MM Co. Holds Case study
Since MM Co.
Holds its consistency in the industry for 80 years of operation, rendering good qualities of their products and services satisfying the needs of their customers and clients. 2) Taking risk in expanding of subsidiaries in the global market. Recruiting thousands of employees to be part of the company. Insaneness: 1) No formal organizational chart was formulated in company. ) Not advisable to put word ” AUTONOMOUS” which is subject to its own laws or regulation only.
3) Formulating too much teams assign to focus in Europe without taking the capabilities of each teams. Opportunities: Continues success for the operation of MM Company in the future with the right decision in managing the company itself. Threats: Misleading of management may cause to conflicts in the company itself.
Strengths strong market position with diversified products strong history and experience (80 yr) globally renowned( created international subsidiaries) strong growth and development outside USA great return of investment seen in 1990 eve big pool of manpower (87,000) worldwide Innovations happening from international division to international subsidiary then to global product company structure Opportunities could extend business in other parts of the world can support regional subsidiaries having created European business center advantage over competitors having own business center that will oversee product divisions Insaneness Organization structure kept on changing since the time it it created overseas subsidiaries in 1950 Lack of Corporate long term strategy and policy since subsidiary Nas allowed to substitute products from USA when sales volume is high which could affect product quality No Country official was designated to manage different subsidiaries to make reporting to home office easier at first Threats Local competitors may have cheaper products Culture in local subsidiary may affect strategies of home office.
Issue of integrating corporate strategies and policies down to lowest level of subsidiary. La.
Whether the historical changes in design CNN be explained by changing circumstances. The demand of growth and development led to the necessity of hanged in organization structure to respond on the need of global coordination and local responsiveness. From a company only in USA, it expanded to internal divisions. But as local responsiveness and independence were getting high, it had to change to INternational subsidiary structure. THe competition by Japanese led them to emphasize more on global coordination of their product in which they shifted to global product company structure.
They are using now transnational company structure in which in which they integrate local competitiveness and culture with outwork of independent resources and competencies.
1 b. Whether its current design take note of the best practice for global companies. LLC. Whether it fits the particular strategies which mm is pursuing particularly its commitment to constant innovations. Yes .
Do you feel that other organizations have lessons to learn about organizational design from MM? Why? YES. When organizations grow , a strategic planning which includes the innovation of organization structure should also be considered in order to define, implement , monitor and evaluate business processes in a systematic manner.
