Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Background
This section of the learning journal will address the GEs Two-Decade Transformation with other papers on topics such as knowledge and learning management, organizational structure, strategic intent, organizational capabilities, competitive advantage layers, and a global perspective. In addition to this, application of the findings to LG Corporation and provision of recommendations. The transformation that GE has undergone in the last two decades is a remarkable example of a company that has been able to adapt to new environments and thrive. They were able to reach their aim thanks to their dedication to constant experimentation and investment in state-of-the-art machinery.
Moreover, they have been successful in centralizing their activities, which has resulted in a more efficient and effective company overall. One of the most crucial aspects of GEs change was the companys embrace of a more global perspective. By expanding internationally, they were able to reach consumers in countries where they had been unable to before, opening up new avenues for growth. This has allowed them to make up for any sluggishness in their home countrys market.
Connecting the Dots
Administrative Heritage
In GEs Two-Decade Transformation, the author discusses how General Electric transformed from a traditional manufacturing organization to a global digital industrial enterprise. GEs emphasis on innovation and lifelong learning drove this transformation. Managing Knowledge and Learning explains how McKinsey & Co. become a knowledge-based corporation (Bartlett and Anthony 1-25). This article discusses the companys knowledge and learning management. This change is due to McKinseys focus on knowledge management and education. Both topics may be used to a real-life corporate context to assess knowledge management and lifelong learning.
Organizational Structure
GE faced nimbler, more agile rivals in the early 2000s. GE initiated an organizational restructuring that flattened and dispersed the corporation. GE needed to evolve to respond to market developments. Procter and Gamble (P&G) revamped its European organization in response to changing market circumstances (Beiske 1-18). This reorganization made P&G more market-adaptive. The GE and P&G case studies have real-world commercial applications. Consider a firm competing with nimble startups. This corporation may require a GE-like change to compete. The corporation must flatten its structure and decentralize decision-making. This would make the firm more market-adaptive.
Strategic Intent
GE has transformed itself over the last two decades by focusing on innovation and learning. GEs 20-year strategy has paid off big time. GE is a leader in healthcare, energy, and transportation. GE and Jollibee have succeeded by adapting to shifting markets and technology. GE pioneered the jet engine and MRI equipment. GE is leading the digital industrial revolution, producing breakthrough technologies that alter industries. Jollibee has adapted to shifting markets. When the Philippines fast food sector grew saturated, Jollibee expanded into quick-service restaurants (Bartlett, 1-23). This strategy helped Jollibee expand in a changing market. GE and Jollibee show that firms must adapt and innovate to prosper. In the past, corporations could depend on one product or technology
Organizational Capabilities
GEs Two-Decade Transformation involves educating staff in data analytics and digital marketing. The firm is strengthening its worldwide presence. Acer Inc. has invested in digital marketing and data analytics to boost its worldwide presence (Bartlett and Anthony 120). Both firms have used these lessons to strengthen their worldwide competitiveness. GE and Acer have improved their capacity to contact and engage consumers by using data analytics and digital marketing. This helps businesses compete with competitors who havent made equivalent investments. GE and Acers digital transformations offer some lessons. First, spend wisely to gain competitive edge. This meant data analytics and digital marketing for GE and Acer. Second, digital transformation requires a long-term vision. GE and Acer have been digitizing for over 20 years.
Layers of Competitive Advantage
This is how General Electric (GE) become more competitive during the last 20 years. GE is a huge company with aviation engine and healthcare interests. GE faced greater competition from Japanese industries in the 1990s. GE changed to compete (Hanno 1-20). GE transformed its organizational structure, culture, and business practices over two decades. GE is now more competitive with a stronger brand, sophisticated technology, and a worldwide reach.
Process
GE was a hierarchical company in the 1990s. Each corporate unit operated separately in functional silos. The companys structure slowed its market response. GE flattened their structure to become more flexible (Beiske 1-18). The corporation decentralized decision-making and empowered local staff. This framework helps GE respond to market changes and expand. P&G Europe has changed. P&G dispersed its operations throughout Europe and enabled staff to make local choices.
Global Mindset
The article GEs Two-Decade Transformation examines the companys efforts to become more globally competitive during the past two decades. Lincoln Electric, in an effort to better compete on a global scale, adopts a global viewpoint, as described in the article Lincoln Electric Venturing Abroad/ Lincoln Electrics Harsh Lessons from International Expansion article (Bartlett and Anthony 122). This action was taken to accommodate the growing interest in Lincoln Electric products in foreign markets. One such lesson was learned when GE expanded into the Chinese market. Despite its initial success, the company soon found itself struggling to adapt to the unique challenges of the Chinese market. In particular, it was difficult to find qualified workers and to deal with the countrys bureaucracy. As a result, GE was forced to scale back its operations in China and take a more cautious approach to expansion in other markets.
Application of the Learnings to Puma Shoe Company
Puma Shoe Company can learn from GE and McKinsey by prioritizing knowledge management and lifetime learning. By focusing on knowledge management, Puma Shoe Company can store and disseminate knowledge throughout the company, which will help the company stay ahead of the competition. Additionally, by emphasizing lifelong learning, Puma Shoe Company can keep staff up-to-date on knowledge and skills, which will help the company adapt to market changes. In order to apply these lessons to Puma Shoe Company, the company should first prioritize knowledge management. Knowledge management systems should be put in place in order to store and disseminate knowledge throughout the company. Additionally, mentoring and peer-to-peer learning should be encouraged in order to increase information exchange among staff.
Secondly, Puma Shoe Company should emphasize lifelong learning. Formal and informal learning opportunities should be made available to staff in order to keep them current on knowledge and skills. Formal learning opportunities could include technical training and courses, while informal learning opportunities could include on-the-job training and mentoring programs. By following the lessons learned by GE and McKinsey, Puma Shoe Company can become more innovative and digital, which will help the company stay ahead of the competition and adapt to market changes.
Recommendations
In order to be successful in the international market, Puma must place a high focus on innovation and ongoing education. In addition, Puma must have a global perspective in order to achieve success on the international market (Begley and David 1-10). First, Puma must continue to invest in new technology and generate fresh concepts. Using this, they will be able to maintain a competitive advantage and remain ahead of the curve. Second, Puma should expand its activities into other nations in order to penetrate new markets and create new expansion chances. Due to this, businesses will have an easier time compensating for any potential domestic market slowdown. Puma would benefit from developing a global corporate perspective in order to better comprehend the needs of its consumers and generate shareholder value.
Works Cited
Bartlett, Christopher A, and Anthony St. George. Acer America: Development of the Aspire. Harvard Business School. 2001, pp. 120.
Bartlett, Christopher A, and Jamie OConnell. Lincoln Electric: Venturing Abroad. Harvard Business School, 1998, pp. 122.
Bartlett, Christopher A, and Meg Wozny. GEs Two-Decade Transformation: Jack Welchs Leadership. Harvard Business School, 2005, pp. 125.
Bartlett, Christopher A. ABBs Relays Business: Building and Managing a Global Matrix. Harvard Business School. 1999, pp. 123.
Bartlett, Christopher A. Jollibee Foods Corporation (A): International Expansion. Harvard Business School. 2001, pp. 123.
Begley, Thomas M, and David P Boyd. The Need for a Corporate Global Mind-Set. MITSloan Management Review, vol. 44, no. 2, 2003, pp. 110.
Beiske, Ben. Procter & Gamble Europe: Vizir Launch. Harvard Business School. 1989, pp. 118.
Hanno, Maha. Philips versus Matsushita the Competitive Battle Continues. Harvard School of Business. 2003, pp. 120.
Hastings, Donald F. Lincoln Electrics Harsh Lessons from International Expansion. Harvard Business School, pp. 112.
Tan, Valerie. McKinsey & Company: Managing Knowledge and Learning. Harvard School of Business. 2000, pp. 120.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.