Companies (Daimler-Chrysler) have teamed up to maintain their unique and distinct identity. Soon after the merger, the honey weeks suddenly ended. Diametrically opposed management and cultural differences have contributed to the deep gap, which has almost sunk a new relationship (Beotra,2016). The integration of the two organizational cultures, of the German car manufacturer Daimler-Benz and the American carmaker the Chrysler Corporation failed due to a culture clash. From the very first day of the merger, the cultural differences made the merger integration process hard for Chrysler. Despite all efforts to harmonize the two corporate cultures and to lay the foundation for a shared organizational culture, DaimlerChrysler’s management failed.
…show more content…
This is a difficult situation for big companies because almost every aspect of manufacturing is different and the connection changes everything. Top-down decision making is based on determination goals early in process, inflexibility, lack of employee participation, lack of motivation compares to this bottom-up is based on flexibility, teamwork, projects are team driven, high level of team motivation. Also, different approach by companies in company management whereas Chrysler was less strict and make working place more self-governing what could lead to problems how it happened after merged with Daimler Benz AG. Daimler Benz management approach was more intense, precise and controlling …show more content…
“From the beginning, the high command in Stuttgart issued orders to Detroit about everything from where the headquarters would be located (Germany) to what kind of business cards would be used” (Plunkett, Allen, Attner, 2013) Chrysler management lost their divisions and Germans head all divisions what is basic mistake. They did not participate together enough because Chrysler workers were unsatisfied and there was a possible change that company will be sold. Lack of participation, open communication about where they are now and where they want to be in future. Next, sensitivity of workers which were unsatisfied with different management which do not listen to them and do not care about their perception during tasks. Difference in bottom up and top down decision making (Wilson,
This is a difficult situation for big companies because almost every aspect of manufacturing is different and the connection changes everything. Top-down decision making is based on determination goals early in process, inflexibility, lack of employee participation, lack of motivation compares to this bottom-up is based on flexibility, teamwork, projects are team driven, high level of team motivation. Also, different approach by companies in company management whereas Chrysler was less strict and make working place more self-governing what could lead to problems how it happened after merged with Daimler Benz AG. Daimler Benz management approach was more intense, precise and controlling …show more content…
“From the beginning, the high command in Stuttgart issued orders to Detroit about everything from where the headquarters would be located (Germany) to what kind of business cards would be used” (Plunkett, Allen, Attner, 2013) Chrysler management lost their divisions and Germans head all divisions what is basic mistake. They did not participate together enough because Chrysler workers were unsatisfied and there was a possible change that company will be sold. Lack of participation, open communication about where they are now and where they want to be in future. Next, sensitivity of workers which were unsatisfied with different management which do not listen to them and do not care about their perception during tasks. Difference in bottom up and top down decision making (Wilson,