Organizational Change and Development in Ford Motor Company
The aspects of organizational change and development are mandatory in any organization. Management has to devise ways of ensuring that the organization is compliant with the current trends. It is imperative to ascertain the efficiency and the growing concern of the organization (Anderson, 2012). The appropriate levels of efficiency have to be evident in all companies, and it is necessary for the company to guarantee its’ future at all times. This leads to an in-depth analysis of two themes. These themes encompass corporate governance and corporate sustainability. Corporate governance consolidates the backgrounds of trust, ethics, morality, profound quality, and certainty. In addition, it deals with the prevalent problems in a given society. Corporate governance addresses the issues that pertain to the government, the public, and the professional entity (Aras & Crowther, 2008). Nevertheless, corporate sustainability deals with establishing the future of the organization. More intently, cooperate sustainability scrutinizes the effects of present actions on the future of the company (Beer & Nohria, 2001). It is necessary for a company to comply with the prevalent trends in a specific locale.
General Analysis of Ford Motor Company
This study shall investigate Ford Motor Company. Henry Ford consolidated the organization in the twentieth century. The company began its operations in the United States, and it later expanded its activities to the Canadian region. Later on, the company diversified its operations in the whole world (Bradford & Burke, 2005). The company flourishes in The United States, and it attains high profitability levels. However, Ford Motor Company encounters numerous challenges in these unstable financial times. The company flourishes in the United States, but it performs poorly in Europe, Asia, and Africa. The company has not been successful in ascertaining the features of diversification. One of the aspects of cooperate governance is ensuring that the company’s products are diversified (Buono & Jamieson, 2010). In addition, Ford’s competitors including Tesco and General Motors have managed to attain high levels of growth. Ford Motor Company has to be vigilant on matters that pertain to the future of the company. Corporate sustainability deals with the issues that pertain to the company’s future. Presently the company is stable, but this does not mean the company will remain fruitful in the future (Colwill, 2012). It is imperative for Ford management to establish a framework that caters to the aspects of cooperate governance and corporate sustainability.
Cooperate Governance in Ford Motor Company
Improvement of Profitability Levels. The main objective of any organization is to ensure that the profitability levels increase in all accounting periods. The management has to plan, and it has to ensure that the set targets are achievable (Daily & Huang, 2014). More intently, the management has to budget for the operations of the company. The principle point of a budget is to contrast the accomplished results with the targeted results. The costs have to diminish, and this will ensure that the company’s profitability levels increase at all times (Griffiths & Petrick, 2001). Ford Motor Company incurs many costs in the production process. The automobiles produced by Ford are spectacular but they do not correspond with the tastes and preferences of the target markets. This is the situation in Europe, Asia, and Africa. The Ford management should ensure that the company’s stability is guaranteed at all times. Ford Motor Company does not manage to make high profits outside the United States locale (Harris & Crane, 2002). Comparing Ford with Toyota, the automobiles produced by Toyota have a more competitive edge in Europe, Asia, and Africa.
Cooperate governance has to cater to matters that pertain to finances. Currently, Ford Motor Company has a committee that addresses the issues that pertain to finance. The committee always encounters many challenges in some of the market segments (Jones & Kramar, 2010). The levels of profits outside the United States are not sufficient. Ford Motor Company has to devise ways of raising the profitability levels in all regions. In addition, Ford Motor Company should cut down on production costs. Some customers may prefer a luxurious car, but others may opt for a simple car (Kavita, 2005). The company has to ensure that the customer satisfaction levels are appropriate at all times. The profitability levels will depend on the volume of sales, and if the sales volumes are low, the profitability levels will diminish. Ford Motor Company has to revamp its corporate governance structures, and this will ascertain the profitability levels of the company at all times.
Marketing Strategy. Corporate governance has to incorporate the aspects of a marketing strategy. Ford Motor Company has to ensure that the competitive environment is favorable at all times (Lemasters & Nieminem, 2001). More intently, Ford should be completely aware of the strategies of General Motors, Chrysler, and Tesco. In the past, the government has bailed General Motors and Chrysler out of a financial crisis. Ford Motor Company has never utilized the financial assistance of the U.S. government. Nevertheless, this is not an assurance that the company will always flourish (Morse & Buss, 2008). General Motors and Chrysler might reformulate their strategies, and this might adversely affect Ford. The company has to ensure that it can cope with the features of the competitive environment. In other regions, Toyota has obtained higher profitability levels than Ford Motor Company (Parkin, 2010). It is necessary for Ford to diversify its operations outside the North American region.
Ford Motor Company experiences many problems with its supply chain management system. For example, the automobiles produced by Ford have not penetrated into some segments of the Asian market (Pasmore & Woodman, 2008). In addition, the regions outside North America act as Ford’s secondary market segments. Ford management has to ensure that it concentrates on all the market segments in the appropriate way. In addition, Ford Motor Company has numerous suppliers, and this may turn out to be disadvantageous to the company. Management has to devise ways of retaining reliable and efficient suppliers (Peck, 2005). There is no need to contact many suppliers who may disappoint the company at the end. The marketing strategy includes ascertaining the stock management system of the company. Ford has to avail the automobiles needed in the market at the right time and place. In order for this to be possible, the company has to devise ways of motivating the suppliers (Poole, 2000). More intently, collective decision-making is essential. The management has to consult the vendors of the company before making any decisions that may affect them.
A multinational company has to launch new ventures in different countries. Ford is a multinational company, and the aspects of cooperate governance come in handy. The company has to examine the automobile market in a specific country before it launches any products. Ford Motor Company has to make sure that the response of the target market will be favorable (Rainey, 2009). In addition, The Company has to examine if the specific region embraces multinational companies that deal with automobiles. For example, if Ford Motor Company wants to launch its’ ventures in China, it has to scrutinize every detail that pertains to the Chinese locale. These details include demographic aspects, cultural beliefs, and existing multinational companies in the area (Seleshi, 2000). Ford cannot be successful if it ignores the tastes and preferences of the target market. Formulating a market entrance strategy is mandatory especially when launching investment projects in different countries. The issues of corporate governance closely relate to the aspects of a marketing strategy, and the company has to establish a framework that caters to the marketing strategy.
Human resource policies. The aspects of corporate governance incorporate the features of a human resource framework (Sims, 2006). Ford has to ensure that it embraces the appropriate human resource procedures. The company has to ascertain the employees’ competence at all times. The automobile industry is a very dynamic sector, and new technologies emerge every day. Ford cannot comply with the current market trends if it does not train its’ employees (Smith & Graetz, 2011). Ford employees have to undergo training at all times. Creativity and innovation are required from all employees. The management has to formulate new plans and innovative tasks for the Ford personnel. The employee representatives have to be included in all procedures. Thus, it is necessary for the employees to possess very high levels of creativity and innovation (Smith & Rayment, 2010). The employees are the ones who implement the new technologies, and involving them in the formulation process is mandatory. Corporate governance practices have to incorporate the aspects of employees’ creativity and innovation levels.
Collective decision-making is a mandatory requirement in all organizations. Many managers are notorious for being the shareholders’ sycophants. In addition, many managers only pay attention to the preferences of the company’s shareholders (Suzanne & Ellen, 2009). This is very dangerous, and the management at Ford Motor Company should not fall into this trap. Ford has to integrate all the stakeholders in the decision-making procedures. The employees directly influence the execution levels of the organization. If the employees feel isolated they may opt to down their tools (Todnem, 2008). Assuming this happens at Ford, the effects will be very devastating. Management has to ensure that the employees participate in making the decisions that affect their welfare. The employees’ opinions have to be of much importance to the Ford management. In addition, the employees need a representative in the decision-making frameworks of the organization (Wilkinson, Hill & Gollan, 2001). The aspects of corporate governance include involving the employees in the decision-making processes of the organization.
Reward frameworks are of extreme vitality in any association. Ford Motor Company deals with matters of manufacturing and assembly. The employees at Ford endure high levels of work stress, and if they lack adequate compensation, the effects may be adverse (Vogelsang, 2013). In addition, the company deals with machinery that may act as a risk to a specific employee. The employees have to get allowances because they adapt to high levels of risk while performing their duties. Reward mechanisms have to be present, and this will aid the management in motivating the employees (Valarie, 2009). If the employees are not motivated, their productivity levels will instantly diminish. As a result, the company will not achieve the set objectives. Employees are very influential in all corporate setups, and they determine whether the company flourishes or not. Corporate governance practices include formulating a rewarding mechanism that caters to the employees’ needs.
Corporate Social Responsibility. Corporate governance has to cater to matters that pertain to charitable activities. Every company has a progressive duty of supporting and helping the natives in their area of operation (Wilson, 2006). In addition, the company has to focus on ecological issues that affect society. Ford Motor Company has to design automobiles that will cater to environmental issues. For example, the automobiles produced by Ford should not emit poisonous gasses into the atmosphere. All organizations have a responsibility to protect the environment, and an organization that ignores this fact has a bad reputation (Yaeger & Sorensen, 2009). Ford Motor Company has to participate in activities that will safeguard the environmental resources.
Ford Motor Company must be avid to help others. More intently, the company has to be cognizant of ecological issues at all times. Ford has to ensure that it grasps the concepts that relate to the social frameworks. The company has launched projects that cater to social needs in specific locales (Wilson, 2006). For example, in the U.K. Ford initiated a trust that deals with education grants and loans. This trust provides the tuition fees of many students studying in the United Kingdom. However, the company should diversify this trust. The U.K. is a first-world country, and it is imperative for Ford to expand the trust services to the Latin American Region, Africa, and Asia (Valarie, 2009). Ford Motor Company emerges as one of the world’s most ethical organizations in many award ceremonies, and many companies do not feature in these awards. Although the company has allocated significant resources to social activities it needs to diversify its’ trust funds. Corporate social responsibility is part of corporate governance, and the company has to ensure that it participates in charitable events at all times.
Corporate Sustainability in Ford Motor Company
Compliance with the Customers’ Needs. All companies have to be vigilant on matters that pertain to customers’ tastes and preferences. For example, in the automobile industry, there is a need for electric cars. Many customers feel that gas prices are extremely high, and they need to evade these high costs (Sims, 2006). In order for Ford Motor Company to be relevant in the market, it has to design automobiles that utilize electrical energy or wind energy. In the future customers may opt to purchase cars that are independent of fuel. Ford Motor Company has to address the current needs of its’ clientele. However, it has to do this while considering the aspects that will emerge in the future (Rainey, 2009). Corporate sustainability is concerned with ascertaining what is to come for the organization.
The company has to ensure that the automobiles produced in the future are safer for all customers. Safety is of extreme necessity in the car business. Safeguards that address safety needs have to be evident in all automobiles (Parkin, 2010). For example, Ford should design cars that are stable at all times. Automobiles have to be able to attain a very high velocity, and the high levels of velocity should not have an adverse effect on the car’s stability. In the future, the customer will scrutinize these features, and Ford Motor Company has to formulate strategies that are in line with the needs of the customer in the future (Anderson, 2012). Corporate sustainability incorporates compliance with the current and future needs of the customers.
Compliance with Government Policies. Compliance with government regulations is obligatory for any association. The government enacts various laws, and Ford Motor Company has to adhere to these laws. These laws may pertain to taxation, environmental issues, and energy (Colwill, 2012). In addition, many governments have plans in place that will ensure the utilization of alternative sources of energy. For example, the U.S. government recently launched plans to diversify its sources of energy (Harris & Crane, 2002). The crude oil market has become unstable, and many governments do not want the instability to affect their operations.
This is a challenge to Ford Motor Company, and Ford has to comply with the prevalent trends. There have been concerns in the past that the company manufactures automobiles that have high fuel consumption (Bradford & Burke, 2005). It is necessary for Ford to revamp its’ designs, and this will ensure that it is compliant with the set government regulations. Corporate sustainability has to cater for matters that pertain to government regulations. If Ford Motor Company does not address these issues, the future of the company might not be guaranteed.
Environmental regulations are of extreme vitality. The millennium development goals focus more on environmental conservation issues (Poole, 2000). This means that environmental issues are prevalent on the whole planet. Ford Motor Company has to produce automobiles that will not emit toxic substances into the atmosphere. Many governments are vigilant on matters pertaining to the depletion of the ozone layer and global warming (Suzzane & Ellen, 2009). Ford has to ensure that it participates in the process of conserving the environment. Corporate sustainability deals with safeguarding the future of the company at all times. If Ford Motor Company is not vigilant on matters that pertain to environmental conservation, then the company’s future is not an assurance (Pasmore & Woodman, 2008). The Ford management has to cater to corporate sustainability issues at all times.
Innovation and Creativity. Technological advancements are prevalent in all states, and companies that are not innovative may have it rough (Todnem, 2008). New inventions in the automobile industry are evident at all times. Many manufacturers produce automobiles that address the particular issues that face society. Ford Motor Company has to be vigilant on matters pertaining to creativity and innovation (Parkin, 2010). The company has to manufacture automobiles that correspond to the consumer’s current needs. Many consumers prefer cars that have the capacity to attain high velocities, and a car that retains the appropriate levels of stability (Morse & Buss, 2008). In addition, consumers prefer cars that guarantee their safety in case of any misfortunes.
The automobiles produced by Ford have to comply with these specifications. Innovation is all about launching products that address the needs of society (Jones & Kramar, 2010). Moreover, creativity focuses on launching new inventions that will influence society in a positive way. At the central point of corporate sustainability lies creativity and innovation (Jackson & Shams, 2006). It is necessary for Ford Motor Company to ensure that it exhibits high levels of creativity and innovation. These practices will ensure that the company is always fruitful.
It is necessary for a company to comply with the prevalent trends in a specific locale. Corporate governance and corporate sustainability have to address the current issues that are predominant in a particular region (Daily & Huang, 2014). Ford Motor Company is a multinational entity, and it has to exhibit compliance with the aspects of corporate governance and corporate sustainability. These two themes are of utmost vitality to all companies. Management curriculums have to emphasize the importance of these two themes (Sims, 2006). This will ensure that all managers have an unshakable academic foundation, and organizational change and development will be successful in all company
Anderson, D. L. (2012). Organization development: The process of leading organizational change. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
Aras, G. & Crowther, D. (2008). Governance and sustainability. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 46 (3), pp.433-448. doi:10.1108/00251740810863870 [Accessed: 28 Mar 2014].
Beer, M., & Nohria, N. (2001). Breaking the code of change. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.
Bradford, D. L., & Burke, W. W. (2005). Reinventing Organization Development: New Approaches to Change in Organizations. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Buono, A. F., & Jamieson, D. (2010). Consultation for organizational change. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub.
Colwill, D. A. (2012). Educating the scholar practitioner in organization development. Charlotte, N.C: Information Age Pub.
Daily, B. F. & Huang, S. (2014). Achieving Sustainability through Attention to Human Resource Factors in Environmental Mangement. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 21 (12), pp. pp.1539-1552. Retrieved from: http://emerald- library.com/ft [Accessed: 28 Mar 2014].
Griffiths, A. & Petrick, J. A. (2001). Corporate Architectures for Sustainability. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 21 (12), pp. 1573-1585. Retrieved from: http://www.emerald-library.com/ft [Accessed: 28 Mar 2014].
Harris, L. C. & Crane, A. (2002). The Greening of Organizational Culture: Management views on the depth degree and diffusion of change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 15 (3), pp. 214-234. doi: 10.110809534810210429273 [Accessed: 28 Mar 2014].
Jackson, P., & Shams, M. (2006). Developments in work and organizational psychology: Implications for international business. Amsterdam [u.a.: Elsevier.
Jones, G. & Kramar, R. (2010). CSR and the Building of Leadership Capability. Journal of Global Responsibility, 1 (2), pp. 250-259. doi: 10.1108/20412561011079380 [Accessed: 28 Mar 2014].
Kavita, S. (2005). Organizational change and development. S.l.: Excel Books.
Lemasters, J. J., & Nieminen, A.-L. (2001). Mitochondria in pathogenesis. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Morse, R. S., & Buss, T. F. (2008). Innovations in public leadership development. Armonk, N.Y: M.E. Sharpe.
Parkin, M. (2010). Tales for change: Using storytelling to develop people and organizations. London: Kogan Page.
Pasmore, W. A., & Woodman, R. W. (2008). Research in organizational change and development. Amsterdam: Elsevier JAI.
Peck, E. (2005). Organisational development in healthcare: Approaches, innovations, achievements. Abingdon: Radcliffe Medical.
Poole, M. S. (2000). Organizational change and innovation processes: Theory and methods for research. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rainey, H. G. (2009). Understanding and managing public organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Seleshi, S. (2000). Organization change and development in management control systems: Process innovation for internal auditing and management accounting. Greenwich, Conn: JAI.
Sims, R. R. (2006). Human resource development: Today and tomorrow. Greenwich: Information Age.
Smith, A., & Graetz, F. (2011). Philosophies of Organizational Change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pub.
Smith, J. & Rayment, J. (2010). Globally fit leadership: Four steps forward. Journal of Global Responsibility, 1 (1), pp. 55-65. doi: 10.1108/20412561011038547 [Accessed: 28 Mar 2014].
Suzanne, B. & Ellen, B. (2009). Advancing Sustainability through Change and Innovation: A Co-Evolutionary Perspecive. Journal of Change Management, 9 (4), pp.383-397. doi:10.1080/14697010903360574 [Accessed: 28 Mar 2014].
Todnem, R. (2008). Organizational Change Management: A Critical Review. Journal Of Change Management, 5 (4), pp.369-380. doi: 10.1080/14697010500359250.
Wilkinson, R., Hill, M. & Gollan, P. (2001). The Sustainability Debate. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 21 (12), pp. 1492-1502. doi: 10.1080/14697010500359250.
Vogelsang, J. (2013). Handbook for strategic HR: Best practices in organizational development from the OD network. New York: American Management Association.
Valarie, G. K. (2009). Organization development. S.l.: New Age International Pvt.
Wilson, J. P. (2006). Human resource development: Learning & training for individuals & organizations. London [u.a.: Kogan Page.
Yaeger, T. F., & Sorensen, P. F. (2009). Strategic organization development: Managing change for success. Charlotte, N.C: Information Age Pub.