Apple Inc.: Organizational Culture, Leadership, and Structure

Introduction to Organizational Behavior

Organizational behavior is a study that encompasses the examination and analysis of the influence that individuals, groups, and organizational structures have on behavior within organizations. The main intent is to employ such understanding to make organizations function more effectively. In other words, organizational behavior is the analysis of what individuals undertake in an organization and how their actions influence the organization's performance. By understanding how individuals interact and work together, improvements can be undertaken for a company. A key characteristic of organizational behavior is discerning the detailed behaviors of personnel or groups of workers in diverse settings and how they respond to particular circumstances (Robbins and Judge, 2013).

Apple Inc. Background and Operations

Apple Inc., formerly known as Apple Computer, Inc., is a transnational American organization based in California that creates, develops, and retails consumer electronics, computer software, and personal computers. The company is renowned for hardware products such as MacBooks, the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad. Apple was founded in 1976 and registered as Apple Computer, Inc., but changed its name in 2007 to reflect its increased focus on consumer electronics following the iPhone launch.

Apple is the largest publicly traded company globally in terms of market capitalization, with just over 350 retail stores in approximately ten nations and over 60,000 permanent full-time employees plus approximately 3,000 temporary full-time employees worldwide. Apple Inc. is the second-largest company in the information technology sector by revenue, ranking below Samsung Electronics. Apple effectively employs numerous key organizational behavior concepts to improve organizational strength. This paper analyzes three of these concepts: organizational leadership, organizational culture, and organizational structure.

Organizational Culture at Apple

Organizational culture, also referred to as corporate culture, encompasses the association between members of an organization and the manner in which they interact with each other as they undertake their roles and duties. Having confidence in and participating in similar objectives and expectations within an organization defines organizational culture. An organization with resilient and solid mutual beliefs that strives toward a common objective and vision can achieve effective and efficient business operations. Organizational culture has observable features and characteristics reflected in day-to-day work practices and the understandings of organization members directly influenced by past events (Stokyo, 2009).

Increasingly, managers use organizational culture as a strategic tool. This reflects a growing recognition that understanding how individuals discuss insights, outlooks, and workplace interactions shapes how they behave. While promoting uniformity is not the goal, there is widespread belief that certain kinds of cohesion can decrease unproductive conflict, encourage teamwork, and align work toward a single objective without requiring authoritarian management. Additionally, cultural pride can boost employee morale and motivate achievement of organizational goals. Organizational culture is a theoretically influential dynamic force (Stokyo, 2009).

Values are considered the core of organizational culture, consisting of vital philosophies and notions mutually shared by employees. The basic reasoning supporting the need for ethical guiding principles is that organizational activities result from individual decisions, and humans tend to seek validation for their actions beyond financial profit (Price, 2007). Business ethics are principles and philosophies that an organization adopts and represents, encompassing its obligations to stakeholders, shareholders, employees, consumers, and the public. They also address economic, political, and environmental concerns (Ferrell, 2004).

Apple Inc.'s stated core ethical principle is the use of good judgment. The company clearly asserts in its mission statement that it is devoted to safeguarding the environment and ensuring the health and safety of its employees and the global community (Blodget, 2013).

However, although Apple Inc. has established a code of business ethics, the organization has not been successful in implementing them or nurturing a comprehensive ethical corporate culture. The vital principles articulated in its mission statement are not reflected in actual business practices. It is considered unethical for the company to pursue profit maximization for shareholders while disregarding the work-life balance of its employees. While profit generation is appropriate, the methods Apple uses to achieve revenues—by increasing working hours to unsustainable levels—are problematic, particularly given the company's stated commitment to employee welfare (Koetsier, 2013).

Milton Friedman argued that an organization's sole social responsibility is to employ its resources on activities intended to increase profit while remaining within legal guidelines and avoiding dishonesty (Lähdesm­äki, 2012). Apple, however, operates differently. The company maintains a secured and sealed business information policy. Apple Inc. sustains a culture of privacy and enforces severe penalties on employees who breach confidentiality by distributing information (Edwards, 2013).

The corporate culture of secrecy generates disapproval regarding Apple's lack of transparency and raises questions about their authenticity. The organization's fascination with maintaining security could harm its brand in an era increasingly demanding transparency from stakeholders and the public. However, the secretive protection policy has enabled the company to maintain discretion regarding its patented products and safeguard trade secrets. Nevertheless, this protection has come at an increasingly expensive cost and has become ethically and morally difficult to justify (Daniels Fund Ethics Initiative, 2012).

Organizational Leadership Styles

A recommendation is that the company could be more transparent about its activities without revealing excessive detail about product development and operations. This approach would benefit all parties, as consumers would no longer feel harassed or threatened by questions about company operations.

Robbins and Judge (2013) define leadership as the capability to influence a group toward achieving a purpose or set of objectives. Leadership does not arise solely from managers or supervisors in official positions; it can emanate from outside the formal organizational structure. Strong leadership and management are imperative for organizations to achieve optimal efficiency. Modern leaders must challenge the status quo, develop visions for future periods, and motivate organizational members to strive toward established goals and objectives.

Different managers employ different leadership styles, ranging from dictatorial and controlling approaches to laissez-faire and facilitative approaches. Transformational and transactional leadership styles represent stark contrasts in fundamental management philosophies and motivation methods. These styles were developed by Bass (1985) and Burns (1978).

Transactional leadership occurs when one individual contacts others with the intent to exchange something of value—that is, when leaders approach followers with direct incentives or exchanges. Transformational leadership, by contrast, encompasses more than follower submission and obedience. It involves changing the principles, desires, and ideals of followers. The outcome of transformational leadership is an association of shared motivation and boost that translates followers into leaders and may translate leaders into agents of ethical good (Kuhnert and Lewis, 1987).

Apple experienced both leadership styles. Steve Jobs, the former CEO, was an enigmatic leader with a resilient desire for innovation and motivation. Based on the models developed by Bass and Burns, Jobs can be considered a transformational leader, as he stimulated and impacted personnel to achieve high levels of productivity. The advancement, development, and progression of Apple were greatly aided by his dynamism, compelling character, and articulate communication (Reschke, 2014).

Transformational leaders employ their power to restructure and alter longstanding practices. Jobs exemplified this approach by motivating Apple workers to produce original and exceptional products by thinking differently than competitors. However, this leadership style has downsides. Responsibility took priority over personal attention; Apple workers perceived the organization as a club rather than a family, with the company valuing assignments and success more than relationships. Additionally, transformational leadership can create a perception of the leader as indispensable, creating a system centered on one individual (Kuhnert and Lewis, 1987). The company greatly feared what life would be without Steve Jobs.

Tim Cook, Jobs's successor and current CEO, employs an entirely different leadership style. Based on the models by Bass and Burns, Cook can be considered a transactional leader. He has attempted to sustain the organization at its current level by making use of existing capital rather than creating innovative products as previously done (Lashinksky, 2012). Since the release of the iPad before Jobs's death, the company has not launched significant new and innovative products. Instead, the company develops variations of existing models, such as the iPhone 6 (Associated Press, 2014). Cook has also used company returns to pay dividends to shareholders (Reschke, 2014).

Transactional leaders largely focus on sustaining existing relationships within and outside the organization rather than stimulating innovation and ingenuity (Kuhnert and Lewis, 1987). This is precisely what Cook is instituting at Apple Inc. However, this approach has weaknesses. The organization concentrates on shareholder and employee relationships while failing to direct itself toward innovation and productivity. Since 2010, Apple has not introduced a new product category. Rival companies such as Samsung have developed innovative products including wearable devices, and Google introduced Google Glass.

A recommendation is that Apple must reconsider its leadership style, as the current approach risks losing its status as the biggest and most innovative company in the world.

Organizational Structure and Evolution

For an organization to achieve success, it requires a reliable and resilient organizational structure. The manner in which a company organizes itself directly influences its success or failure rate. It is essential for an organization to structure itself in ways that achieve objectives and targets effectively. Although organizational structure emphasizes objectives and goals, it also determines how strategies and executive concerns are reported. Understanding a company's organizational structure enables recognition of cross-functional interactions and optimum outcomes (Robbins and Judge, 2013).

Apple Inc. has experienced significant changes in organizational structure in recent years. Before Steve Jobs's death, the organization functioned through him; every decision regarding a product or service required his approval. The primary advantage of this structure was fast decision-making, as no consensus was needed—one individual made the decisions. However, it had disadvantages. When the CEO focused on one product, other products were neglected and stalled in development (Yarow, 2013).

When Tim Cook assumed the role of CEO, the organizational structure changed significantly. The company now operates under a cooperative or combined structure designed to bring parties and teams together for long-term affiliation toward mutual objectives. This structure helps individuals in both personal work and team collaboration. Professionals work together to achieve objectives independent of their position, enabling effective partnerships across diverse abilities. Collaboration combines multiple perspectives, increasing productivity levels.

However, this structure has drawbacks. Apple's long history of individual-centered work makes transitioning to collaborative approaches challenging. Strong-willed individuals with different ideas often struggle to reach unified solutions (Yarow, 2013). The strategic response has been employing a manager to oversee this process, with the vice president given this responsibility.

Conclusion

Organizational leadership, culture, and structure are elements of organizational behavior that shape how personnel behave based on their attitudes and values and how they execute the organization's business ideals and structure. As emphasized throughout this paper, through consistent interaction of Apple Inc.'s organizational behavior concepts, the organization can govern, control, and regulate its personnel and execute policies at different strategic levels. Academic understanding and various human resource models regarding organizational culture provide a profound understanding of Apple Inc., a company distinguished by its incomparable history, inventive capability, and unique structure.