No abstract

Purpose:We offer a conceptualization of how and why corporate level strategic change may build on historical differentiation at business unit level.Design/methodology/approach: Methodologically, we report an historical case study of Nokia Practical implications:Our results highlight the importance of corporate level 'market mechanisms' that allow promising strategic alternatives to emerge and select out inferior options.In this process, a key mechanism is the exchange of executives and cognitive mindsets between business units and corporate headquarters (CHQ). Originality/value:The reported research offers an original contribution by (a) showing the dynamic interplay of cognitive and organizational change processes, and (b) highlighting the importance on building on existing capabilities and competencies despite the pressure to demonstrate strong turnaround activities.

In this paper we conceptualise explanations of company-specific commercial performance as corporate myths. To improve our understanding of anatomy and causal structure of corporate myths, we analyse publications that deal with Nokia's historical transformation from a lossmaking 1980s conglomerate to a focused and successful telecommunications company in the early 1990s. From a corpus of related literature, 89 causal arguments are identified and analysed in terms of the logic of the arguments employed. The analysis shows that (1) most existing analyses offer either a specific or a biased explanation for Nokia's success; (2) very few explanations are either plausible or logical; (3) it is most unlikely that another company would achieve the same outcomes even if exactly the same decisions were made. Even though combining and comparing different explanations does not enhance the validity of any specific historical interpretation of Nokia's evolution or commercial success, it does offer an improved conceptual understanding of the ingredients found in corporate myths.

This study examines the role that multiple organizational identities have on organizational transformation and outcomes. It uses rich historical data extracted from company archives to fonn a longitudinal study of the interaction and co evolution of multiple identities within a multibusiness firm.The purpose of the paper is to show that a) there is a clear linkage between corporate and business unit level identity evolution and b) differing identities and their evolution act as mechanisms for organizational decision making, especially during radical organizational transformation.The findings show that identity evolution essentially represents a process of variation, selection and retention, where signals for evolution differ across organizational levels. Furthermore, the analysis suggests that this prior evolutionary process is highly relevant for top management decision making during severe organizational transformation, because it constrains the selection mechanisms that dictate the possible alternatives for a focus and turnaround process. These findings are summarized into two frameworks, which describe the processes behind identity evolution and its relevance for managerial decision making.