Philips Versus Matsushita Case Analysis

1551 Words7 Pages
Philips versus Matsushita Case Analysis The case is about two global consumer electronics giants that dominated the market and industry over different periods. Philips of Netherlands and Matsushita of Japan (now called Panasonic) have historical legacies encompassing more than a century. Philips, founded in 1892 by Gerard Philips in Netherlands started as a small light bulb factory. Matsushita, founded by Konosuke Matsushita (KM), on the other hand started with the production of double ended sockets. Both organizations have had a great impact on the consumer electronics industry, following different strategies and developing very different capabilities. Philips built its tenured success on a portfolio of responsive national organizations while Matsushita based its global strategy on a centralized and efficient operation through Japan. The case illustrates how competitiveness in the current globalized market depends on the organizational capabilities and the difficulty of overcoming long and deep rooted heritage and legacy. Philips After the World War II, new and larger electrical products companies were being formed and were racing to diversify. Philips decided on the other hand to stick to what they knew best, producing light bulbs. Philips became an innovative company with the company policy to use new machines and emphasis on industrial research. As the industry started to show signs of overcapacity, Philips started building overseas sales corporations. Philips also started entering into agreements with organization that gave it access to newer technologies and markets. The most significant strategic decision by Philips was to transfer its overseas assets and research laboratories to UK and USA. This provided for the regional subsidiaries to become more independent. This capability became a valuable asset as this allowed the National Organizations (NOs) to
Open Document