phillips vs matsushita
TRANSCRIPT
Distinctive Competencies Incompetency ChangePhillips A long track record of
innovations at local subsidiaries, which have developed strong research capabilities in different areas
Self-sufficiency of NOs allowed them to become adept at responding to country-specific market condition
Creation of common market, eroded trade barriers and made NOs less important
Ability to bring products to market began to falter
Company fragmentation presented by the miscommunication between on product introduction and research
Unnecessary overlapping R&D projects were being conducted
Phillips was once force to abandon its superior technical product
Close down least efficient plants and concerting the best into International Production Centers to take advantage of the economy of scale
Replace dual leadership by single management to simplify company structure
Identify company’s core business and sell off the rest
Cut cost in labor and R&D
Matsushita Adaptive operational culture Flood of market driven new
products and outlets Low cost as a result of global
scale efficiency
Highly centralize operations heavily relying on domestic technical support
Lack of leading technological edge and global learning makes it vulnerable to rapidly-changing market conditions and demand in the future
Adopting “operation localization” to help overseas company develop the innovative capability and entrepreneurial initiative as Phillips
Relocate major regional headquarter from Japan to other continent to decentralize operation control nearer to local market
Invest in innovative and high-potential business with its huge capital reserve
Move production to low-cost countries