International strategy during Phase 4: “A time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted” (Paulo Coelho) which is planted” (Paulo Coelho)

During this period, “T” was focused on building itself as an MNC – in both the continuing international expansion and strengthening of the cluster mindset, and the “internationalization of organization” at all levels – from top management to ordinary employees in both HQ and the subsidiaries.

1. “T” continued investing in the new markets and strengthened its cluster-based business strategy.

“T” strengthened its position in Asia and Europe, supporting the geographical “cluster-thinking” that was described in the previous chapter, to combine the operations in one geographic area and similar culture into one cluster. A head of each cluster was appointed and became a member of the Executive Board of “T”, in order to link the activities abroad even more closely to the top level. In this period,

“T” nuanced the previous cluster-thinking that was described in Chapter 6. Norway had been included in the Scandinavian cluster, making Scandinavia the domestic market. That led to closer co-operation and synergy-building among three Scandinavian countries. In Eastern and Central Europe, two WOSs or OpCos⁶⁰, as “T” started to call WOSs, were added to the Eastern and Central European Cluster:

Serbia (2009) and Bulgaria (2010). The Asian cluster had experienced high growth, and several OpCos had been added to the portfolio: Pakistan (2006), India (2009), and Myanmar (2011). In 2012, the thinking on the cluster strategy “turned” again. “T” announced the “cluster-based business model”

(annual report, 2013). This model included the use of synergy effects, a popular phrase among business

60 WOS is a definition, used in this study, describing the 100%-owned subsidiary abroad. OpCO is an operational company.

The definition started to be used in “T”’s HQ during the “Different companies – one Group” phase, in order to underline HQ’s involvement in its subsidiaries abroad at the operational level. This study will continue to use WOS

169

companies, meaning a situation when several entities or companies working together bring a particularly fruitful effect, greater than the efforts of a single company.

In “T”, the synergy effect in the cluster meant close co-operation across national borders within a geographical cluster, in order to improve the operational excellence and business performance. That resulted in the opening of operational business centers that would coordinate the activities inside each cluster.

Although Norway was a natural part of the Scandinavian cluster. It was taken out of the Scandinavian cluster portfolio and cultivated as a pure domestic market, in order to underline the importance of having a focus on their own local markets and local customers. Thus, during this process, two operational centers were opened: one in Norway, looking for synergy in Sweden and Denmark, the second in Serbia, managing the operations in Central Europe. These operational centers were managed from HQ and coordinated the synergy of OpCos from operational perspectives across country borders;

technology and marketing were the focus. The third cluster was the Asian one, which included the whole Asian portfolio.

The Asian portfolio was different from the Central European one; there were OpCos with different levels of ownership: there were JVs in Bangladesh and Malaysia (the rest of the OpCos were WOSs).

This was a reason why an operational center was not opened in Asia: the OpCos of the different levels of “T”’s ownership did not give “T” the opportunity to build common technological and managerial skills, due to the limitations of the licensing conditions that regulated certain activities at the national level and did not allow activities to be established across borders.

Thus, in the Asian cluster, the “operational center” was replaced by the idea of building “a little” “T”’s HQ in the form of a large country office in Bangkok. The whole management team responsible for the Asian region – both Norwegians and employees from other nationalities – moved to Bangkok. Firstly, it was important to save travel expenses and the time taken for business trips for employees who traveled from Norway to Asia. Secondly, it a was a short way from Bangkok to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia and, later, to Myanmar, in order to manage all the operations as a cluster.

Thirdly, the executives and managerial staff who administered the Asian office could utilize the local presence and build up the Asian organization, reaping the benefits of working in local environments.

“T” could update experience and knowledge from the Asian market, build a strong network and connections with the authorities and decision-makers.

170

The only operation that was not in any cluster – and was operated as an important JV because of the size of the markets the operation included – was VCom: a JV with Russian co-owners that itself was constructed as a cluster-based operation, having clusters in Russia, the CIS⁶¹ region, Western Europe, and Asia.

Table 7.2. The portfolio for “T”’s mobile projects, 2013

Company Markets Percentage owned

Scandinavian Cluster:

T Sweden Sweden 100%

T Denmark Denmark 100%

Asian Cluster:

DT Thailand 69.3%

DG Malaysia 49%

T Myanmar Myanmar 100%

GRPh Bangladesh 55.8%

T Pakistan Pakistan 100%

UNI⁶² India From 60% (2009) to 100% (2013)

CEE⁶³ Cluster:

T Hungary Hungary 100%

T Montenegro Montenegro 100%

T Serbia Serbia 100%

T Bulgaria Bulgaria 100%

JVs without cluster:

VCom LtD HQ Nederland 33%

61 CIS - Commonwealth of Independent States an alliance of former Soviet republics formed in December 1991, including Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan (http://www.cisstat.com/eng/)

62 JV in India, and later on - the WOS

63 CEE – Central Eastern Europe. Hereafter in the text, it will be used CEE.

171

2. “T” changed its name to “T” Group (in this research, “T” will be used), in order to underline the size of the company and a new strategy: “Different companies – one Group” (“T”’s website).

Membership of the “MNC executive club” demanded organizational changes in “T”.

Internationalization of the organization.

“T” changed its name to “T” Group, underlining the importance of building one company, despite the fact that “T” had consisted of 13 mobile operations abroad and one operation in Norway. In addition to mobile operations, “T” had several operations in other business areas than mobile, such as broadcast and satellite communication. “T” proclaimed the strategy: “Different companies – one Group”, which included the following important activities:

1) “T” Group changed the language in the company: English started to be the corporate language.

This means that mail communication was switched to English (mostly for Group activities, which included close co-operation with the subsidiaries; “T” Norway mostly used Norwegian).

All the governing documents were produced in English. All presentations on behalf of “T”

Group were produced in English.

2) A “chat” mode and Facebook were opened on the intranet that functioned “direct line” with voices from abroad. “T” started to arrange “Group campaigns” via the intranet, in order to create a “family feeling” across the Group, such as sending pictures from your holiday and telling about the favorite places you visited, quizzes, competitions for employees for the best name, or good ideas. Such activities via the common intranet were appreciated by employees of the subsidiaries and created a feeling of common values and one community: a citizenship of “T”.

3) Both intranet and extranet started to be built to the same design, created in HQ (with exceptions in the JVs). The common intranet functioned as an important tool regarding information from the Group, events, benefits for employees, etc. “T” Group intranet was produced in English and connected to the subsidiaries that had the intranet in two languages: local and English. “T”

Norway also had the intranet in two languages: Norwegian and English. In this connection, employees across the Group could be updated on HQ’s and local news, order facilities where they were needed, apply for vacancies, and find relevant information about Group policy, etc.

172

4) Group-building was the central idea behind the development and implementation of “T”’s common governance. “T” realized that active international expansion, global presence and the size of the investments outside Norway demanded a strong and professional organization.

“T” started to promote itself as the MNC, understanding that that the company needs to start changes in the organization.

We had joined the executive club of MNCs, and that placed MNC – thinking on the agenda for the top managers, and later it was transferred to the whole organization.

We needed changes for the whole organization. (Interview with one of the executives, who worked in HR, 2016)

The staff of different professional services were organized across the subsidiaries under the management of the Group. For example, once a year, the head of the Group entity from HQ invited all colleagues from the same entities from the subsidiaries to an annual meeting to discuss important issues, such as strategy, good practice, etc. Thus, the Head of Group Communication invited all leaders for communication activities from all the countries, as did other heads of the corporate or Group entities: legal services, corporate affairs services, technical services, etc. The Head of Corporate Staff Services worked not only with his group in Norway, but with the staff in the subsidiaries. The same model was described in the previous chapter, in relation to the CEO’s activities regarding TMB⁶⁴. The Group Staff leaders started the same practice, as did the CEO. The described activities supported the building of common practices and common thinking, regarding business, and connected the subsidiaries more closely to HQ.

At the same time, the HR department developed a common platform for the shared services connected to HR issues, such as the “T” Development Platform – a performance platform to support the performance result for each employee in the Group. Other common services related to salary, trip-reporting documents, different leaves, etc. were launched.

64 TMB – Top management Board – arena for the top management in “T”.

173

3. Strong focus on ethical issues; the role of the state as an owner started to be visible when