Running head: THE EVALUATION OF APPLE INC.

The Evaluation of Apple Inc. Using Organizational Metrics to Understand the Success of an

Organization Through Employee’s Productivity

Robert Guajardo

South Texas College

Abstract

Having an organization that is successful, and dealing with organizational change can be

a challenging aspect to some leaders. In this work, a hypothesis has been made to show a

relationship between employees’ productivity and the success of an organization. Three articles

were analyzed that showcased key performance indicators (KPI), customer experience

management (CEM), and critical success factors (CSF). These three metrics are crucial for the

success of an organization, and is measured for employee’s productivity and organizational

development. An example of this technique that was done on a successful organization was

Apple Inc. who used Kotter’s method of theory for organizational change. Apple was able to

start from the ground up, and is now one of the most successful organizations in the world. This

is partly due because of employee’s productivity, and the organization's success to keep

customers satisfied at all costs. In conclusion, multiple variables are critical for the success of an

organization, and this was seen through analyzing how Apple was able to become successful.

The most important aspect for an organization's success is employee’s productivity, and

customer acquisition.
THE EVALUATION OF APPLE INC. 3

I. Introduction

The end-goal of an organization should always be success. This success can be defined

by a variety of ways, and it is up to the organization themselves to decide what is important for

them. To achieve success, one way to do this is to be productive. Productivity is how effective a

process is, and this can be measured in many different ways such as with time, money, material,

or even efficiency. All of these aspects are related to productivity, and productivity is one of the

main ways for an organization to be successful. One American company that has seen success,

and is now the most valuable company in the world at a brand value of $146.3 billion is Apple

Inc. Most of Apple’s revenue comes from their most branded phone, the iPhone. It is an

understatement to say that Apple is the best company in the world that has done so well in terms

of revenue, employee satisfaction, and customer retention. They release different updated

products every year and this is what allows them to stay fresh with customers, who want to

continue buying their products because it truly is the golden standard of electronics. Apple leads

other industries in terms of innovation, people management, financial soundness, quality of

products/services, and global competitiveness. It is not just an American company, but a global

brand. When someone sees an iPhone, they know it is from Apple and it brings the end-user a

sense of joy. Apple did not achieve its success overnight. It took time, creativity, and innovation

to be the most branded organization in the world. It is an understatement to say that managing

employee’s productivity was one of the leading reasons why Apple is so successful today. With

Apple’s success, I hypothesize that there is a relationship between the success of an organization

and employee’s productivity. Apple’s success of an organization is greatly related to Kotter’s

theory of organizational change. They focus less on the change itself and more on the people

behind it. Apple creates a sense of urgency for change, and maintains that momentum and
THE EVALUATION OF APPLE INC. 4

continues to use this great effect in adapting the business to the current climate, and the direction

it needs to go. It is clear that Apple is so successful today because of employee’s productivity,

and using the organizational change theory of Kotter.

II. Literature Review

Customer Experience Management, Key Performance Indicators, and Critical Success

Factors

Customer experience management (CEM) is critical for an organization's success. It is

important that the customer is treated with respect, and they are always right. This is what drives

an organization to do well in terms of revenue, and sales. With high revenue and sales, you

create a trust bond between the organization and the customers. Customers are then able to apply

feedback to the organization and let them know what they are doing right, and what they should

improve on. CEM is directly related to how productive an organization is. Arineli (2015) did a

study on increasing productivity through the management and monitoring of experiences

provided to customers. They were able to explore this idea through fashion retail stores in Brazil,

identifying the relationship between productivity, customer experience management, and overall

the success of the organization. A questionnaire was used to evaluate 23 variables that were

important in the experience of the customer and their impact on increasing productivity. Their

end goal was to determine whether customer experience management was effective in increasing

productivity, and whether it had anything to do with how successful an organization was.

Another way for an organization to be successful is to evaluate critical success factors

(CSF). Gorantiwar (2015) identified CSF and performance measurement factors with the relation

of each other to evaluate the quality-productivity improvement framework developed in the

sponge iron industry. This framework that they used is critical for the success in other industries
THE EVALUATION OF APPLE INC. 5

and they were able to develop this framework to help improve the desired parameters through its

implementation. This framework focuses on the key ideas of cost effectiveness, employee

satisfaction, and success of the organization. Through the implementation and creation of this

framework, they used a regression analysis and identified traits that had a significant relation,

moderate significant relation, or less significant relation.

Understanding KPIs are also important for the success of an organization. KPIs are

directly related to how productive an organization is. Kang (2015) hypothesized that KPIs are

critical for manufacturing operation management and continuous improvement. Their goal was

to introduce a multi-level structure that identified and analyzed KPIs and how that relationship is

correlated with production systems. Kang (2015) proposed a framework that was directly

associated with time and quantity. The time element was to focus on time durations in production

systems operations, while the quantity element was to focus on issues related to product quality

and quantity. They were able to use KPIs and their proposed framework to develop a cocktail for

an organization's success. The main way to do this was to identify the bottlenecks in an

organization, and eliminate that in any way that they could. Having done this, they were able to

increase the productivity of an organization, closely monitor the KPIs of the organization, and

evaluate the overall success.

Apple Inc. Using KPIs, CEMs and CSFs

Apple is able to be successful in today’s day and age because of the evaluation of their

employee’s productivity based on KPIs, CEMs and CSFs. Apple is able to focus on time, talent

and energy to derive a number of successful employees that want to continue working for them,

to develop new products that are important for individuals. Jurmo (2010) argues that, “worker

education should facilitate both technical efficiency and high levels of worker participation.”
THE EVALUATION OF APPLE INC. 6

This worker education is what Apple is using in their own company to keep that high level of

worker participation. Vozza (2017) explains how Apple is able to use a technique that involves a

reward system as a CSF to exceptional team performances that were asked to focus on a specific

initiative that was important to the company. It was a system that disallowed a single individual

to receive a reward, unless the whole team did. This was focused on team performance and

evaluations as a whole, rather than a part. Apple was also able to eliminate organizational drag.

Organizational drag is the effect of needless internal interactions, unnecessary email

communications, and pointless meetings. Overall, it is a complete waste that can highly be

avoided. With this, Apple creates a free culture where employees aren’t tracked by managers,

and trust that the reason they are working at Apple, is because they love what they do, and they

want to improve the company in any way that they can. Apple also focuses on a leadership style

called, inspiration leadership. They were able to conclude that employees who were inspired

were more productive because they enjoyed what they did, and wanted to make a successful

change. It is top-performing companies, like Apple, that focuses on teams and meaningful

change, rather than individuals who are not productive or inspired.

Apple Inc. and Kotter’s Theory

Apple was also able to use their organizational change for productivity and success using

Kotter’s theory. According to Kotter (2009), efforts that do not have a powerful guiding coalition

can make progress, but sooner or later, the opposition stops the change efforts. This was

something Apple was really good at: creating a powerful guiding coalition. Apple employees are

motivated and devoted to making a change at their own company. They know the power of the

organization and how it changes the lives of many individuals with the new technologies that are

introduced annually. Steve Jobs, the former CEO of Apple, wanted to find employees who were
THE EVALUATION OF APPLE INC. 7

emotionally attached and invested in producing results. He had the task of identifying and

recruiting dedicated team members who were experienced in leadership and organizational

change. It started off like this, but then it evolved into building commitment with these

individuals and to come together for a common purpose: build an organization that was

inspiration and groundbreaking for the advancements of technology. It was also step five of

Kotter's theory of organizational change that allowed Apple to become such a successful

company. Empower employees for broad based action. Steve Jobs was able to announce his

vision for the company, and it was those employees who were able to take the vision and mold it

into something spectacular that was astonishing. Kotter (2009) states, “After communicating the

vision, the next step is to empower the team to execute the vision and allow people to take action

by removing as many barriers to the implementation of the change.” These barriers that Kotter

describes is the organizational drag that was mentioned earlier in this article. It was important for

Steve Jobs to remove this organization drag, barriers, to implement the change that was needed

for his vision to become a reality. For Steve Jobs, communication was a vital key component for

the success of his organization because he wanted to make sure that his employees understood

with what he wanted, and what they needed to get to that place. It was his stress on employee’s

productivity that allowed a spark into the organization's success altogether.

III. Findings

Gorantiwar (2015) was able to conclude how multiple traits such as productivity,

business, process management, customer satisfaction, and quality performance were all related to

each other. The biggest finding that was observed in this article was that process management

and productivity improvement were directly related and correlated with each other. This was

because process management is dependent on productivity. If employers are not productive, then
THE EVALUATION OF APPLE INC. 8

the whole organization stops managing, and the process will not run. This is also directly

correlated to how successful an organization is. Without the proper techniques of process

management, then there will be no organization. A finding of two traits that were less

significantly related were training and customer satisfaction. With this, Gorantiwar (2015)

identified that there was no correlation between the two. If training were to occur within the

organization, this had little to no effect on customer satisfaction. The reason was because

customers never knew or cared whether training was happening internally or not. What the

customer wanted was to understand a process and be done with the reason they were there in the

first place.

Arineli (2015) concluded that productivity is highly related to customer experiences, and

more importantly, positive ones. Even if it does not amount to immediate sales, it does contribute

significantly to the consolidation of the brand, which is important in the competitive aspect in

which businesses are placed. If the employee’s productivity begins to decline, then this is

directly impacted to the customers experiences. More importantly, they focused on customers

being able to indirectly dictate how the company’s success is going to be. If the customers are

happy with an organization, then this amounts to more success. It is also crucial to the opposite

end of the spectrum to keep the customers happy at all costs, because they are the ones that are

spending their capital on inventory from your organization. If the customer is not happy, then the

organization is not happy. There is a direct correlation between employees’ productivity,

customers, and the success of an organization.

Kang (2015) was able to identify how KPIs worked in relation to the success of an

organization. He stated that there are supporting elements monitoring, that trickles down to KPIs

evaluation, then to bottleneck identification, which had a high impact on operation improvement.
THE EVALUATION OF APPLE INC. 9

With the correct steps for operation improvement, and identifying these KPIs, this would then

allow an organization to be highly successful. The way KPIs are evaluated and monitored, is

through the productivity of the employees. They were able to identify a relationship between

KPIs, operation improvement, employee productivity, and organization success. More useful

KPIs were directly associated with higher operation improvement because employees knew what

they were evaluated on, and knew how to fix it based on these measurements. With this,

employees were then more productive based on how to fix their own issues. With employee’s

productivity increasing, this made the organization more successful.

With diving into these three sources that mentioned KPIs, CEMs, and CSFs, I was able to

identify that an organization's success is dependent on a variety of factors. Rather, it is a mixture

of components. I would say the main source for an organization’s success, is customer

acquisition, which is directly related to employee’s productivity. If a customer uses an

organization, or goes into one, and they did not have the best experience, this could hurt the

organization financially. With Apple, this was affected greatly but they learned quick that

gaining customers trust was most important to them. An example of this was Apple went into

extreme measures to make sure that customer security was a priority. This would then disallow

Apple or anyone else to obtain customer information that is stored inside their products. It got to

the point where the FBI asked Apple to break into an iPhone for a murder case, and Apple

refused. Apple released a statement that said, doing that would not fall into the guidelines of their

security features. Also, Apple has been highly successful because they have employees who care

what they do and are extremely productive. They do not need a manager to hold their hand or

guide them through every step of the way, because they already know what to do, and how to do

it well. I have reached this conclusion because Apple is one of the top grossing companies in the
THE EVALUATION OF APPLE INC. 10

world, and they have shared their secrets from time to time. They value customer acquisition,

and make sure that their customers are always happy. It even stems to employees, and they

themselves can say that they are happy they work at Apple.

IV. Conclusion

What I have learned was how an organization's success is dependent on a variety of

factors. It is especially important that organizational leaders understand how their employees

work and listen to their concerns, because that impact is directly impacted on customer care and

acquisition. I have also learned how Apple was able to use KPIs, CEMs and CSFs to understand

how to build an organization from the bottom up. They were able to listen to the concerns of

their employees, and fix those mistakes, so that the most productive people can be happy

working at their company. With this, my hypothesis was correct that employee’s productivity has

a direct correlation to the organization’s success through a variety of ways. If employees are not

productive, then this can make it hard for an organization to be successful. Having employees

that are motivated and have a passion for what they do is important for an organization. With

this, customers also play a key role into this, because they will be loyal to those organizations

that treat them well.

As a future leader in an organization, when I implement change, I will make sure that I

analyze the organizations and my employees KPIs, CEFs and CSFs. I will also make sure that I

use servant leadership, to make my team heard and understood. When I make decisions, I plan to

ask my team their thoughts on the process, and how we can all improve together. With those

employees that are productive, I will allow them to get special perks such as getting overtime

when needed, paid time off when requested, and healthy raises annually. I want my most

productive employees to be happy that they are working for me, and happy that they are working
THE EVALUATION OF APPLE INC. 11

at a good organization. With these techniques and methods, I can strongly say that I will work

for a successful organization, like Apple, and I know that I will play a big part in keeping

employees happy and making sure the organization is taking an understanding approach to be

successful with clear visions and goals.

References

Arineli, A., & Heitor Luiz Murat De Meirelles Quintella. (2015). CEM: Increasing productivity

through the management and monitoring of experiences provided to customers. Cogent Business

& Management,2(1). doi:10.1080/23311975.2015.1023015

Gorantiwar, V. S., & Shrivastava, R. (2015). Validating quality productivity improvement

framework for sponge iron industry in India. Production & Manufacturing Research,3(1), 103-

123. doi:10.1080/21693277.2015.1012233

Jurmo, P. (2010). Productive and participatory: Basic education for high-performing and actively

engaged workers. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education,2010(128), 47-57.

doi:10.1002/ace.390

Kang, N., Zhao, C., Li, J., & Horst, J. A. (2016). A Hierarchical structure of key performance

indicators for operation management and continuous improvement in production

systems. International Journal of Production Research,54(21), 6333-6350.

doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1136082

Kotter, J. P. (2009). Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. The Principles and Practice

of Change,113-123. doi:10.1007/978-1-137-16511-4_7

Mbamalu, G., & Whiteman, K. (2014). Vascular Access Team Collaboration To Decrease Catheter

Rates in Patients On Hemodialysis: Utilization of Kotter’s Change Process. Nephrology Nursing

Journal,283-288. Retrieved from

https://ezproxy.southtexascollege.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=tr

ue&db=a9h&AN=96673767&site=eds-live&scope=site
 THE EVALUATION OF APPLE INC. 13

Vozza, S., & Vozza, S. (2017, May 02). Why Employees At Apple And Google Are More

Productive. Retrieved from https://www.fastcompany.com/3068771/how-employees-at-apple-

and-google-are-more-productive