Executive Summary

This essay examines how Fujifilm, once a major player in the film photography

industry, managed to adjust during a time of digital change. While other

companies, including Kodak, struggled to respond, Fujifilm began moving into

areas like healthcare, imaging technology, and cosmetics. It did so not by

chance, but through a series of actions that went beyond its original business.

To better understand this process, several change management models are

used—among them, Kotter’s eight steps, Lewin’s three stages, the McKinsey

7S framework, and the ADKAR model. These models help shed light on both

what the company did and why those decisions made a difference, especially

when it came to internal alignment and how people within the company

responded.

What the case suggests is that successful change is not built on one big shift.

Instead, it happens through many smaller efforts over time—through decisions

that reflect both strategy and culture. Fujifilm didn’t just change its products. It

reshaped the way it operated, and the way it viewed itself.

For creative industries, this case holds particular relevance. Many face

pressure from changing technology and shifting markets. While Fujifilm’s path

may not offer a ready-made model, it does offer something worth considering:

an approach to change that is gradual, deliberate, and built from within.Introduction

In recent years, creative industries have faced growing pressure brought on by

new technologies, fragmented markets, and shifts in consumer behavior.

Companies that rely on analog formats or physical media seem especially

exposed. These conditions have made the topic of organizational change

increasingly important，not just as a way to respond, but as a way to stay

present in an evolving landscape.

This essay looks at how change happens in practice, using the example of

Fujifilm—a company long associated with photographic film. As demand for its

core business declined, Fujifilm took a different path. It began investing in new

industries and moving beyond its original identity. The case gives us a chance

to consider what legacy creative firms can do when faced with rapid, uncertain

shifts.

Rather than offering a broad theory, this paper stays close to one key question:

how might creative organizations rethink who they are, and how they work,

before change leaves them behind?

Theoretical Background

To make sense of Fujifilm’s transformation, it’s helpful to draw on several

well-known frameworks from change management. These models are not

used as strict formulas, but more as lenses that offer different ways of

understanding what happened—and why it worked the way it did.

Kotter’s eight-step model is one way to follow the company’s path from

recognizing the decline of film to gradually building new directions. The early

steps—acknowledging urgency, forming strong leadership groups, and setting

a clear vision—seem to show up clearly in Fujifilm’s response. Later parts of

the model, such as celebrating short-term progress and reinforcing new

practices, can be seen in how the company slowly made its new business

areas part of everyday operations.

Lewin’s three-stage model—unfreeze, change, refreeze—adds another layer,

especially in how it looks at people. Fujifilm wasn’t just shifting markets; it was

asking employees to move past a long-held identity as a film company. That

kind of shift takes more than a strategy—it takes emotional adjustment. People

weren’t only resisting new tasks; they were facing a change in how they saw

their work, and themselves. Lewin’s view reminds us that helping people let go

is part of the work too.The McKinsey 7S Framework pushes the view even wider. It argues that

transformation needs more than vision—it needs systems, people, structure,

and values to all shift together. In Fujifilm’s case, the effort to bring these parts

into alignment was just as important as the external strategy.

Taken together, these models help show that Fujifilm’s response to disruption

wasn’t simple or sudden. It was built across multiple levels: strategy, structure,

and mindset. That may be part of why it worked—because the company

treated change not just as a business move, but as something deeper,

involving people, values, and time.

Case Analysis: Fujifilm’s Transformation

Fujifilm’s transformation was not only about renewing its products, but also

about redefining the company’s position and purpose. To understand how this

transformation took place and why it worked, we can examine it through three

change management models: Lewin’s three-stage process, Kotter’s eight-step

method, and the McKinsey 7S framework. Together, these models allow us to

break down Fujifilm’s change journey into three phases: preparation, execution,

and long-term maintenance.

In the early 2000s, the demand for traditional film declined rapidly. For Fujifilm,

transformation was no longer optional—it had become a matter of survival.

Several external factors, including advances in digital technology, shifting

consumer habits, and growing environmental concerns, were pressuring the

company to rethink its direction.

Drivers of Change

In the early 2000s, digital photography started replacing film at a speed few

had predicted. For Fujifilm, this wasn’t just a shift in the market—it felt like a

direct threat to the company’s future.

Looking from a PESTEL perspective, the pressure was coming from several

directions. Technology was moving fast, people were changing the way they

captured and shared images. At the same time, there were growing

environmental concerns about how film was produced and processed.

Fujifilm’s main business was losing ground quickly, and something had to

change.

Inside the company, there was also a sense that what they were offering no

longer matched where the market was heading. This is where Lewin’s

“unfreezing” stage becomes helpful. The first step was not just technical—it

was emotional. The company had to face the fact that its old model no longer

fit. And for many employees, that wasn’t easy. Some had worked with film their

whole careers. Asking them to think differently meant more than training—itmeant letting go of how they saw their own work.

By naming the problem early and starting to shift mindsets, Fujifilm began to

open the door to real, lasting change.

Vision and Strategic Direction

Fujifilm’s leadership introduced a new message during the transition: “Beyond

Film.” This was not just a slogan—it reflected a real shift in direction. The

company was preparing to move away from its traditional image and enter

unfamiliar areas like healthcare, digital imaging, and cosmetics.

In Lewin’s model, this stage marks the start of real change, when a new path

needs to be communicated and accepted within the organization. It also aligns

with the early steps in Kotter’s process, such as building urgency, forming

strong leadership support, and setting a clear goal.

What gave this vision strength was its link between innovation and the

company’s core identity. Fujifilm didn’t just announce new business areas—it

explained how they were connected to its background in imaging and applied

science. The goal was not only to survive, but to stay relevant in a changing

world.

Organizational Alignment

Having a vision is only one part of the process. If the internal systems and

structure stay the same, the strategy may not go very far. That’s where the

McKinsey 7S model becomes helpful. Fujifilm didn’t just talk about change—it

actually made changes in several parts of the organization.

On the strategic side, it put more money into research and started new teams

in healthcare and advanced materials. Inside the structure, departments were

rearranged so old and new businesses could work together better. Systems

like how performance was measured, and how budgets were made, were

changed to match the new direction.

Some staff had to be trained again, others moved to new roles. Leadership

also shifted—from being more traditional to focusing more on new ideas. But

maybe the biggest change was in what the company believed about itself.

Over time, Fujifilm stopped thinking of itself only as a film company and started

to act more like a tech-driven business trying to solve real-world problems.

These small but connected changes gave the transformation more stability

and made it easier to keep going.

4.Managing ResistanceA solid strategy helps, but change inside a company is rarely simple. Many of

Fujifilm’s employees had spent years, sometimes decades, working in

film-related roles. Shifting into completely different fields was not only a

practical challenge—it was an emotional one.

The ADKAR model (Hiatt, 2006) gives a useful way to look at this part of the

process. Fujifilm first helped employees understand why the change had to

happen. It tried to make the new direction feel logical, and gave people

chances to learn skills that were more suited to the company’s next steps.

Instead of pushing back against hesitation, the company offered support and

made space for communication. It also marked small early achievements—like

initial progress in healthcare—which gave people confidence that the change

might actually work.

Conclusion

Fujifilm’s transformation offers a useful reference point for understanding how

creative industry organizations might respond to large-scale disruption. It

demonstrates that even companies with long histories and deep attachment to

traditional formats are not locked into decline. What matters is not only the

willingness to act, but the capacity to rethink what the company stands

for—and to do so before the need becomes urgent.

Rather than treating change as a short-term adjustment, Fujifilm took a

broader approach. It questioned its role, looked for new areas where its

capabilities could be relevant, and made space internally for new ways of

thinking and working. This included shifts in leadership style, team structure,

investment focus, and cultural values. These changes did not happen all at

once. They were gradual, layered, and at times difficult. But over time, they

helped the company rebuild a sense of purpose that made sense in a digital

age.

For creative industries more broadly, especially those still centered on legacy

formats or struggling with rapid technological change, this case brings out

several lessons. Clear direction matters, but so does the ability to create

internal alignment across departments and roles. Culture plays a role

too—organizations that are open to learning, willing to let go of fixed identities,

and capable of experimenting across domains may be more likely to adapt

over the long run.

Fujifilm’s path isn’t a universal model. Not every company has the same

resources, history, or leadership. But its experience shows that transformation

is possible when it’s approached as a process—not a reaction. What we see inthis case is not just how a company stayed alive, but how it began to see itself

differently. And in the context of today’s fast-changing creative economy, that

shift in mindset may be just as important as the strategies used to get there.

Mar 26, 2025