Comparison and Contrast of General Motors and Toyota Motor
General Motor and Toyota Motor
1
Comparison and Contrast of General Motors and Toyota Motor Thomas Hong, Ph.D. The Impact of Technology on Organization University of Phoenix November 12, 2007
General Motor and Toyota Motor Introduction
2
This paper seeks to compare core and enabling technologies of two organizations in the automobile industry. General Motors Corporation experienced a crisis that recorded another operating loss of $7,668 million during the fiscal year of 2006, while Toyota Motor Corporation recorded an operating income of approximately $19 billion during the fiscal year of 2006, an increase of 19.2% over 2005. The net profit of Toyota was approximately $13.9 billion in the fiscal year of 2006, an increase of 19.8% over 2005. It is interesting to understand why one company is struggling to survive with such losses, while the other is generating profits every year. This paper further analyzes contrasting strategies of core and enabling technologies between two organizations that may result in profit or loss. General Motors‟ problems are significant beyond those directly involved. If GM fails, it will not only have a huge social, psychological, and economic impact in the US, where it is an iconic automobile manufacturer, but such a failure would also have a negative impact on the US economy and adversely affect other economies. Thus, the failure of General Motors would have world-wide repercussions. Comparison and Contrast of General Motors and Toyota Motor General Motors Corporation History General Motors (GM) was founded in1908 in Flint, Michigan, as a holding company for Buick, then controlled by William C. Durant, and acquired Oldsmobile later that year. Durant brought in Cadillac, Elmore, Oakland (later known as Pontiac), and several others. In 1909, General Motors acquired the Reliance Motor Truck Company of Owosso, Michigan, and the Rapid Motor Vehicle Company of Pontiac, Michigan, the
General Motor and Toyota Motor
1
Comparison and Contrast of General Motors and Toyota Motor Thomas Hong, Ph.D. The Impact of Technology on Organization University of Phoenix November 12, 2007
General Motor and Toyota Motor Introduction
2
This paper seeks to compare core and enabling technologies of two organizations in the automobile industry. General Motors Corporation experienced a crisis that recorded another operating loss of $7,668 million during the fiscal year of 2006, while Toyota Motor Corporation recorded an operating income of approximately $19 billion during the fiscal year of 2006, an increase of 19.2% over 2005. The net profit of Toyota was approximately $13.9 billion in the fiscal year of 2006, an increase of 19.8% over 2005. It is interesting to understand why one company is struggling to survive with such losses, while the other is generating profits every year. This paper further analyzes contrasting strategies of core and enabling technologies between two organizations that may result in profit or loss. General Motors‟ problems are significant beyond those directly involved. If GM fails, it will not only have a huge social, psychological, and economic impact in the US, where it is an iconic automobile manufacturer, but such a failure would also have a negative impact on the US economy and adversely affect other economies. Thus, the failure of General Motors would have world-wide repercussions. Comparison and Contrast of General Motors and Toyota Motor General Motors Corporation History General Motors (GM) was founded in1908 in Flint, Michigan, as a holding company for Buick, then controlled by William C. Durant, and acquired Oldsmobile later that year. Durant brought in Cadillac, Elmore, Oakland (later known as Pontiac), and several others. In 1909, General Motors acquired the Reliance Motor Truck Company of Owosso, Michigan, and the Rapid Motor Vehicle Company of Pontiac, Michigan, the
General Motor and Toyota Motor
References: Alkadi, I., Alkadi, G., & Totaro, M. (2003). Effects of information technology on the business world. Human System Management, 22(3), 99-104. Carr-Ruffino, N., & Acheson, J. (2007). The car makers: Who is in the lead and who is catching up? Futurist, 41(4), 21-21. Cummings, M. (1993). The expert 's opinion. Journal of Global Information Management, 1(4), 38-41. Drucker, P. F. (1994). The theory of the business. Claremont, California: HBR. Dyer, J. H., Cho, D. S., & Chu, W. (1998). Strategic supplier segmentation: The next best practice in supply chain Management. California Management Review, 40(2), 5777. Ehrenman, G. (2003). New wheels for grandma. Mechanical Engineering, 125(4), 37-40. Fine, C. H., & Whitney, D. E. (1999). Is the make-buy decision process a core competence. MIT: MIT Center for Technology, Policy and Industrial Development. Frey, D. D., & Lewis, K. (2005). The deciding factor. Mechanical Engineering, pp. 2024. GM and the future of new product development. (2003). Strategic Direction, 19(1), 1721. Gress, J. J., Xu, S. J., R., Wang, C., & Paul, S. (2005). Massively parallel processing for fast and accurate stamping simulations. AIP Conference Proceedings, 778(1), 152-157. General Motor and Toyota Motor 19 Harrop, B., & Varey, R. J. (1998). Communication practice as corporate business performance: An empirical approach. Corporate Communications, 3(4), 123-130. Hass, W. J., Pryor IV, S. G., & Broders, V. (2006). A graphic tour of success and failure in corporate renewal. Journal of Private Equity, 9(2), 30-44. Helper, S. (1991). Strategy and irreversibility in supplier relations: The case of the U.S. automobile industry. Business History Review, 65(4), 781-825. Lorenzoni, G., & Baden-Fuller, C. (1995). Creating a strategic center to manage a web of partners. California Management Review, 37(3), 146. Lowery, E. (2007). Energy diversity as a business imperative. Futurist, 41(4), 23-23. Marketline (2007). General Motors Corporation. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://dbic.datamonitor.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/companies/company/?pid=DAD3 A6FC-60A1-4E63-AD90-B025AB2A0C12 Marketline (2007). Toyota Motor Corporation. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://dbic.datamonitor.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/companies/company/?pid=2A89F 017-6903-477A-A94B-628576B59972 Ndahi, H. B. (2006). Lean manufacturing in a global and competitive marker. Technology Teacher, 66(3), 14-18. Saunders, D. (1989). What MAP means to the production manager. Journal of Operations & Production Management, 9(2), 58-68. Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (2005). Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market and organizational change (3ed.). San Francisco: Wiley. Toyota on a roll. (2005). Nature, 435(7045), 1004-1004. General Motor and Toyota Motor 20 Towill, D. R. (2006). Handshakes around the world [Toyota production system]. Manufacturing Engineer, 85(1), 20-25. Truss, L. T., Wu P., Saroop, A., & Sehgal, S. K. (2006). Enterprise demand sensing in the automotive industry. Journal of Business Forecasting, 25(3), 22-30. Wearable Robots. (2007). Communications of the ACM, 50(4), 14-14.