Introduction:
This article explores the concept of Organizational Behaviour and Human Resources (OBHR) and its significance in the success or failure of organisations. Using Telus Communication and Nortel Network as case studies, this analysis examines their organisational structure, culture, communication strategies, leadership styles, and HR strategies within the framework of OBHR principles (Kondalkar, 2020; Luthans et al., 2021).
Case Study Overview:
Telus Communication Case Study
Telus Communication is a leading telecommunications company in Canada known for its innovative and reliable communication services. The company prioritises customer satisfaction and loyalty by investing in customer support infrastructure and continuously improving its services based on customer feedback (Bingham & Galagan, 2017). Telus fosters a culture of transparency and open internal and external dialogue by utilising regular communication channels such as newsletters, intranets, and town hall meetings. The company’s leadership style is customer-centric, proactive, and innovative. Bingham & Galagan (2017) suggests that Telus maintains a flat organisational structure that promotes collaboration and quick decision-making. The HR strategy focuses on performance and talent management, aligning with business objectives and emphasising employee development and career growth.
Nortel Network Case Study
Nortel Network was a multinational telecommunications and networking equipment company that experienced a severe organisational failure, leading to bankruptcy and dissolution. According to CBC News (2014), Nortel faced financial mismanagement, an inability to adapt to market changes, weak corporate governance, and poor communication. Internal communication resulted in silos and a lack of cohesive decision-making, while external communication lacked transparency and consistent messaging. Nortel’s leadership style was less customer-focused, lacking innovation and adaptability (CBC News, 2014). The hierarchical organisational structure hindered effective communication and decision-making. The company struggled with talent management, performance assessment, and reward systems, reducing employee engagement and productivity. Nortel’s HR strategy suffered due to financial and operational challenges, resulting in an inability to compete effectively.
Mode of Communication: Telus Communication versus Nortel Network
Based on the two case studies above, Telus and Nortel’s internal and external communication strategies differed significantly, contributing to their divergent outcomes. Telus prioritises internal communication by fostering a culture of transparency and open dialogue. The company ensure that employees are well-informed about organisational goals, strategies, and updates through regular communication channels such as newsletters, intranets, town hall meetings, and team briefings. Telus also encourages employee engagement and feedback, valuing their input in shaping company policies and initiatives. It focuses on establishing strong external communication channels to engage with its customers, stakeholders, and the broader community (Rana & Sharma, 2019). It emphasises customer-centric messaging, promoting its commitment to exceptional service, technological innovation, and corporate social responsibility.
In contrast, the case of Nortel reveals that the company struggles with internal communication, especially during its downfall. There are issues of poor communication between different departments and levels of the organisation, leading to silos and a lack of cohesive decision-making. The company also fails to effectively disseminate important information and updates to its employees, resulting in confusion and uncertainty about its direction. It is further apparent that Nortel faces challenges in its external communication efforts, particularly in transparency and consistent messaging. The company’s external communication is often driven by the need to maintain a positive image and project a sense of stability, even as internal issues persist. As a result, Nortel struggles to address customer concerns and effectively communicate its plans to adapt to the changing telecommunications industry, resulting in a loss of confidence from customers, investors, and other stakeholders.
Leadership style: Telus Communication versus Nortel Network
According to the two case studies above, the leadership styles exhibited by Telus and Nortel differed significantly, contributing to their divergent outcomes. Telus demonstrates a customer-centric leadership style. They prioritise customer satisfaction and loyalty by investing in exceptional customer service and seeking feedback. This approach ensured that Telus met customer needs effectively and provided a positive experience (Bratton, 2020). Telus also exhibited a proactive and innovative leadership style. They were at the forefront of technological innovation, continuously upgrading their network infrastructure and expanding service offerings to meet evolving customer demands. This allowed Telus to stay competitive and meet market expectations. Based on the case study, Telus maintains a strong corporate governance structure and financial integrity. This ensured transparency, accountability, and proper management of resources. For example, Telus executives upheld ethical practices, enhancing stakeholder trust and contributing to the company’s success. Telus actively pursues strategic partnerships with other organisations, leveraging synergies to enhance its service offerings. These partnerships allow Telus to provide integrated solutions to customers and broaden its market reach.
In contrast, Nortel has a less customer-focused leadership style. The company fails to adapt to changing customer demands and neglects to invest adequately in new technologies that should meet evolving market requirements. Nortel’s leadership style lacked innovation and adaptability (Vermeulen et al., 2022). The company struggled to keep pace with rapidly evolving industry trends and failed to introduce disruptive technologies. This inability to adapt to changing market dynamics eventually led to Nortel’s downfall. The case study further reveals that Nortel suffers from weak corporate governance and financial mismanagement. For example, executives engage in fraudulent accounting practices, which misrepresent the company’s financial health. This lack of integrity undermined Nortel’s credibility and contributed to its eventual bankruptcy. Additionally, Nortel does not effectively leverage strategic partnerships to enhance its competitiveness. The company lacks collaborative efforts with key industry players, limiting its ability to adapt to market changes and leverage shared resources.
Organisational culture and structure: Telus Communication versus Nortel Network
Based on the two case studies above, Telus fosters a customer-centric culture, strongly emphasising customer satisfaction and service. They prioritise building strong customer relationships, investing in customer support infrastructure, and actively seeking feedback to improve service delivery. They also demonstrate a commitment to corporate social responsibility, engaging in community initiatives and sustainability efforts. This customer-centric and socially responsible culture helped cultivate a positive brand image and enhance customer loyalty (Addis, 2020; Chang, 2021). Additionally, the company has a relatively flat organisational structure that encourages open communication and collaboration. The company focused on empowering its employees and promoting ownership and accountability. They embrace technological innovation and are agile in adapting to changing market dynamics, allowing for quick decision-making and efficient implementation of strategies. The strategic partnerships forged by Telus also influenced its organisational structure, enabling collaboration with external entities to enhance service offerings.
In contrast, Nortel’s organisational culture is characterised by a lack of transparency, accountability, and ethical practices. The company experiences significant financial mismanagement, including accounting scandals and fraudulent practices. The culture at Nortel is not conducive to fostering innovation or adaptability. As a result, the company struggled to keep pace with industry advancements and failed to invest adequately in new technologies, which hindered its ability to meet customer demands (Carmona et al., 2020). Additionally, Nortel has hierarchical organisational structure hinders effective communication and decision-making. There is a lack of checks and balances, weak corporate governance, and limited organisational transparency. The overreliance on legacy products further constrains Nortel’s ability to adapt to changing market dynamics. The failure to foster a culture of innovation and agility within the organisational structure contributed to Nortel’s downfall.
HR Strategy: Telus Communication versus Nortel Network
Telus emphasises performance and talent management as key drivers of organisational success. The company implements performance management systems and processes that promote continuous feedback, goal alignment, and employee development. Telus invests in training and development programs to nurture talent and provide opportunities for career growth within the organisation. Telus also has demonstrated a strong emphasis on HR strategic planning. The company aligns its HR strategies with its overall business objectives, considering customer satisfaction, technological innovation, and corporate social responsibility. They recognise the importance of attracting and retaining top talent to support its growth and maintain a competitive edge in the telecommunications industry.
In contrast, Nortel’s performance and talent management strategy suffered due to financial and operational challenges. The company’s lack of innovation and inability to adapt affected its talent management practices (Zaamount et al., 2019). Nortel also struggles to provide meaningful career development opportunities and effectively assess and reward employee performance, contributing to declining employee engagement and productivity. Nortel also fails to effectively implement HR strategic planning. The company’s focus on HR strategies and alignment with business objectives is inadequate. The lack of proper planning and strategic HR initiatives contributes to the company’s inability to adapt to market changes and compete effectively.
Recommendations:
To achieve success, telecommunication companies in Canada should prioritise effective internal and external communication, transformational leadership, a culture of innovation and learning, and enhanced corporate governance (Banerjee et al.,2020; King & Lawley,2022). Regular communication channels should be utilised to keep employees informed about organisational goals and updates. Clear and consistent messaging should be developed to engage customers, stakeholders, and the broader community. Transformational leadership should inspire innovation, adaptability, and employee engagement (Aquinas, 2022). A culture that encourages innovation and continuous learning should be fostered, with resources and opportunities provided for employee development. Strong corporate governance, including transparency and accountability, is crucial to prevent financial mismanagement. Ethical practices and an ethical culture should be promoted.
Conclusion:
Incorporating OBHR principles is vital for creating a supportive and productive work environment. Telus Communication’s success demonstrates the positive outcomes that can be achieved through customer-centricity, innovation, corporate social responsibility, and strategic partnerships. Nortel Network’s failure is a cautionary tale, highlighting the detrimental effects of neglecting HR and OB considerations. By implementing recommended strategies and embracing OBHR concepts, organisations can enhance their culture, leadership effectiveness, communication practices, talent management, and overall performance. Strong internal and external communication, a focus on ethical practices and corporate governance, and developing a culture of transparency, innovation, and learning are crucial for long-term success.
References
Addis, M. (2020). Engaging brands: A customer-centric approach for superior experiences. Routledge.
Aquinas, P. G. (2022). 1.1 Management Principles and Practice.
Banerjee, K., Adhikary, M. S., & Chatterjee, M. S. (2020). Organisational Behaviour. RED’SHINE Publication. Pvt. Ltd.
Bratton, J. (2020). Work and organisational behaviour. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Carmona, L. J. D. M., Gomes, G., & da Costa, D. D. L. C. (2020). Elements of organisational culture that encourage innovation development. Revista de Administração FACES Journal, 08-26.
CBC News. (2014, March 22). Nortel failed amid a “culture of arrogance.” CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/nortel-failed-amid-culture-of-arrogance-1.2582136
Chang, C. W., Huang, H. C., Wang, S. J., & Lee, H. (2021). Relational bonds, customer engagement, and service quality. The Service Industries Journal, 41(5-6), pp. 330–354.
Luthans, F., Luthans, B. C., & Luthans, K. W. (2021). Organisational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach Fourteenth Edition. IAP.
King, D., & Lawley, S. (2022). Organisational behaviour. Oxford University Press.
Kondalkar, V. G. (2020). Organisational behaviour. New Age.
Rana, G., & Sharma, R. (2019). Emerging human resource management practices in Industry 4.0. Strategic HR Review.
Vermeulen, M., Kreijns, K., & Evers, A. T. (2022). Transformational leadership, leader–member exchange and school learning climate: Impact on teachers’ innovative behaviour in the Netherlands. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 50(3), 491-510.
Zaamout, N., Alton, T., & Houlden, G. (2019). Examining Huawei’s Growth & Global Reach: Key Implications, Issues, and the Canadian Connection.
write