Daimler Ag and Chrysler

1. In what ways did the glosss of the dickens companies differ? What do you think the ground innovation and entrepreneurship meant to Chrysler employees? What about to Daimler employees? In 1998 when German industrial giant Daimler-Benz AG merged with American automobile manufacturer, Chrysler Corporation, Daimler Chrysler came into existence. This merger didnt result for the egotism-aggrandizing picture that was expected after this merge. It was eyeshot that this merger would create a world(a) economy not only surrounded by ii of the worlds superlative economy but also capturing the merchandise in various part of the world.Whereas, underneath this view there were many issues, which were regard in this merger of tot totallyy two different cultures. Daimler-Benz was an aggressive firm, which believed in hustling all(prenominal) possible way to mystify its political party the number throughout the world. But, Chrysler was on the otherwise hand an easy going and abate p rogress firm which believed in the issue and flexibility of operation. At DaimlerChrysler, differences in hire systems and decision-making processes caused friction amidst cured management, maculation pass up level employees fought over issues such as dress code, civiliseing hours and green goddess on the job.Language also became an issue. While nigh managers on the Daimler side could speak slightly English, not all were able to do so with the fluency needed for in force(p) work relationships. Also, only a whatever Chrysler managers had any knowledge of the German language. For Chrysler innovation way of life to Look forward for new changes, converting ideas into profit, resentment of designing, developing and create greatest cars and For Daimler innovation mean more analytical, more long-term looking, more technology-minded. 2. Compargon and contrast the two companies organizational complex body parts.What challenges do you think these different structures c reated? twist of Daimler Structure of Chrysler 1) The company had traditionalistic officious bureaucratic structure 1) It established a matrix management structure for the senior managers. 2) There were issues between the middle and lower management levels. 2) Many of the traditional valetudinarianism presidents were replaced with people who not only had useful expertise but who were able to work together. 3) Significant level of streamlining and restructuring was needed. 3) Each delinquency president under the new structure had to create Mutual dependencies among them. Chrysler management had bulldozened its traditional functional organization structure. It created platform for the strong organization, assigning all functional to superstar of five teams,large,car,small car,minivan,truck or jeep. In prodigious changes at Daimler due to Lack of tight-laced organization structure many employees left field organization and many of the people working for century old compa ny were unable to abide by pace or keep track of changes going on almost them. 3.What issues do you think the different leading styles of the three DaimlerChrysler loss leaders (Schrempp, Eaton, Stallkamp) created? SCHREMPP He believed in the creative side, to find an optimal solution, accord to him, its the arguments which count. However, for him leadership means at some stage you stand to summarize the arguments and set out a decision. Decision is not a matter of committee, you have to take responsibility. statement is not forever. Speed is a free-enterprise(a) factor. Its better to have 80% than to require for 100%. At some places I found him a strict leader which causes the lack of unity among employees.EATON Eaton historically is more willing to listen to the opinions of others and delegate authority, which should alleviate create a culture of teamwork and consensus building at Chrysler. Empowering lower level managers to make more decisions removes the fear of bein g overridden by the CEO, and develops confidence. Emphasizing teamwork and empowering more people indoors the organization will help to falling out the companys focus to designing and building the outperform automobiles in the world. STALLKAMP The number two American executive behind Eaton has played a key role in melding the German and U. S. perations since the combination of Daimler-Benz and Chrysler Corp. Stallkamp, who was president of the former Chrysler Corp. , was attribute with pi one and only(a)ering a new system that involved suppliers earlier in the vehicle discipline process. The result was lower costs and alter relations. 4. Assess Stallkamps power base as head of integration and president of Chrysler. What schema did Stallkamp employ to achieve integration between Daimler and Chrysler? As a president Stallkamp did so well as 1. He was self effacing and having the ability to generate consensus. 2. He gravel great efforts on quality betterment. . For him, Chrysl er was a business and its reputation was very of import and he believes in bringing the analogous ethnics into business as he has in his personal life. 4. He tried to observe something new to increase sales. 5. He was everlastingly ready to accept challenges. 6. He focused on cost saving and make better marketing. Quality problems are rarely with one part of the corporation. The problem is usually the process. He gets design, engineering, procurement, sales and manufacturing working together to lap the problem. He identifies more with real-life customers accelerate the rejoinder time whenever a problem occurs.He also meet with all the executive wrong presidents, to make sure they are all on the same team and are working on common goals. 5. What would you have done differently? Why? What should Stallkamp do next? According to me, Stallkamp has done up to his maximum ability, but still he should also do following 1. launch some more efforts to reduce the culture mismatch. 2. Connection between lower velocity management should be improved, by enhancing organization structure. 3. Implementation of a system where individualist can put his views. 4. Policy execution process improvement. 5. Put some efforts to improve the skills of existing employee.