Executive Summary
The following paper focuses on analyzing Ford’s company case and its strategies to increase its global presence. The company realizes the critical importance of overseas markets and the necessity to enter them. For this reason, it alters its strategy to make it more relevant. Ford introduces more autonomy to its units while creating a single center for technology. The paper discusses the role cultural differences and diversity play in the work of companies. First, the structures’ flexibility and the positive change are discussed. They are introduced regarding the need to promote positive change and adapt the company to new conditions. Second, the role of cultural differences in planning is investigated. The growing diversity introduces the need for additional data collection and processing to create the most effective strategy. For this reason, the paper investigates these elements and their influence on positive change. In the end, a conclusion summarizing the information and discussing it is given.
Introduction
Continuous change is one of the major characteristics of successful companies. To meet new challenges, a firm should be able to consider the existing environment and alterations in clients’ demands, visions, and expectations (Abramson & Moran, 2017). These factors critically influence the functioning of any organization and its revenue. Additionally, Carnall and Todnem (2014) state that the current degree of market globalization demands increased attention to diversity. The cultural differences existing among various clients should impact the final product as it ensures it will be popular among the targeted audience and help the company to generate a competitive advantage to survive and struggle against the closest rivals (Vaara et al., 2019). Under these conditions, the ability of different structures to cope with challenges depends on management’s vision of change and its ability to consider all factors relevant at the moment.
The following paper focuses on discussing Ford’s experience regarding its globalization efforts and the desire to create a single worldwide business model capable of meeting the diversified demands peculiar to various regions. Considering the desire to integrate regional units into one effective model, Ford devotes attention to structural changes emphasizing the ability of departments to meet expectations, satisfy clients, and enter multiple markets. The paper discusses the importance of cultural aspects regarding the planned change, the significance of sustainable model integration, and how structures can adapt their functioning to remain effective and ensure the company continues its growth and generates a competitive advantage.
Ford’s Strategy
The proposed case demonstrates Ford’s company intends to become a global and successful business by altering its work. International development needs single leadership and the creation of successful teams with the ability to analyze the current situation and respond to alterations in clients’ demands and the state of the market. For this reason, the company plans and implements numerous transformations in the work of its departments. Ford has created a single global unit for technology development to ensure no aspects are disregarded. Moreover, the global cycle plan for the product launch was introduced to guarantee the company can align the functioning of all its departments. Thus, these alterations are expected to promote a positive change process and improve outcomes.
In such a way, Ford’s attempt to consider globalization and integrate a single model for coordinating the work of all its units is influenced by its past experiences and existing conditions. The diversification of clients’ demands, along with the desire to enter new markets, means structures need to cope with a variety of change processes to ensure the company evolves. It demands reconsideration of previous strategies and shifting priorities toward integrating new methods of working with clients (Taras et al., 2021). The process depends on the flexibility of existing units, their ability to adapt to new conditions, and management’s vision and efforts to support positive change. Fort supports incentives aimed at improving the company’s ability to work in a globalized world and cooperate with various clients.
Horizontal and Vertical Models
One of the factors helping Ford to initiate a positive change process and attain positive outcomes is the consideration of vertical and horizontal management and integration models. The first business structure means that decisions flow from top to bottom, while the second one implies decision-making made at various levels (Champion, 2014). These models also influence planning and getting results from particular actions. Having launched a centralized and vertical single technology unit, Ford also cultivates horizontal integration, meaning that decisions can be made closer to place (De Gersem, 2020). The employment of a mixed model provides the company with several advantages. First of all, it saves control over the situation and can introduce strategies approved by the senior management (Sroufe, 2017). At the same time, the horizontal model means that the departments working in various regions acquire a higher level of flexibility and can devote more attention to cultural differences and local clients’ demands. It guarantees the adaptability of structures and their responsiveness.
Cultural Differences
Cultural differences should also be viewed as one of the factors influencing sustainable change and Ford’s globalization attempts. Hayes (2007) assumes that the diversity in demands peculiar to the international market results from significant globalization processes. It means that companies’ attempts to enter different regions lead to the discovery of new requirements for products and factors vital for high client satisfaction levels (Hendriks et al., 2018). Moreover, the products already popular within a particular audience might fail in other areas because of the absence of factors appreciated by people there (Cummings & Worley, 2018). Under these conditions, cultural differences play a critical role in the work of international corporations such as Ford. They influence the policies and the departments’ performance, meaning that positive and sustainable change is possible only if the demands of local communities are considered. In such a way, Ford has to adapt its work to ensure clients from various countries are satisfied with the quality and specific features offered to them.
The cultural differences’ influence on policy and management can be viewed in several ways. First of all, the company should avoid using a single strategy for working with clients from different areas (Kirrane et al., 2017). Successful global corporations should refuse to use unified techniques that were effective in the past and shift towards a continuous change regarding the current demand and factors peculiar to local markets (Hooper & Potter, 2001). Ford’s case proves it; in attempting to become a dominant international player, the company focuses on the horizontal integration of various companies focusing on their ability to make decisions regarding the existing situation (Neeley, 2015). Additionally, the influence of cultural differences influence can be seen in options offered to clients of various origins (Molinsky, 2016). The high quality peculiar to all units should be supported with additional characteristics depending on the area as it will help to increase satisfaction levels (Rosenbaum et al., 2018). It means that positive change depends on the ability to consider the target audience and local communities’ desires and act appropriately.
Culture and Strategy
The sustainable organizational change also demands effective planning. However, the given process is impossible without effective data collection, allowing top management to make strategic decisions and select the best possible option for future growth (DiTomaso, 2021). Regarding cultural differences, the data collection phase becomes more important as it helps to understand existing trends and the target audience’s peculiarities, which is vital for planning (Wickert et al., 2021). For instance, Ford uses its past and relevant experiences of operating at the international level to introduce appropriate changes in the work of its structures, introduce a single technological cycle, and implement horizontal and vertical models (Subasi, 2018). Under these conditions, cultural diversity demands effective data collection tools to avoid failures in forecasting the demand and entering various regions with effective strategies.
Data analysis also plays a critical role in cultural diversity peculiar to the modern business world. The correct and comprehensive investigation of acquired information about the current demand and features clients want to see in products helps to generate a competitive advantage and overcome the closest rivals (Senge, 1999). For this reason, big international corporations, such as Ford, should devote increased attention to research as one of the ways to select the most potent and applicable strategy and ensure it becomes a part of the current course. It will also increase the structures’ flexibility and their ability to work in various regions.
Finally, the modification of the current course and introduction of appropriate and relevant changes to the existing strategy is another critical element of global corporations’ work. The increased cultural diversity means that units should be ready to engage in a continuous change process guaranteeing that all employees can function regarding the current demand and implement the needed alterations to the approaches (Mattison Thompson & Brouthers, 2021). It also implies adding missing features or qualities to the products to guarantee they are more popular with the target audience and are appreciated by them. It means that cultural differences become a factor impacting the company’s change.
Conclusion
Altogether, Ford’s case demonstrates that companies working at the international level face multiple challenges. One of the major sources of complexities is the sophistication of existing demand and its diversification under the impact of cultural differences. Ford wants to improve its global presence, meaning that the company has to reorganize the work of its departments and structures to ensure they meet new demands. The change influences the relations within the company, such as the implementation of horizontal and vertical models. Moreover, it implies a sustainable change to consider the local communities and clients’ needs and select appropriate strategies to meet them.
The case also shows the critical importance of cultural differences in the modern business world. The dominance of giant international corporations introduced the necessity to consider the needs of various population groups living in different areas. The examples such as Ford’s show that the disregard of specific values might result in the failure and inability to sell products in a particular country. For this reason, it becomes critical to plan future expiation and activities regarding the relevant cultural differences and diversity typical for various regions. It will help to evolve and remain popular with the target audience.
References
Abramson, N., & Moran, R. (2017). Managing cultural differences: Global leadership for the 21st century (10th ed.). Routledge.
Carnall, C.& Todnem, R. (2014). Managing change in organizations (6th ed.). Pearson.
Champion, D. (2014). A tool that maps out cultural differences. Harvard Business Review. Web.
Cummings, T.G. & Worley, C.G. (2018). Organization development and change (11th ed.). Cengage Learning.
De Gersem, N. (2020). Cultural differences in management: Two aspects. IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, 9(1), 9–22. Web.
DiTomaso, N. (2021), Why difference makes a difference: Diversity, inequality, and institutionalization. Journal of Management Studies, 58(8), 2024-2051. Web.
Hayes, J. (2007). The theory and practice of change management (2nd ed.). Palgrave.
Hendriks, G., Slangen, A., & Heugens, P. (2018). How a firm’s domestic footprint and domestic environmental uncertainties jointly shape added cultural distances: The roles of resource dependence and headquarters attention. Journal of Management Studies, 55(6), 883-909. Web.
Hooper, A. & Potter, J. (2001). Intelligent leadership. Creating a passion for change. Random House.
Kirrane, M., Lennon, M., O’Connor, C., & Fu, N. (2017). Linking perceived management support with employees’ readiness for change: the mediating role of psychological capital. Journal of Change Management, 17(1), 47-66.
Mattison Thompson, F., & Brouthers, K. D. (2021). Digital consumer engagement: National cultural differences and cultural tightness. Journal of International Marketing, 29(4), 22–44. Web.
Molinsky, A. (2016). Cultural differences are more complicated than what country you’re from. Harvard Business Review. Web.
Neeley, T. (2015). Global teams that work. Harvard Business Review. Web.
Rosenbaum, D., More, E., & Steane, P. (2018). Planned organisational change management: Forward to the past? An exploratory literature review. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31(2), 286-303.
Senge, P. M. (1999). The dance of change: The challenges to sustaining momentum in learning organizations. Bantam Books.
Sroufe, R. (2017). Integration and organizational change towards sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 315-329.
Subasi, B. (2018). Research: People share more information with colleagues of similar cultural backgrounds. Harvard Business Review. Web.
Taras, V., Baack, D., Caprar, D., Jimenez, A., & Froese, F. (2021). Research: How cultural differences can impact global teams. Harvard Business Review. Web.
Vaara, E., Tienari, J., & Koveshnikov, A. (2019). From cultural differences to identity politics: A critical discursive approach to national identity in multinational corporations. Journal of Management Studies, 58(8), 2052-2081. Web.
Wickert, C., Post, C., Doh, J.P., Prescott, J., & Prencipe, A. (2021). Management research that makes a difference: Broadening the meaning of impact. Journal of Management Studies., 58(2), 297-320. Web.