Scribd
Upload
126 views7 pages

Philips Vs Matsushita

Philips and Matsushita were both founded in the late 19th/early 20th century and became global electronics giants, but faced different challenges due to their organizational structures. Philips was highly decentralized with autonomous national organizations that lacked strategic coordination, while Matsushita was overly centralized with subsidiaries too dependent on headquarters. Both companies can learn from each other - a balance of centralized strategic decision making and decentralized operational autonomy is needed.

Uploaded by

Kaushik Kg
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
126 views7 pages

Philips Vs Matsushita

Philips and Matsushita were both founded in the late 19th/early 20th century and became global electronics giants, but faced different challenges due to their organizational structures. Philips was highly decentralized with autonomous national organizations that lacked strategic coordination, while Matsushita was overly centralized with subsidiaries too dependent on headquarters. Both companies can learn from each other - a balance of centralized strategic decision making and decentralized operational autonomy is needed.

Uploaded by

Kaushik Kg
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 7

PHILIPS

MATSUSHIT
A
BY:
VANIA UTAMI, HENDRY LUKITO, PI-JEN HSUEH
BACKGROUND
Philips Matsushita
Founded in 1892 by Gerard Philips Founded in 1918 by Konosuke
in Eindhoven, Holland Matsushita in Osaka, Japan

Innovation and product First Japanese company to adopt


development core strengths: the divisional structure
Single product focus One-product-one-division

Gerrards Technology Prowess Internal competition among


divisions
Decentralized, highly autonomous
responsive national organizations Matsushita built its success on its
centralized, highly efficient
Technology-driven innovation operations in Japan
Market-driven rapid innovation
VALUE CHAIN
Philips
Product Sales &
Research Manufacturing Services
Development Marketing

Centralized initial Multinational/decentralized management, product development, manufacturing,


research & innovation sales and services through PDs & NOs within national/local market

Matsushita
Product Sales &
Research Manufacturing Services
Development Marketing

Centralized operations: research, innovation and product Marketing and Services within national
development. market

Centralized Decentralized
SUCCESSIVE LEADER
Philips Matsushita
Gerard Philips and Anton Konosuke Matsushita
Van Riemsdijk and Yamashita
Rodenburg
Tanii
Wisse Dekker
Van der Klugt
Yoichi Morishita
Timmer Kunio Nakamura
Boonstra
Kleisterlee
NET INCOME
CHALLENGES FACED
Philips Too Decentralized Matsushita Too Centralized
Powerful and autonomous Highly centralized services:
National Organizations (NOs) Centralized product development

Lack of company-wide strategic Subsidiaries too dependent to parent


among NOs company

Lack of accountability in NO/PD Less responsive to customer demand


and preference
matrix
Communication between overseas
Management by Technical and subsidiaries and parent company
commercial consensus
Product Divisional structure
Slow of respond
Too deep competition can make an
Inefficient production due to local internal conflict
production centers
LESSON FROM
CASES
We need to Balance the decision making between
Centralized and Decentralized
All the operation decision need to take by subsidiaries
while strategic decision need to consult to HQ
My dream company which is Samsung has similarity with
Matshushita. Almost the decision is decided by HQ, but
some operation decision is decided by subsidiaries, like
technical issue in plant, employee recruitment , after
market service

You might also like