Chrysler Observable Artifacts

Of course, the board does not confess to satisfying the greed for higher profits by taking these unpopular steps; they present all the process as catching up on the competitors. “GM has to do what it has to do in order to stay competitive, even if it means laying off thousands of people”, says a member of the board, and thus makes it more than clear that in a capitalist society the managers and the directors are concerned only with the profit maximization and with their own welfare, whereas the employees have to fight for their jobs in more and more unfavorable conditions. More than 30 000 workers have now lost their jobs, whereas the company’s chairman Roger Smith has just made $2 millions himself. The unions are no help at all in this moment. Supposed to increase the workers’ bargaining power, the unions have now become useless, since “too many people in the unions friends with the management”, whose interests, in this case, are completely the opposites to those of the workers.

Basic Underlying Assumptions are the beliefs that employees have about the everyday operation of a company. Chrysler’s employees began to believe that sales, market shares, and the awards were the most important aspect of their company; simply because that was what management kept pushing on them, probably in sales meetings (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013). Their employees were so driven to get the quota to become sales person of the month and get a plaque with their name on it, and hung on the wall so everyone could see; that they got blind sided of what was really important (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013). By striving to get this behavior down right, it is hard to begin to change back into what it was supposed to be or something new altogether because it has become a part of these employees belief of how things are to operate (Kinicki, 2013, slide 14).

The use of the competing values framework was demonstrated through Ralph Langley’s management style. He leveraged the four distinct models collaboratively as he led the production staff of the nuclear assembly room. His management approach help lead to the following: an increase in profits for the tube manufacturing operations, team cohesiveness amongst the production staff, individual ownership and problem solving during the production process, staff pride in meeting production goals and deadlines, and respect as well as admiration for management in the assembly room. The current positive direction of the nuclear assembly room staff under Langley’s leadership was in contrast to the department two years prior to him assuming the role as general foreman. It can be concluded that Langley displayed mastery of the competing values framework within the scope of his role as general foreman for the assembly room at American Radiatronics. He was able to develop a word class staff that was able to work as a team to accomplish the goals of the production unit and the company.

While it was foreseen that the company would initially take financial setbacks because of the reorganization, it was not believed that the financial risks would be drastic. However, the impending report that Mr. Elesser has to present to the board will detail a net income that will be nearly 26 million dollars in the red for 2004 (see exhibit 2)3. The blunt force restructuring met resistance on numerous fronts. First of all, the various components of the company did not operate under the same uniformed leadership objectives. Each division was set up to look out for their own interests and markets. When the restructuring plan that focused on a more centralized management process, many of the things that worked for one division did not necessarily work for other divisions of the company. This left some divisions at a severe disadvantage. Another obstacle that worked against the restructuring was the employee unions in which the company had to deal. The unions were not on board with the various downsizing and restructuring methods. In addition, the company had to deal with a couple of different unions which posed a problem with negotiating tactics. Benefit costs were also a significant investment that did not hold up well under the auspice of restructuring.

I think it very difficult to give meaningful recommendations to Marchionne with his history of restoring failing automotive companies to profitability. One of the biggest recommendations to anyone who has a history of success is to not lose sight of where your success came from. It could be easy for Marchionne to lose focus on keeping high-potential employees in positions where they are able to realize their potential. Marchionne’s successful history of changing organization culture from the management down revolved around identifying people at all levels of the companies with potential, and then thrusting them into positions that allowed them to affect the greatest change (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013; Marchionne, 2008). My recommendation on this strategy is to continue to make this a priority. Just because Marchionne identified someone with potential, gave them a chance, and they succeeded, doesn’t mean they will continue to excel. Staying vigilant in ensuring he has good management, that has not gotten complacent, is important to retaining the culture he established.

On February 2, 2018 at approximately 1950 hours, I observed a 2006 Chrysler utility vehicle bearing Florida tag HWHB51 exiting the Walmart parking lot located at 8701 US HWY 19 Port Richey, FL. The vehicle made a right turn at a posted left turn only exit. I observed the Chrysler to not have an operational tag light. I initiated my unmarked patrol vehicle’s (116) emergency equipment in an effort to conduct a lawful traffic stop in the area of US HWY 19 and Ridge RD.

He decided to enlarge the goals of the company so as to include the marketing of the vehicles that they produced. This in itself is what entails planning. Therefore, management has affected planning in that the presence of a new CEO in the company has introduced other goals that were not there in the first place. The presence of an eligible leader led to the company building its own battery packs, power microelectronics segments and great proficiency automotive to enable them work without a license from AC Propulsion. Apart from influencing the planning of the company in a positive manner, the management also led to improved performance of the firm in that they now had extensive goals to achieve which required them to work harder (Hunger, 2010).

18. Why did Ford, GM and Chrysler undergo a harsh downturn relative to other car makers?

Observable artifacts is defined as the physical manifestation of an organization's culture not limited to the company’s manner dress, awards, myths and stories told about the organization, public lists of values, observable rituals and ceremonies, decorations and so on (Kreitner, Kinicki, 2013). Mr. Marchionne attempted to create a new culture for Chrysler. A negative observable artifacts was discovered by Mr. Marchionne occurred when Mr. Fong was the Sales Chief in 2009. At that time,Chrysler was known for giving out a matching rebate of $4500 along with the government incentive given with the same value.(Kreitner, Kinicki, 2013) This created financial issues for Chrysler as they struggled with profits gain. Mr. Marchionne wanted a more positive

Based on the condition that Mr. Marchionne inherited from Chrysler, there is not too many changes I would have made. Mr. Marchionne had to shock the culture in order to revitalize it. His intentions were very good, however, the way he handled or reacted could have been better.

The chapters two and five discuss two successful figures in business that I can learn from with their different leadership styles. Michael Dell and Andy Grove led their companies to billionaire status with great business strategies and some risks during their tenure. Michael Dell focus on the customer and Andy Grove focus on the employees always being on their toes so that they will always work hard. Their companies both struggle at times, but they put strategies in place to continue their successful. I will provide a brief description of Michael Dell and Andy Grove contributions, their resistance they encountered, and how they are different along with the factor of their success.

Alan Mulally’s Restructuring of Ford Motor Company Case Study Alan Mulally received an opportunity to turn around one of the most famous brand names in the United States. Ford was struggling; losing more than 12.7 million in 2006 (Nelson p558) and desperately needed a change. Alan Mulally took the challenge, and stated he would do what many thought was impossible at the time – make Ford profitable. He did just that.

The case deals with two major transformational organisational changes that take place within a span of 5 years in Marconi PLC. The first change process was under the leadership of Lord Simpson who took over this large diversified conglomerate in 1996 when the company was in a mature phase, already in decline. The company was under performing, had a rigid structure, lacked a clear vision and the employees had become change averse and complacent. To recharge the company Lord Simpson lead a change process with a clear vision with a growth oriented strategy, acquisition and a cultural change process for the employees. To motivate the employers to embrace the cultural change he introduced an attractive stock option plan.

The invention of automobiles had been dated long back in history. From that day till now, it had not only made our lives easier but also simpler. From times back then till now many big automobile companies had came into existence, some of them were successful and some were not, thus going out of market and competition. Among them, Porsche and Volkswagen Group(VW) have emerged as one of the world leaders in automobile industry. Through years of hardwork and sheer use of technology and engineering developments, both of these companies have carved a name for themselves in their respective markets. But sometimes, bad management and several areas of conflict arise between two companies that can lead to its downfall. In this case too the CEO of Porsche, just wanted to administer each and everything according to his own ways and rules, but on the other hand the CEO of Volkswagen, even after facing huge loses wanted to continue on with his strategy because he was quite confident about his strategy and clearly had a broader outlook of the scenario. Therefore, due to having different mindsets, there was a conflict between the ideas of two which led to the decline of one of them. These conflicts can be summed up in the following couple of questions:

In reviewing this article it was observed that some employees were skeptical of the merger between Chrysler and Daimler-Benz. Daimler-Benz employees were proud of the elite image and were concerned about having that tarnished by another company. Chrysler employees voiced concerns about the addition of a foreign partner to one of America's auto manufacturers. Employees needed reassurance that this merger was going to be a success! In light of all the adversity both companies faced since announcing their plans to merge, how did they remain so steadfast in their commitment to pursuing this merger? What kept them believing this merger was a good deal that deserved a second look? To answer these questions I want to step back and discuss what I