|dc.description.abstract||The main subject of this studie is to look at possible reasons why large companies are having problems, go bankrupt or being bought up. If we look at the average lifetime of the S&P 500 companies, we see that the average lifetime has been falling over the last hundred years. Since the 1970s the average lifetime has fallen from about 40 years to about 20 years.
In this thesis we look more closely at Norske Skog AS, and investigate the possible reasons why they, as a large global company, got into trouble, and study what Norske Skog could have done. The thesis attempts to answer this research question:
Based on the theoretical frameworks ambidextrous organizations and threat rigidity effects, why did Norske Skog AS get problems when the industry experienced a radical innovation, and what measures could have been taken to avoid bankruptcy or reduced profitability?
In this thesis we discuss how the ambidextrous organizations and the threat rigidity effects contribute to explain, how Norske Skog responded in facing a radical innovations. In this casestudy, we discuss to what extent Norske Skog was an ambidextrous organization, and whether Norske Skog was influenced by the threat rigidity effects.
In the findings of this casestudy we find that Norske Skog was an exploitative organization, which had a large focus on incremental improvement of the operational processes and products. We see from the findings that Norske Skog had a very limited exploratory focus. Furthermore, we find in the findings that threat rigidity effects help explain how Norske Skog responded when the threat came from the Internet and online newspapers. Norske Skog went "all in" to become one of the world's leading newspaper and magazine producers. When the internet and online newspapers began to transform the market, we saw that Norske Skog had chosen a risky strategy. We find several similarities between threat rigidity effects and how Norske Skog responded.
Finally, we summarize why Norske Skog had challenges and what measures Norske Skog could have done. In short, Norske Skog chose a risky strategy by investing everything in newspaper and magazine paper. In a world with a market that changes faster and faster, Norske Skog should have been more forward-looking and focused more on the customer. In this way, the signals of changes in the market could have been captured earlier, and measures could have been taken earlier.||nb_NO