later the remarkable and prolonged achievement of Windows and office products, Microsoft had a

difficult situation to stand with other firms – particularly, with google developing mainly in the search
and software market and the phone market owned by apple.

The tech giant was in active and doing internal wars from main departments that fighting each other.
Instead of fighting with other competing companies, they fight inside the company.

After the environment become successful through the windows and office products. The company
dependent on both products, however the achievement of both products cause lack of progress and put
firm into the risky comfort zone. www.tinypulse.com
Among most of the senior executives have mixed feelings the in internal competition. There is a
question whether it is allowed or not in the company, the gut feeling will be usually negative for senior
executives. Then the departments do continuous wars among themselves. Through this it can
understand clearly strategic direction, especially it affects the result of effort in the financial
performance. Through fighting like war do not have success in the company progress.

There is somehow motivation for better effort through internal competition. It is a human tendency for
everyone to organize the work together and do hard work when there is in threat in the faced with
direct competition.

The cost and benefits of the companies need to be careful lly stable beside one another. Allowing a
minor competition of internal makes lack of chances opportunities in emerging marketing and
technologies.

Internal competition occurs in a huge part as effect of the tension from top-down and bottom-up steps.
Senior executives realizes that they need to motivate individuals lower down in the company to give
their often-competing knowledge and projects a head as a way of new update with technologies and
changes in marketing. Furthermore, Senior executives know that there are important disadvantages to
internal competition, the condition of simple cost duplication and the quality can create between
strategic direction. Thinking of terms in Lifecycle of internal competition has a possible choice. It begins
when two or more choices are brought forward in side by side, and it finishes when senior executives
choose one of the options at the cost of the others. There is a short in the part of internal competition
and it can be easily destroyed soon, or it can stay for a very longtime.

The main common form of internal competition around technologies is when two or more groups along
start improving very similar technologies.

Strategies for managing internal competition Birkinshaw, Julian California Management Review; Fall
2001; 44, 1; ProQuest One Academic pg. 21
On February 2014, Satya Nadella become CEO in Microsoft and he take on important restructuring of
the tech giant wipeout its destructive internal competition.

There is no separate division on Microsoft products and platforms. Before the senior departments
appointed different work to employees and they always concentrate on the limited set of common
goals, however now they work together to achieve goals. There are new common functions are included
like, reinventing productivity business steps, inventing an intelligent cloud platform and building more
personal computing.

This move brought roughly 5,000 engineers and computer scientists together to focus on artificial
innovation across all Microsoft product lines.

Nadella built a new Al and research group in September 2016 and Bing, Cortana, and information
platform terms, which they merged. He appointed nearly 5000 engineers and computer scientists to
concentrate on artificial innovation around all product lines of Microsoft.

Nadella brought a new idea of mission with his staffs; it is called right at the beginning. To empower all
people and all companies on the planet to success more.

He brought again his steps of thoughts; : “Over the past year, we’ve challenged ourselves to think about
our core mission, our soul — what would be lost if we disappeared... We also asked ourselves, what
culture do we want to foster that will enable us to achieve these goals?”

Before the restructuring, employees had been problem with positive feel of purpose, with the effect
being low morale and weakened employee engagement.
Nadella is the main reason of the development of micro soft restructure. All microsoft’s employees are
starting working together with everyone and they achive the common goal that made in real work

Presently, restructuring of Microsoft is still in development, however, it will become brighter in the
future also, it expects a great mission forever.

www.tinypulse.com
These structures provide greater accountability, coordination and collaboration among the team when
compared to a divisional structure. Collaboration within product teams leads to innovation in terms of
new technology or innovative products.

There is a vital role in the realization of strategy of firm is the structure of the organization. Lots of
companies are large and have many businesses have mainly trusted on the sector form organizational
structure. Even though this structure has produced outcomes in the past, it has been noted that the
structure is obstructing on innovation of company’s capabilities. With the aim of encourage cross-
dependencies and create the companies more quick and innovative companies are concentrated to
restructure organizations. For the competition in the current business situation, several organizations
are moving on divisional organization structures.

Both Microsoft and Sony have been firms in the markets they operate and are considered ahead of their
times in terms of innovation. However, these companies seem to be losing out in terms of market share
to agile rivals such as Google, Apple, and Amazon in this era of innovative converged devices and
computing systems where a company’s ecosystem matters more than individual products

Microsoft has been leading companies in the business they operate and considered before their times in
innovation, where as this firm seem to be down in terms of market share.

Microsoft took main changes in their organizational design to take a better collaboration around
technologies as competitors such as apple and goggle were developing a better business and mind share
in Cyber and mobile space.

1ST JORNAL
an attempt to change can have a positive or negative impact on attitude and productivity. In such
complex settings, most change efforts fail.

Assessment of employees’ attitudes toward ongoing organizational transformations Irina Heim and
Nibedita Sardar-Drenda Henley Business School, University of Reading, Reading, UK

Nowadays digital service organisations are facing various challenges. These challenges are different,
updates from the strategic and operational levels to problems of individuals management. The
operational challenges involve the wants for continuous organizational changes as an outcome of
technological acquisitions and the approval of innovative technologies and models of business. A
transformation in technology can provide innovative competitors a better benefit, so current firms want
to always updates. Therefore, satisfaction is frequently stated among the staffs. Furthermore, the digital
service organizations is competing on automation and digitalization and concentrating towards delivery
of bigdata and security services. Employees do not have the right abilities to support the transformation
business portfolio. The international companies are expanded and involve various business across
acquisitions and there are many issues of coordination. The change management is a essential
organizational skill set and do business with the entrenched lack of skill of companies to implement
behaviors which would accept to embrace innovative technologies. There is a huge cost, smaller profit
margins and slow proliferation of automation and industrialisation due to lack of knowledge. There are
lots of financial difficulties on transition and transformation projects and it has huge challenges in
processing. These truths lead to disadvantage around the employees and result to several employees
sitting through the change but an effort to change have a advantage or disadvantage result on attitude
and productivity as well as there is a chance to fail the changes.

There is critical in the supportive behavior for the achievement of implementation of planed change.

The organizations’ achievement or survival deeply strong s on their employees support to change and
better skills to success a sustainable competitive benefit.

Even though attitudes of employees on change are important fact which defines the achievement of
change in hard work of organisation. There are research concentrating on problems actual to
organisational change has concentrated on organizational level concern than individual level concerns.
There are major factors have been used to define the attitudes of employee on change and the factors
of resistance for change the factors of change readiness.

When employees of the company do not have trust him self or emotional intelligence to approve
innovative ways of operating. When there is missing in the emotional skills at the organizational level,
then the results of change can be negatively affected.

For the process of change inviduals, teams and companies have a role and leaders have more
responsibility than others. Making change readiness and that readiness of employees are leaders job to
approvr change is important for the steps of the achievement.
The main mechanism for making readiness is communication changes for change among employees
from organization and leaders can approve an energizing leadership strategy to change the challenge in
the company from toxic to achieving. 3RD JORNSL
. Employees can perceive such processes as being unfair, lowering their attachment to the workplace
(17–20). This is supported by findings of a 4% decrease in trust of management after reorganization
involving change of top management (21) as well as distributive justice partially mediating the
association between trust and intention to quit in the context of downsizing
Original article Scand J Work Environ Health. 2019;45(1):53–62 doi:10.5271/sjweh.3766 Longitudinal
associations between organizational change, work-unit social capital, and employee exit from the work
unit among public healthcare workers: a mediation analysis by Johan Høy Jensen, MSc,1 Esben
Meulengracht Flachs, PhD,1 Janne Skakon, PhD,2 Naja Hulvej Rod, Professor,3 Jens Peter Bonde,
Professor 1 Jensen JH, Flachs EM, Skakon J, Rod NH, Bonde JP. Longitudinal

There are lots of limitation in reorganization. There is having social dimensions with coworkers in the
workplace. It is important to believe that organisational change disrupt work- linked to social networks
and ties of friendship in a work place.

It is needed to shows exposure to organizational change and high or low levels of social capital and
exposure to changes in the company was more dominant in units of work with less social capital linked
in lots of workers.

There are lot of risk in the work units of lower social- capital levels linked to better social capital later the
organizational changes and their huge risk in the work units for social capital later organisational change
linked to no change.

Lower social capital later connecting together leads to huge risk, there is no change contrasted with
split-up or change management. There are lots of challenges including outsiders on work units with high
social capital. It can have chance to reduce the social cohesion, belief in the context of a merger.

Transformation a work unit with low social capital can be possibly have some better influence towards
psychosocial work environment.

Before the social capital assessment, employees are exiting because of transformation will be respond
more essentially to the socisl -capital matters than their participants and there is gap in time between
organizational changes and social capacity assessment provides to some underestimation association.
the Since the need for change often is unpredictable, it tends to be reactive, discontinuous, ad hoc and
often triggered by a situation of organisational crisis approach has gained ground.

Organisational change management: A critical review Rune Todnem By To cite this article: Rune Todnem
By (2005) Organisational change management: A critical

Instead of watching the change to top down driven, the development approach tends to watch change
driven from the botton up.

Change should not be understand as series of linear events within a provide time. However, as a
continuous, flexible steps of reworking of change according to the conditions.

. Apart from only being a method of changing organisational practices and structures, change is also
perceived as a process of learning

Only being a process of orgnisational change methods and structures, change is also identified as a
learning process.

To cope up with the difficulty and incertainity of the environment, It is suggested that organisations
want to have open learning ststems where strategy development and emergies of change from way of a
firm as a whole develops, interprets