4.2 Kvalitativno istraživanje
Poglavlje analizira i
razmatra utjecaj unutra firmi performanse i finansijske pokazatelje (FP),
ekološkog učinka (EP), i društvenog učinka (SP). U nastavku ćemo govoriti o
tome kako je važno globalnih trendova može utjecati na četiri cjeline:
proizvođača, potrošača, tržišta i društva (Kauffman i Eric, 2011, str.
2 [1]), Whose interactions depend on the sustainability of all entities,
the structures and capabilities of the relationship they belong to. The basic
assumption is that globalization is a key driver in helping developing
economies to apply knowledge, regulations and standards, to become mature
markets that are reliable for investment. (Spahr,2008) Three determinants need
to answer on three questions: WHY? (Sustainability), HOW? (Network), and WHAT?
(Agencies), which define the entity's economic interactions (Kauffman and Eric,2011, p.
2 [2]) This important field of research relates to a measure of the
transformation of inter-firm strategy, based on modern principles of economy
and mobility of the society.
Conceptually, we have developed a Dynamic
Business Model Innovation (DBMI) based on the "Culture of
Innovation". We review literature, used the RBV theory, Shareholders
theory, Stakeholder theory, Agency theory, Dynamic Capabilities theory, Systems
theory, and Strategic theory. Cilj istraživanja je odgovoriti na istraživačka
pitanja i testirati hipoteze, kvantitativno. Reports industry point out that
more than 90 percent of CEOs consider the question of sustainability crucial to
the future success of the company (UNGC & Accenture,2013[3]; x[4]). In this regard, Chiefs
Managers of sustainability can have a key role to integrate environmental and
social goals with economic goals, in the approach to the triple bottom line. Financial
analysis of six companies Daimler, BMW, VW, FCA Ford, and Hyundai covering
areas: product innovation, sales growth, market growth rate, relationship
evaluation (ROS, ROI, ROA, ROE, ROIC), profit
margin, long-term obligations. Majority voting has companies VW (Piëch families
50,73%), Susanne Klatten hold approximately 46 % of the BMW share and Daimler
36,6% shareholders come from Germany and 22,9% from USA[LUM1] . FCA is controlled by Giovanni
Agnelli (51,39%).
The research focuses on the
automotive industry as an experimental case study, and strategy of the company
to adopt new technologies and new product development. The goal is to get a
descriptive and objective input, (Yin,1994), which can help us to maximize the
ability to draw general conclusions and to reduce the danger of biased results.
The objective of a deep-rooted approach is often related to case studies and
detailed studies. In research was adopted Eisenhartt (1989[5]) approach related to
case studies and detailed studies, where empirical evidence can be qualitative,
quantitative, or both. Predmet istraživanja su profitabilnost i rast.
4.2.1 A Framework for Innovation
The purpose of paper is to understand more
fully the forms, functions and effectiveness of inter-firm strategies and relationship
with key players in its environment (Ancona & Caldwell,1992[6]).
The vast amount of literature offers an extremely diverse collection of
collaborative forms, where researchers given attention relate to business
concepts such as knowledge management, technology output. flexible or dynamic
networking, agile competition, business process redesign, new products or
service design. Main goals is to improve process-oriented working environment
for knowledge creation, learning and collaboration, and this deeper
understanding what organization form is and how it is organized trough
technologically intensive fields such automakers manufactures industry. I
assumed that direct network creates apositiveexternality, and that consumers
may value a product if not similar consumers or group of economic agents use
that product as well (Gawera.2011[7];
[1[8]]).
Main focus of this companies are driven by businesses' needs to reduce costs
and increase efficiency, expanded company offerings, and improve competitive
positions.
Cluster Model
The aim of the research model is to establish a link between the strategy
of the firm and the socio-psychological theoretical-cultural profile at the
national level of the country. In order to further study the countries under
consideration, used cluster analysis. Standardized indicators are used toin order to prevent the influence of different
scales initial indicators on the results. The countries are grouped according
to three variables: Global Innovation Index (Ecological sustainability,
Innovation Efficiency Ratio, and joint venture / strategic alliance deals)
Innovation Index, and Patenting (in order to balance
outcome-oriented and input-oriented indicators, the patenting indicator is
omitted). Knowledge and technology output is used to obtain adequate results.
The following principle was used to select the number of clusters. If the
country has the highest score of a cultural dimension, it will be added first
to that cluster. If the cluster contains the company leader, another country will
be added to the country where the factory has it. If the new cluster is
significantly different from the previous clusters, it will be added. If you
add another cluster, the new cluster is quite similar to another group, the
cluster will not be added. It turned out that it was most appropriate to divide
the countries into three clusters. The results of the cluster analysis are
shown in Table[LUM2] 3.
In order to give an idea of the variations
within the cluster, in parentheses are added standard deviations.
Table
4 gives the mean values of cultural dimensions for standardized Innovation
Efficiency Ratio for clusters. First, it can be seen that the Innovation
Efficiency Ratio is exceptionally high in the US, Germany is followed, and
China has a rank 22. The highest level of individualism and level of power
distraction, avoidance of uncertainty and masculinity in Cluster 1. Cluster 3
is, on the contrary, the lowest levels of Innovation Efficiency Ratio and
Individualism and Low Individualism and High PDI, but not the highest power
levels (here, as in the case of individualism, also the climax deviation is
highest). The testing of standard deviations shows that cluster consistency is
highest in Cluster 1. Countries with high innovative indicators (Cluster 1),
and masculinity and High UAI are higher than average. Countries with High
Individualism in innovation (Cluster 2) have masculinity and avoidance of
uncertainty above average (except for USA, where this is valid for Low UAI).
Therefore, the results of the cluster analysis are in accordance with the
grouping that could be suggested on the basis of Table 21.
Table 21. Results of
cluster analysis based on the three indicators of innovation (standard
deviation in brackets)
|
The final cluster
centers:
|
Cluster
1
|
Cluster
2
|
Cluster
3
|
|
R&D costs
|
1.07
(0.76)
|
-0.44
(0.36)
|
-1.01
(0.20)
|
|
The index of global
innovation
|
1.10
(0.52)
|
-0.36
(0.47)
|
-1.11
(0.37)
|
|
Innovation Index
|
0.98
(0.30)
|
-0.02
(0.43)
|
-1.55
(0.28)
|
|
Countries in clusters:
|
Germany
UK
Poland
South Korea
Romania
Mexico
Hungary
|
USA
Ireland
Italy
Israel
Japan
Poland
Serbia
|
China
Brazil
India
Slovakia
South Africa
Russia
Turkey
|
Source:
Author. Darko Milosevic
It can be seen that Cluster 1 embodies the
most successful countries in terms of innovation. Ecological sustainability for
Germany Rank 36, Innovation Efficiency Ratio rank 9, Joint venture / Strategic
alliance deals Germany rank 46. All Cluster countries have the highest or
lowest value of innovation indicators. Thus, China is "on the right
path" towards becoming a leading power in global scientific and
technological innovations. Japan — Known for its manufacturing and technology
sector, Japan ranks highest in infrastructure and patent filings. Republic of
Korea — According to the Index, South Korea's greatest asset is its innovation
sector. The country has also seen tremendous growth in research and
development. Germany — The country ranks at the top of the list's measurement
of patent creation, and has strong technology output, especially in automobile
technology. United Kingdom — The UK's success in infrastructure, such as the
London Crossrail, buoy it near the top. But the country has lower scores in
productivity. United States — The US held steady in its fourth-place ranking
since 2016, most notably due to the strength of its global-facing markets, the
value of its stock trades, and its widespread implementation of internet
technology.[9]
Therefore,
the results of cluster analysis are in agreement with the group that can be
proposed in Table 22.
Table 22. Mean values
of the factors of innovation clusters (standard deviation in brackets)
|
Cluster
1
|
Cluster
2
|
Cluster
3
|
|
|
0.29
(0.69)
|
12:03
(1.19)
|
-0.87
(0.53)
|
|
|
PDI
|
-0.35
(0.96)
|
0.55
(0.87)
|
12.25
(1.11)
|
|
UAI
|
-0.89
(0.67)
|
0.33
(0.82)
|
0.78
(0.84)
|
|
MAS
|
-0.74
(0.58)
|
-0.04
(0.87)
|
1.27
(0.61)
|
|
IND
|
0.68
(0.76)
|
-0.27
(0.77)
|
-0.44
(1.26)
|
The possible within-cluster variations can
also be seen in Figure 2. It demonstrates that in the countries with high
innovation indicators (Cluster 1) both masculinity and uncertainty avoidance
are lower than average. At the same time countries with poorest performance in
innovation (Cluster 3) all have masculinity and uncertainty avoidance higher
than average (except Azerbaijan, where this holds only for masculinity).
It can also be seen from Figure 1 that the
difference between those countries from other countries is larger in the case
of the Innovation Index and smaller in the case of R&D expenditures. Here,
at least two explanations are possible. First, in those countries (neighboring
countries belonging to Cluster 3) of the R&D expenditures are not utilized
well enough. Second, it is also possible that the indicators used in this study
focus on the aspects of innovation processes that are poorer in those
countries. Usually, the most easily available way to measure innovation outputs
is to count patents or scientific articles etc. , but as was noted before, the
tendency to protect intellectual property with patenting may also depend on
culture as well as historical background and traditions. It is possible that
the implementation aspect of innovation or even the initiation aspect (if
innovations are not documented by patent applications, for example), are not
covered well enough with the indicators used in this analysis. However, using
other indicators can not be expected to change the results and the relative
positions of countries dramatically.
Concluding
Remarks
The results from correlation and regression
analysis indicated that all four cultural dimensions have significant influence
on innovation. Uncertainty avoidance and masculinity appeared to have strong
negative relationship with all innovation indicators used. Power distance that
was also negatively related to innovation seemed to be more related to the
inputs and less to the outputs of innovation while individualism turned out to
be positively related to innovation and to be more related with the outputs of
innovation. All these results are in accordance with theoretical reasoning and
previous results. Next, graphical and cluster analysis showed that countries
group differently according to different cultural dimensions, but different
cultural dimensions often seem to balance each-other: countries may have
different combinations cultural dimensions, but still perform equally well in
innovating.
As all four cultural dimensions were found to
be significant in regression analysis, it was assumed that the final innovation
performance may develop on the basis of the combined effect of four cultural
dimensions. Hence, the indicator of the support of culture for innovation was
calculated as an average of the indicators of four cultural dimensions,
incorporating the indicator of individualism with a plus sign and the
indicators of power distance, uncertainty avoidance and masculinity with minus
signs. The calculated indicator appeared to explain quite well the differences
in the innovation performance in different countries.
4.2.2 Kulturni identitet nacije
Culture can be studied
at an international, national, regional, business and organizational level,
taking into account that these levels are often interconnected and intertwined.
Analysis of cultural differences at national level, based on the geocentric and
cultural approach. These two approaches are adopted in the research and aim to
study international management and intercultural interaction. "Culture of
Innovation" should be understood in relation to the work and attitudes
within the organization to innovation, technology, knowledge exchange,
entrepreneurial activities, business, uncertainty (Hofstede 2001[10]) and related behavioral and historical trajectory.
For a cultural embeddedness key individuals "who have a strong impact on
the corporate culture. Cultural
differences in the styles of leadership often create unexpected
misunderstandings[11]. James
(2005[12]) argues that the cultural embeddedness of company best understood as
opposed to the key elements of corporate culture shown by the ability of
companies to innovate (p. 1198).
Corporate culture can be an ally or an obstacle to the successful adoption of
new organizational practices. So,integration of
cultural concepts in innovation and cluster policy will be feasible only if the
regional culture better conceptualize and empirically verified (James 2003p.
1198). Solve problems relating to internal integration and external
adaptation.
The aim of this
part of the research is to establish a link between sociokultoroškog profile
nationally and strategy company. Related to Bamberger's (2008[13]) Claim for a more formal inclusion of
contextual factors (eg institutions) in existing models we attempt to use
advance management theories. The recognition of the relevance of institutions
for competitive advantage is important they cease was treated (Global
Innovation Index) as background conditions or control variables (Peng et al.
,2008[14]). Do businesses take into account cultural differences
in making decisions about the production and sale of certain car models in some
of the markets?
Do businesses take into account cultural differences in
decisions making process about the production and sale of certain car models in
some of the markets? Whether we work in Michigan, Munich, Seoul, Beijing, or
New York, we are all part of a global network. Today, success depends on the
ability of variations in the way people from different societies think, do, and
act. That is why a distinctive motive has been created for specific groups at
the national level that can play a significant role in the adoption and
application of new technologies. Research on cultural identity issues can prove
to be a difficult task. The reason: cultural identity is a unique mix of
infinite inner qualities and self-perception. Many of the fragments make up our
inner self: nation, religion, family, sex, sexuality, as well as culture,
self-representation involves the appearance, personality or belief of one
person. It is therefore obvious that a very small part of our cultural identity
is permanent or unchanged. Ultimate identity is part and is associated with
compassion by nationality, religion, social class, generation, locality or any
social group that has its own specific culture. In this way, cultural identity
is characteristic of an individual, but also for a culturally identical group
of members sharing the same cultural identity. [1]
The importance of the process of creating and adopting
the innovation of new technologies and products is defined by determining the
measures of the nation's innovation status. Industrial Innovation Indices for
Culture (IIC) can be established to statistically analyze the relationship of
innovation with a sufficient level of integrity.
Cultural and implicit
theories of leadership (CILT) (Dorfman et al. ,2004; Schyns and Meindl,2005
Ton,2010) contributed to the understanding of cultural influences on leadership styles. It is assumed
that the different cultures of the individual nations gradually developing a
range of beliefs about the behavior and characteristics of leaders. Structure
and context from "observer's eye" (Dorfman et al. ,2004: 670; Lord
and Maher,1991), may be divided among individuals in the common cultures
(Dorfman et al. ,2004: 669). Although the majority of cross-cultural research
highlights how different cultural groups to understand what executives need to
understand, there are a number of recognized cultural dimensions that explain
the different perceptions and expectations of the management of the national
cultures.
Deo
prepricavam za sve nacije po nesto
National cultural differences have a major impact on the expected behavior
of employees, resulting in inconsistencies among participants (Morris &
Pavett,1992; Nakata & Sivakumar,1996; Schoening et al. ,1998). For example,
(High PDI), in the South Koreans, a more structured hierarchy, where the exact
job description is given to the boss, while the employee must follow the tasks.
Chinese communication rules that are regulated by the principle (ren, yi, and
li) of self-discipline of indirect expression of disapproval, guarding honor
among colleagues is the fact that they actually deal with interpersonal and
social relations without conflict (Chen & Xiao,1993). Managers need to be
at the top and can never be offended at work. There are strong feelings of fear
to directly participate in communication with senior managers (Denison,1990).
In the culture of decision-making from top to bottom (India, Italy, Mexico,
Morocco and Russia are other examples), decisions are made quickly, but are
subject to change when new input or arguments appear. An American decision is
simply an agreement to continue the conversation. When people in these cultures
say that they have made a decision, the decision is not a firm commitment, but
a placeholder who can later adjust. Contrasting with what is happening in
Germany, Japan, the Netherlands and Sweden, which consider the decision a final
commitment to progress in the plan, which may lead to major confusion. If you
have worked with companies in these countries, you may have noticed that many
people seem to be involved in the decision-making process, and it takes a long
time to negotiate a group agreement. However, after making a decision, the
implementation is surprisingly fast, as the details and actors are harmonized
while a consensus is reached. Germany shows that it is a pragmatic country, has
a highly decentralized, direct and participative style of communication.
Management and supporters must demonstrate expertise and achieve the best
results of a company when management is based on it. Education plays a very
important role in German life. Primary education begins in the sixth year,
after the fourth grade there are five options for secondary education. Some
times the fate of students is decided in 10 years, as each of the 16 Member
States Germany has its own school system and controls the rules and regulations
of schools sponsored by the states. Compared with the Chinese, it is very
likely that the Germans will openly criticize their associates, talk to bosses
about problems they have with their tasks, tend to speak and write more than a
Chinese colleague. In a very low context culture, the number of information
transmitted increases. The importance of the rule becomes very important,
because without the details of the rules, individuals would not feel
comfortable with the task. This plays an important role when the manager has to
describe in detail the job description or write work expectations for
colleagues. The concept of power and authority is observed in a similar way in
Germany and the United States. Decision-making also falls within the concept of
authority that changes according to culture. In Germany, as in China, focus is
long-term decision making and is an important component of success. Since the
respect of the plan determines success and failure, leaving the plan or
uncertainty of the plan is something that the Germans are not comfortable with.
The follow-up plan, as well as the rules that maintain the plan, are so
important that they can not lead to the disruption of the entire business
function. Speaking of cultural differences in the leadership of the Italians,
one should say that the strength and cultural dynamics between the leader and
the followers was first analyzed by Niccolo 'Machiavelli (1469-1527), who wrote
about leadership and power, how to maintain it and to successfully shape it.
Mussolini claimed that leaders hold power not only by force and control, but
mainly through cultural hegemony (Fontana,1993). Cultural homogeneity thus
referring to the maintenance power leader (hegemon) dominating the followers
subordinate social classes through "belief" combination with
"restraint and compliance" (Fontana,1993: 30). Thus, positive
cultural stereotypes used universally recognized positive values related to the
good life of Italy (la dolce vita) in art, cuisine and style related to the
adjective "Tuscan" and the name of Toscana (Tuscany) or the term
"Made in Italy '' or '' Italian Style ''. The challenge now is how to deal
with the American stereotypes of the Italian car manufacturer.
4.2.3 Strategic Cultural Innovation
As a qualitative research method was adopted model portfolio and
event study. In research we used comparative analyzes, included comparing the
environmentallyportfolio for proactive firms with environmentally reactive
firms (Cohen, Fenn and Naimon 1995[15]; Edwards,1998). The researchfocuses on the automotive
industry as an experimental case study, and strategy of the company to adopt
new technologies and new product development. Before summarizing the results,
the question is, what is the relationship between the global growth of 1-2%
annually and the total sales, profit, and EBIT? For the assessment we used data
from the website Marklin[16]Total sales and production. From a total of 18 companies were
presented6 Company: VW, BMW, Daimler, FCA, Ford, and Hyundai.
The research follows the proposed Dynamic
Business Model Innovation (DBMI). The conceptual basis involves relations
between the competitive environment of the company and the global market, type
of innovative strategies and objectives that are taken. Use of the institution-based view increasing and
Strategic Management and it should be understood as a complementary perspective
to the industry- and resource-based views (Peng et al. ,2009[17]). Management Science has produced a lot of research ondesign, formulation and implementation of
strategies[18]. many definitions[19] implementation of strategies exist, some
researchers use "implementation" and "enforcement", while
others claim that these two concepts should not be treated as the same[20][21]. "Implement" is defined as the
execution, performance or completion of the task, while "make" is
defined as performance, action. In essence, the meaning is the same. Li Guohui
and Eppler [2010[22]] Propose a definition of the three
implementation strategy: 1) emphasis on process and systematic nature of
implementation; 2) emphasis on the performance of certain actions, either in
sequence or at the same time, and how these actions translate to organizational
behavior; and 3) hybrid approach to both processes and behaviors.
Implementation of the strategy is the process in which managers and employees
perform a series of decisions and tasks, which are influenced by various
organizational and environmental factors and are designed for the realization
of strategic objectives[23]. Herbiniak [9[24]] Argued that it is difficult to plan for the
strategy, but the most difficult is to implement the strategy. Similarly, Cater
Andante [10[25]] Concluded that, although 80% of organizations
have the right strategy, rarely 14% were able to implement them[26].
On the other hand Management Science has produced
a lot of research on design,
formulation and implementation of strategies[27]. many definitions[28] implementation of strategies exist, some
researchers use "implementation" and "enforcement", while
others claim that these two concepts should not be treated as the same[29][30]. "Implement" is defined as the
execution, performance or completion of the task, while "make" is
defined as performance, action. In essence, the meaning is the same. Li Guohui
and Eppler [2010[31]] Propose a definition of the three
implementation strategy: 1) emphasis on process and systematic nature of
implementation; 2) emphasis on the performance of certain actions, either in
sequence or at the same time, and how these actions translate to organizational
behavior; and 3) hybrid approach to both processes and behaviors.
Implementation of the strategy is the process in which managers and employees
perform a series of decisions and tasks, which are influenced by various
organizational and environmental factors and are designed for the realization
of strategic objectives[32]. Herbiniak [9[33]] Argued that it is difficult to plan for the
strategy, but the most difficult is to implement the strategy. Similarly, Cater
Andante [10[34]] Concluded that, although 80% of organizations
have the right strategy, rarely 14% were able to implement them[35].
In the literature review we
used the Resource Based Theory, Dynamic Capabilities theory Systems theory and
strategic theory. Conceptually, we have developed Dynamic Business Model
Innovation (DBMI) based on the "culture of innovation". The
conceptual basis involves relations between the competitive environment of the
company, the type of innovative strategies and objectives to be taken, taking
into account maximizing the impact, maximize sales, minimize costs, and development
of the production process. The business model of innovative firms is a key
driver for the determination of internal and external activities of innovative
firms. Using studies of events related to the profitability and productivity,
we analyze the factors of influence and management capability of the company in
relation to innovation, technology development, share knowledge, degree of
adjustment, adaptation and growth (Helfat and Peteraf,2003), construction,
reconfiguration (deliberately create, expand or modify) resource base (Helfat
et al. ,2007, p. 4) inside and outside of company property (Bruni and Verona
2009; Eisenhardt and Martin,2000; Teece 2007).usvojenkulturnu dimenziju (O'Clock u.
el 2003[36]str.
18)je podijeljena u 8 blokova (Build, Hold, Harvest,
Low cost, Razlikovanje, Fokus, Defender, i Prospector).
Tabela 20. Formiranje analize kulturnih dimenzija (SBU[LUM5] - linija proizvoda strategija)
|
kulturni
dimenzija
|
Poslovna
jedinica strategija
(PPJ)
|
linija
proizvoda
Strategija
(plss)
|
|||||||
|
graditi
|
držati
|
žetva
|
Jeftino
|
razlikovati
|
fokus
|
branitelj
|
tražilac zlata
|
||
|
|
visoka (IND)
|
a, h, j, l
|
b, d, f, h,
j, l
|
E, F, h, j,
l
|
e, h, j, l
|
c, d, h, j,
l
|
a, h, j, l
|
d, e, f, g,
h, j, l
|
A, C, D, h,
j, l
|
|
|
Low (PIO)
|
a, h, n
|
b, d, f, h,
n
|
E, F, h, n
|
e, h, n
|
c, d, h, n
|
a, h, n
|
d, e, f, h,
n
|
A, C, D, h,
n
|
|
|
Low (UAI)
|
a, h, o, v
|
b, d, f, h,
o, v
|
E, F, h, o,
v
|
e, h, o, v
|
c, d, h, o,
v
|
a, h, o, v
|
d, e, f, h,
o, v
|
A, C, D, h,
o, v
|
|
|
Dugoročno (LTO)
|
a, v, h, z
|
b, d, f, v, x, z
|
E, F, v, x, z
|
e, v, x, z
|
c, d, v, x, z
|
a, v, x, z
|
d, e, f, v, x, z
|
A, C, D, v, x, z
|
|
|
visoka (MAS)
|
a, h, n, j,
l
|
b, d, f, h,
ny, l
|
E, F, J, L,
h, n
|
e, h,
|
c, d, j, h,
n
|
a, h, j, l
|
d, e, f, h,
n, l
|
a, c, d, h,
j,
|
Source:
O'Clock, Priscilla, and Kevin Devine,2003[37]p. 18; Darko Milosevic,2017.
Legend:
and- focus
on market share and / or sales growth; b - maintain market share; c - new
products to market; d - Quality and / or customer service measures; e - Cost
management / efficiency measures; f - Return-based measures (eg, ROI, EVA) ; g
- tight budgetary controls; h - budgetary slack and controls; and - group-based
rewards / evaluation; j - individual-based rewards; to - preference for evaluation
relative to others; l - business-unit vs. company rewards; m - firm-based
rewards vs. business-unit; n - formula-based evaluation / rewards / bonuses;
about - subjective evaluation / rewards / bonuses; p - pay for performance /
rewards contingent; q - performance-based rewards motivating less; r - desire
for extrinsic incentive-based rewards; with - intrinsic rewards likely to be
valued; t - focus on short term financial performance *; in - past / present
orientation; in - future orientation / long planning horizons; w - preference
for immediate rewards; x - motivated by deferred compensation; y - acceptance /
desire for stretch budgets; by - preference for interactive budget process[38].
The research includes a
Formation analysis of cultural dimensions divided into the Business Unit
Strategy (SBU) and Production Line Strategy (PLS) for the six leading
automotive companies (BMW, Daimler, VW, FCA, Ford, and Huyndai) with a total of
49 brands. Business unit strategy (Build,
Hold, and Harvest) were analyzed with respect to at performance measures
"WHAT" strategy for the 6 sub-strategies "a, b, c, d, e and
f". Product line Strategy (Low cost, Differentiate, Focus, Defender, and
Prospector) were analyzed with respect to performance measures "HOW"
strategy for the 18 firms, numbered from "g" to "z". Within
each strategy, the factors are consistent in all cultural dimensions inqualitative
research analysis. Conceptually sales and production analysis is divided into (1) production and sale in countries where the companies
are based or in countries where they have factories; (2) sale in countries of
major competitors; (3) production and sales in China as the fastest growing
market; (4) EU countries; (5) third markets.Data were collected for the
period 2005 - 2015 from Market Watch [Market Watch,2016[39]] and through the published annual reports of
companies.
Results:
Competitive advantage directly linked to the the achievement of strategic
objectives which depends on availability capital resources. The companies that
are leader in costs (production) and product differentiation (based on the
technical expertise) on a specialized market segment, With a strong formal
control (budget controldepurse reports costsand, focus on production costs,
extensive market information, Regular meetings of the Committee on Development
products. frequent informal chati) encourage efficient and effective
implementation strategy and thus can achieve advantage with regard to
competitors. Thus, the combination of formal and informal control can be used
to support strategic direction. Simons (1991) is identified five different
types of control systems that managers can choose to use Interactive:
programmed control system, the system of planning gain, budgets based on
brand-income, intelligence systems and systems of human development. The
following assumptions were adopted. First, under the influence of technological
change senior managers with cleara strategic vision can choose only one type of
control system for the use of interactive. Second, senior managers use multiple
control systems interact only during a short period of crisis. Third, senior
managers without a strategic vision, do not use control systems interactively.
The high level of decentralization (Roberts,1990). encourage competition
corporate executives profit center (VW EXAMPLE). Archer & Otley (1991[40]), Have studied the company during the three-year
period in order to present a unified story of the implementation of the
strategy, as well as to move dormant paternalistic company in an aggressive
competitive company (FORD CASE).
Simons
(1987b,1990,1991,1994) presented a number of cases for the implementation and
development of a business strategy that contribute to the theory of how certain
strategies that are important can be used to distribute greater management
attention. Thus, DBMI is viewed not only as a system that monitors activities,
but ensures that the goals of the organization are achieved, plays an important
role in maintaining or changing the organizational patterns. The study looked
at the relationship between the DBMI and the innovation-based cultural
strategy. The assumption that certain nations have the ability to provide more
resources for R&D than others have supported an economic theory that
suggests that firms have sufficient incentives for innovation if they fully and
exclusively benefit from investing in the research and development of new
technologies. Below is a Business Unit strategy analysis, which includes Build,
Hold, and Harvest strategies.
Strategy „Build“
The research considers the Strategy Build, which implies a focus on market share, total production and sales in leading markets. In
order to maintain European competitiveness and sustainability in the automotive
industry, the first was presented Germany, followed by Italy[LUM6] . Formal analysis of
cultural values and differences was made. In figure 9 is presented EU Map
cluster automotive manufactures.
Figure 9. EU Map cluster automotive
manufactures
Source:
A key feature in organizations’ capacity for
learning from collaboration is a function of access to knowledge and possession
of capabilities for utilizing and building on such knowledge. The idea of
transformationas a result of thelearningprocess is present in the most recent
learning theories (Stenström,2009[41]). The RBV suggests that firms in the same
industry perform differently because they differ in their resources and
capabilities (Wernerfelt,1984[42]).
Theories such as Mezirow`s (1991[43]) theory of transformative learning, speak explicitly
about transformation, while in other theories the transformative dimension is
an implicit one. For example, cognitive constructivists describe learning as a
process of conceptual change (Vosniadou,1994[44]), while socio-cultural
theories see learning as changes in the learner`s participation in a community
of practice (Lave & Wenger,1991; Wegner,1998). Basically a process of
transformation: a change in the way in which people think and act
(Stenström,2009).The concept of explorative and exploitative learning
(March,1999[45])
contrasts entrepreneurial search for new opportunities and solutions with
adaptive and more risk-averse learning that leverages existing knowledge.
Exploration activities include search, variation, risk taking, experimentation,
play, flexibility, discovery, or innovation, while exploitation activities
include refinement, choice, production, efficiency, selection, implementation,
and execution (March,1991).
Most of the literature assumes that, if large firms as
providers of knowledge with high absorptive capacities and high R&D
expenditures are willing to modify attitudes and approaches, they will able to
engage constructively with local counterparts (Tan,2012[46]). Određene firme mogu se pojaviti kao
"tehnološki vratari 'dok su snažno povezane sa spoljnim izvorima znanja; a
može biti od ključne važnosti za prenošenje znanja dok su snažno povezane sa
spoljnim izvorima znanja; drugi su 'aktivni međusobne izmjenjivači', odnosno
karakterizira pravu ravnotežu apsorpcije i difuzije znanja, dok su drugi i
dalje se mogu pojaviti da igra ulogu "slabe međusobne izmjenjivači 's
uravnoteženom ulogu apsorbera (Lazarić u. el., 2008[47]).
Neki istraživači kao što su Byosiere i Luethge, (2004[48]);
Nonaka et al. , (2000[49])
I Rai (2001, str. 789[50])
Predlaže da "režim internalizacije je proces u kojem se oličen eksplicitno
znanje i internalizovanih kroz tumačenje znanja i pretvara se u prećutno
znanja" (str. 783).
Njemačka
Germany
has 21 of the top 100 automotive manufacturers from OEM, and generate 27% of
total turnover of 361 billion euros in 2013, and about 20 percent of the total
revenue of the German industry. Ukupna prodaja u poslednjih 2 godine raste
zahvaljujući rastu prodaje PHEV, HEV, i EV. A total of 12.5 million new cars
were registered in 2014, the first overall increase since 2007. In the fourth
quarter of 2015, total alternative fuel vehicle (AFV) registrations in the EU
continued the positive momentum (+21.1 percent), totaling 164.718 units, from
38,000 registered in 2014. The uplift was fully sustained by the electric
(+108.8 percent) and hybrid electric (+23.1 percent) markets, while the other
alternative fuels declined (-8.4 percent). Not to express much emotion and
business. People rather "live in order to work" and draw a lot of
self-esteem from their tasks. Germany as pragmatic country has the ability to
adapt traditions easily to changed conditions.
Table x. Germany Cultural dimensions
|
IDV
|
Characteristics
|
tips
|
|
high
IDV
|
|
|
|
High UAI
|
|
|
|
Low PDI
|
|
|
|
High
MAS
|
|
|
Druga pretpostavka je da …
Kvalitativno
analizirali smo 3 kompanija: Volkswagen, BMW, i Daimler. Majority voting has
companies VW (Piëch families 50,73%), Susanne Klatten hold approximately 46.6%
of the BMW share and Daimler 36,6% shareholders come from Germany and 22,9%
from USA[LUM7] .
Volkswagen
Volkswagen global
ranking is 71,05. The Volkswagen Group is one of the leading automobile
manufacturers worldwide and the largest automobile producer in Europe. Its
twelve fascinating brands offer mobility in every vehicle class to meet the
highest expectations, all around the world. Details are equally important to
create certainty that project is well-thought-out. VW ima velike distance moći,
autokratsko rukovodstvo, centraliziranom strukturom odluke na nivou štaba u
Nemačkoj, izraženo je pošovanje nadređenih, prihvanje nejednake distribucije
moći i jačanje CSR (Hofstede,1991,2001; Suchman,1995; Bagchi at. el,2015; lee
at. el. ,2013 ) ; Iako svi brendovi imaju centralizovani nadzor, svako dobija
autonomiju da maksimizira svoje konkurentske prednosti. Zbog ove centralizovane
strategije, Grupa se često smatra previsokom da reaguje na tržišne trendove.
During the first three months of this year Volkswagen Group led the global
market with 2.43 million units, up by 0.9%. At the same time the German car
maker faced its worst crisis in decades. As a result, its operations in some
key markets suffered a decline.
Sales conditions
vary between the market. Sales in North America and Western Europe increased,
however, sales in Russia (40.3% to 98,000 units), and Brazil (30.6% to 246,000
units) were recorded. Sales in China dropped by 3.9% from 1.81 to 1.74 million
units. High profitable Premium Brand Brands, Audi and Porsche, have increased
their shipments by more than 10%. Audi saw an increase of 3.8% while Porsche
had strong sales (1.7 billion euros), up 29.8%. SKODA, a popular brand in
Europe, saw an increase of 4.2%, while SEAT, sold exclusively on the European
market, increased by 8.2%. year. A downward revision of the prospects in 2016
is noticeable, and the VW Group is in a state of uncertainty whether it can
achieve its sales forecast of 10 million units. VW has been more profitable on
average, judging by net profit and EBIT ratios (4,46% in 2016, -0,61% in 2015,
and 7,87% in 2014). However, there is a decreasing trend, while BMW (7,63%) and
Daimler (6,48%) are more stable. Trend of long term debt increasing when
compared to equity. For investors, the P/E ratio of Volkswagen (10,93% in 2016)
is at an enticing level, some analysts suggesting a value play for this year,
meaning that the stock price is still at a low level but is expected to rise
(11,38% in August 2017), creating value for the investor. Volkswagen paid 7
billion euros in 2015 due to emissions scandal, which had a significant impact
on profitability. Profitability of the company has recovered slightly but is
still far from average especially in terms of ROA (0,3% in 2016) and ROE (1,37%
in 2016). Prihod od prodaje i profita porasla je prvenstveno jer je Evro
depresirao u smislu američkog dolara, sa oko 1 evra na 1,35 dolara (2014), To
1.10 US dollars (2015). Car sales dealership organization was reduced from
5,207,000 units in 2014, to 5.09 million units in 2015. Audi and Skoda are the
leading brands which are exported to China.
BMW
BMW global
ranking is 73.36. This timeline shows the global earnings before interest and
tax (EBIT) of the BMW Group from 2006 to 2016. In 2016, the BMW Group had a
global EBIT of 9.3 billion euros, which was a deacrease of 207 million euros
from the previous year. Figure 10 (Appendix) show Global EBIT of the BMW Group
from 2006 to 2016 (in%). BMW recorded the record-high sales in the unit,
revenues and EBIT. EBIT rose by 20.6% (14.3% in 2014) in at 2.52 billion euros
(9.1 billion in 2014), while net profit increased by 9.2% to EUR 5.8 billion.
Globally and sales increased by 7.9% (20.6% in 2014, a total of sold 1.66
million units) to 2.52 billion euros compared to 2014 (2.12 million units), and
for 7.9% compared to 2014/2013. china is the largest market of the BMW. In
North America increased by 4.0% to 482,000 units, of which the United States
increased by 5.4% to 397,000 units. The Germany was recorded growth of the
fifth of 1% to 272,000 units, the first increase in the last two years.
Daimler
Daimler global ranking
is 69.87. Daimler sales increased by 9.6% y / y to 94.1 billion euros, EBIT
rose by 2.7% to 8.61 billion euros. Consolidated EBIT moves with an increase of
2.7%, because Daimler in 2013 a profit of around 3.2 billion euros from the
sale of shares. In regional comparison, sales in 2015 in the US is a growth of:
8.1% to 344.000 units (12.8% to 253.000 units in 2014), Asia-Pacific region
growth of 13.4% to 329.000 units (China growth of 7.8% to 188,000 units,
Japan's growth of 30.8% to 44,000 units). Mercedes-Benz sales in Europe rose to
607,000 vehicles with an increase of 5.7% compared to 2014 (UK growth of 18.8%
to 95,000 units, Italy growth of 6.6% to 38,000 units, Spain growth of 10.2% to
20,000 units).
The unit's sales in
Germany fell by 3.5% per year, to 280,000 units. Daimler has achieved new
record sales of 2.55 million units in 2014, primarily due to sales growth of
22.6% on the Chinese market (293,000 units), which has significantly
contributed to annual sales growth, increase to 511,000 units in 2017, double the
result from 2013. The sales share of China's market in the total sales of the
global Daimler in 2013 will increase to 21.8% in 2017 from 13.8%. So, for
Daimler Chinese market becomes larger market than the US market and the German
market. Chart 12 shows the total output for all brands that are part of the
analysis.
Chart 12. Total sales
by brand
Source: Author
Darko Milosevic; Table x.
Note: VW, BMW, Daimler, FCA, Ford, Hyundai ukupna
prodaja
The results show that countries have recorded
slight growth in EV and HEV production. Japan had the highest growth in the
production of electric cars with over 4,169,810, as much as 85% of total sales
compared to other PM countries. The US is in second place with the production
of 1,366,620 vehicles. China ranked third. Positive growth in production (BMW,
VW and Mercedes) is noticeable, which means that the national characteristics
of these countries have a positive impact on the adoption of new technologies
and products. Kada je ponašanje u skladu
sa društveno izgrađenih sistema normi, vrijednosti i uvjerenja, tvrtke imaju
veći ugled i lakše dobiti potrebne resurse (Suchman 1995). Smanjenje
nacionalnih emisija CO2 ima pozitivan učinak na odnos između prediktori
kulturnih i uticaja na životnu sredinu kompanije. Niska distanca moći i
korelira s potrošačima donošenje odluke o kupovini na osnovu informacija koje
ima jasne implikacije za oglašavanje. Ovi argumenti podržavaju nekoliko
prethodnih studija o odnosu između inovacija i iniciranje energije na daljinu
(Shane 1993[52][13];
Herbig i Dunphy 1998[53][14];
Kaasa i praksa, 2010).
Grafikon 12 Ukupna
proizvodnja po zemljama
Izvor: Autor
Darko Milošević; Tabela x.
Napomena: Brazil, Meksiko, Kina, Japan,
Francuska, Njemačka, Srbija, Poljska, Slovačka
German high
individualism leads to higher income and productivity only through the faster
absorption of existing technologies, which is in line with Fogli's claim and
Veldkamp (2012[54]). We can see that Germany has the most highly score
in terms of professionalism
Italy
Significant regional differences in economic structure and development in
Italy have prompted many researchers to look for reasons for such unequal
development. Some of these studies have taken into account cultural and
economic factors. Stemmermann (1996), in his analysis of Italian economic
culture, considers significant regional differences that encourage him to use
"regional economic zones" instead of research units. He defines a
"zone of economic style" as a region that is part of the national
economy and which has specific functional and coordination mechanisms which are
however integrated into the national economic system. We can see that FCA
(Figure 9) bases production in large part in Italy, in addition to production
in Turkey, Poland, and Serbia. Other automakers have a greater dispersion of
factories than FCA located in Europe.
Globalization and regionalization quickly changed the culture of Italy and
its leaders. The links between the dynamics of 'masculinity', 'uncertainty',
and 'power distance' are visible in some Italian leaders in the United States
often associated with conservative political attitudes. Masculinity is
positively related to innovation, the acceptance of new technologies and products.
Sergio Marchionne, Italian and Canadian businessman and CEO of FCA Group,
represent this new type of Italian leadership. As he acknowledges, the question
of the revival of the Italian economy is linked to a joint and globally
competent leadership:
“From the first day I
recognized that Fiat had a management problem. Traditionally, all important
decisions in Italian companies are made by the Director General. It probably
worked well as a management model in the 1950s, but today it's pretty unsustainable.
A business like Fiat is too big and complicated for just one man who will
lead”. (Marchionne,2008)
Italy has formal supervision, teamwork and an open
management style. Italian has aversion of being controlled and told what to do.
There are not comfortable in ambiguous situations, and when they thinking they
have contradiction between all the existing norms and procedures and the fact.
High tendency to cynicism and pessimism. Emotions are so powerfully that
individuals cannot keep them inside and must express them to others, especially
with the use of body language. Truth depends very much on situation, context
and time. Working environment is the place where every Italian can reach
his/her success, competition among colleagues for making a career can be very
strong. They show status symbols such as a beautiful car, a big house, a yacht
and travels.
Table x. Italy Cultural dimension
|
DV
|
Characteristics
|
Tips
|
|
High
IDV
|
|
|
|
High
UAI
|
|
|
|
Low
PDI
|
|
|
|
High
MAS
|
|
|
No comments :
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.