Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Assignment: Cultural Clash During Merger and Acquisition (with references)


Introduction
Culture refers to a shared and deeply held set of norms, values, beliefs and attitudes that influence individual and group behaviour within an organization. When M&A happens, it becomes the prime task for the enterprise to integrate resources and operations in terms of its organizational culture, doing so sometimes it faces various cultural clashes.
Literature review
Each organization has its own norms, customs, roles, rituals, ceremonies, dress code, symbols, and hierarchy and reporting lines. To avoid or lessen the conflict of cultural clashes, two aspects need to be considered. One, whether cultural differences should be considered before the decision to acquire/merge is taken. Cultural clashes between enterprises are found in the way they operate, direct, communicate, and motivate. It is the core content of cross border M&A cultural integration to integrate cultural clashes of nations and those of enterprise, which are interdependent, not separate. Communicating with each other effectively and understanding each other’s' culture is the most effective way to eliminate cultural clashes. According to (Cartwright & Schoenberg, 2006), the main factor in making or breaking the merger equation is the culture. Calculations prove that 50% to 80% of the mergers and acquisition are failure because they are performing low than the expected according to different industry and cannot adopt in the culture and cultural clashes happens. For example the Ford motors acquired Jaguar before Tata but it was not a profitable acquisition because of cultural clashes so the Ford motors sold it to the Tata motors but now Tata motors is struggling to pay the bridge loan taken to buy the Jaguar Company and manage its cultural environment.

http://www.tatamotors.com/investors/pdf/2008/Jaguar-Land-Rover-Acquisition-Part-1.pdf 

Comment

The first case of culture clash is the one that occurred between the merger of Hewlett-Packard (HP) and Compaq. The reason of the merge is to improve HP’s market share across the hardware line and double the size of HP’s service unit—both essential steps in being able to compete with industry-giant IBM. Moreover, they hope to create a full-service technology firm capable of doing everything from selling PCs and printers to setting up complex networks. The merger had face culture clash as their cultural differences among these two companies. In 2004, the fact of HP missing the merger’s longer-term revenue and profit goals had become clearer. This poor cultural fit resulted in years of bitter infighting in the new company, and resulted in a loss of an estimated 13 billion dollars in market capitalization. Though the merger itself was widely regarded as a failure, the company has hung on, and has been able to make significant cultural and leadership changes that have resulted in long-term success. (Hewlett, 2009)

Another example of the failure of merger due to problems with cultural integration can be seen in the case of Daimler-Chrysler. The merger of Daimler-Benz and Chrysler became a straight out clash between the business cultures of the two firms. The differentiation in corporate culture of the firms involved was the main reason for the non-success of this alliance. While the management style of Daimler-Benz's was more of a formal and planned out sort, Chrysler's management was more tilted towards a stress-free, unrestrictive style. Additionally, the views of both the firms on key factors, for instance pay scales, benefits and travel expenditure, were completely different from each other. As a result the company's shareholders had to bear the burden of the collision.   (DiMaggio, 2009 )


Conclusion

Compare to HP-Compaq, IBM had outstanding performed in its business for over a century. The reason of their success: ‘IBM has been found in its core business development through organizational culture, decision making and organizational structure’.

First, it should coordinate the cultural differences of peoples to promote understanding and communicating between the different communities in one enterprise and to avoid the negative influence arising from the different thinking models, behaviours, and values. Second, it should coordinate the different company cultures to eliminate the barriers in leadership styles, communication models, personnel system, performance appraisals, and social security benefits. Third, it should establish the company's core values by integrating diverse cultures to improve the company's creativity and competitiveness. Fourth, the effective integration of the companies' cultures could provide conditions beneficial for the integration of operations. (Jacobsen, 2012)



References

Cartwright, S. & Schoenberg, R., 2006. Thirty Years of Mergers and Acquisitions Research: Recent Advances and Future Opportunities. British Journal of Management, 17(s1), pp. s1 - s5.
DiMaggio, M., 2009 . Rasmussen College. [Online] 
Available at: http://www.rasmussen.edu/degrees/business/blog/best-and-worst-corporate-mergers/

Hewlett, R., 2009. Article Base. [Online] 
Available at: http://www.articlesbase.com/ask-an-expert-articles/failure-of-mergers-examples-987272.html

Jacobsen, D., 2012. Globoforce. [Online] 
Available at: http://www.globoforce.com/gfblog/2012/6-big-mergers-that-were-killed-by-culture/




0 comments:

Post a Comment