Philips vs. Matsushita: the Competitive Battle Continue

In: Business and Management

Submitted By baobaokim
Words 803
Pages 4
Qwertyuinmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiop

asdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm…...

Similar Documents

Competitive Bidding vs. Sealed Proposals

...Sealed bidding and competitive proposals are the two methods used to acquire competitive prices from bidders. Sealed bidding is “a process by which government needs are made known by a solicitation called and Invitation for Bids. The government will use sealed bidding when (1) it feels confident that award can be made to the lowest price offeror who is responsive and responsible and (2) the government’s requirement is reasonably well defined in the form of drawings and specifications”(Murphy, 2009). Once the bids are opened, the prices become public knowledge. This could be a disadvantage to contractors because their prices will be made known for all to see. When sealed bidding is used, the lowest bidder that is found to responsive and responsible will be awarded the contract. “Sealed bidding always leads to a firm-fixed-price contract or fixed-price with economic adjustment contract” (Murphy, 2009). This would be another disadvantage to the contractor, because all the risk is on the contractor in fixed-priced contracts. “Competitive acquisitions rely on market forces to obtain the best value to the government” (Murphy, 2009). This process differs from sealed bidding because offerors can change their proposals and negotiate. Unlike sealed bidding, competitive acquisitions may not award the contract to the lowest bidder. “This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and noncost factors and allows the government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal...

Words: 402 - Pages: 2

Fedex vs Ups Competitive Advantage

...Competitive Advantage Paper In this report we focus on the two main competitors in the package delivery industry: Federal Express Corporation (FedEx) and United Parcel Service of America, Inc. (UPS). Studying FedEx, UPS and their competitive relationship gives a good insight for the companies' and industry's future. The two companies have different strategic goals and are operating in the same industry but in different main markets: FedEx is working on "producing outstanding financial returns" and focuses on the profitability of overnight air market whereas UPS is looking for "earning reasonable profit" and its core business that is the ground delivery. Sustainable competitive advantage Attaining a competitive advantage in package delivery business appears to be a challenging task. The main reason is that it is an easy-to- duplicate business both for the competitors and any new entrants. This is obvious in FedEx's case: the company always has distinguished itself through technologically advanced services, expanding in many places and new products over other competitors, especially UPS. UPS was the main choice for low-priced ground delivery services however being a market follower in the air delivery sector could negatively affect its reputation and cause loss of market in the long term. Taking the above into consideration the combination of high-service quality, convenience and low rates can give a company a sustainable competitive advantage. Federal Express "We......

Words: 1028 - Pages: 5

Competitive Strategies Coca-Cola vs. Pepsi Co

...Competitive Strategies Coca-Cola vs. Pepsi Co Joyce Conyers Strayer University 3 May 2013 BUS 508 Online Course Instructor: Dr. Phyllis Parise Dowers Grove Campus Phone Number: (630)874-6128 / (630)456-2348 Cell phone   Question: Choose an industry in which two or more companies has historically competed to maintain a significant share of the marketplace. These could include: Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola, Apple and Microsoft, GM and Ford Motor Company, or any other well-known pair of competitors. 1. To thoroughly determine how each corporate culture differs from the other, I will start with the history of Coca Cola. Type of the company: Public Website: http://www.cocacola.com Employees: As of 2010, The Coca-Cola Company employed just under 140,000 people worldwide. Let’s began with the background on the Coca-Cola Company history from 1886, when an Atlanta pharmacist, Dr. John Pemberton, began to produce Coca-Cola syrup for sale in fountain drinks. The bottling business however, began in 1899 when two Chattanooga businessmen, Benjamin F. Thomas and Joseph B. Whitehead, secured the exclusive rights to bottle and sell Coca-Cola for most of the United States from The Coca-Cola Company. See “LONNIE, 2003” This agreement stayed in place and operated solely as and independent, local business until the beginning of 1980s with certain bottling franchises began to consolidate. In 1986, The Coca-Cola Company merged some of its company-owned......

Words: 1402 - Pages: 6

Bus 508 - Assignment 2 - Coca Cola vs. Pepsi - Competitive Strategies

...Coca Cola vs. Pepsi: Competitive Strategies Christoper Gilchrist BUS 508 7/28/2013 Coca Cola and Pepsi marketing are a consumer products company operating in highly competitive markets. They heavily rely on continued demand for products. To generate profit and bonus, they both must sell products that appeal to our customers and to consumers. Any significant changes in consumer preferences or any inability on the part to anticipate or react to such changes could result in reduced demand for our products and erosion of our competitive and financial position (Dyer, Jeffrey H., page 3). The achievements of Pepsi and Coca Cola relies on being able to answer to daily needs of buyers, concerning health and wellness, obesity, product attributes and ingredients, and to broaden into similar categories. Changes in product category consumption or consumer demographics could indicate a deductible demand for the good that’s produced. Consumer preferences could change for many reasons, such as generations being affected by the age (Hoffman, Benjamin, page 17). Socializing has also expanded and became very diverse. Traveling, vacation or leisure activity patterns, weather, seasonal consumption cycles, negative publicity resulting from regulatory action or litigation against companies in our industry, a downturn in economic conditions or taxes specifically targeting the consumption of our products. Any of these changes may reduce consumers’ willingness to purchase the goods of......

Words: 994 - Pages: 4

Philips vs. Matsushita

...Philips vs. Matsushita Assignment Hussain AlmakramiUniversity of Scranton | 11/14/2013 | | Strategies followed by Philips and Matsushita Philips focused on their R&D and it tried to be the independent organization. It tried decentralized method to market its products. It had very strong relationships with their suppliers and that’s why it had more than 250 suppliers in the world. It started a program called “partners for growth” to improve its relationship with the suppliers. It tried to take supply from the countries where cost is low like China, France, and Brazil. For marketing and selling their products Philips used very dedicated sales representatives and other options also like indirect channels. Customer service is very good. It provides 24 hr. service to clients. On the other hand Matsushita focused on centralization and it has highly efficient organization in Japan. It focused on local sourcing but still they got the control of quality and productivity of their goods. It was not dependent on one supplier. It has suppliers in all the parts of the world. It works with its suppliers and has very good relationship with the suppliers which help in maintaining the quality of the goods. It also tried to set up plants and produce raw material for their final products. Globalization becomes difficult for Philips It became difficult for Philips to globalize its strategies because of the fast growing competitors in the market. The other factors were......

Words: 537 - Pages: 3

Philips

...Philips vs. Matsushita Case Greg Tensa 1. How did Philips become the leading consumer electronics company in the world post war era? What distinctive competencies did they build? What incompetancies did they build? Prior to World War II, Philips had created a culture of embracing technical innovation. On the production side, Philips was a leader in industrial research, and scrapped old plants in favor of new machines or factories whenever advances were made. On the product side, strong research enabled the company to broaden its product line, starting with light bulbs but growing into vacuum tubes, radios and X-ray tubes by the 1930s. Because Holland was such a small country, Philips was forced to start exporting in the early 1900s in order to have enough sales volume for its mass-production facilities. Philips evolved into a highly centralized company with decentralized sales and autonomous marketing in 17 countries. Political events in the world during the 1930s forced Philips to change into a truly multi-national company. First, the depression caused countries to erect trade barriers and enact high tariffs, forcing Philips to build local production facilities in the foreign markets they served. Second, in anticipation of World War II, Philips transferred its overseas assets into trusts in Great Britain and the U.S. They moved the bulk of their research staffs to England, and their top managers to the United States. With these assets, the national organizations (NOs)......

Words: 1891 - Pages: 8

Competitive Strategies: Cisco vs. Aruba:

...Competitive Strategies: Cisco vs. Aruba: For the purpose of this assignment a comparison between two very successful companies leading commercial wireless enterprise networks, Cisco Systems and Aruba Networks will be the featured topic of research. This paper will discuss various points behind this comparison between these companies including Corporate Culture differences, Unique Culture Benefits, Affects if changes in Corporate Culture are Required. Corporate Culture Corporate culture is uniquely built and a myriad of factors go into creating an effective culture. There are at least six different components that have been found to be common within great corporate cultures. The vision, values, practices, people, narrative and place and how they are brought together will determine how successful or unsuccessful that corporation becomes. Developing these elements is essential to building an individual and long lasting organization. Because all corporations and businesses are unique it becomes increasingly difficult to duplicate each corporation exactly the same. Seven dimension of organizational cultures has been identifies that include: innovative, stable, people, outcome oriented, detail oriented, team oriented and aggressive (Chatman & Jehn, 1994). As the organization become more complex in their make-up, so do the various cultures they incorporate. In any organization looking to be successful, they need to be a hybrid of these cultures in order to keep......

Words: 2160 - Pages: 9

Matsushita vs. Sony

...Case Study #2 The main differences between Matsushita and Sony’s products are that, Matsushita product line is more involved in the household appliances market as it is the world leader in this category, while Sony strives to be the globe’s technological leader and has a product line that is driven by advanced consumer electronics. “While companies such as Matsushita concentrates on being customer intimate, Sony has differentiated itself by focusing on product leadership.” Matsushita is the largest home appliances and household equipment (HAHE) producer in the world. Some of Matsushita’s products include: microwave ovens, refrigerators, irons, fax machines, air compressors, automatic washers and dryers, vacuum cleaners, air conditioners, dishwashers, digital cameras, DVD players, TVs, telephones, cell phones, computers, and printers. “Matsushita possesses world-class brand names, cutting-edge techniques, perception of high quality, powerful promotion campaigns, and affluent capital.” Sony has the competitive advantage when it comes to developing new technology and products in the consumer electronics market. “Sony has consistently been successful at commercializing new technologies into innovative products such as the transistor radio, tape recorder, Beta-Max video recorder, CD, Walkman, minidisk, DVD, and recently the digital camera and camcorder.” In 2001, Matsushita was in need of rebuilding its supply chain, so managing director Yukio Shohtoku, led Matsushita’s...

Words: 1181 - Pages: 5

Competitive Strategies Coca Cola vs. Pepsi

... Competitive Strategies Coca Cola vs. Pepsi By Mohammed Hashim Professor Dr. Phyllis Parise Contemporary Business May 05, 2013 Coca Cola and Pepsi Company are two of the largest producers and distributors of beverage in the world. They manufacture, markets and sells variety of carbonated, non-alcohol beverages. They continued to lead the industry with their commitment to healthier food and maintaining the high quality of their beverages. Pepsi and Coca Cola has been known to have history of competition to maintained share of world mark, where both companies need each other in order to remain competitive. Pepsi is known to offer culture that encourage their employee to be initiative, risk taking and free to pursue their goals. Senior management door are always open to question and ideas from junior employees. Diversity is a way of business to Pepsi, Pepsi President Walter Mack; in his diversification he hired Hennan Smith a black executive to lead an all-black sales team. While Coca Cola general culture is defined as leadership, passion, integrity, and diversity. To attain this Coca Cola Company create a worldwide tam that is full of diverse people, talent and ideas. If we discuss diversity Pepsi has proven to be ahead of Coca Cola, by recruiting people of color and give them early opportunity for advancement. Though Coca Cola has claim that, their workplace diversity program is design to attract, retain, and develop talent. This really did not provide a true count of......

Words: 860 - Pages: 4

Phllips vs Matsushita

...vivencia de Phillips. Pero lo que realmente impulso su éxito en la post guerra fue la independencia que poseían sus organizaciones nacionales (NO), este incremento de independencia comenzó al transferir sus instalaciones y laboratorios de investigación a UK y sus instalaciones de manegment a USA como precaución a la anticipada guerra. Esta independencia fue extremadamente útil para Phillips pues le permitió sentir y responder a las diferencias de los mercados locales tanto en marketing como eventualmente lo que seria desarrollo de producto. Dando así origen a una ventaja competitiva, las condiciones que se atribuye a esta constante innovación, en este caso particular, es que era escasa en el momento, en especial al comprarla con Matsushita que tenia problemas para generar innovaciones; era altamente relevante, ya que una de los factores claves para este negocio es la innovación y finalmente contaba con la tecnología y el prestigio necesario para mantenerla y sostenerla en el tiempo. Luego de analizar la cadena de valor de Phillips encontramos que su logística de entrada era una cobertura mundial de las demandas del mercado; en operaciones, esta la autonomía de las NOs y focalización en su mayor línea de producto, permitiéndoles un rendimiento superior; en la logística de salida y distribución su principal idea fu transferir sus instalaciones a otros países durante la guerra para facilitar los procesos; Ventas y mercado-tecnia, su enfoque era canalizar sus......

Words: 1412 - Pages: 6

Philips vs. Matsushita: the Competitive Battle Continues

...Philips vs. Matsushita: The Competitive Battle Continues 1. Philips and Matsushita are two very large consumer electronic companies. Philips success over the years can be largely contributed to the company’s adaptive and innovative product marketing and its expansive portfolio based on the responsive needs of national organizations. However, Phillips, has faced extreme volatility over the past 50 years due to a lack of innovation, low employee morale, loss of focus of core competencies, and a global recession. On the other hand, Matsushita success can be largely contributed to the company’s efficient and low cost production, synergy, and competitive divisions that encourage innovation. However, Matsushita also experienced volatility due to a lack of innovation, a global recession, and the addition of a major supply glut and price collapse. 2. The concepts from the assigned chapter can help us understand how Philips and Matsushita might develop a strategy that will focus on long term success. The concepts from the chapter discuss terms such as “administrative heritage” or the idea that a company’s existing configuration cannot be changed overnight. And one of the most important lessons for management is to build and leverage their company’s existing capabilities rather than emulating another company’s strategic capabilities in order to be more responsive in a constantly changing world. 3. My strategic recommendation for Philips is to maintain its strong......

Words: 305 - Pages: 2

Phillips vs Masuhita

...Philips vs Matsushita Susan Cumpton PHL-3100 International Management April 11, 2015 Professor Ismail Throughout History Philips and Matsushita have charted different strategies as well as different organizational structures, and the outcome has been the same; success. With success comes adversity and both companies’ experienced major challenges in the beginning of the 21st century. Both CEO’s were forced to implement organizational restructurings as well as new strategies. How they would come out of was unknown as well as if their competitive nature with each other would continue. In 1892 Gerard Philips and his father founded a small light bulb company in Eindhoven Holland, at firs the ventured failed and they were forced to recruit Gerard’s brother Anton an excellent salesman. Philips focused on a singled product while larger electrical production companies raced to diversify. Innovation was a priority and Philips company policy was to keep up with modern technology and advancement in research. Philips labs developed a tungsten metal filament bulb that gave them finical strength to compete against it rivals.. In 1899 Anton hired the companies first export manager and the company was sell into markets in Japan, Australia, Canada, Brazil, and Russia. By 1900 Philips was the third largest light-bulb producer in Europe. By 1912 the lamp industry stated showing an overcapacity of companies so Philips started building sales organizations in the United States,......

Words: 1231 - Pages: 5

Philips vs Matsuhita

...9-910-410 DECEMBER 11, 2009 CHRISTOPHER A. BARTLETT Philips versus Matsushita: The Competitive Battle Continues Throughout their long histories, N.V. Philips (Netherlands) and Matsushita Electric (Japan) had followed very different strategies and emerged with very different organizational capabilities. Philips built its success on a worldwide portfolio of responsive national organizations while Matsushita based its global competitiveness on its centralized, highly efficient operations in Japan. During the first decade of the 21st century, however, both companies experienced major challenges to their historic competitive positions and organizational models. Implementing yet another round of strategic initiatives and organizational restructurings, the CEOs at both companies were taking their respective organizations in very different directions. At the end of the decade, observers wondered how the changes would affect their long-running competitive battle. Philips: Background In 1892, Gerard Philips and his father opened a small light-bulb factory in Eindhoven, Holland. When their venture almost failed, they recruited Gerard’s brother, Anton, an excellent salesman and manager. By 1900, Philips was the third largest light-bulb producer in Europe. Technological Competence and Geographic Expansion While larger electrical products companies were racing to diversify, Philips made only light-bulbs. This one-product focus and Gerard’s technological prowess......

Words: 9318 - Pages: 38

Philips

...The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0953-4814.htm Leadership style and entrepreneurial change The Centurion operation at Philips Electronics Leadership style 73 Luchien Karsten University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands Sjoerd Keulen University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Ronald Kroeze Free University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and Rik Peters University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands Abstract Purpose – This paper aims to look at the role of the top and middle management of the Philips organization during the transition from one type of organizational change to another in the 1990s and the role the history of the organisation played in this process. Design/methodology/approach – The paper analysis is based on historical records, literature and interviews with former Philips top managers. Findings – The paper shows that Philips’ leaders used different styles of leadership to create a deliberate atmosphere and willingness to change. The final emergent transformation, however, could only sufficiently materialise while it rejuvenated existing management concepts like Quality Management. The success was partly based on the fact that these concepts played a historical role in the Philips organisation. Originality/value – The paper adds the historical style approach to leadership research and pays attention to the important role of the organization’s history during processes...

Words: 10260 - Pages: 42

Sony vs Matsushita

...* Matsushita and sony are the two largest consumer electronics makers in Japan and in the world and both stretched their supply chains to their low-cost manufacturing neighbor which is CHINA to reduce cost. * Matsushitas 49 of 144 manufacturing subsidiaries are scattered in China. * 6 of 35 Sony’s factories abroad are located in China. * In 2002 when Matsushita was expanding their supply chain in China, Sony decided to shift some of its manufacturing business in China back to JAPAN. MATSUSHITA’s EMBARASSING LOSS * Matsushita is a electric industrial co., the largest home appliances and household equipment producer in the world. * They have competed with low priced Chinese counterparts in the international market. * Yukio Shohtoku who was responsible for Matsushitas overseas business, kept hearing bad news from overseas branches because Chinese price is becoming the world’s price. To stay in the market against those Chinese competitors, Matsushitas had to cut their profit margins. PROBLEMS * Matsushitas weakness was high cost. * To maintain its leadership in the market, Matsushita believed combination of Japanese advanced techniques/parts and Chinese low cost labor would enhance their competitive advantage in the world. * By doing that it helped them cut their products prices. However, Shanghai subsidiary “Panasonic” microwave over was 30 percent cheaper than its counterpart made in Japan. * However, in 2000 they Shanghai......

Words: 479 - Pages: 2