compared to the other mobile companies.

There is a need to develop a change strategy so that innovative digital products could be
launched other than iPods, iPhones, iPads, and laptops. Moreover, the corporate culture

developed by Jobs was becoming comfortable and the employees and managers were not putting

extra efforts to achieve the business objectives (Thompson et al. 2015).

4.0- Effectiveness of Leadership

The effectiveness of leadership is discussed in terms of the leadership style of Steve Jobs,

Tim Cook and the impact of their leadership of corporate culture.

4.1- Leadership Effectiveness of Steve Jobs

The leadership style of Steve Jobs is found to be of transformational leadership as he was

more focused on envisioning the employees along so that all members of the organisation could

be streamlined towards the achievement of change objectives. Jobs acquired the talented team for

designing innovative and technological products as he believed that user-friendly and innovative

designs are the tool to attract customers. His effective leadership was also exhibited by his

approach of deep collaboration with the managerial staff as he wanted to align the whole

organisation towards the achievement of a single and collaborative goal. The effectiveness of his

leadership is evident by the increased market capitalisation of $741.8 billion in 2015 as

compared to $2 billion in 1997 when Jobs took over the leadership charge of Apple Inc

(Heracleous & Papachroni, 2016).

4.2- Leadership Effectiveness of Tim Cook

By reviewing the case study presented by Heracleous and Papachroni, (2016) it is evident

that Tim Cook induced transactional leadership style when he became Apple’s CEO after Steve

Jobs. This is because he emphasized designing new products, setting financial and performance
targets and carefully monitored all the business strategies. He also considered the organisational

culture by making significant changes in firing Scott Forstall and giving operating control to

Jonathan Ive. The effectiveness of his leadership is evident by the introduction of new

technologies and products such as Apple Pay, Apple Watch, Apple TV and iOS 8 and Mac OS X

Yosemite. During his tenure, Apple became the most valuable brand of the world having worth

of $170.3 billion in 2015.

4.3- Impact of Leadership on Corporate Culture

Steve Jobs established a collaborative corporate culture in which all the hardware-

software designers, graphic designers, product managers, electrical, mechanical and industrial

engineers were taken on a single platform so that they collaboratively develop innovative

products and digital services. Since he was only two steps away from the key parts of the

company, he was able to communicate with all the members and also he could also resolve the

concerns and issues of the employees efficiently (Xue, 2016).

On the other hand, Tim Cook took some bold steps regarding the organisational culture

such as firing the Jobs’ trusted Scott, iOS development of the mobile systems Craig Federighi

and promoting Jonathan Ive to the head of design. However, the impact of Cook’s decision was

found in the form of development of iOS 7, hiring professional experts from Tag Heuer, Haute

Couture, and Burberry. It is also found that Cook’s leadership impact on the corporate culture

resulted in the diversified skills of the professionals due to which the company was able to

launch valued digital products during his tenure (Heracleous & Papachroni, 2016).

5.0- Effectiveness of the Change

done in light of the Kotter’s eight-step change process. Small et al. (2016) elaborated that if a

change process follows the Kotter’s change steps, then the probability of success of the change is

much higher. Therefore, we consider that if the Jobs’ change process followed the Kotter’s

change model, then it is a successful change.

1- Jobs did not create a sense of urgency as he did not communicate the need for change

throughout the organisation.

2- He formed a powerful coalition for guiding the corporate structure and the employees

of the company regarding the technical capabilities of the company.

3- He created a vision of pacing the technological development in the field of

computers, mobile phones, and digital products.

4- He communicated this vision through the press releases and annual strategic reports

of the company.

5- He empowered the deep collaborated teams so that they can design the products that

bring change in the company.

6- Jobs created short term wins by launching the products and by providing stock-based

incentives for the employees.

7- He consolidated the new technologies to design more new products such as iOS and

iPhones.

8- He did not institutionalise the new Apple products with any other brand or company

(Xue, 2016).

The change steps taken by Steve Jobs are based on Kotter’s change model, which shows

that the change process was much successful.

followed by the levers of strategic change. He created a compelling case for change as he felt the

need of changing the iPhone design and technology, as the competitors were introducing large

screen mobiles and innovative digital services. He also accepted the challenge of granted

leadership as the majority of the strategic analysts and managers perceive that he cannot lead any

change at Apple Inc. and the company cannot revive its past successes. Cook also changed the

operational processes and routine corporate culture in such a way that all are liable to perform in

designing the new approaches (Heracleous & Papachroni, 2016). However, he did not have the

symbolic view of the management of the company’s business as he did not take into account the

multiple external factors which were out of his control. The power and political systems were

considered as the primary component of the change as he empowered the product development

and designing heads (Xue, 2016).

Based on the analysis of Cook’s change process and the levers of strategic change, it is

evident that the change process was successful under the leadership of Cook.

6.0- Recommendations for Initiatives that Would Improve the Implementation of the

Strategy

The analysis of the change strategy led by Steve Jobs and Tim Cook revealed that Jobs’

strategy would have been more successful if he followed all the 8 steps of Kotter change model

and Cook would consider all the levers of the strategic change. therefore, it is recommended that;

1- Jobs should have created a sense of urgency right after he took over the CEO’s charge

of Apple Inc. This would have resulted in a more aligned development of the

technology and positive response from the corporate culture. Moreover, he should
 have institutionalized Apple products with other companies to renew or innovate the

products (Xue, 2016)

2- Cook should have considered the symbolic view of the company’s management and

strategic stance. This would have helped him in limited effect from the external

factors on the Apple products. Xue, (2016) also stated that the symbolic view of the

management allows the managers to lead change by limiting the effect of multiple

factors that are beyond the control and could hinder the processes.

7.0- Difference of Leadership Style under Different Situation

The leadership style of Steve Jobs and Tim Cook would have been different if the

situation was different. Jobs took over the charge when the company was in a failing state and

the market share of the company was much lower as compared to the competitors. If the

company would be in a stable state with a higher market share, then there was no need to bring

bold changes throughout the organisation. Jobs collaborated the corporate culture because he

wanted to bring significant changes in the Apple’s products. If the situation was different, then

he might do not feel the need to extensively changing the corporate structure of Apple Inc.

(Heracleous & Papachroni, 2016).

In the same way, the leadership style of Tim Cook would also be different as he found the

company in a stable position. The purpose of the change process was to revolutionise the Apple

products rather than developing from scratch. When Cook became the CEO, the company was

financially stable, although it was needed to design and introduce innovative products. If the case

was different, then Cook would have not adopted transactional leadership style and would not

change the corporate culture of the company (Heracleous & Papachroni, 2016).
8.0- Conclusion

The leadership style of Steve Jobs and Tim Cook are different from each other although

effective at its own pace because of the difference of situation when they took the CEO’s charge.

The situational analysis and need for change are analysed through force field analysis that

revealed that the need for innovation and new technology in the field of mobile devices is much

higher and need to be continuously changed. The changes articulated by both the CEOs were

proved to be successful although the process would have been more accelerated if the suggested

recommendations would have been considered.

Heracleous, L., & Papachroni, A. (2016). Leadership and innovation at Apple Inc.: Entering the

post-Jobs era. Warwick Business School.

Johnson, G., Whittington, R., Scholes, K., Angwin, D., and Regnér, P., (2011). Exploring

strategy. Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Shrivastava, S. R., Shrivastava, P. S., & Ramasamy, J. (2017). Force field analysis: An effective

tool in qualitative research. Journal of Current Research in Scientific Medicine, 3(2),

139.

Small, A., Gist, D., Souza, D., Dalton, J., Magny-Normilus, C., & David, D. (2016). Using

Kotter's change model for implementing bedside handoff: a quality improvement

project. Journal of nursing care quality, 31(4), 304-309.

Thompson, A., Strickland, A. J., & Gamble, J. (2015). Crafting and executing strategy: Concepts

and readings. McGraw-Hill Education.

Xue,C, T,S,. (2016). Role of Leadership in Achieving Sustainable Organizational Change: Steve

Jobs. Asia Pacific University of Technology and Innovation, TPM, Kaula Lumpur, 5700,

Malaysia.