P. 1
Philips vs Matsushita

Philips vs Matsushita

|Views: 127|Likes:
Published by Hendry Lukito
Case study about philips and matsushita
Case study about philips and matsushita

More info:

Published by: Hendry Lukito on Mar 10, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less







highly autonomous responsive national organizations • Technology-driven innovation • Matsushita built its success on its centralized. Japan • First Japanese company to adopt the divisional structure • One-product-one-division • Internal competition among divisions • Decentralized. Holland • Innovation and product development core strengths: • Single product focus • Gerrard’s Technology Prowess Matsushita • Founded in 1918 by Konosuke Matsushita in Osaka. highly efficient operations in Japan • Market-driven rapid innovation .BACKGROUND Philips • Founded in 1892 by Gerard Philips in Eindhoven.

research & innovation sales and services through PDs & NOs within national/local market Matsushita Research Product Development Manufacturing Sales & Marketing Services Centralized operations: research. innovation and product development. manufacturing. Marketing and Services within national market Centralized Decentralized .VALUE CHAIN Philips Research Product Development Manufacturing Sales & Marketing Services Centralized initial Multinational/decentralized management. product development.

SUCCESSIVE LEADER Philips • Gerard Philips and Anton • Van Riemsdijk and Rodenburg • Wisse Dekker • Van der Klugt • Timmer • Boonstra • Kleisterlee Matsushita • Konosuke Matsushita • Yamashita • Tanii • Yoichi Morishita • Kunio Nakamura .


CHALLENGES FACED Philips – Too Decentralized • Powerful and autonomous National Organizations (NOs) • Lack of company-wide strategic among NOs • Lack of accountability in NO/PD matrix Matsushita – Too Centralized • Highly centralized services: • Centralized product development • • Subsidiaries too dependent to parent company Less responsive to customer demand and preference • Management by Technical and commercial consensus • Slow of respond • Communication between overseas subsidiaries and parent company • Product Divisional structure • Too deep competition can make an internal conflict • Inefficient production due to local production centers .

after market service . Almost the decision is decided by HQ.• We need to Balance the decision making between Centralized and Decentralized LESSON FROM CASES • All the operation decision need to take by subsidiaries while strategic decision need to consult to HQ • My dream company which is Samsung has similarity with Matshushita. like technical issue in plant. but some operation decision is decided by subsidiaries. employee recruitment .

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->