Haier Company Essay Example

Haier Company Paper The conflict may occur in teams when JVC tries to integrate the staff from partners. There are many reasons for it. Some of the more important ones relate to limited resources, communication problems, differences in interests and goals, different perceptions and attitudes, and lack of clarity about responsibilities (Sanchez, et al. , 2000). A case about Haier Company will help to illustrate it. Haier, Chinese appliance maker, has the first Chinese major manufacturing plant in the U. S. It is slowly but clearly importing its corporate philosophy and culture to its Camden, South Carolina, plant. The upper management and the technical group is Chinese and the operating employees are American. The American employees at plant are majority at the plant. The Hair Chinese group is using the 6-S concept, which is an adaptation of Japanese quality control concept (Konopaske and Ivancevich, 2004). The U. S. employees prefer to stick photos on the wall. This comes into conflict with one S of the 6-S concept, seisoh (keep the workplace clean). Haier pays more attention to quality, this behaviour is not permit. With communication, they all agree that the photos can be showed out when not at work. Another conflict in the team is about the punishment. The punishment is let the employee with the worst performance stand on the big footprint to criticize himself loudly. In Americans view, it infringes their rights. In this condition, Haier changes the punishment to encouragement. They let the best employee stand on the big footprint and speak out they are the best. The conflicts in the case are caused by different cultural habits, and attitudes. The case presents how Haier solve the conflict and blended its corporate style to one of its oversees plants. We can see from the case, communication is quite important in the team. With communication, we can understand each other better, and find out the reason of conflict. In this way, we can build a better inter-personal relationship, and enhance trust, too. And building trust between the partners through encouraging personal relationships between the staff, who have to work together for the JVC to succeed: senior managers, functional managers, engineers, and technical staff is to establishing the right one (Yoshino and Rangan, 1995), the one coherent team. We will write a custom essay sample on Haier Company specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Haier Company specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Haier Company specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Although JVC has independent equity, it cant live without the parent company. The intervention of parent company to JVC is the control. Generally, there are two forms of control: direct control and indirect control (Johnson, J. L. , et al 2001). Direct parent control is similar to dominant management. The parents attempt to influence activities or decisions in a way consistent with its own interests and expectations. Indirect control is based on the IJVs need for consultation with the parent firm, similar to shared management (Johnson, J. L. , et al 2001). The control bases on the parents equity position. The fifty-fifty ownership is a common form. These JVCs are usually shared management. When one partner holds a majority shares, the JVC seems to apply dominant management or split management. Bleeke and Ernst (2002) indicate the fifty-fifty equity JVCs are not as successful as the split ownership JVCs in which one partner has majority shares. 50-50 ownership can build trust through the mutual success, but it indeed has many problems. The case about control in the Dowty-Sema JV (Faulkner 1995) shows the problem clearly. Dowty-Sema was a JV set up by the two eponymous companies with 50:50 equity in 1982 to provide command and control systems for the British navy. Dowty provided the hardware and Sema provided the software. The venture company was largely a shop window for tendering, in that the 100-odd staff were all assigned to the payrolls of one parent or the other, dependent on their function. Software engineers were assigned to Sema and hardware engineers to Dowty. Control was exercised in the following way. A project was divided up between the two companies and 90 percent of it was carried out in the parent companies, leaving only 10 percent, principally project management, for the venture company to do. Dowty controlled contract negotiation and administration and Sema controlled finance. Each parent appointed its own project teams, and an element of competition and tension developed between them. The board membership was 50% from each partner. Difficult decisions led to very lengthy meetings by a committee of the board. The venture grew to i 50 million sales but unclear control meant that deadlines were missed and the venture made no profit. From the case, we can see the inefficient management of 50-50 equity JVC. But it doesnt means 50-50 equity JVC always perform worse than other form management. It depends on the relationship with partners and good communication between JVC and parents companies. And no matter what kind of control of parents companies, the constant presence of a parent interferes with the development of organisational cohesiveness within theJVC. The activity of organisational learning is the way for the company to gain knowledge for its partner. These activities affect the prospect of JVC. The communication with parent companies to transfer technology from them to JVC is one of the key success factors. The collaborative attitude allows for JVC learning by both partners and is likely to be more productive over the long run. There are three levels of organisational learning: technical, systemic, and strategic (Child, J. , et al. 2005). Collaboration with partner organisations offers a potential to learn at all three levels. It can provide access to techniques, facilitate the transfer of new systems, and enhance a firms ability to undertake new strategic initiatives (Child, J. , et al. 2005). The case about GM-Suzuki joint venture can be used to explain the learning and skills transfer to JVC. CAMI Automotive, Inc. , was set up to manufacture low-end cars for the U. S. market. The plant, run by Suzuki management, produces the Geo Metro/Suzuki Swift, the smallest, highest gas-mileage GM car sold in North America, as well as the Geo Tracker/Suzuki Sidekick spot utility vehicle. Through CAMI, Suzuki has obtained access to GMs dealer network and an expanded market for parts and components. GM avoided the cost of developing low-end cars and gained models it needed to help revitalize the lower end of the Chevrolet product line and to improve GMs average fuel economy rating. And once the CAMI factory reaches full capacity, GM took it as a test bed for to learn Japanese management of work teams, flexible assembly lines, and quality control (Bleeke and Ernst, 2002). The case indicates if the partners both bring specific strengths, both will benefit. JVC maintain relations with parent company to improve their performance. In the CAMI case, JVC run smoothly and reach the full capacity. From the parent organisations view, JVC is a great place to learn from partners. When we discuss learning and skills transfer, the intellectual property rights (IPR) is an important issue in an ongoing JVC. Legal protections go only so far. In addition to IPR protection of their own, the new technology and intelligence in JVC should be identified the ownership. Three structural tactics can protect IPR successfully (Bleeke and Ernst, 2002). First is to separate sensitive technologies from JVC. For instance, GE modularized the production of high value-added engine-core components to protect its know-how from Snecma. Second, some companies centralise contact points between the JVC and the parents. It is easier in highly centralised companies like Japanese businesses, than in more decentralised firms, like Western ones. Third, they combine complementary strengths and can not succee without the other. Toshiba and Motorola would not keep their strategic position if either terminated the alliance, because the two companies have such a high level of interdependence in the form of shared factories, distribution, and complementary specialised skills (Bleeke and Ernst, 2002). JVC success is often an ambiguous notion (Dussauge and Garrette, 1999): should attention focus on the success of the JVC itself-i. e. , its survival, duration, growth, and profits-or should it focus on the positive or negative consequences of the alliance for each of the parent companies? It is a dilemma, parent-local management conflict. Johnson, J. L. , et al. (2001) indicates there exits the logic that parental control of the IJV keeps IJV management loyal to the parent and focused on the parents needs. In such cases, although partner-partner conflict may result, control should reduce any. On the other hand, the characteristics of JVC can create an independence. JVC is not only separate legal entity, it is also a new established organisation, staffed by entrepreneurial managers, and quickly develops an entrepreneurial culture. In such cases, a prevailing climate of we versus them may lead to increased parent-local management conflict when parents intervene in IJV operations. There is a case about a JVC. The aim of foreign partner is to develop its business in the targeted country and the goal of the local partner is to derive adequate profits from its investment. The profitability of the JVC is strongly affected by decisions made by the parent companies. When the strategic direction of parent companies has changed, it affects the performance of JVC significantly. A typical example of this is when a multinational parent decides to limit the exports of the JVC to a neighboring country because that local market can be more profitably supplied via a wholly owned subsidiary confronted with excess capacity. The consequence of such a decision is decreased sales and profits for the JVC (Dussauge and Garrette, 1999). But in another way, they may offer opportunities for JVC to propose new activities which will contribute to its long-term development. We can see the importance to maintain relations with the parent companies from the case obviously. The performances and strategy direction of parent companies even determine the JVC survive or not.

The French Revolution, Its Outcome, and Legacy

The French Revolution, Its Outcome, and Legacy The outcome of the French Revolution, which began in 1789 and lasted for more than a decade, had numerous social, economic, and political effects not just in France but also in Europe and beyond.   Prelude to Revolt By the late 1780s, the French monarchy was on the brink of collapse. Its involvement in the American Revolution had left the regime of King Louis XVI bankrupt and desperate to raise funds by taxing the wealthy and the clergy. Years of bad harvests and rising prices for basic commodities led to social unrest among the rural and urban poor. Meanwhile, the growing middle class (known as the bourgeoisie) was chafing under an absolute monarchical rule and demanding political inclusion. In 1789  the king called for a meeting of the Estates-General- an advisory body of clergy, nobles, and bourgeoisie that had not convened in more than 170 years- to garner support for his financial reforms. When the representatives assembled in May of that year, they couldnt agree on how to apportion representation. After two months of bitter debate, the king ordered delegates locked out of the meeting hall. In response, they convened on June 20 on the royal tennis courts, where the bourgeoisie, with the support of many clergy and nobles, declared themselves the new governing body of the nation, the National Assembly, and  vowed to write a new constitution. Although Louis XVI agreed  in principle to these demands, he began plotting to undermine the Estates-General, stationing troops throughout the country. This alarmed the peasants and middle class alike, and on July 14, 1789, a mob attacked and occupied the Bastille prison in protest, touching off a wave of violent demonstrations nationwide. On Aug. 26, 1789, the National Assembly  approved the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. Like the Declaration of Independence in the United States, the French declaration guaranteed all citizens equal, enshrined property rights and free assembly, abolished the absolute power of the monarchy and established representative government. Not surprisingly, Louis XVI refused to accept the document, triggering another massive public outcry. The Reign of Terror For two years, Louis XVI and the National Assembly co-existed uneasily as reformers, radicals, and monarchists all jockeyed for political dominance. In April 1792 the Assembly declared war on Austria. But it quickly went badly for France, as Austrian ally Prussia joined in the conflict; troops from both nations soon occupied French soil. On Aug. 10, French radicals took the royal family prisoner at Tuileries Palace. Weeks later, on Sept. 21, the National Assembly abolished the monarchy entirely and declared France a republic. King Louis and Queen Marie-Antoinette were tried hastily and found guilty of treason. Both would be beheaded in 1793, Louis on Jan. 21 and Marie-Antoinette on Oct. 16. As the Austro-Prussian war dragged on, the French government and society, in general, were mired in turmoil. In the National Assembly, a radical group of politicians seized control and began implementing reforms, including a new national calendar and the abolition of religion. Beginning in September 1793, thousands of French citizens, many from the middle and upper classes, were arrested, tried, and executed during a wave of violent repression aimed at the Jacobins opponents, called the Reign of Terror.   The Reign of Terror would last until the following July when its Jacobin leaders were overthrown and executed. In its wake, former members of the National Assembly who had survived the oppression emerged and seized power, creating a conservative backlash to the ongoing French Revolution. Rise of Napoleon On Aug. 22, 1795, the National Assembly approved a new constitution that established a representative system of government with a bicameral legislature similar to that in the U.S. For the next four years, the French government would be beset by political corruption, domestic unrest, a weak economy, and ongoing efforts by radicals and monarchists to seize power. Into the vacuum strode French Gen. Napoleon Bonaparte. On Nov. 9, 1799, Bonaparte backed by the army overthrew the National Assembly and declared the French Revolution over. Over the next decade and a half, he could consolidate power domestically as he led France in a series of military victories across much of Europe, declaring himself emperor of France in 1804. During his reign, Bonaparte continued the liberalization that had begun during the Revolution, reforming its civil code, establishing the first national bank, expanding public education, and investing heavily in infrastructures like roads and sewers. As the French army conquered foreign lands, he brought these reforms, known as the Napoleonic Code, with him, liberalizing property rights, ending the practice of segregating Jews in ghettos, and declaring all men equal. But Napoleon would eventually be undermined by his own military ambitions and be defeated in 1815 by the British at the Battle of Waterloo. He would die in exile on the Mediterranean island of St. Helena in 1821. Revolutions Legacy and Lessons With the advantage of hindsight, its easy to see the positive legacies of the French Revolution. It established the precedent of representational, democratic government, now the model of governance in much of the world. It also established liberal social tenets of equality among all citizens, basic property rights, and separation of church and state, much as did the American Revolution.   Napoleons conquest of Europe spread these ideas throughout the continent, while further destabilizing the influence of the Holy Roman Empire, which would eventually collapse in 1806. It also sowed the seeds for later revolts in 1830 and 1849 across Europe, loosening or ending the monarchical rule that would lead to the creation of modern-day Germany and Italy later in the century, as well as sow the seeds for the Franco-Prussian war and, later, World War I. Sources Editors of the Encyclopaedia Brittanica. French Revolution. 7 February 2018.History.com staff. French Revolution. History.com.The Open University staff. French Revolution. Open.edu.Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media staff. Legacies of the Revolution. chnm.gmu.edu.