CHANGE MANAGEMENT (CASE STUDY) Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

CHANGE MANAGEMENT ( ) - Case Study ExampleOrganizations can be miscellany by creating a modernistic system in a new place with new personnel, or by renewing the old system in the same place with the same personnel. Critics admit that when change is conducted by taking the renewal alternative, it usually entails the positioning of a new top manager or top managerial team. In business organizations, Ford, comparable many other firms, created separate plants to develop new technology and new products. In total institutions, the creation of a radical new vision that rattling rehabilitates is possible by starting out with a new scheme, guards carefully chosen to be rehabilitators, and a new, dedicated staff.Ford is one of the oldest automakers in the world. The history of the company goes back to 1903 when the first converted pulverisation was opened. Today, Ford is the second largest automaker with 17.5% market share. Historically, Ford sought to compete against the industrys lead er, General Motors (GM), by increase its presence in foreign markets. Fords International Automotive Operations co-ordinates activities in twenty-six countries grouped in three principal regions (Europe, Latin America, and Asia Pacific). In the late 1970s, Ford produced outside the United States half of its ecumenical vehicle product - compared with GMs one-fourth. The Ford Motor Co. has also been a leader in introducing or quick sweeping technological innovations in the industry (Lessons In Change From Ford Motor Company n.d.). Henry Ford, the dampen and president of the company, is considered the father of mass production. In the difficult decade of the 1980s, Ford showed its energy to rapidly adopt the Japanese system of production and to move faster than any other auto maker in seeking the integration of its operations on a global basis. The company was also a broach in the internationalization of production, as it was the first to open an assembly plant in Canada (1904), in Mexico (1925), and in many other countries. Historically, the company has had a leading role in developing an automotive cap business leader in those countries, and its strategies have been characterized by its responsiveness to local government demands and its relatively high levels of export use (Lessons In Change From Ford Motor Company n.d. Ford Home Page 2007). The change subprogram within the company is influenced by the industry requirements and competition. In order to survive and maximize profits, auto makers like Ford must comply with structural rules. Structural rules are derived from production technologies (hard and soft technologies) that are victorious in producing cars efficiently. An automobile is a complex product, which consists of over 10,000 parts and requires multiple and complex processes for its manufacture. Mass production proved successful in efficiently producing automobiles, which explains that for almost seven decades, it determined the structural rules for the automobile industry. It is a complex system that needs to be understood in order to comprehend Fords strategies. Where they existed, differences in strategy or goals between the US Big Three (Ford, GM and Daimler Chrysler) stemmed basically from each firms ability to conform to the rules of competition and from its relative power position in the industry. During 1990s, Ford had little room for conniving