It appears that GM showed traits of being both prospectors and reactors. Prospectors are known for creating their own opportunities and being bold and going after an opportunity, not sitting back and waiting for something to happen. After taking the bailout from the federal government, GM set out to make an unprecedented profit of $10 billion dollars. Prospectors often put fear into the hearts of their competitors and that is what GM is trying to do by going after the “ best in class” peers. They are targeting the high class markets like the BMW and Hyundai markets which are known for higher return on sales. I believe that’s exactly what GM was trying to do by “calling out” the other companies, similar to Babe Ruth pointing to the outfield and calling where he was going to hit his homerun. It was showing a confidence in something unknown, which could backfire and cause them to suffer in the long run. I believe GM also showed traits of being reactionary in their planning. They apparently were in a lot of debt and couldn’t go forward without the government bailout, they waited until they were forced to do something about the problem to actually confront it. The other piece of the case that leads me to believe they were reactors is two cuts that were made by GM. The first was the idea to offer incentives in 2011. While sales jumped they actually had a profit loss in North America. This was a reactionary move spurred by the need to get sales off to a quick start. The second cut they made was to workforce. They cut their global workforce by about 50,000 jobs in reaction losing profits. I will also say I struggled with whether or not to also say that GM has shown traits of being analyzers. I think that by looking at what other companies have done with lowering platforms (Ford and Volkswagen) and by changing the plan with the incentives they were really taking a look at what has been working for others and putting in into their own plans for...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document