Philips and Matsushita are technology and electronics companies. Their scope ranges from Radio to Television and other electronics. The former was staterd by Philips and his fathers in Einhdoven Netherlands. They first started making bulbs but grew to international standards soon later. Matsushita in Japan started Matsushita. The two companies have common denominator in their activities. Both also experienced the effects of the world war and the great economic depression (1-8).
Philips however took caution to ensure that it does not suffer the impacts. It decided to take control measures. It took its trust to America and Britain. The Second World War negatively affected its plant operation. The company however adopted several measures to mitigate the effects. It used the strategy of setting up national organisations in its subsidiary branches in other nations. These bodies would operate independently. They also had the responsibilty of obtaining local market and producing market tailored products. This mechanism ensured that Philips penetrated the market and established itself.
The national organisations had expertise who would handle a country’s market. The production divisions retained the role of production and global distribution of the products. The national organisations produced consumer products in line with the market requirements of the specific country. The national organisations would report to the centralised production department at the mother country. The national harmonisation managers made several trips to the mother headquaters. This was to ensure that the activities and progress of the organisations was minitored (4-7).
Matsushita runs parallel activities with Philips. Both companies deal in technology and electronics. More often, they venture into consumers products. The duo has heard intercompany market competition. They also receive competition from other companies in this industry. Mitsushita was earlier an under dog but it overtook Philips at some point. First, it ventured more into expert markets because of low distribution. It was also hard to expand its prodcut line. Secondly, it adopted a divisionalised organisation structure. This kind of organisation creates a condusive working environment for each division. It encourages interdivision competition and hence promotes innovation. Each division would leverage the technology and expertise at its disposal and come up with new sleek products. This ensured that the product’s quality was in tandem with the latest market demands (8-10).
Both companies have made several changes in their business models, management and administration system. There are a large number of technocrats at the helm of these companies. Several chief executive officers have steered the companies. Changes are also noteable in prodcution and marketing systems. Philips chose to use a centralised system of organization structure while Matsushita chose a divisionalised system. These managers have brought up new ways of expending knowledge and improving prifitability. Philips has made several changes on the roles of wokers and job design between the national organisations and the production divisions. Matsushita have made changes in their divisionalised management system. A number of officers have not been able to implement their policies because they did not get moral and financial support. Only a small number have been sucessful in implementing their blue prints (11-13).
There are specific recomendations for Gerald Kleisterlee and Eumo Ohtusubo. The latter should concentrate on shifting the production to countries with relatively low labor cost. He should expand the company’s prodcut line rather than reducing. An expanded product line provides a fall back trap incase of a negative market eventuality. The former should develop his policies with anticipation of risks and uncertainities. This prevents unnecessary closure of the business (6-13).