Eastman Kodak Company’s Intended and Actual Organization

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Intended Organization
Actual Organization
Closing the Gap
Conclusion
Reference List

Introduction

The selected organization for this analysis is Eastman Kodak Company, simply called Kodak. The company has been in operation for a century now and has its headquarters in New York, United States. Within the past decade, Kodak has been experiencing various organizational challenges that might affect its future performance and sustainability. This discussion begins by identifying Kodak’s “intended organization”, the actual organization, and the best suggestions to help the managers close the recorded gap.

Intended Organization

To learn more about the anticipated organization, interviews targeting one of the departmental managers and a salesperson at Kodak were completed. Such exercises were done via Skype and video conferencing since the company was not operating fully in Saudi Arabia. The completed exercise presented unique observations and views about the intended goals. The respondents revealed that Kodak was strategizing and focusing on the best approaches to become a leader and competitor in the imaging industry (Anthony, 2016). The leaders were keen to establish a results-oriented structure that would support a superior culture, provide experiences to more customers, and guide them on the best ways to process capture and even store pictures that contributed to their memories.

The organization was also keen to consider solutions that were cost-effective while maximizing the quality of its products. Workers were empowered to deliver world-class skills and competencies while focusing on the changing goals and expectations of the targeted customers. These aspects form the ideal Kodak Company that is capable of maximizing profits and meeting the demands of all customers across the globe. The organization fosters a superior culture, structure, and hierarchy that resonate with the demands of customers and workers in different regions (Grant, 2016). The intended company would have a unique team of workers and innovators who take the concept of innovation seriously to meet the demands of different customers and take digital imaging to the next level.

Actual Organization

While Kodak is an organization positioning itself to become a leader in modern digital imaging, numerous gaps and challenges exist that affect the anticipated goals. In reality, Kodak has been facing financial problems since it filed for bankruptcy in 2012. Towards the end of the 20th century, the organization began to innovate and experiment with emerging digital cameras. This strategy made it a leader and provider of such devices. However, the leaders were not keen to focus on this interruptive technology that would eventually redefine photography in the future (Anthony, 2016). Most of the leaders were keen to capitalize on photography film paper that had delivered profits for decades. The professionals would agree that digital cameras were not going to change or transform the company’s profitability.

Compared with the intended organization described above, it is agreeable that the workers are becoming disenfranchised and unmotivated. The company is unable to compete directly with the existing company in some of the sectors it operates in. The current culture is unreflective of the recorded experiences (Gluckman, 2016). The key similarities include the presence of superior products and a focus on the best strategies to achieve organizational goals. The ideal company is also focusing on the best approaches to maximize profits and transform customers’ experiences. However, things appear to be different in reality since the company is fighting constant competition, lacks an effective organizational strategy, and has poor business outcomes.

Closing the Gap

The current situation at Kodak reveals that the organization might take longer to achieve the anticipated goals and regain its original position as a leader in imaging. The company is facing financial problems and is incapable of identifying the right sectors to invest in and maximize profits (Grant, 2016). While the managers have set and defined the right mission, goals, and vision, the reality is that the recorded organizational culture and model affect the confidence of most of the employees and partners. Such gaps have the potential to affect profitability in the long term. However, several proposals are worth considering turning operations around and maximizing performance.

First, the time has come for the managers to present a different mindset. These professionals will begin by setting the most appropriate attitudes and consider the best ways to approach or address situations. This strategy will make it easier for all partners to collaborate, identify the current gaps, and consider the best approaches to change the current culture. A superior leadership presence will help all stakeholders think together and focus on the gaps affecting overall performance (Gluckman, 2016). The professionals will go further to identify some of the best practices from different companies and emulate them to improve performance.

The second approach to take Kodak closer to its “ideal organization” is that of effective problem-solving. The reality is that this company is facing the challenges and aftermath of bankruptcy. Unfortunately, the leaders failed to consider some of the best approaches that could have redefined the situation. Through the proposed concept, the managers will embrace the power of creativity and envision the best future (Hussain et al., 2014). They will provide the right culture, structure, and resources that can innovation to the next level. The workers will get additional guidelines for experimenting and analyzing some of the best practices from its immediate competitors. This model will make t possible for the company to avoid making some of the mistakes that led to its demise.

Third, the adoption and application of a better leadership approach will make it possible for more employees to promote a better organizational culture. Workers will find a reason to solve their differences, engage one another, and become more productive. The professionals will offer a sense of direction and solve internal disputes (Gluckman, 2016). The leaders can provide a wider picture of the intended goals, offer the right support, and promote a sense of direction. Constant evaluation, analysis, and experimentation are powerful approaches that can help Kodak transform its current position and eventually become more profitable.

Finally, the use of an effective change theory is essential to help transform the situation at Kodak. Such an approach will help the leaders identify the current problems, cultural issues, and performance gaps existing at the company. The organizational leaders will embrace the model to introduce new concepts that can take performance to the next level, including cultural transformation, innovation, research and development (R&D), customer satisfaction, and sustainability. These attributes will change the current situation and eventually make this company more successful and competitive.

Conclusion

The completed discussion has identified Kodak as an international organization struggling to succeed in the imaging industry. The ideal organization is currently unattainable due to the existing inefficiencies, culture, structure, and leadership. The proposed approaches will transform managerial practices, present a superior structure and culture, and guide the workers to become more innovative. The final products and services will eventually meet the demands of the company’s customers and maximize the recorded profits.

Reference List

Anthony, S.D. (2016) ‘Kodak’s downfall wasn’t about technology’, Harvard Business Review. Web.

Hussain, N. et al. (2014) ‘Kodak stunning journey of fortune to misfortune (a case study –financial analysis)’, Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 5(17), pp. 127-140.

Gluckman, R. (2016) ‘Management lessons from a Kodak career’, Journal of Business & Economic Policy, 3(4), pp. 9-12.

Grant, R.M. (2016) Contemporary strategy analysis. New York: Wiley.

Click Here To Order Now!