Mulally and Ford Jr. led Ford Motor Company through the economic downturn of 2007-2008 using transformational and democratic leadership styles. They avoided government bailouts by borrowing $23.6 billion in 2006. Mulally overhauled Ford's operations, culture, and products. He empowered internal teams and the marketing officer to lead change. Their authentic "glocal" communication and branding efforts positioned Ford for success as the economy recovered. By 2010, Ford was profitable again thanks to Mulally and the leadership team's strategic vision and communication.
General Motor Strategic Management AnalysisRashid Javed
Best report of Strategic Management . We apply these tools strategic formulation, implantation and evaluation on general motor very effectively. we hope u will got help from this report. .
General Motor Strategic Management AnalysisRashid Javed
Best report of Strategic Management . We apply these tools strategic formulation, implantation and evaluation on general motor very effectively. we hope u will got help from this report. .
GENERAL BACKGROUND
PROBLEM STATEMENT
PREVIOUS LEADERSHIP AND TEAM FAILURE LESSONS
CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP AND NEW TEAM
LEADERSHIP LESSONS, TEAM DYNAMICS, & STRATEGY.
REFERENCES
Ford Motor Company was founded by Henry Ford in the year 1903; it is an American Multinational Automaker.
Using elaborately engineered production sequences typified by moving assembly lines, ford developed techniques for large-scale automobile manufacturing by 1914; these techniques became known as “Fordism” worldwide.
Today Ford is the Second largest US based automaker & Fifth largest in the World. Ford has produced over 350 million cars and employs 190,000 people with over 90 locations and facilities worldwide.
Information technology makes significance influence in today’s business context. Organizations are becoming virtual with the technology advancement. It is a dream for an organization to become more competitive and successful without information technology. Therefore, companies make huge investments to implement information technology advancements in their businesses. Apple Inc. is one of leading digital product manufacturing organization in United States. This assignment explains about the management information system of Apple Inc.
Firstly, report discusses about the overview of the organization and primary and supporting activities of the company. Further, it discusses about the Information System of Apple Inc. and key information systems of the organization. Moreover, it explains about the Customer Satisfaction with Information System of Apple Inc. and Competitive advantage of Apple Inc. Meanwhile, report elaborates about the Factors affecting to utilize information technology. At end of the report, the MS Sway created link and preview was mentioned.
• PRODUCTIVIDAD
Alcanzar/mejorar los niveles de productividad de Toyota.
Aumentar la utilización de recursos.
Estandarizar las prácticas/procesos óptimos.
Sistema de producción Ford estandarizado.
• SATISFACCION DEL CLIENTE
Mayor sensibilidad hacia los clientes.
Decisiones rápidas e implementación ágil.”
Así, el objetivo que Ford Motor Company persigue es "producir mejores productos más rápidamente y a un precio más bajo para satisfacer a más clientes en todo el mundo". Para conseguirlo va a llevar a cabo un rediseño tanto de sus procesos como de su estructura, basando la misma en sus productos y no en las áreas geográficas, como venía actuando desde su creación.
GENERAL BACKGROUND
PROBLEM STATEMENT
PREVIOUS LEADERSHIP AND TEAM FAILURE LESSONS
CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP AND NEW TEAM
LEADERSHIP LESSONS, TEAM DYNAMICS, & STRATEGY.
REFERENCES
Ford Motor Company was founded by Henry Ford in the year 1903; it is an American Multinational Automaker.
Using elaborately engineered production sequences typified by moving assembly lines, ford developed techniques for large-scale automobile manufacturing by 1914; these techniques became known as “Fordism” worldwide.
Today Ford is the Second largest US based automaker & Fifth largest in the World. Ford has produced over 350 million cars and employs 190,000 people with over 90 locations and facilities worldwide.
Information technology makes significance influence in today’s business context. Organizations are becoming virtual with the technology advancement. It is a dream for an organization to become more competitive and successful without information technology. Therefore, companies make huge investments to implement information technology advancements in their businesses. Apple Inc. is one of leading digital product manufacturing organization in United States. This assignment explains about the management information system of Apple Inc.
Firstly, report discusses about the overview of the organization and primary and supporting activities of the company. Further, it discusses about the Information System of Apple Inc. and key information systems of the organization. Moreover, it explains about the Customer Satisfaction with Information System of Apple Inc. and Competitive advantage of Apple Inc. Meanwhile, report elaborates about the Factors affecting to utilize information technology. At end of the report, the MS Sway created link and preview was mentioned.
• PRODUCTIVIDAD
Alcanzar/mejorar los niveles de productividad de Toyota.
Aumentar la utilización de recursos.
Estandarizar las prácticas/procesos óptimos.
Sistema de producción Ford estandarizado.
• SATISFACCION DEL CLIENTE
Mayor sensibilidad hacia los clientes.
Decisiones rápidas e implementación ágil.”
Así, el objetivo que Ford Motor Company persigue es "producir mejores productos más rápidamente y a un precio más bajo para satisfacer a más clientes en todo el mundo". Para conseguirlo va a llevar a cabo un rediseño tanto de sus procesos como de su estructura, basando la misma en sus productos y no en las áreas geográficas, como venía actuando desde su creación.
Developing Multicultural Leadership delivers information about the changing American workforce. It highlights different aspects of culture with a focus on corporate culture. Tips are given for developing global etiquette and developing multicultural leadership
The purpose of project 3 is to study about the automotive industry in generally. Then the scope will going deeply to reveal what innovation was occur nowadays in this industry. The study will take two major players in this industry. These are Toyota Motor Company and Honda Motor Company. Inside this document also will review about how the largest automotive manufacturer such Toyota Motor Company and Honda Motor Company carries out the management of innovation. Innovation management will discuss about Toyota Production System (TPS), Toyota Way, Seven Principles of Toyota Production System (TPS), Honda’s Philosophy, Fundamental Beliefs and Three Joy. At the end of this document, it wills write-down how the automotive industry will be manage in the future that focus on research & development (R&D).
This is a case study analysis that was done by a group of Management Information Students (from UIC). The case on Ford discussed how it could adopt the business model of Dell to achieve economies of scale.
3Implementing ChangeConstruction workers on scaffolding..docxBHANU281672
3
Implementing Change
Construction workers on scaffolding.
hxdbzxy/iStock/Thinkstock
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to do the following:
Summarize the nine steps in Ackerman and Anderson’s road map for change.
Analyze Cummings and Worley’s five dimensions of leading and managing change.
Describe how to align an organization with its new vision and future state.
Explain how roles/relationships and interventions are used to implement change.
Examine ways to interact with and influence stakeholders.
Change is the law of life and those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.
—John F. Kennedy
Alan Mulally was selected to lead Ford in 2006 after he was bypassed as CEO at Boeing, where he had worked and was expected to become CEO. Insiders and top-level managers at Ford, some of whom had expected to become CEO, were initially suspicious and then outraged when Mulally was hired. They questioned what someone from the airplane industry would know about the car business (Kiley, 2009).
Chair William (Bill) Clay Ford, Jr.—who selected Mulally as CEO—told Ford’s officers that the company needed a fresh perspective and a shake-up, especially since it had lost $14.8 billion in 2008—the most in its 105-year history—and had burned through $21.2 billion, or 61%, of its cash (Kiley, 2009). Because Ford knew that the company’s upper echelon culture was closed, bureaucratic, and rejected outsiders and new ways of thinking, he was not surprised by his officers’ reactions. However, Ford’s managers had no idea that the company was fighting for its life. To succeed, Mulally would need Chair Ford’s full endorsement and support, and he got it.
The company’s biggest cultural challenge was to break down the silos that various executives had built. As we will discuss more in Chapter 4, silos are specific processes or departments in an organization that work independently of each other without strong communication between or among them. A lack of communication can often stifle productivity and innovation, and this was exactly what was happening at Ford.
Mulally devised a turnaround strategy and developed it into the Way Forward Plan. The plan centralized and modernized plants to handle several models at once, to be sold in several markets. The plan was designed to break up the fiefdoms of isolated cultures, in which leaders independently developed and decided where to sell cars. Mulally’s plan also kept managers in positions for longer periods of time to deepen their expertise and improve consistency of operations. The manager who ran the Mazda Motor affiliate commented, “I’m going into my fourth year in the same job. I’ve never had such consistency of purpose before” (as cited in Kiley, 2009, “Meetings About Meetings,” para. 2).
Mulally’s leadership style involved evaluating and analyzing a situation using data and facts and then earning individuals’ support with his determinatio.
3Implementing ChangeConstruction workers on scaffolding..docxlorainedeserre
3
Implementing Change
Construction workers on scaffolding.
hxdbzxy/iStock/Thinkstock
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to do the following:
Summarize the nine steps in Ackerman and Anderson’s road map for change.
Analyze Cummings and Worley’s five dimensions of leading and managing change.
Describe how to align an organization with its new vision and future state.
Explain how roles/relationships and interventions are used to implement change.
Examine ways to interact with and influence stakeholders.
Change is the law of life and those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.
—John F. Kennedy
Alan Mulally was selected to lead Ford in 2006 after he was bypassed as CEO at Boeing, where he had worked and was expected to become CEO. Insiders and top-level managers at Ford, some of whom had expected to become CEO, were initially suspicious and then outraged when Mulally was hired. They questioned what someone from the airplane industry would know about the car business (Kiley, 2009).
Chair William (Bill) Clay Ford, Jr.—who selected Mulally as CEO—told Ford’s officers that the company needed a fresh perspective and a shake-up, especially since it had lost $14.8 billion in 2008—the most in its 105-year history—and had burned through $21.2 billion, or 61%, of its cash (Kiley, 2009). Because Ford knew that the company’s upper echelon culture was closed, bureaucratic, and rejected outsiders and new ways of thinking, he was not surprised by his officers’ reactions. However, Ford’s managers had no idea that the company was fighting for its life. To succeed, Mulally would need Chair Ford’s full endorsement and support, and he got it.
The company’s biggest cultural challenge was to break down the silos that various executives had built. As we will discuss more in Chapter 4, silos are specific processes or departments in an organization that work independently of each other without strong communication between or among them. A lack of communication can often stifle productivity and innovation, and this was exactly what was happening at Ford.
Mulally devised a turnaround strategy and developed it into the Way Forward Plan. The plan centralized and modernized plants to handle several models at once, to be sold in several markets. The plan was designed to break up the fiefdoms of isolated cultures, in which leaders independently developed and decided where to sell cars. Mulally’s plan also kept managers in positions for longer periods of time to deepen their expertise and improve consistency of operations. The manager who ran the Mazda Motor affiliate commented, “I’m going into my fourth year in the same job. I’ve never had such consistency of purpose before” (as cited in Kiley, 2009, “Meetings About Meetings,” para. 2).
Mulally’s leadership style involved evaluating and analyzing a situation using data and facts and then earning individuals’ support with his determinatio ...
MGT 521 Week 6 Final ExamMGT521Write a paper of no more than .docxannandleola
MGT 521 Week 6 Final Exam
MGT/521
Write a paper of no more than 3,500 words reviewing the strategic
initiatives taken by the company relative to organizational and
operational adaptation to changing markets.
Explain the following in your paper:
How recent economic trends are influencing the business
Strategies the company has used or could use for adapting
to changing markets, such as an economic downturn or
recession
Tactics the company has implemented or could implement
to achieve their strategic goals
The role human resource management plays in helping the
company achieve its business goals
If you would be willing to invest in this company as a mutual
fund manager
Write a conclusion for your overall business analysis. Be sure to
support your conclusion with information you have gathered from
parts one and two of your business analysis.
Format your paper consistent with APA guidelines.
Week 6 Business Analysis Part III
Ford Motor Company was founded by Henry Ford and incorporated in 1903, the great depression and now the recession we are in the company has survived and found ways to become stronger. The company has rebounded in the past few years and right now the company is booming and generating a great profit which is pleasing for the company and its stakeholders. As numbers tell no lies, in 2008 Ford suffered its worst year in history with a $14.6 billion dollar loss (Starner, 2010), and by 2010 reported a $2.7 billion dollar gain. With a turn around like that one must assume Ford has figured out what they need to change to survive. A few ways that the company has turned around the business is by downsizing and changing company values, to introduce a new, “Battery Electric Vehicle(BEV)” ("Media.ford.com", 2011), and also they have incorporated robotics into their Quality Control(Robotic Trends Staff, 2011). Ford has a very strong human resource department and a woman by the name of Felicia Fields (Starner, 2010), has been a major player for the company. Ford is now as a company who is striving and achieving great success that once again has made them a top performer in the auto industry.
In 2008 the company hit rock bottom, with record losses and the companies stock falling to about a dollar, the company has had to regroup and focus. It has done just that and become a rock in the auto industry once again. In 2008 with such a hard financial year the company was forced to sell some of other car companies that they had stake in, Jaguar, Land Rover, Volvo and Ashton Martin were some of those names. Their CEO Alan Mulally had a vision and his vision was, “ONE Ford: ONE Team, ONE Plan, ONE Goal.” (Starner, 2010) The plan is a lot like it sounds, the company would regroup and become one, become more efficient and operate in a way that it had never done so before. The company then soon downsized and went from a company of 213,000 employees in 2008 and now it operates with around 176,000, which is a sizeable difference. Ford is now ...
Introduction William Clay Ford, Jr., was staring out the window of.pdfcharanjit1717
Introduction
William Clay Ford, Jr., was staring out the window of
his office in Dearborn, Michigan, lost in thought. The
future of Ford Motor Company was hanging in the
balance, and no one was certain how best to save this
once-great company. Question after question without
any easy answers kept going through his mind. . . . How
much longer can Ford survive with the large losses? Will
it have to sell off assets or financially restructure? Can
it cut enough costs, and where should it cut? Will the
union leaders realize the situation, and how much will
they be willing to help? When will Chinese competitors
enter the U.S. market? How can Ford develop its product
offerings to adjust for higher fuel costs? How can
Ford improve its product offering to reverse or at least
stop the market share losses? How much more market
share will it lose?
The magnitude of the situation seemed overwhelming.
In order to overcome these challenges, it seemed as if
Ford would have to restructure every aspect of its business.
It would require improved product offerings with cuttingedge
design and high quality; improved operation with
more flexibility and lower costs; and improved marketing
with better brand image and customer interest. Ford was at
a crossroads, and the way ahead remained shrouded in fog.
History
Ford has gone through many evolutions since its humble
beginnings on June 16, 1903.1 Henry Ford began this
corporation, now synonymous with the assembly line,
the Industrial Revolution, and the American Dream,
with 11 business associates and $28,000 in capital.2 Ford
Motor Company continued along with minimal leadership
problems until the death of its president, Edsel Ford,
Case 10
in 1943. Intense dissension about who should succeed
Edsel Ford continued until Henry Ford, at the age of 79,
returned from retirement to lead the company. For the
next two years under Henry Ford the company operated
with massive losses of $10 million dollars per month.3
Finally, in 1945, Henry Ford was forced to step down and
Henry Ford II assumed the role of president.4 Henry Ford
II managed to successfully maneuver the company back
to productivity and empowered Robert McNamara and
his group (planning and financial analysis) to transform
Fords leadership style from a tyrannical dictatorship to a
powerful, professional oligarchy.5 Over the next 20 years,
Ford Motor Companys presidents and CEOs turned over
13 times.6 The current CEO, Alan Mulally, was appointed
in September 2006 to take over for William Clay Ford, Jr.,
who had served as both president and CEO since 2001.
William Clay Ford, Jr., led Ford Motor Company to three
straight years of profitability followed by a sharp decrease
in profits marked by a $1.44 billion loss in the first half
of 2006.7 These losses motivated Ford Motor Company
to search for a new CEO from outside the industry, Alan
Mulally, formerly of Boeing Corporation. Mulally stood
out as a qualified successor because he demonstrated the
leadership skills Ford.
5/26/2015 Print
https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT435.12.3?sections=ch03,sec3.1,sec3.2,sec3.3,sec3.4,sec3.5,ch03summary,ch04,sec4.1,sec4.2,sec4.3,sec4.4,sec4.5… 1/153
Chapter 3
Implementing Change
"Whosoever desires constant success must change his conduct
with the times."
—Niccolo Machiavelli
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to do the following:
1. Describe the importance of implementation in the change process.
2. Identify the nine steps in Ackerman and Anderson's roadmap for change.
3. Identify Cummings and Worley's five dimensions of leading and managing
change.
4. Describe the implementation process in terms of the three components of
organizational change.
5/26/2015 Print
https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT435.12.3?sections=ch03,sec3.1,sec3.2,sec3.3,sec3.4,sec3.5,ch03summary,ch04,sec4.1,sec4.2,sec4.3,sec4.4,sec4.5… 2/153
5. Describe the roles of strategy, culture, and processes in implementation.
6. Identify different leadership roles that may be used in the change
implementation process.
7. Describe the qualifications of a successful change leader.
8. Describe the role of stakeholders and conflict in implementing change.
9. Define collaboration and its significance to successful implementation.
5/26/2015 Print
https://content.ashford.edu/print/AUMGT435.12.3?sections=ch03,sec3.1,sec3.2,sec3.3,sec3.4,sec3.5,ch03summary,ch04,sec4.1,sec4.2,sec4.3,sec4.4,sec4.5… 3/153
Getting from here to there takes careful planning
and implementation. Leadership skills, intelligence,
courage, and a high capacity for collaboration are
required.
3.1 Introduction: Getting from Here to There
Implementing major organizational changes is neither
automatic nor mechanical. Transitioning an
organization to a new vision and future state is a
process, not an event. During any change phase,
leaders and change teams guide and shape people's
mindsets and behaviors in organizations to adopt new
ways of thinking, apply different strategies,
reinvigorate the culture, and align internal systems.
Leadership skills, intelligence, courage, and a high
capacity for collaboration are required. The bottom
line is that the success of any organizational change
depends in large degree on implementation.
According to Warrick, "In the change process,
assessment plays an essential role in assessing present
realities and future possibilities. Action planning plays
a very valuable role in planning changes so that they
have a high probability of success. However,
implementation would be considered by many OD
(organizational development) practitioners as the most important role. If changes are not successfully
implemented, the rest of the change process will count for little" (Warrick, 2010, p. 259).
The implementation process begins once the urgency that change must occur is communicated, the
organization is assessed for the type of change needed, and a plan is communicated throughout the
organizati.
Ford financial crisis which has escalated over the last few years has been mainly triggered by the executive bureaucracy and royal hierarchy which is fashioned to the Ford family ties, the new appointed chief executive Alan R. Mulally articulates that the working atmosphere in this organization is very reclusive, information and communication among production stage shop floor taskforce is prohibited, this fact rationalize the employees making errors and been unable to correct them which has led to the corporation loss of $1.2 billion dollars. This fact has led to Ford degeneration to symbol of inefficiency, projected y the fact that the executive are reluctant making the culture of this organization to be dysfunctional and defeatist conflicting resulting to losing to the new Cerberus Chrysler management in sales as voiced by Kiley (2007). The case study evaluates three question that are aligned with the organization atmosphere, centrally emphasizing on fords main flaws which have degenerated to dysfunctional conflict, the role that the new chief executive Mulally has patterned to combat this conflict and will analyzed Mulally intervention of the incident involving Consumer Reports staff and two senior Ford engineers.
The Gap is Growing: Solution: Social Credit.
“As we have seen, the more automatic machinery replaces men, the wider becomes the gap between buying power and prices because salaries and wages are thus reduced, leaving other cost items proportionately increased. When we stop to realize that the gap is constantly widening as efficient machine-power rapidly replaces inefficient man-labor in doing the work of the world, it becomes evident that we are reaching the senseless
absurdity of a maximum production and a minimum of consumption. Yet we wonder at the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty !”
Ford and GM A Comparison of 2 Fortune 500 CompaniesLeo de Sousa
This paper compares and contrasts two top ten Fortune 500 automotive companies: Ford Motor Company (Ford) and General Motors Corporation (GM). Through a series of strategic decisions and initiatives, Ford was able to survive the 2008-2009 global economic crisis. General Motors had similar opportunities to make strategic changes but remained entrenched in their approaches and strategy. The result was General Motors filed for bankruptcy, and had to ask the US and Canadian governments for loans in order to restart business.
Selection and Description of OrganizationBy Dawn Branzei.docxkenjordan97598
Selection and Description of Organization
By: Dawn Branzei
Business Tactics and Execution
Argosy University
April 24, 2013
Introduction
Fortune 500 is an annual list of the 500 largest companies in the United States as compiled by FORTUNE magazine. Collective performance of the Fortune 500 companies may be seen as one indicator of the country's overall economic performance. The list is put together using the most recent figures for revenue and includes both public and private companies with openly available income data. When a company is listed on the Fortune 500 it is a status symbol that proves the success of the business. The Fortune 500 list is made up entirely of U.S. companies. One of the companies that have made it on the list is General Motors (GM).
General Motors (GM)
Commonly known as GM, General Motors is an American international motorized corporation. It’s among the world’s largest automobile makers by vehicle unit sales (Gall R T, 2011). The company was founded on September 16, 1908 by William “Billy” Durant in Flint, Michigan. The inspiration that led to the creation of General Motors in 1908 was the decision by William C. Durant, "king" of the Flint carriage makers, to take control of the tiny and almost bankrupt Buick Motor Company in Flint on Nov. 1, 1904.At its beginning GM held only the Buick Motor Company, but in a matter of years it would acquire more than 20 companies. Currently, the corporation’s headquarters is based in Detroit, Michigan. The corporation is located in 157 countries worldwide. Their website (www.gm.com) offers a wide range of information about the company.
Organizational strategy
Organizational strategy is the discipline and knowledge that changes strategic intent into organizational capability, commitment and performance. Developing an organizational strategy for a business involves first comparing its present state to its targeted state to outline differences, and then stating what is required for the wanted changes to take place. At GM, their focus is on a single global vision which is to design, build and sell the world’s best vehicles. This powers the development of first-class world products that are winning in the marketplace, and helping to transform their business and strengthen their stability (Wisner, J. D., Tan, K. C. and Leong, G.K., 2011). Their strategy includes the following:
Designing, Building and Selling
They focus on core brands that have been there since its creation. They leveraged global resources to create the most fascinating vehicles and technologies, also leading in the research and development of advanced technologies to reinvent the future of transportation. By enhancing their global impression to efficiently develop the best vehicles they maximize the efficiency of operating their facilities in a globally and socially responsible way. To maximize their revenues they must do this with a focused product approach.in.
I need a paragraph of information added in the appropriate place to .docxursabrooks36447
I need a paragraph of information added in the appropriate place to my paper with in-text citing along with citing the source. The source has to be from Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). The PAPER is located below.
Comprehensive Analysis of Ford Motor Company
Bigfella15
Institution
Abstract
Since its beginning in 1903, the Ford Motor company has gone through some phases to enable it to reach its current market position. The Ford Motor Company possesses a good supply chain management status that enables it to receive raw materials and sell its products to the domestic and international market. Its possession of 90 plants and more than 213,000 employees in three major regions of the world makes it manufacture $5 million vehicles yearly, generating approximately $100 billion. The market is highly demanding and possesses dynamic changes that affect automobile companies such as Ford Motor. The market also comprises of some challenging factors such as fluctuating prices of oil and petroleum, competition, and political instability among others that affect the operations of Ford Motor Company. The SWOT Analysis of Ford Motor Company influences the company to adapt effective strategies that save it from falling in the market. Developing the right approaches in the company’s operations makes it easy for the company to beat the competition and remain relevant.
Comprehensive Analysis of Ford Motor Company
Introduction
The paper discusses the Ford Motor Company through an extensive and conclusive research. It uses the available public information about the company and its operations. It carries out an analysis of its products and services, and how it relates to the market. The paper discusses the relationship between Ford’s operations and the stakeholders found in its market (external and internal stakeholders). The stakeholders have a significant status in its operations as they affect the business operations launched by the company on them. Ford Motor Company is also affected by both its internal and external operational environment. The paper discusses the external and internal factors that affect its performance through SWOT (Strength, weakness, opportunities, and threats) Analysis.
The paper also has a key focuses on the corporate strategy provided by Ford Motor Company to survive in the market. Ford Motor Company has come through a period of financial challenges to reach where it is today. The company has employed some strategies that have influenced continuous survival in the market about the competitors. The paper focuses on the corporate strategies that the managers employ to beat the competition and remain relevant in the market. The conclusion session develops a summary of the content of study and gives recommendations to create a clear understanding of the topic of study.
Background Information on Ford Motor Company
Henry Ford, a prolific engineer, born by immigrant farmers, established Ford Motor Company in .
Type Discussion BoardResearch Design and AnalysisTue, 6.docxcandycemidgley
Type: Discussion Board
Research Design and Analysis
Tue, 6/12/17
Assignment Details
Assignment Description
Course Comprehensive Project
Collaboration in a business environment is a best practice that leverages the collective knowledge of the team assembled. Peer evaluation and support, provided in the spirit of continuous improvement and organizational success, result in higher quality deliverables than generally possible by the efforts of an individual. Please describe the process you plan to use to conduct research, identify findings, and develop the Comprehensive Project due in Unit 5 and present a preliminary outline indicating how you intend to organize the project deliverable.
Unit 5 project located below:
Comprehensive Analysis of Ford Motor Company
Name
American InterContinental University
Abstract
Since its beginning in 1903, the Ford Motor company has gone through some phases to enable it to reach its current market position. The Ford Motor Company possesses a good supply chain management status that enables it to receive raw materials and sell its products to the domestic and international market. Its possession of 90 plants and more than 213,000 employees in three major regions of the world makes it manufacture $5 million vehicles yearly, generating approximately $100 billion. The market is highly demanding and possesses dynamic changes that affect automobile companies such as Ford Motor. The market also comprises of some challenging factors such as fluctuating prices of oil and petroleum, competition, and political instability among others that affect the operations of Ford Motor Company. The SWOT Analysis of Ford Motor Company influences the company to adapt effective strategies that save it from falling in the market. Developing the right approaches in the company’s operations makes it easy for the company to beat the competition and remain relevant.
Comprehensive Analysis of Ford Motor Company
Introduction
The paper discusses the Ford Motor Company through an extensive and conclusive research. It uses the available public information about the company and its operations. It carries out an analysis of its products and services, and how it relates to the market. The paper discusses the relationship between Ford’s operations and the stakeholders found in its market (external and internal stakeholders). The stakeholders have a significant status in its operations as they affect the business operations launched by the company on them. Ford Motor Company is also affected by both its internal and external operational environment. The paper discusses the external and internal factors that affect its performance through SWOT (Strength, weakness, opportunities, and threats) Analysis.
The paper also has a key focuses on the corporate strategy provided by Ford Motor Company to survive in the market. Ford Motor Company has come through a period of financial challenges to reach where it ...
COM60811 - Final Paper - Leadership at Ford Motor Company
1. Running head: LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 1
LEADERSHIP STRATEGIES
AND STYLES AT THE
FORD MOTOR COMPANY
Katie L. Organ
COMS60811
Purdue University
Author Note
Author is a graduate student at the Brian Lamb School of Communication, Purdue University.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to the department chair.
2. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 2
The situation
“With twelve investors and one thousand shares, the Ford Motor Company had spent
almost all of its’ $28,000 cash investment by the time it sold the first Ford Model A on July 23,
1903. But by October 1, 1903, Ford Motor Company had turned a profit of $37,000” (Ford
corporate history, 2016). Challenge and struggles are nothing new for the Ford Motor Company,
but when the US economy took a down-turn in late 2007, Ford was already positioned to work its
way through the challenge. Led by William Ford, Jr. and Alan Mulally, the Ford Motor Company
was able to avoid taking a massive loan from the US Government, now referred to as a ‘bail out’.
This paper will explore the strategic leadership communication style of Alan Mulally and the
executive leadership team at Ford, and the successes and pitfalls of leading a major corporation
through a difficult financial situation.
The beginning of the end
In 2007, the writing was on the wall with the housing industry bubble beginning to show
signs of instability. Hot on the heels of that bubble were the automakers, Ford, General Motors,
and Chrysler, all wondering how their fate would fare as the American auto market began to feel
the squeeze. “When President Obama took office, America’s automobile industry was on the brink
of collapse. The financial crisis had nearly frozen access to credit for vehicle loans and sales had
plunged by 40 percent. Faced with that sober reality, the Obama Administration moved quickly to
protect the broader economy by stabilizing the industry” (www.treasury.gov, 2016). In late 2008,
Congress authorize $700 billion for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP. General Motors
and Chrysler took part in the TARP program, borrowing $51.0 billion and $11.2 million
respectively from the US Government (www.treasury.gov, 2016).
However, the Ford Motor Company did not participate in the TARP program as Ford was
already supported financially with a massive borrowing effort that took place in November of
3. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 3
2006. “In a packed ballroom at a New York hotel, Ford’s chief executive, Alan R. Mulally, said he
would mortgage all the company’s assets for billions of dollars in loans to finance an overhaul of
the troubled automaker. Although the economy was healthy then, Mr. Mulally said the money
would give Ford ‘a cushion to protect for a recession or other unexpected event’. At the time, the
request was considered an act of desperation. But the $23.6 billion in loans it received turned out
to be Ford’s salvation” (Vlasic, The New York Times, 2009).
A new era
While GM and Chrysler were working through the public relations backlash over taxpayer
money being used to float private businesses, the Ford Motor Company was moving forward with
a new CEO, Alan Mulally. The company had been traditionally spearheaded by a member of the
Ford family, but the family recognized the need for a change in thinking. “Bill Ford didn't just
hand over the reins of the company to Alan Mulally, who he recruited from Boeing (BA, Fortune
500) after several competing auto industry executives turned down the CEO spot. As Executive
Chairman, Ford is at work every day, collaborating with Mulally on the direction of the company.
‘I talk to Alan many times a day, every day. The way we like to work, our styles are very similar,
we don't have formal meetings, we bounce back and forth between each other’s offices. We don't
like to have any kind of scheduled meetings. We communicate on every big decision, and a lot of
little ones too’ " (Quote from Ford Jr., Hammond, Fortune, 2011).
“’It was a defining moment for us,’ Mr. Mulally said in an interview. ‘But they never
would have been willing to lend us the money if we weren’t on a different path.’ Mr. Mulally had
been on the job as Ford’s chief executive less than 90 days when he asked for the loans. But as he
told the bankers, he was prepared to make tough decisions, including selling off brands, shedding
jobs and focusing Ford’s efforts on small cars rather than trucks and sport utility vehicles” (Vlasic,
The New York Times, 2009).
4. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 4
Leading with style
“Researchers have identified a number of leadership communication styles in the past half-
century. These varying styles can be pared down to two primary models of communication: one
model compares authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire styles of leadership communication; a
second model contrasts task and interpersonal leadership communication.” (Hackman & Johnson,
2013, p. 39). Ford Jr. and Mulally both exhibited characteristics of a more democratic style of
leadership. “Democratic leaders engage in supportive communication that facilitates interaction
between leaders and followers. The leader adopting the democratic communication style
encourages follower involvement and participation in the determination of goals and procedures”
(Hackman & Johnson, 2013, p. 40). Additionally, Mulally demonstrated a transformational style of
leadership through not only his communication style but his actions associated with presenting the
company’s case for borrowing money.
In the research conducted regarding transformational leadership Van Wart observes that
“effective leaders not only ensure that things get done and that employees are appropriately
empowered in the present but also take the organization into the future (2013, p 558).” Mulally’s
actions when first coming on board at Ford ultimately lead the company to a full economic
recovery in a shorter amount of time than was previously expected by investors. “Unlike the
transactional leader who indicates how current needs of followers can be fulfilled, the
transformational leader sharply arouses or alters the strength of needs that may have lain
dormant…It is leadership that is transformational that can bring about the big differences and big
changes in groups, organization, and societies” (Bass, 2007, as quoted in Hackman & Johnson,
2013, p.102).
5. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 5
The application of style
“To build the case [for borrowing money] to the other stake-holding members of his
family, Ford needed to go back to the basics of good business communication from the executive
level: Lay out your plan, be as forthcoming with information as possible, answer questions and
seek feedback” (Cassano, Smart Business, 2011). Ford Jr. and Mulally did just that. They knew
that their current approach to research and development was not going to be enough to sustain the
company through their economic hardships, so they went to work to set about a change at the Ford
Motor Company. They employed transformational styles of leadership to overhaul how the
company operated, as well as how the employees felt about the company and behavior within the
corporate culture. In the Hackman and Johnson text, a transactional leader is described as “most
concerned with the satisfaction of physiological, safety, and belonging needs” (2013, p.101). In the
reverse, a transformational leader “also attempts to satisfy the basic needs of follower, but they go
beyond mere exchange by engaging the total person in an attempt to satisfy the higher-level needs
of self-esteem and self-actualization” (2013, p. 101).
At the beginning of the overhaul of the business, the leadership team presented their
strategy for borrowing money from banks and investors. They exhibited both influential and
natural authenticity in regards to their plans for transforming the business through continued
investment in research and development activities, as well as natural authenticity in regards to
improving the commodities (vehicles) that would be offered in the marketplace as a result of the
capital investment. Leaders who exhibit traits of influential authenticity are “perceive as authentic
that which exerts influence on other entities, calling human beings to a higher goal and providing a
foretaste of a better way; not inconsequential or without meaning” (Molleda & Roberts, 2014, p.
159). Leaders who exhibit traits of natural authenticity are “perceive as authentic that which exists
in its natural state in or of the earth, remaining untouched by human hands; not artificial or
6. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 6
synthetic” (Molleda & Roberts, 2014, p. 159). Their authentic leadership styles coupled with a
transformational agenda allowed them to raise $5.9 million (Fox News, 2009).
In their case study exploring the concepts of global yet local, or ‘glocal’, strategic
communications in relation to the PR campaign for Colombian coffee, authors Molleda and
Roberts noted that “Gilmore and Pine (2007) introduce five genres of perceived authenticity
corresponding to these five economic offerings: commodities (natural authenticity), goods
(original authenticity), services (exceptional authenticity), experiences (referential authenticity),
and transformations (influential authenticity)” (2014, p. 159). Ford Jr. and Mulally were
attempting to lead a global manufacturing company, whose roots in the community of Detroit are
deeply embedded, through massive internal and external changes in order to avoid failure on a
global scale. “Glocal” strategic communication and leadership was present throughout all their
efforts. Mulally and his team presented their leadership concepts with different aspects of Gilmore
and Pine’s authenticities.
After the necessary capital was raised, however, the work was only just beginning. Mulally
and his team needed to think broadly about how they were going to lead the company through the
change that so desperately needed to occur in order for Ford to be profitable again in the not too
distant future. Mulally’s transformational leadership style, coupled with his communication skills,
allowed him to focus his next efforts on the internal culture at Ford.
Leading internally
“The other critical component in building your business for the future is a motivated work
force. You motivate employees by giving them avenues to pursue their ideas and removing
roadblocks. But you also need to encourage the behaviors you want to see. Ultimately, your
internal culture needs to work in tandem with your outside resources. When a motivated work
force can draw upon extensive financial and intellectual support, your company can have the tools
7. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 7
to weather just about any circumstance that comes your way. There will still be adversity, but
you’ll be prepared for it” (Quote from Ford Jr., Cassano, Smart Business, 2011). The importance
of being authentic to the roots of the Ford company were strategically critical to the success of the
changes needed to be made. Mulally understood that he could not simply implement a new way to
doing business without taking in the ‘glocal’ factors. It was critically important that Mulally and
the leadership team be authentic in their communication with the teams. Addressing difficult issues
of change with teams who’s locally based roots run deep in Detroit and with teams who worked in
the global manufacturing centers around the world could not have been conducted in the same
manner. “’There are different ways to deliver the same message and we learned that we had to be
flexible,’ said Mike Parris, manager for mass communications. ‘It didn’t make sense to feed
straight stories, and we couldn’t get into tons of approvals so we would share themes and then trust
them [local management teams] to do the job right.’ To keeps ideas flowing, members of the
communications team benchmarked their operations with other companies and held off-site
meetings with a facilitator to brainstorm ways of getting the messages out” (Marton, 1999, p. 11).
Ford Jr. and Mulally’s democratic style of leadership was a major contributing factor to the
success of the internal communication change campaign. Democratic leadership ‘involves
followers in setting goals, engages in two-way, open communication, and solicit input regarding
determination of policy and procedures” (Hackman & Johnson, 2013, p. 41). The management
teams across Ford understood what the direction of the campaign was, and not only did they feel
empowered to manage the campaign in their own sites but were actually empowered to do so by
Mulally and his team. The ‘glocal’ leadership approach to managing the communication provided
regular feedback in the form of surveys. “Employees’ support for Ford 2000 [campaign] was
gauged through surveys initially conducted every six weeks and then quarterly. The surveys also
8. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 8
helped determine employee response to the barrage of information they were receiving” (Marton,
1999, p.10).
As a true transformational leader, Mulally applied the basic philosophies of his leadership
style across all facets of the organization time and time again. “To succeed, he [Mulally] said,
programs such as “Go Further” must begin by making sure every constituency in the company is
fully apprised of the common platform and expectations about it; then break it down to help
individual employees understand what it means for them in their roles; then obtain commitments
from employees and begin measuring behaviors that will indicate the internal branding effort is
taking hold; and, finally, seriously recognize and reward the desired behaviors” (Buss, 2016).
“Focus on communication quality as well as quantity. Communication behaviors that are
positively correlated with emergent leadership include: setting goals, giving directions, managing
tension and conflict, and summarizing. Not only is quality communication essential to becoming a
leader, but effective leadership communication helps the group as a whole. Groups are most likely
to make good decisions when their most influential members facilitate discussion by asking
questions, challenging poor assumptions, clarifying ideas, and keeping the group on track”
(Hackman & Johnson, 2013, p. 205).
Leadership through public relations and branding
Ford Jr. and Mulally understood that their democratic leadership of the company through
the economic downturn by cultivating investor relations and internal communication alone would
not be enough to ensure the survival of the Ford Motor Company. They knew that a significant
level of effort and investment would be required with the American and international publics, who
ultimately buy Ford’s vehicles. Investing in branding and public relations could have been
perceived as superfluous to the needs of the business, but Ford Jr. and Mulally understood the
benefits.
9. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 9
In their study addressing the return on investment of public relations, authors Lee and Yoon
examined the application of international public relations leadership methodologies at a more
macro-level. “The most important contribution of this study is to show empirical evidence of the
bottom-line impact of country-level international public relations based on macro-level analysis.
To practitioners in public diplomacy and international public relations, the findings of this study
are supportive of the value of public relations at the country level. As in the company setting,
international public relations budgets at the country level are often easy targets for reduction,
especially in times of economic downturn due to the difficulty of showing tangible outcomes from
international public relations investment. This study clearly presents convincing empirical
evidence as to the value of international public relations, specifically in the form of economic
returns back to the country” (2009, p.19). Mulally in particular understood that Ford needed to lead
its way back to the American public’s brand conscious prior to the improvement of the overall
economic picture, in order to be well positioned to make back the lost market share once the
recovery began.
As a transformational leader, Mulally understood how critical it would be for Ford’s
continued growth and success to spend money on marketing and advertising. He hired Jim Farley
as marketing officer. Mulally laid out his plan and vision for Ford, but ultimately empowered
Farley to make decisions he felt would be best for the brand. “"He pulled out a document and there
were, like, 200 individual models on it. But he said to me, 'You see this blue oval? We are going to
focus on Ford, and take Ford and integrate it globally,’ Mr. Farley said of his meeting with Mr.
Mulally. ‘As a competitor, I was always scared that Ford was going to do that.’ But the bigger
concern was a cultural one. Mr. Farley, a self-described "freak," was worried he wouldn't fit in at
Ford. ‘By 'freak,' I mean that I like bottom-up ideas, creative thinking at the client, not the agency.
I expect our team to come up with new ideas and I expect that to flow up from the bottom. I was
10. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 10
worried the culture would reject me like a bad organ,’ Mr. Farley said. ‘Alan just said, 'Jim, we'll
stand back to back. Like Wyatt Earp.’ Instead of wondering whether he would fit in with the
culture of Ford, Mr. Farley changed the culture” (Thomaselli, 2010). Through a democratic and
transformational leadership style, Mulally was able to secure the recruitment of Farley for the
marketing team. Mulally’s efforts results in $4.7 billion in profit year-ending 2010, the company’s
largest profit since 1998 (Thomaselli, 2010).
Conclusions
Mulally and his team worked tirelessly to deploy their communication campaign across the
‘glocal’ organization. There were missteps along the way, but ultimately the leadership style of
Mulally and the reinforcement of Mulally’s leadership style by Bill Ford Jr., allowed Ford to
emerge from one of the worst financial situations in the company’s long history. “Leaders are not
the only factor influencing organizational success, follower happiness, and constituent satisfaction;
however, leaders are generally significant factors and, sometimes, the most important factor (e.g.,
Fernandez 2005; Hennessey 1998; Kaiser, Hogan, and Craig 2008; Trottier, Van Wart, and Wang
2008). For example, in a study using 30,000 respondents, Dull (2010) demonstrated the strong
relationship between trusted leadership and satisfaction, perceived performance, and a sense of
freedom in expressing opinions. The literature also points out, however, that leadership is often
romanticized or exaggerated in many circumstances, even when leaders are perceived to play
relatively strong roles” (Van Wart, 2013, p. 555).
Through the application of the principles of the democratic style of leadership Mulally
listened to his team, employees, and investors, which led him to not only maintain a healthy level
of investment of company funds and resources in research and development efforts, but also to
drive change in the internal culture at Ford from one of segregation and mismanagement to that of
collaboration and partnership. Furthermore, Mulally continually demonstrated authenticity
11. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 11
throughout the transformation of the internal culture, investor relations, and external branding
efforts. He spoke candidly, openly, and honestly to the team at Ford about the company’s financial
situation. He presented his ideas to move the company forward both clearly and with relevance to
the overall strategic plan. Employees and investors understood that tough times were ahead, but
that on the other side of those tough times there would be prosperity. The team rallied around
Mulally’s plans and now Ford is back as the number two auto manufacturer in the United States.
Leadership and leadership styles may not ultimately be responsible for an organization’s success,
as it takes many individuals working hard towards a goal in order to achieve it. However, without
consistency of leadership and leadership styling, an organization may find itself lost among the
multiple avenues that can be taken towards success.
12. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 12
References
Biography for William Clay Ford Jr. - Executive Chairman. (2016, August 2). In The Ford Motor
Company Media Center. Retrieved from
https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/people/william-clay-ford--jr-.html
Buss, D. (2012, June 14). ‘Go Further’ Brand Message Is Aimed at Ford’s Employees, Too. In
Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/dalebuss/2012/06/14/go-further-brand-
message-is-aimed-at-fords-employees-too/#3d3a448333d6
Cassano, E. (2011, March 1). How Bill Ford Jr. led Ford Motor Co. through the recession. In Smart
Business. Retrieved from http://www.sbnonline.com/article/bill-ford-jr-on-the-future-of-
his-brand-the-business/
Ford Gets $5.9 Billion Government Loan. (2009, June 23). In Fox News. Retrieved from
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2009/06/23/ford-gets-5-billion-government-loan.html
Hackman, M. Z., & Johnson, C. E. (2013). Leadership: A Communication Perspective (6th ed.)
Long Grove, IL: Waveland.
Hammond, L. (2011, January 13). How Ford Did It. In Fortune. Retrieved from
http://archive.fortune.com/2011/01/12/autos/Bill-Ford-Alan-Mulally-
carmaker.fortune/index.htm
Jian, G. (2007, August). Unpacking Unintended Consequences in Planned Organizational Change:
A Process Model. Management Communication Quarterly, 21(1), 5-28.
doi:10.1177/0893318907301986
Lee, S., & Yoon, Y. (2009, August 29). Return on investment (ROI) of international public
relations: A country-level analysis. Public Relations Review, 36, 15-20.
doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.08.011
13. LEADERSHIP AT FORD MOTOR COMPANY 13
Mackey, S. (2009, October 11). The original bailout of US corporations: The public relations
bailout. Public Relations Review, 36, 1-6. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.10.008
Marton, B. A. (1999, May). If It Ain't Broke, Fix It Anyway: Communicating to Create Change at
Ford. Harvard Business Review, 10-11.
Molleda, J., & Roberts, M. (2008). The Value of "Authenticity" in "Glocal" Strategic
Communication: The new Juan Valdez campaign. International Journal of Strategic
Communication, 2, 154-174.
Thomaselli, R. (2010, October 10). Marketer of the Year: Ford Motor Co. In Advertising Age.
Retrieved from http://adage.com/article/special-report-marketer-of-the-year-2010/marketer-
year-2010-ford-motor/146528/
Van Wart, M. (2013). Lessons from Leadership Theory and the Contemporary Challenges of
Leaders. Public Administration Review, 73(4), 553-565. doi:10.1111/puar.12069
Vlasic, B. (2009, April 9). How Ford Avoided the Meltdown that Hit GM, Chrysler. In CNBC.
Retrieved from http://www.cnbc.com/id/30134908