Scribd Logo
Încărcați

Bine ați venit la Scribd!

  • Group 6 ODC

    Încărcat de

    Sanchi Monga
    9 vizualizări12 pagini
    The document compares the organizational structures and strategies of Matsushita and Phillips. Matsushita had a hierarchical and decentralized structure with strict accountability. It followed a strategy of global expansion. Phillips had a matrix structure and decentralized decision making. It was focused on single products and technical innovation. In the 1960s, increased globalization led both companies to shift towards more centralized and worldwide approaches, though Phillips' centralization reduced complexity and improved market knowledge. The companies struggled in later decades due to issues like a lack of low-cost manufacturing, marketing mistakes, and insufficient innovation. Recommendations included investing in R&D, improving delegation, setting up plants in low-wage areas, and better mot

    Descriere originală:

    odc

    Drepturi de autor

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formate disponibile

    PPTX, PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

    Vi se pare util acest document?

    Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

    Raportați acest document
    The document compares the organizational structures and strategies of Matsushita and Phillips. Matsushita had a hierarchical and decentralized structure with strict accountability. It followed a strategy of global expansion. Phillips had a matrix structure and decentralized decision making. It was focused on single products and technical innovation. In the 1960s, increased globalization led both companies to shift towards more centralized and worldwide approaches, though Phillips' centralization reduced complexity and improved market knowledge. The companies struggled in later decades due to issues like a lack of low-cost manufacturing, marketing mistakes, and insufficient innovation. Recommendations included investing in R&D, improving delegation, setting up plants in low-wage areas, and better mot

    Drepturi de autor:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Descărcați ca PPTX, PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    9 vizualizări12 pagini

    Group 6 ODC

    Încărcat de

    Sanchi Monga
    The document compares the organizational structures and strategies of Matsushita and Phillips. Matsushita had a hierarchical and decentralized structure with strict accountability. It followed a strategy of global expansion. Phillips had a matrix structure and decentralized decision making. It was focused on single products and technical innovation. In the 1960s, increased globalization led both companies to shift towards more centralized and worldwide approaches, though Phillips' centralization reduced complexity and improved market knowledge. The companies struggled in later decades due to issues like a lack of low-cost manufacturing, marketing mistakes, and insufficient innovation. Recommendations included investing in R&D, improving delegation, setting up plants in low-wage areas, and better mot

    Drepturi de autor:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Descărcați ca PPTX, PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    din 12

    MATSUSHITA V/S PHILLIPS

    Group 6
    Vidhi Seksaria 281174
    Eni Srivasatava 281136
    Saumya Prasoon 281157
    Suruchi Kumar 281166
    Sumeedha Singh 281191
    MATSUSHITA ENVIRONMENT

    • Founded in 1918
    • First Japanese company to adopt the divisional structure
    • Decentralized structure
    • Introduced new products to the market
    • Ex-pats key staff
    • Fast follower startegy
    Strategy: Try to
    stay afloat, drastic
    cuts were made,
    adjustment of z

    systems
    Styles: Strixt
    accountability
    op
    Staff: Training,
    Friendly
    competition
    Strategy: Achieve
    worldwide
    presence

    Styles: 60% profit to


    headquarters and
    40% profit to the
    Staff:bUnique in division with most
    each division, profitability
    lifetime
    employment
    BRIEF

    Phillips Matsushita

    Structure Matrix based Hierarchical

    Decision making Decentralised Centralised


    PHILLIPS

    • Founded in 1892
    • Decentralized joint leadership management style
    • Single product focused
    • Local key staff
    • Technical innovation strategy
    CHANGES IN ENVIRONMENT

    • In the 60’s, there was a development of common markets


    • Erosion of trade barriers
    • Increased the need for globalisation
    IMPLICATIONS

    Philips
    • shifted towards local operations
    • Became centralized
    • Shifted to a more worldwide approach
    • Yet, the centralization led to less complexity.
    • It also created NO’s to know the market
    • better. It also shifted from decentralized to centralized.
    Matsushita
    • created divisional structure
    • Implemented a global functional model
    REASONS FOR LACK OF PERFORMANCE
    IN 70-80S

    • Manufacturing plants not in low wage markets


    • Several marketing blunders
    • No clear control
    • Lack of innovation
    • Power struggle b/w NOs and PDs
    • Lack of coherence in strategy and structure
    RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PHILLIPS

    • Invest continuously in research and development and marketing


    • Better delegation of responsibilities to improve response time
    • Set up manufacturing plants in low wage areas
    • The organizational structure should align with the operational strategy
    • The employees should be better motivated
    RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MATSUSHITA

    • A solid and robust information system


    • Cross-functional teams for market investigations
    • Hiring local to stimulate company culture
    • Should encourage innovation
    THANK YOU

    S-ar putea să vă placă și