N.V. Philips (Netherlands) and Matsushita Electric (Japan) are among the largest consumer electronics companies in the world. Their success was based on two contrasting strategies – diversification of worldwide portfolio and local responsiveness for Philips‚ and high centralization and mass production for Matsushita. Royal Philips Electronics of the Netherlands began as a small light-bulb factory in Holland‚ and by the turn of the century‚ was one of the largest producers in Europe. One-product
Premium Sony Philips Consumer electronics
organizational structure is embedded in its capabilities and competencies. The first obvious example is Matsushita’s highly centralized mode of production which dictates global operations unlike its competitor in the electronics market‚ a conglomerate‚ Philips‚ who has very little centralized mode of coordination. Matsushita’s management style was very traditional‚ since it was established. It is believed that they chose this form of structure and structure because of the nature of the market the organization
Premium Bureaucracy Marketing Organizational structure
Philips versus Matsushita: The Competitive Battle Continues 1) The major issues in this case are as follows: * Choosing the best organizational design; restructuration/ reorganization of multinational corporations: Philips and Matsushita. Philips: Problematic relation between product divisions (PD) and national organizations (NO)- responsibility issue‚ lower speed of reaction; NO had the real power and independency (power struggle issue) Matshushita- difficulties with too centralized
Premium Strategic management Marketing Management
Case 4: Philips versus Matsushita: A New Century‚ a New Round Steve Kotarski MGT380 – Dr. Tang Case Synopsis Two major competitors in the global consumer electronics industry‚ Philips of the Netherlands and Matsushita of Japan‚ both have extensive histories that can be traced back more than a century. They have each followed different strategies and have had significant capabilities and downfalls along the way. In general‚ Philips built its tenured success on a portfolio of responsive
Premium Philips
Philips versus Matsushita Case Analysis Competing Strategic and Organizational Choices Erik F. Spear Lynelle C. Vidale Vannessa. D. Williams IMAN601‚ Section 9040 Dr. Mariana Feld November 2‚ 2010 Philips versus Matsushita Case Analysis Competing Strategic and Organizational Choices Introduction Royal Philips NV and Matsushita (owner of the Panasonic brand among others) are two of the world’s biggest electronics multinationals. After successfully building their global empires in
Premium Porter five forces analysis Strategic management Complementors
Porter five forces analysis From Wikipedia‚ the free encyclopedia A graphical representation of Porter’s Five Forces Porter five forces analysis is a framework for industry analysis and business strategy development. It draws upon industrial organization (IO) economics to derive five forces that determine the competitive intensity and therefore attractiveness of a market. Attractiveness in this context refers to the overall industry profitability. An "unattractive" industry is one in which the
Premium Strategic management Porter five forces analysis Management
and structures of Philips and Matsushita? What are their distinctive competencies and incompetencies? 2. What are the key organizational challenges that each company is facing at the end of the case? What recommendations would you give to the respective CEOs? 1. The two companies‚ each from different regions of the world‚ have an extensive history that have caused for different cultures‚ strategies and structures to be implemented (Bartlett & Beamish‚ 2010: 301). Philips‚ as an European
Premium Organizational structure Management Subsidiary
Philips was founded by Gerard Philips and his father in 1892 in Eindhoven‚ Holland . Then‚ they recruited Anton Philips (Herard ’s brother)‚ an excellent salesman and manager‚ and soon after they became the third largest light-bulb producer in Europe. However from its beginning on it always took care for his workers. As an example in Eindhoven it built company houses‚ bolstered education‚ and paid its employees so well that other local employers complained. When larger electrical product companies
Premium Management Philips
Running head: PORTER’S STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK Porter Five Forces Analysis Managerial Economics – MBA 500 Instructor: Professor Franklin By: LaTonya Perryman Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Business Administration Concordia University Wisconsin November 1‚ 2011 Table of Contents Introduction……………………………………………………………………………3 Michael Porter’s Strategic Framework…...……………..……………………..………3 The Long-run Efficiency Implications of an Oligopoly……………………………
Premium Economics Monopoly Perfect competition
followed by Philips and Matsushita. How and why do they differ? Philips and Matsushita had followed very different strategies. Philips adopted the localization strategy and built its success on a worldwide portfolio of responsive national organizations. On the other hand‚ Matsushita adopt the strategy of global standardization. The structure of the organization has been matrix based whereas Matsushita followed a more hierarchical structure. The management is more decentralized at Philips; that is
Free Developed country Developing country Emerging markets