Conditions at Ford: From Trend Setting to Mediocrity

Abstract

The following research observations are based on the recent internal conflicts within the Ford Motor Company. The objective of this research analysis is to reflect on efforts of Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Alan R. Mulally, as being a new hired to turn the around undesired internal company cultural behaviors that are non-value added. These non-value added behaviors are a direct result of conflict paradigms developed over the years that are responsible for the decline of the Ford Co brand. It is the intent of this research to review elements of conflict, as reduced or induced by CEO Mulally, as well as development points of conflict, consciously or unconsciously by Mr. Mulally. All research within this paper is done on a second-hand account and will be referenced as such.

Keywords: Interpersonal Conflict, interdependency, heuristics, perceptual defense

Conditions at Ford: From Trend Setting to Mediocrity

Ford Motor Company, known for its stake in the industrial revolution, is now characterized for its inconsistences in the area of value added-ness and profitability. One unwanted consistency, described by David Kiley, is Ford’s ability to accept mediocrity (Kiley 2007). Also, Ford is described By Kiley as “once exemplifying corporate efficiency--it is the birthplace of the assembly line and home of the celebrated Whiz Kids, who pioneered many modern management techniques in the 1960s--it has degenerated into a symbol of inefficiency (Kiley 2007). Moreover he continues, “weary corporate lifers have become all too comfortable with the idea of losing money” (Kiley 2007). This is a great disappointment for such an American historic symbol of country business innovative strength. Due to conflict complexities within Ford, profits suffer. However with the hiring of new CEO Alan R. Mulally, a corporate re-constructionist known for his saving of the Boeing airline after 9-11, Ford is being approached with a new “rational choice decision making process model” (McShane & Von Glinow 2012). This could prove positive for Ford Co. considering the needed reduction of sum 30 engineering platform designs, verses competitors such as Honda which have only 5 engineering platforms that great increases their bottom line profitability due to not wasting resources. First however, CEO Mulally will have to change the main source of conflict which is the company cultural differentiation.

Relational Conflicts Verses Constructive Conflicts

Definitively, differentiations are the differences among people and work units regarding their training, values, beliefs, and experiences (McShane & Von Glinow 2012). Ford declined to this state of affairs over its years due to change in management,