I think that Bernard Arnault was previously a director. Although during the change management in China he had to also be a navigator and a caretaker. He is also a nurturer when it comes to his employees. Arnault is in a position of high interest and high power and in order for the business to succeed in the Chinese market Arnault has to change his approach to the management process.
The changes faced in China were outside the control of LVMH and they had to react accordingly. The outside environment changed while LVMH stayed the same resulting in a decline sales. Arnault is seen as a navigator during the changes because he is no longer in complete power but it is not a complete crisis for the company yet. This is because LVMH is worldwide …show more content…
Bernard Arnault put his daughter Delphine in charge of ‘overseeing the label’s re-positioning within the luxury market following slowing growth at LVMH’s biggest luxury brand’ (BOF 2017). This can be seen as a navigator. He had some bit of control over the decision to change the logo. In the fact that it would remain the same just smaller. Bernard Arnault had to work closely with Michael Burke as a caretaker because as the CEO of Louis Vuitton Burke was directly impacted by the changing economy and wants of the Chinese market. The struggles continued for LV in 2015 when LV had to make the decision to close three of their mainland China stores. This decision was made as a result of falling sales due to the anti-corruption laws in place in China (Financial Times). Bernard Arnaults LVMH is competing with the Chinese government anti-corruption laws. This was not seen anywhere else and was out of Arnaults control. He had to nurture his employees and give them the freedom to think of new products and product designs in order to save the business in China.
Bernard Arnault had to work closely with Jean Claude Biver to ensure that the watch making section of his business was not ruined. In the case of LVMH’s watch making problems in China he stayed a director and took a more nurturing role over the situation and allowed Biver to control the situation. Biver did not believe that the fall in LVMH watch sales in China was significant and believed that it would sort itself out. He also believed that the sales in other parts of the world would make up for the struggles in LVMH. He did not change his approach to watch making in China (Financial Times
The changes faced in China were outside the control of LVMH and they had to react accordingly. The outside environment changed while LVMH stayed the same resulting in a decline sales. Arnault is seen as a navigator during the changes because he is no longer in complete power but it is not a complete crisis for the company yet. This is because LVMH is worldwide …show more content…
Bernard Arnault put his daughter Delphine in charge of ‘overseeing the label’s re-positioning within the luxury market following slowing growth at LVMH’s biggest luxury brand’ (BOF 2017). This can be seen as a navigator. He had some bit of control over the decision to change the logo. In the fact that it would remain the same just smaller. Bernard Arnault had to work closely with Michael Burke as a caretaker because as the CEO of Louis Vuitton Burke was directly impacted by the changing economy and wants of the Chinese market. The struggles continued for LV in 2015 when LV had to make the decision to close three of their mainland China stores. This decision was made as a result of falling sales due to the anti-corruption laws in place in China (Financial Times). Bernard Arnaults LVMH is competing with the Chinese government anti-corruption laws. This was not seen anywhere else and was out of Arnaults control. He had to nurture his employees and give them the freedom to think of new products and product designs in order to save the business in China.
Bernard Arnault had to work closely with Jean Claude Biver to ensure that the watch making section of his business was not ruined. In the case of LVMH’s watch making problems in China he stayed a director and took a more nurturing role over the situation and allowed Biver to control the situation. Biver did not believe that the fall in LVMH watch sales in China was significant and believed that it would sort itself out. He also believed that the sales in other parts of the world would make up for the struggles in LVMH. He did not change his approach to watch making in China (Financial Times