In 1999, the Japanese manufacturer Nissan was on the verge of bankruptcy with, all indicators flashing. The company faced recurring financial losses. Its debts exceeded 22 billion dollars and its stock market value is still plummeting. In addition, the company manufactures expensive cars and its market share is steadily declining due to this. Also, its product has stagnated and the Japanese organization lacks flexibility.
Coincidentally this crisis comes at a time when the French manufacturer Renault is seeking a partner for obvious strategic reasons, particularly with respect to global competition.
[...] Whereas Renault was leading the markets in Europe and particularly in Latin America (including the Brazilian market is very dynamic), Nissan had the second largest market share in Japan and a major presence in North America. The goal of this alliance was to be present on most world markets. In 1998, the merger of two major competitors accelerated the process. Indeed, the German company Daimler-Benz AG and Chrysler Corporation associate emerged as the main competitor of an entire industry. The partnership envisaged by Renault became urgent, and the French manufacturer took the risk of injecting 5 billion stake in Nissan. [...]
[...] In addition, Nissan had some major advantages, namely a presence on several continents, plants at the forefront of technology (developed with major in this field), and a quality recognized by everyone. These advantages seemed compatible with the Renault, and recovery was seen as being possible in collaboration with it. A. The missions and roles of cross teams The Nissan Revival Plan was agreed upon in the general meeting held on July based on the introduction of 9-pin horizontal working model. [...]
[...] Corporate restructuring also involves a change of mentality in Japan, including the questioning of lifetime employment, the concept of seniority by age, and the birth of a culture of emergency. Change management was facilitated as the expectations of senior and middle management were frustrated with the inaction of the leaders. Employees have been the first applicants for change in the organization. II. External factors A. The failure of Yamaichi as an opportunity In Japan, successive governments have taken the initiative of saving big business when they were in difficulty, both to save thousands of jobs at stake and salvage the economy. [...]
[...] This approach has led to Carlos Ghosn meeting the requirements of both corporate cultures, including that of Nissan, as well as the national cultures. Paradoxically, this respect did not prevent his from adopting measures that were especially painful to the Japanese model, and yet he was considered a hero in Japan. Carlos Ghosn believed in the positive shock of cultures, so he did not hesitate to remove the legacy that he thought was a retarding factor while relying on the excellence of the Japanese in terms of process and technology. [...]
[...] Carlos Ghosn countered this practice by explaining at length and clearly all decisions to be taken, in accordance with his belief that an employee is truly effective only if he believes and understands the proposed project. Communication includes not only top management but also all other employees who participate in the effort. Knowing what direction the company is taking stresses the importance of the sacrifices asked of them and their mission. Specific commitments are also provided to give credibility to his statements and make employees accountable. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
