The document outlines a case study on Nokia’s and Ericsson's responses to a supply chain disruption caused by a fire at Philips' semiconductor plant in 2000. It details the problems both companies faced, particularly Ericsson's delayed reaction and lack of contingency planning, which led to significant losses. Nokia's proactive crisis management and adaptability, including seeking alternative suppliers, are highlighted as key to its success amidst the supply chain crisis.

1. Annexure-V- Cover Page for Academic Tasks
Course Code: Course Title:
Course Instructor:
Academic Task No.: Academic Task Title:
Date of Allotment: Date of submission:
Student’s Roll no: Student’s Reg. no:
Evaluation Parameters: (Parameters on which student is to be evaluated- To be mentioned by students as
specified at the time of assigning the task by the instructor)
Learning Outcomes: (Student to write briefly about learnings obtained from the academic tasks)
Declaration:
I declare that this Assignment is my individual work. I have not copied it from any other student‟s work
or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made explicitly in the text, nor has any
part been written for me by any other person.
Student’s
Signature:
Evaluator’scomments (For Instructor’s use only)
General Observations Suggestions for Improvement Best part of Assignment
Evaluator‟s Signature and Date:
Marks Obtained: Max. Marks: …………………………

2. Case Study on
Nokia’s Supply Chain Management
INDEX
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Philips…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1
1.2 Nokia……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
1.3 Ericsson………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2
1.4 Case Overview……………………………………..………………………………………………………. 2
2. PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED
2.1 Problems at Philip’s end: Supply Chain Interruption…………………………………….. 3
2.2 Problems at Ericsson’s end…………………………………………………………………………… 4
2.3 Telecom Industry Bubble Burst…………………………………………………………………….. 5
3. NOKIA’S ACTIONS TO STABILIZE SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
3.1 Early speculations of possible crisis………………………………………………………………. 5
3.2 Preparedness against supply crisis………………………………………………………………… 5
3.3 Finding alternative source of chip supply………………………………………………………. 6
4. SOLTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Solutions to Philips………………………………………………………………………………………… 6
4.2 Recommendations to Ericsson………………………………………………………………………. 6
5. RFERENCES

3. 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 PHILIPS
Royal Philips (commonly known as Philips) is a Dutch technology company headquartered in
Amsterdam, Netherlands with primary divisions focused in the areas of electronics, healthcare and
lighting. It was founded in Eindhovenin 1891 by Gerard Philips and his father Frederik. It is one of the
largest electronics companies in the world and employs around 105,000 people across more than 60
countries. Philips has a primary listing on the Euronext Amsterdam stock exchange.
In 2000 Philip’s semiconductor division was manufacturing about 80 million chips every day. Eighty
percent of the mobile phones sold worldwide used Philips chips. Other than mobile phones their chips
were being used in the other electronic devices, such as, new cars, digital cameras and mobile memory
devices. Owing to this increasing demand, their supply capacity was scarce.
The increasing demand of mobile phone in the market, consumer’s increased purchase capacity and
constant demand for fashionable model resulted in shortened product life cycle of the mobile phone
industry to an average of 18 months. Phillips increasingly relied on the replacement market, which meant
speed to market became a critical sales factor for them.
1.2 NOKIA
Nokia Corporation is a Finnish multinational communications and information technology company,
founded in 1865. Nokia is headquartered in Espoo, Uusimaa, in the greater Helsinki metropolitan area. In
2014, Nokia employed 61,656 people across 120 countries, conducts sales in more than 150 countries
and reported annual revenues of around €12.73 billion. Nokia is a public limited-liability company listed
on the Helsinki Stock Exchange and New York Stock Exchange. It is the world's 274th-largest company
measured by 2013 revenues according to the Fortune Global 500.
Nokia is a global leader in the technologies that connect people and things. They combine global
leadership in mobile and fixed network infrastructure, with the software, services, and advanced
technologies to transform how smart devices and sensors tap the power of connectivity. With state-of-
the-art software, hardware and services for any type of network, Nokia is uniquely positioned to help
communication service providers, governments, and large enterprises deliver on the promise of 5G, the
Cloud and the Internet of Things.

4. In 2000, Nokia was the world’s leader in cell phone sales and the largest corporation in Europe by market
capitalization.
1.3 ERICSSON
Ericsson is a Swedish multi-national corporation that provides communication technology and services.
The company was founded in 1876 by Lars Magnus Ericsson and is headquartered in Stockholm,
Sweden. The company employs around 110,000 people and operates in around 180 countries. Ericsson
holds over 37,000 granted patents as of May 2015, including many in wireless communications. The
company offers services, software and infrastructure in information and communications technology
(ICT) for telecommunications operators, traditional telecommunications and Internet Protocol (IP)
networking equipment etc. Ericsson had 35% market share in the 2G/3G/4G mobile network
infrastructure market in 2012.
1.4 CASE OVERVIEW
On March 17, 2000, a lightning bolt struck a high-voltage electricity line in New Mexico. As power
fluctuated across the state, a fire broke out in a fabrication line of the Royal Philips Electronics radio
frequency chip manufacturing plant in Albuquerque. The plant was a key supplier of semiconductor chips
used in cell phones for both Ericsson and Nokia Corporation: together they received 40 per cent of the
plant’s chip production. At that time, both companies were about to release new cell phones into the
market and those tiny chips were the key component to their product’s functionality. Plant personnel
reacted quickly and extinguished the fire within ten minutes. At first blush, it was clear that eight trays of
silicon wafers on that line were destroyed, but the extent of the damage to Philip’s “clean-rooms” was
unknown.
In its initial reports of fire to Ericsson and Nokia, Philips relayed that it would take around a week before
production would return. Philips soon realized it had underestimated how much damage the clean rooms
had sustained and reported to Ericsson and Nokia that the process to resume normal operations would
take six weeks.

5. At Nokia, word of the setback spread quickly up the chain of command. Nokia's team, which had a crisis
plan in place, sprang into action. With an aggressive, multipronged strategy, Nokia avoided any cell
phone production loss.
In contrast, the low-level technician who received the information at Ericsson did not notify his
supervisors about the fire until early April and had to scramble to locate new sources for the chips. This
search delayed production and proved a fatal blow to Ericsson's independent production of mobile
phones. By April 2001, Ericsson was done with independent manufacture of mobile phones and had
created a 50/50 venture with Sony that became Ericsson’s new production shop. In 2010, Ericsson was a
much smaller company, at 82,500 employees with plans for further reduction.
Nokia's handling of its supply chain disruption provides a dramatic example of how a company's strategic
risk management can alleviate financial disaster and lay the groundwork for success in the future.
Perturbations in supply chain management are inevitable, and grow harder and harder to assess as the
marketplace becomes more globalized.
2. PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED
2.1 Problems at Philip’s end: Supply Chain Interruption
 Fire breakout in Philip’s clean-rooms:
At the Philip’s semiconductor chip factory, production takes place in “clean-room” conditions. Since
Philips was a major chip supplier to Nokia and Ericsson, both expecting a new product launch in their
near future at that time, the sudden fire outbreak was a huge setback for all the three companies.
 Inability to determine the exact damage to clean-rooms:
The clean-rooms are such facilities which have no more than one speck of dust per cubic foot, and therein
lay the problem. Fire produces smoke and triggers sprinklers. Fire and smoke take lives, and sprinklers
save them, but all—fire, smoke, and water—wreak havoc on property. As they dug deeper, plant
personnel found that smoke and water had contaminated millions of chips that had been stored for
shipment.
 Inability to determine their ‘time for normal production resuming’
Immediately after the fire outbreak at their clean rooms, Philips informed Nokia and Ericsson of 1 week
maintenance time before they resume their operations, on the basis of assumptions and without proper

6. analysis of their damage. Philips soon realized it had underestimated the extent of damage to its clean
rooms and had to re-inform Ericsson and Nokia that their process to resume normal operations would
take six weeks.
 Lack of emergency preparations
Philips production plant in New Mexico lacked in the pre-planned management in case of uncertainties.
They had no backup planned to resume their supply chain once the clean room production stalled after
fire outbreak. This resulted into their strong criticism in the market, and loss of business partners and
faith too.
2.2 Problems at Ericsson’s end:
 Weak crisis judgement:
Until they were informed by Philips about the damage to existing chips and upcoming shortage of chip
supply, Ericsson’s planners and managers had not sensed any discrepancy in Philips’ performance. As
such, its management had no reason to disbelieve Philips’ explanations. They certainly did not perceive a
need for concern or stepped-up action or inform higher authorities. This resulted into their second
problem listed below.
 Failure to take prompt actions in time
Since, managers and officials were unable to identify the gravity of the problem upcoming from the lack
of chip supply from Philips, they did not take any measures to create action plan and waited for Philips
production to recover after a week. Later, when Philips announced about its further delay in production
process, Ericsson had no alternatives preplanned and eventually had to face huge setbacks in their new
mobile phone launch. Components shortage at Ericson helped delayed to launch the product and
company officials estimated $400millions direct revenue losses.
 Single supplier reliability
Ericsson had previously moved to streamline its supply chain by making Philips its sole provider of
semiconductor chips. It was three weeks post fire that anyone on the executive team knew about the
complete issue and as Ericsson announced the loss to the market, their shares fell more than 11 percent.

7. 2.3 Telecom Industry Bubble Burst
During 2000, the telecom industry experienced bankruptcies, fraud, and destruction of shareholder value
on a massive scale, in part because investments were based on incorrect predictions about the growth of
the Internet and accompanying goods and services. However, cell phones at that time were chunky, had
small screens, and failed to utilize the Internet in an appealing way. The bubble showed up in Ericsson in
early 2001, when company laid off its workforce and outsourced its cell phone production.
3. NOKIA’S ACTIONS TO STABILIZE SUPPLY CHAIN
MANAGEMENT
3.1 Early speculations of possible crisis
A production planner at Nokia followed a well-articulated process for managing chip inflows from
Philips and failed to get a routine input he needed from Philips. He identified small defects in the chips
and informed the possible problem to his manager unlike the worker at Ericsson.
3.2 Preparedness against supply crisis
Nokia’s production planner adopted a monitoring process, developed in Nokia over the prior five years,
to frequently monitor the parts made in his plant.
3.3 Finding alternative source of chip supply
Nokia estimated the chip supply shortage from Philips to effect the production of their four million
handsets. The team identified alternative suppliers to temporarily meet the crisis created due to shortage
of supply from Philips.
4. SOLTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Solutions to Philips:
Recognizing that Philips’ problem could affect the production of several million mobile phones, Nokia
took three key steps:

8.  One team of executives and engineers focused on Philips, seeking a major role in developing
alternative plans. Guided by Mr. Korhonen and assisted by CEO Jorma Ollila, it pressed Nokia’s case
with Philips executives, including its CEO, Cor Boonstra. Philips responded by rearranging its plans
in factories as far away as Eindhoven and Shanghai.
 A second cross-continental team redesigned some chips so that they could be produced in other
Philips and non-Philips plants. Where appropriate, it consulted with Philips to assess the possible
impact of its actions.
 A third group worked to find alternative manufacturers to reduce pressure on Philips. Two current
suppliers responded within five days.
4.2 Recommendations to Ericsson
Due to negligence and non-recognition of major crisis, Ericsson had to face heavy losses from where it
was never able to rise up again in the market. It could have avoided the catastrophe by:
 Promptly responding to the availing chi crisis rather than waiting for the supply from Philips to
resume.
 Devising an emergency production recovery strategy in advance for handling sudden supply chain
crisis.
 Identifying alternative source of semiconductor chips immediately, to cope up with the deficit
created du to stalled production at Philips.
REFERENCES
1. Walker, R., (n.d.), “Nokia’s Supply Chain Management”, Kellog School of Management, KEL673.
2. Mukherjee, A.S., (2003), “The Fire That Changed an Industry: A Case Study on Thriving in a
Networked World”, The Spider’s Strategy: Creating Networks to Avert Crisis, Change, and Really
Get Ahead, 3-5(3).
3. Fourtane, S., (2014), “Supply Chain Agility: Nokia's Supply Chain Management Success”, Retrieved
from: http://www.ebnonline.com/author.asp?section_id=1364 &doc_id=273562