4. Review Attached Chapter 4A - AMD's Struggle for Survival: A Technology Giant's Restructuring and Changing Process to Win Competition and answer the following questions:

a. How do you think the change process of AMD contributed to negative organizational performance?

b. How should AMD adjust and change its organizational structure and organizational culture?

c. What went wrong during AMD's change process?

d. What might an organization development consultant have offered to the leadership of AMD? e. What would you have done in order to make AMD's change process more successful?

Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) was founded in 1969 in Sunnyvale, California, and is one of the largest rms in the semiconductor business. The firm produces microprocessors, graphic processors, and embedded processors for personal computers, workstations, and servers. The organization is the second-largest X86 microprocessor producer and second-largest supplier for discrete graphic cards in the world. AMD possesses unique technological capacity, which very few rms have, and currently is one of the two biggest license holders of X86 microprocessor architecture. This means that every single Windows-based computer in the world must use either AMD or Intel-based microprocessors. Similarly, it is also one of two firms in the discrete graphic card market. In 1977, 20% of the company was sold to German conglomerate Siemens. The organization has two main competitors. The rst one is the world's largest semiconductor manufacturer and an industry giant: Intel. The other one is the world's largest discrete graphic card producer: NVIDIA. Even though the competition in AMD's target markets is limited to only two main competitors, the competition is stiff and has proved to be extremely difcult. Both Intel and NVIDIA possess unique capabilities. While Intel has almost innite resources compared to AMD, NVIDIA, under the charismatic and extremely successful leadership of Jen-Hsun Huan, has one of the best research and development capabilities. This competitive environment shapes almost every single action taken by AMD and its competitors. AMD's current market cap stands at $1.61 billion. At its peak point (early 2000s), it was valued at around $44 billion. However, after 15 years the company lost almost $42 billion in market cap. So what happened to AMD? The answer necessitates a sophisticated approach to competition, change, and restructuring process. The firm was restructured many times, and each time, things only got worse. In order to understand the long and painful process for AMD, the case focuses on two central questions: First, how, under very intense competition, a firm with unique capabilities could not react to a changing environment, and second, how the organization was poorly managed and consequently the restructuring process produced no benefit to the firm. This will help the reader to understand the importance of alignment with changing environment as well as to show the crucial understanding of the surrounding environment and its importance for a restructuring process. The case also identifies how competitors have inuenced the firm's actions. This will strengthen your understanding of the change process. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND FROM 2000 TO 2016 In the early 20003, everything was looking good for AMD. They had highly competitive products against Intel. The company was protable, margins were good, and more important, the product portfolio was very competitive. Intel had trouble competing against AMD and was feeling very intense competition from desktop PCs to servers. In the early 2000s, the market cap of the company was ranging around $40 billion and at peak point it reached to $44 billion. AMD had entered the microprocessor market in 1975, so they developed strong engineering capabilities and experiences. At that time, AMD had not bought ATI yetithe world's second largest discrete graphic cards producertherefore, it was not competing in the graphic cards market. Moreover, Athlon and Athlon x64 processors were extremely competitive both in terms of performance and price; the quality of a microprocessor depends on different factors, but arguably the most important one is raw performance data. Intel was not able to respond quickly. Their Pentium 4 processors were not good enough and were more expensive than competing products. In May 2005, both Intel and AMD released their rst dual core processors. However, things started to change for AMD after 2005. In 2006, AMD acquired ATI Technologies, Inc. (AT1), a Canadian-based graphic card technologies company, for $5.4 billion. This was quite a shock for the market but perhaps was a logical step for AMD's future plans. With the acquisition, AMD became a direct competitor to NVIDIA and its charismatic long-term CEO Jen-Hsun Huang, the Taiwanese American cofounder. At the same time, Intel was releasing its Core 2 processor family, which became the base for an extremely successful product group. It looked like a relatively successful competitive position was going to have a dramatic turn, as the competitive advantage AMD had was changing rapidly. Nonetheless, at the time of the acquisition everything was going according to plan. None of the problems they faced were looking troublesome, so there were not many things to worry about. In 2007, the new generation of processors, Phenom and Phenom II, based on K10 architecture, was released. The processor family was not as competitive as the previous generations. Its comparative performance was mediocre at best. In 2008, Intel had released one of the best processor families to date: CORE I3-IS-I7. AMD could not directly answer this product launch. Instead, they released their Fusion processors (accelerated processing unit) in 2011. This processor, for the first time in the history, brought entry-level discrete graphic processing unit performance into the integral graphic processor unit of a central processing unit (CPU). It was a powerful CPU and a graphic processing unit (GPU) in single die. It was a result of AMD's acquisition of ATI, as such technology relies on heavy graphic performance. In 2011, AMD released the Bulldozer processors family. It was a completely new approach to CPU design and was also a risky oneit has currently reached the sixth generation. First performance results were promising, but it was understood that it could not directly compete against Intel's newly released Sandy Bridge family of processors. In 2012, AMD acquired MicroStar. In doing so, AMD had gained the design capabilities of ARM microarchitecture. AMD also won designs of CPUs and GPUs for all modern gaming consoles, Xbox One, PS4, and Nintendo Wii U in 2013. In 2016, it was clear that AMD had a difficult nancial situation. It was predicted that if the upcoming ZEN processor family was not going to be competitive enough, survival would be difficult. So how did it become such a failure for AMD when they have unique engineering capabilities and countless IP and design wins? In order to clarify that, it would be beneficial to have a look at what competitors have done. Not in many other industries have competition and change shaped firms' actions as it has done in the case of AMD, which has only two main competitors in two different but similar main business areas. Intel was founded in 1968 in Santa Clara, California. It is the largest semiconductor producer in the world. It is known for its motherboard chipsets, embedded processors, graphic chipsets, and ash memories. It has both manufacturing and designing capabilities, which very few firms possess. Intel's foundries have one of the most advanced production techniques. In fact, for a long time they had the most advanced processor manufacturing techniques. Intel is the dominant power in the X86 processor microarchitecture. They have a strategic lock in the Windows computer market. If an end user would like to use a Windows operating systems in a PC/laptop or servers, he or she must buy either Intel or AMD-based computers. This situation has worked extremely well for Intel, as at the time of this writing the firm absolutely dominates the Windows-based computer market