Publicēts: 26.05.2000.
Valoda: Angļu
Līmenis: Augstskolas
Literatūras saraksts: 8 vienības
Atsauces: Nav
  • Referāts 'Nissan: to Be or not to Be?', 1.
  • Referāts 'Nissan: to Be or not to Be?', 2.
  • Referāts 'Nissan: to Be or not to Be?', 3.
  • Referāts 'Nissan: to Be or not to Be?', 4.
  • Referāts 'Nissan: to Be or not to Be?', 5.
  • Referāts 'Nissan: to Be or not to Be?', 6.
  • Referāts 'Nissan: to Be or not to Be?', 7.
Darba fragmentsAizvērt

ing a big company since it’s birth through merging several companies, Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. was caught by the expanding web of globalisation immediately. Nissan thus has always had a strategy of globalisation. They believe there are two issues contributing to the success of their overseas operations: establishing an insider market position and promoting the globalisation of the headquarters in Japan. In 1988 problems were starting to arise however with their subsidiaries exemplifying the possible problems that can arise with cross-cultural business and mergers.
Corporate Culture
When one reads about Nissan Motor Co., the first issue that comes to mind is the high level of decentralization of the company. From the very beginning Nissan has been a multinational and multi-domestic company. As such, Nissan has not been able to imply a strong corporate culture.

On another hand, high level of implementation of corporate culture could also be a disturbing factor – if we assume ethnocentrism. With headquarters in Japan, Nissan would then have Japanese managers in key positions in plants, subsidiaries etc., all over Europe and United States, as most Japanese companies do, but one cannot observe such a tendency within Nissan. Indeed, everywhere Nissan operates, Japanese people in key positions are the minority and local people are in the local decision-making power positions.…

Autora komentārsAtvērt