APA STYLE CASE STUDY, GOOD GRAMMAR, SENTENCE STRUCTURE, ATTENTION TO DETAIL

Issues

In March of 1999, the ninth carmaker in the world asked Carlos Ghosen to lead as its CEO after a failed merger with Volvo. Nissans strength in product design and manufacturing and Renaults engineering quality made the merger all the more necessary. Renault would help with international expansions and Nissan would get rid of its short-term troubles of poor production portfolio and its diminished brand value.

As one of the youngest to head companies of this size, Ghosn knew he had to make an impact, for the Japanese were not accustomed to a dictatorship type of leadership. Therefore, he knew dictating his expectations could lead to low morale, and if too lenient, it could slow change. Therefore, Ghosen brought the need for urgency in operations by mobilizing them. Just as Nissan’s employees were reluctant to except failures and blamed other departments or economic changes on most of the problems, which resulted in the lack of urgency and the resolve to just live with the problems. Ghosen believed that human tendency is to resist change and anything new of different from the status quo. However, he belied by excepting changes, people will be stronger, because they would have a better understanding of the differences and find ways to discover the root cause of the issues.

Proposed Solutions

Ghosen formed Cross-function teams with employees being directly involved in the process. Doing so helped Ghosen explain his plans and gain acceptance more easily. In these cross-functional teams, the employees were asked to look beyond their responsibilities, and obtain a better understanding of other departments. Once the teams were in place it became much easier for the employees to see and own responsibility whenever something went wrong.

Just after appointing the teams, they were asked to submit their plans to achieve the maximum output in each of the areas. By listening to the employees and asking their opinions in the reform process, was monumental in the way Ghosen lead his vision for reform. He avoided impersonal meetings and stressed the importance of face-to-face communications.

Once both companies became one, Ghosn choose to promote Transparency, Performance, and Value. Ghosn believed that blending the strengths of the employees at each of the companies, innovation excellence of the French and the dedication towards the manufacturing of the Japanese, which created synergy in purchasing, manufacturing, information systems and platform sharing, but also maintained both companies autonomy by keeping their own brand identities and corporations.

Ghosn’s goal was to making the company recognizable by the consumer as one of the best automakers in quality, value, service and generate a total operating profit among all other leading automakers by keeping a high profit margin and continued upward growth. Renault took an equity stake in Nissan with the understanding that Nissan would have the same opertunity at a later time. This would enhance both Renault and Nissan’s performance by creating a community interest and cross shareholdings.

Barriers to Change/ Emotional Bonds

The differences in culture between the French and Japanese could have been very difficult, however Ghosn kept an open mind focusing on the economic benefits and the turnaround of the company’s. Goshn had to make tough changes such as haying off more than 21,000 people and closing five factories in order to increase Nissans profit margin. He also changed the policy of the lifetime employment and hired more women, which both were frowned upon. Goshn also demanded at least 20% savings from suppliers over a 3-year time period and the ability to use global contractors.

Personal reflection

I think Goshn took whatever measures necessary to get both companies producing at profitable pace and I think his decisions on were based on that fact, which proved profitable in the end.

Conclusion

The commitments of the Nissan Revival Plan had been met one year prior to its expected schedule, and the launch of new models was created at a very high rate. Nissans profitability contributed to Renault’s net income and higher profitability and global presence. The President of Nissan was concerned about the complacent nature of Nissan because of poor markets. However, he also expected more flexibility to ensure employees work closer to the consumer’s needs.

References

Spector, B. (2013). Implementing organizational change: Theory into practice (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Leading Change 4