It is true that maintaining a business isn't easy and that's why a business that's already seeing its peak should maintain its consistency. That's all that matters in most businesses because even if you're the best right now.
But, you're not consistent in what you do like marketing, customer support and innovation then you're going to be the last someday if you're not able to maintain that. Especially for these businesses that requires continuous upgrade and innovation, they'll be left behind if they don't accept that fact.
Nokia is a testament to that, a corporation that has always been a leader in phones has been killed by competitors because of its refusal to innovate. In fact, maintaining a business is not simple, it includes hundreds of different factors, not only capital management, planning, poor customer care support...Nowadays, every field will have extremely fierce competition, so opening a company or business is simple but maintaining it somehow is the problem.
There are many people who always say that there is no fairness in business when the director is paid dozens of times more than the workers. But we can see that to run and find a way to survive for a business is an extremely difficult thing, not everyone has the courage to do it.
The history of the collapse of Nokia is somewhat different. I will not now retell "the last years of the life of a dying patient", but I will suggest that you familiarize yourself with this period, familiarize yourself with the "transformation in Nokia" arranged by Stephen Elop. I also highly recommend reading The Impossible Success, the autobiography of Jorma Ollila, the former Nokia CEO who led the company to the height of fame we all know or have heard of.
PS. Ollila joined Nokia in 1985 and soon became Vice President of Finance and then CEO of Nokia. He held the high position for more than a decade, building Nokia into the world's largest smartphone maker.
Variety is the spice of life and there is always survival of the fittest --Nokia didn't go with the flow.
they were the best one years ago but the company didn't realized the fact that the synonym of technology is change - Nokia learnt it heard way!
I agree with you and disagree
I use a "hackneyed phrase", but well applicable to the real situation with Nokia - "this is a bit not the case"
In what I agree - yes, Nokia ignored Android, focusing on Symbian. By the way, Symbian is a very good system, the first in which real multitasking appeared, good stability, not very demanding on resources, and not bad at all ... for ITS TIME. But they did not appreciate the "risks" of Android's luck.
Although even Steve Jobs, who I respect, said "... that he was ready to spend a lot of money and effort to destroy the Android operating system." True, this was presented under the sauce "Google stole my ideas", but I think this is some kind of lie, because to. Steve was well aware that this is a real competitor to iOS. But that's a completely different story.....
Back to Nokia! At the same time, Nokia still had a good trump card - MeeGo, but he was deliberately "killed". I’m not ready to say that MeeGo would kill iOS or Android, but MeeGo would definitely get its niche! And instead of objectively assessing and ACCEPTING the trend set by Android, developing MeeGo in parallel, they not only did not adapt, but also KILLED Symbian and MeeGo by changing the head, and began to poke Windows Phone everywhere, which was really not competitive and unpromising, at least on the basis of that this system was aimed primarily at the corporate sector.