Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6


Key Aspects of Apples Corporate Culture Apple Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL; formerly Apple Computer, Inc.) is an American multinational corporation that designs and sells consumer electronics, computer software, and personal computers. The company's best-known hardware products are the Macintosh line of computers, the iPod, the iPhone and the iPad. Its software includes the Mac OS X operating system; theiTunes media browser; the iLife suite of multimedia and creativity software; the iWork suite of productivity software; Aperture, a professional photography package; Final Cut Studio, a suite of professional audio and film-industry software products; Logic Studio, a suite of music production tools; the Safari web browser; and iOS, a mobile operating system. Apple was one of several highly successful companies founded in the 1970s that bucked the traditional notions of what a corporate culture should look like in organizational hierarchy (flat versus tall, casual versus formal attire, etc.). Other highly successful firms with similar cultural aspects from the same period include Southwest Airlines and Microsoft. Originally, the company stood in opposition to staid competitors like IBM by default, thanks to the influence of its founders; Steve Jobs often walked around the office barefoot even after Apple was a Fortune 500 company. By the time of the"1984" TV ad, this trait had become a key way the company attempted to differentiate itself from its competitors Functional & Dysfunctional aspects of Apples corporate culture At Apple, employees are specialists who are not exposed to functions outside their area of expertise. Jobs saw this as a means of having best-in-class employees in every role. For instance, Ron Johnson who was Senior Vice President of Retail Operations until November 1, 2011, was responsible for site selection, in-store service, and store layout, yet he had no control the inventory in his stores (which is done company wide by thenCOO and now CEO Tim Cook who has a background in supply-chain management). This is the opposite of General Electric's corporate culture which has created wellrounded managers. CULTURE DRIVES INNOVATION Culture is a shared set of norms. David Caldwell, professor of management at Santa Clara University, talks about "culture as a shared understanding of assumptions and expectations among an organization's members, and it is reflected in the policies, vision, and goals of that organization."In other words, culture informs success, not the other way around. Leadership drives a culture. Stephen Sadove, chairman and chief executive of Saks, says culture drives numbers: "Culture drives innovation and whatever else you are trying to accomplish within a companyinnovation, execution, whatever it's going to be. And that then drives results," he said in a recent New York Times article. "When I talk to Wall Street, people really want to know your results, what are your strategies, what are the issues, what it is that you're doing to drive your business. Never do you get people asking about the culture, about leadership, about the

people in the organization. Yet it's the reverse, because it's the people, the leadership, and the ideas that are ultimately driving the numbers and the results." So culture might feel like a soft idea, but it's the stuff that formulates how you get things done. Thus it's a key driver of results and its importance should never be underestimated. Jobs could have focused on near-term fixes. Instead, he focused on building a highperformance culture by doing three things well. 1. He refocused the strategy to be about one thing. That meant he killed off even good things. I led server channel management at Apple when Jobs returned to the company in 1997, and I was there when he made the decision to shut down big portions of revenue-generating businesses (including my division) because they didn't fit with his vision for the company. Some people thought he was crazy. But he was being extremely clear, and in doing so, he "Murder Boarded"eliminated many options to get one cohesive strategyhis way to greatness. 2. He eliminated passive aggressiveness and encouraged debate when new ideas were forming. When you are thinking about difficult problems together with exceptionally bright people, there are going to be disagreements. But it is through the tension of that creative conflict that new ideas get born, new angles get explored, and risks get mitigated. Thinking together means you deal with conflict up front, rather than have to counter passive aggressiveness on the back end. 3. He set up a cross-disciplinary view of how the company would succeed. This holistic vision means there is cohesion throughout the company, from concept to product to sales. For example, the retail strategy could have been a separate or disparate part of the whole, but Apple has made its retail strategy part and parcel of its overall promise of ease of use.

Organizational Culture at Apple Inc Introduction Apple Inc. is a global computer manufacturing company that is going through major changes in its organizational culture and its organizational structure due to several

events of the past few years. This is a company that grew extremely fast in little time, that their management found themselves not being able to keep their operations and finances under control. Apple Inc. has been forced to reevaluate and redesign its organizational culture and organizational structure to avoid bankruptcy. The organizational culture of Apple is one of change; with the drive to outperform and succeed as their major objectives. The organizational structure of the company has also transformed to be more competitive in a critical juncture in the companys history. Apple is going through major restructuring to regain control of its operations and finances in order to stay competitive on the global market. This paper will describe the organizational culture and structure of Apple (www.fundinguniverse).Organizational Culture The culture of Apple was based on an ideal that self-motivated individuals will work harder if they do not have a boss micromanaging every action. The unique structure of Apple had allowed it to grow and react more quickly to changes than its competitors. The reason for the quick responsiveness is simple; it is much easier to get a project started if there are only a few people to obtain approval from. Apple initially grew fast, because decisions were made at the lowest possible level. Corporate headquarters made policy and oversaw all activities, but the local employees made the day-to-day decisions on the ground in countries all over the world. This type of top-down philosophy allowed for quick responsiveness and resolutions to situations without involving the corporate headquarters, thus avoiding corporate red tape (Mc Shane and Travglione, 2005, pp 89-290).Organizational Structure The organizational structure of Apple was almost non-existent and focused on placing decision making in the hands of the people in the field. Apple was doing incredibly well and had gotten the attention of many people because the company worked well and was very responsive to change. However, things took a downward turn and Apple found themselves in a financial nightmare. Apple suffered problems in regional areas, specifically in the accountability of spending and in fiscal decision-making. The same "top-down" ideology that helped Apple grow also opened the door for some serious financial losses. With employees at different levels making decisions, it became difficult for the corporate office to keep track of spending and purchasing (Offermann & Spiros, 2001, pp 376-92).Behavior at work (personality traits)Apple Inc. case study Personality refers to the relatively stable pattern of behaviors and consistent internal states that explain a persons behavioral tendencies. Personality has both internal and external elements. The external traits are the observable behaviors that people rely on to identify someones personality. Personality is both inherited and shaped by the environment (Mc Shane and Travglione, 2005, pp 89-290). Some examples of personality traits are quiet, aggressive and

ambitious (Robbins et al., 2003, pp 178-90).While working overtime late one night, you accidentally overhear a colleague called Amanda having a telephone conversation in which she states that she had stolen ideas from a co-worker and close friend of yours called Bill. Amanda recently received a prestigious promotion on the basis of stealing Bills ideas, while Bill has been reprimanded by his manager for not performing up to the organizations expectations (Glinow, 2003, pp 189-67). Values, perceptions and personality traits are the key concepts that shape an individuals behavior and way of doing things in day to day life as well as in organizational factors and issues. That is why the study of these concepts is vitalin the context of organizational behavior theory. In the following, the issue talks about a dispute about a staffer named Amanda stealing another staffer named Bills idea and later Bill got reprimanded. In a circumstance like this, it isto be determined how an honest employee who had known about the theft and misdeed towards Bill should react in an organizational setting depending on the employees own values, perception and personality(Sagie & Elizur, 2002 pp.503-14).Self-Esteem and Self-Efficacy Self-Esteem is a personal judgment of ones worth and the satisfaction or dissatisfaction with ones own self. By this definition Self-Esteem is how each individual person views themselves as a person both mentality and physically. According to William James, a psychologist, self esteem involves only one mental perception of their own qualities and their physical appearance (Glinow, 2003, pp18967). Self esteem plays an important role of who people are and starts at every young age. There are both positives and negative cycles of self esteem. Self esteem is the one of the most important aspects in psychology because it can either give confidence or accept defeat (Offermann & Spiros, 2001, pp.376-92).Similarly Self-efficacy is a mechanism that explains an individuals behavior and perceived capability to perform a behavior. It is associated with a positive self-concept, and selfpersonal control that comes from mastering new experiences with anticipation of successful performance (Schiffman etal, 2005, pp 78-90). It is the reservation of a behavior until success is met. Self-efficacy varies in its strength and the level of self-efficacy is impacted by the experience of success or failure related to the risk of taking actions toward change. It evolves from a persons perception of competence in performing behavior and having positive outcomes. Self-esteem and self-efficacy both is necessary to influence a persons work behavior (Stephen, 2005, pp 181-167).Perceptual Selection Influence Perception is "the process of acquiring, interpreting, selecting, and organizing sensory information." Perception plays a vital role in ones life as it depends on the five senses and triggers the ability to acquire and mentally interpret information perceived by the brain from the

senses (Toffler, 1991, pp 14-20). Everything which we see around us are converted by the brain into nerve impulses, and these impulses are the only information the brain receives as it has not direct contact with the external world, therefore creating the real world inside our heads. We would not be able to see the world as it is today if it were not for our senses and perception (Schiff man et al, 2005, pp 78-90).Persons ability to perceive correctly the structure of his or her place within an organization is an important source of power. When it comes down to how well a persons perception skills are I think it has to do with the persons position in the social makeup of the organization, and his or her personality traits. People with keen perceptive abilities can precisely structure their relationships within their work environment to get what they want, since they know which social associations allow them to access the resources they need; those who skills are not as keen may not be as successful, because of their lack of perception (Sagie & Elizur, 2002 pp.503oo as of officeexpansion. Moreover allow people to be more productive by working from their communications. Additionally Personnel policies lead to fact that creates better environmental policy. They have to point out personnel through

Organizations (such as Apple Inc. in this case) are the dominant cultural foundation of our times; the study of behavior within those Organizations (such as Apple Inc. in this case) is of active interest to many audiences. Many of our daily activities are regulated by Organizations (such as Apple Inc. in this case) called governments. nd most adults spend the better part of their lives working in Organizations (such as Apple Inc. in this case). Given the widespread of organizational influence, there are many reasons to be concerned about how and why Organizations (such as Apple Inc. in this case) function. The value of organizational behavior is that it isolates important aspects of our daily interactions with people and offers specific perspectives on interrelation of the human context:people as Organizations (such as Apple Inc. in this case), people as for todays Organizations (such as Apple Inc. in this case). In order to better motivate, in behavioral studies to change their environment

Over the years, the US-based technology giant Apple Inc. (Apple) have earned the reputation for its innovative products and for its ability to create a huge amount of hype surrounding its new product launches. Experts felt that its success was, in part, due to the mystique surrounding Apple and its products which has been created by the company by maintaining a veil of secrecy. So much so, that secrecy has become one of the key elements of Apple's corporate culture. Critics contend that this aspect of Apple's culture also has a dark side. Apple imposed harsh sanctions on employees who violated rules by sharing information. Due to its obsession with secrecy, Apple sued bloggers, online journalists and former employees for disclosing confidential details about upcoming products.

In 2009, the company also attracted criticism for failing to disclose vital information regarding CEO Steve Jobs' health to its shareholders. Some critics opined that this strict insistence on absolute secrecy was robbing Apple of its humanity and has also become morally and ethically untenable.