The Autodesk Case Study
The business world knows many stories of fundamental, structural, and paradigm transformations of small and large companies, both successful and destructive. The case of the technological reorganization of Autodesk belongs to the first category. Its leaders decided that the organization should be more innovative and competitive and initiated a comprehensive reform of all its processes and segments to adapt them to cloud technologies. One of the most affected elements of this transformation has been Autodesk employees from departments responsible for products, sales, and technical issues. The product and technical teams had to reconsider their product lifecycle management model completely, which led to a partial abandonment of the 12-month one in favor of “continual software updates” (Siegel & Seibert, 2017, p. 8). Sales and marketing specialists at Autodesk have had to reinvent their strategies and methods of selling, advertising, and communicating with content marketing and the subscription model as core ideas. The unification of software and interaction principles is another consequence. Moreover, all of these categories of workers have had to develop new skills, resulting in high turnover and many newcomers.
Impact on Channel Partners, Customers, and Shareholders
Autodesk’s technological and ideological transformation has also affected its stakeholders, such as channel partners, customers, and shareholders. With the shift to cloud computing, the software industry leader had to move from a perpetual license model to an approach known as “Software as a Service” (Siegel & Seibert, 2017, p. 6). However, now customers were also subscribers, with a new obligation to renew their subscriptions every month. For some, it was a better offer as the product became cheaper; for others, this innovation was inconvenient and simply costly. Autodesk’s adoption of cloud computing has mostly had a financial effect on its network of channel partners. Some distributors and resellers who could not afford the digital and conceptual transition had to end their relationship with Autodesk, but most of them adapted and stayed. According to Siegel and Seibert (2017), “partners maintained a majority of the relationships within the existing customer base” (p. 7). Shareholders such as investors began to receive much more financial information from the organization. The transformation also attracted activist investors who began infiltrating Autodesk’s internal hierarchy.
Autodesk’s Biggest Revelation during Reorganization
Such a massive and comprehensive ideological, structural, and technical organizational reform was a new experience for the entire leadership of Autodesk. Carl Bass and other leaders responsible for the successful yet challenging transformation admit to having gained many new insights and developed various unique ideas during the restructuring and renewal of their company (Siegel & Seibert, 2017). Siegel & Seibert (2017) note that there was a great revelation for the management team, which resulted in what might be called a reformation within a transformation. According to them, “the real challenges came from eliminating some of the tried and true methodologies of the past” (Siegel & Seibert, 2017). It was a surprise to Bass and others that introducing technical innovations and new marketing methods into innovation would render many established practices, methodologies, and procedures obsolete and ineffective. Cloud technology has shown the need for software unification, centralization, and enhanced communication between teams and departments. Technological diversity within the company’s systems and software tools is excessive and creates delays, and misunderstandings, while its simplification and consolidation contribute to better performance and profits.
Reference
Siegel, R., & Seibert, P. (2017). Autodesk in 2016: Transforming to meet a changing industry. Stanford Graduate School of Business Case No. E-613. Web.