A Concise Research on Siemens AG and Nissan

Contents

I. Introduction………….…………………………………………………...…………….….1
II. Finding…………………………………....……………………………...…………...…...2
2.1 A concise background of Siemens AG and Nissan………………..…2
2.2 The high performance culture of Siemens….…………….….…………….........2
2.3 Comparison of organisational structure and culture…………….………………...…..2
2.4 Effectiveness of different leadership styles………………………………………......3
2.5 Approaches to management among Siemens AG and Nissan………………………..4
2.6 Factors influence individual behaviour at work………………………………………5
2.7 Different motivational theories………………………………………………………5
2.8 Nature of groups and group behaviour of Siemens…………………………………..6
2.9 Factors to the development of effective teamwork at Siemens………………………6
III. Conclusion…...……………………….………………………………………..………8
3.1 Structure and culture affect the performance of Siemens…………………………..8
3.2 Explanation of the leadership of Siemens AG……………………………………….8
3.3 Organisational theory influences the practice of management……………………8
3.4 Different leadership styles motivate organisations in periods of change……………9
3.5 The usefulness of motivational theories for managers………………….…………10
3.6 Impact of technology on team functioning within Siemens……………………10
Reference………………………………………………..………………….……….……….12

I. Introduction
All my research is about two huge companies: Nissan Motor Company and Siemens AG. One topic has already been set by the requirements, and I choose Nissan as a model to accomplish this report. It is mainly because I had a motive programme diploma and I am in favour of comparing marketing strategies through different car brands. What is more, there is a Nissan manufacture factory in Sunderland, by which I could observe the cooperation closely and even there is a chance to interview the department manager. Above all, Nissan is the best choice.
I would like cite some effectiveness done by representative leaders to point out the impact caused. In addition, the decisive quality would be discussed in detail. Further, this is a very good point to my report. I would analyse the relationship between high performance culture and the impact made to Siemens, including the influence on individuals’ working behaviour. In terms of respecting diversity, I would like to dig up more about how Nissan converts diversity to power and the way that the power obtained to maintain the advancing trend.
The next part is a comparison between the two corporations, including its difference to common points. Evaluating the different approaches to management used by Nissan and Siemens is an easy viewpoint to start with. To accomplish that, in my opinion, a thorough explanation of different management methods should be done. Secondly each company has its own way to strengthen the practice of management by carrying out organisational theory. So the exact extent of how effective does the theory reach should be discussed. What’s more, details such as the nature of groups, promoting factors of teamwork and the impact of technology on team functioning should also be noticed.

Ⅱ. Findings

2.1 A concise background of Siemens AG and Nissan
To begin with, the concise history of Siemens AG and Nissan must be mentioned. Nissan Motor Company was founded in 1933, while Siemens AG was founded in 1847. Both of them are very old corporations, with leaders and very purpose changing, suffering numerous external factors like Wars and economic crisis, and of course the crisis of themselves. The existence itself for the two is a miracle. So the factors like chief executive officers replacements, the very first entrepreneurs, and decisive events should be noticed and stressed.

2.2 The high performance culture of Siemens
In terms of cultural and structural impacts, Siemens’ unique high performance culture is the core. As a large organization with nearly half a million employees, Siemens is operating on a tall structure, which is the best organising manner for such a global corporation. Under this appropriate hierarchy structure, the overall performance would be excellent, especially with its effectiveness. Further, every company is committed to its staff, same as Siemens. To some extent, personal success therefore decides the organisational success. So getting employees organised, trained and motivated well is the key pillar, while the relationship between Siemens’ structure and culture is playing a significant role.

2.3 Comparison of organisational structure and culture
Then different culture needs to be discussed. Two companies are large global organisations with hierarchy system, and so there must be some clues to follow in various aspects about culture. The cultural core of Siemens AG is high performance, which could also be explained as efficiency. Inside Siemens AG, from the average operatives to CEO at the top, they should pursue the high performance value all the time, and of course there are chains such as people excellence and competitive advantage to engage the maximum efficiency. As for Nissan, they believe ‘the power comes from inside’. As a global group, with multicultural background employees, maximising the profit from its diversity is their motto.

Tall Organizational Structure

Also the organisational structure between these two should be compared. Both of them are large global organisations, with 157,365 employees in Nissan and 370,000 employees in Siemens AG throughout the world, which are on hierarchy basis with tall structure. The difference is, Siemens has 4 main sections: energy, healthcare, industry, and infrastructure with cities separately, while there are 8 persons in charge of these sections on managing board. By contrast, Nissan has its main commercial intercourse on Manufacturing, sales and related business of automotive products and marine equipment, with its current President and Chief Executive Officer Carlos Ghosn.

2.4 Effectiveness of different leadership styles
In the first place, authoritarian style is very typical. Generally this kind of style is being used by a powerful manager, who is the decisive factor, and usually only the manager has the authority. By contract, the democratic style distributes its power among the group, while the manager plays a functional part of the group, and group members could make decisions together. These two styles are opposed to each other, however, there is a special style called laissez-faire. Within this definition, the manager is playing a relaxing role. With full authority applied to group members, the manager only works when it is necessary.

2.5 Approaches to management among Siemens AG and Nissan
There are two aspects should be noticed about the management of Siemens AG. People excellence as well as talent management aims at matching talent to according to their inherent nature. This contains job enrichment which encourages employees to take extra tasks and responsibilities and job enlargement which gives a widen extent of skills development. Further, talent management makes it feasible for managers to encourage workers scattered the corporation. A successful approach to talent management for staff could fulfil their potential; regardless of they are the average persons or highfliers. On the other hand, Performance Management Process greatly builds an interactive connective between organisational targets and individual targets. From both individual and company there are chains to orientate Siemens AG toward success.
As for Nissan, as a detailed point, the plant in Sunderland could be a great example to dig up. It operates on a flow production, which connect operatives and automated machine efficiently. Also to achieve full potential of each individual, there is a cycle process called ‘plan-do-action-check’ has been used, which gathers ideas from employees rather than think of by one or two decision makers and could make the production line smoother. Meanwhile, Nissan is using a key theory expressed as Total Quality Management (TQM). Under this approach, Nissan combined customers’ requirements and establish the customer-leading targets to reach the maximum profit in the best way.

Total Quality Management and Cycle Process

2.6 Factors influence individual behaviour at work
Motivation is the most decisive element of individual behaviour. To a large extent, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs does make sense, which states physiology, safety, socialising, esteem and self-actualisation mainly motivate people, as it is changing over time. In his theory, the priority factor is physiology. Undoubtedly money and working conditions are the very basic and essential need for the average person, since at least everybody needs to earn something in somewhere just for surviving. Meanwhile, the next stage is looking at employees’ job safety and job security, a stable position always settles workers down.
Further need is what he refers to as positive work groups and friendly supervision, which is similar to be trusted and entrusted with responsibility, exactly the status in a group. Definitely this would enhance their sense of engagement and commitment, leading to positive individual behaviour. The most valuable factor that is very hard to reach is esteem and satisfaction. Nobody likes working in a condition with constant conflicts and unreasonable criticism, but usually an ideal working condition with mutual respect and understanding is uncommon to some degree. So this could greatly motivate individuals do good work. Laterally from workers’ side, to reach its full potential, there might be some personal requirements should be fulfilled owing to specific case.

2.7 Different motivational theories
Again the Nissan plant at Sunderland is a very demonstrative example of different motivational theories. Refer to the production line, Fredrick Tylor who believed workers were only motivated by money is kind of reasonable, since there is a successful former application that Henry Ford made the first production line by using Tylor’s theory. To be more exact, Tylor’s theory focuses on training workers with the most efficient way and then supervising them to ensure they are working on this way. As the payment rate is based on the productivity done by operatives, the priority for all employees is to maintain the production. A detailed example is, inside this Nissan plant, there is a department called NMUK, which concludes the training needs with individual needs and then to make organise training programmes, similar to what Ford did long time ago.
Despite Tylor’s theory has many advantages, the drawback should also be noticed. It only works for manufacture like artisan industry to some degree, meanwhile not everyone works only for money. Being more compensational, Herzberg’s two-factor theory states there are certain elements contributes to job satisfaction while some others cause dissatisfaction. Taking Siemens AG as an example, its unique job enrichment along with job enlargement maximise the responsibility, recognition and nature of employees, which could encourage the workers to work on the way they prefer, meanwhile bringing in job satisfaction. Under this situation, staff would not only perform routine work simply for salary, but also for the enjoyable fun inside their works.

2.8 Nature of groups and group behaviour of Siemens
Siemens is a formal group. To demonstrate that, firstly, Siemens is a global organisation, operating on hierarchy structure, with just under half a million employees. It refers to its group consciousness as high performance culture, along with its shared targets and shared responsibility. Further, inside the structure, it is built on people excellence including job enrichment and job enlargement, while a direct link has built between the corporative strategies and personal plans. Therefore, all the above factors make Siemens a formal group.
To be more exact, bolstered by many other factors, Siemens has its high performance culture. All of the staff in this group, from the most senior executive to the newest trainee, are sharing the same culture. To connect the chain from the bottom to the top, factors like people excellence, targets and teamwork involved in. A detailed viewpoint is, as a individual in this group, an employee has chances to match talent, to perform teamwork, to be trusted, then to feel responsibility, which also means individuals have their specific roles; As part of the chain, managing manners like performance management, sharing targets are used to organise this group to pursue the maximum profit. So far Siemens is a formal group undoubtedly.

2.9 Factors to the development of effective teamwork at Siemens
Referring to factors that may affect teamwork inside Siemens, in the first place, from positive side, its specific culture of high performance team should be emphasized. This company respect different talent of everyone, and is willing to provide its staff chances to match their talent, of which they refer to as job enrichment and job enlargement, a special care with humanism inside a team. What’s more, this is also an attempt to approach functional roles for each individual. As a whole team, there must be some theories to follow to perform teamwork. Siemens operate it on People Excellence creed. Firstly building a value of responsibility for employees, then making them being trusted, finally the mentioned steps would lead to engagement, commitment for teamwork, including its development.
As for the negative side, the size of teams could be a latent problem. According to some research, the most suitable size for a team is between 2 and 12 members. In such a global company, sometimes maybe it is infeasible to allocate staff with the ideal size for different projects. Even if the allocation is organised properly, how to build shared responsibility and targets is very uncertain. Also problems like unifying compatibility, values and attitudes could be encountered. All the above elements would undermine the effectiveness of teamwork in Siemens.

Ⅲ. Conclusions

3.1 Structure and culture affect the performance of Siemens
Firstly Siemens has already operated on suitable organisational structure. As for the cultural influence interacts with its structure, Siemens comprises People Excellence to build high performance culture, shared target and shared responsibility to enhance commitment and engagement, also competitive advantage to support high performance. In addition, there is a tight connection between its culture and structure called Performance management process, which builds a direct link between the corporate strategies and individual plans. Those factors alone with structure composed a strong driving force, which keeps Siemens moving forward, achieves full potential, and works on its best performance.

3.2 Explanation of the leadership of Siemens AG
Each style fits for its aimed area. For instance, in terms of manufacture, artisan industry or production lines, the authoritarian is extremely suitable. All the operatives would operate under direct supervision with routine works. By comparison, for the managing board or an executive grade, to gather the idea each one, to synthesize each kind of situation, certainly the democratic style is best solution while laissez-faire style is the most effective way to make ideas, and innovations, usually involving creativity. Siemens AG tends to belong to an intermediate leadership between democracy and laissez-faire. Their shared targets and shared responsibility as well as talent management system has already defined the style.

3.3 Organisational theory influences the practice of management
In the first place, we define an organisation as a social arrangement for achieving controlled performance in pursuit of collective goals. The decisive factor of a company is its people and the management. In an organisation, social arrangement means groups of people, regardless of the form of a team, a project or a department. Practically, inside Siemens AG, specialised for energy sector, Michael Suess is in charge overall, whereas there are 9 other CEOs and CFOs for detailed department to share their unique responsibilities.
In regard to controlled performance, which means the survival of an organisation is determined by its performance, is its high performance culture and other related elements for Siemens AG. To strengthen the practice of management, Siemens AG is using HR development, People Excellence for individuals, and Shared Targets along with Performance Management Process for comprehensive management. Under this theory, it connects individuals and the company closely owing to the shared value, while as a whole both of them performed pretty well over the years. Simultaneously, collective goals which represent shared objectives have been reached. Theoretically, role culture is applied to support management. Also by using Siemens as an example, inside the corporation there are energy, healthcare, industry and infrastructure sectors. Each sector aims at a specific area, and there is no substitute in collateral sectors.

3.4 Different leadership styles motivate organisations in periods of change
At the very beginning, in my opinion, for most entrepreneurs, the authoritarian style would be the most suitable solution. A well-known factor is, for most new organisations operated by entrepreneurs, the first three years has been proven to be the hardest time. During this time, the pressure form mature competitors outside, non-perseverance colleagues inside, even the tough men shall yield, so do the average people. Therefore, during this period of time, a powerful leader who has strong willpower with intelligence is significant. The managers should be strict and give orders all the time with great confidence, at least when facing subordinates.
Further, as long as a strict but confident impression is given, the strong driving force will be built inside the organisation, which undoubtedly composes a mandatory culture. To some extent, operating a new company is like leading a troop, what do soldiers or employees do is simply obey orders or follow instructions with no hesitation. Moreover, if a mature enterprise is formed, in another word, when the aggressive strategies used in early pioneering days are replaced by long term holding strategies, the leading style should tend to democracy or laissez-faire. For old companies, how to raise its competitive power for customer retention usually the priority, while maintaining a democratic or even laissez-faire atmosphere to think of more ideas and innovations is the point.

3.5 The usefulness of motivational theories for managers
With well-equipped facility and guaranteed safety at workplace, the motivational elements made work more comfortable, whereas better job satisfaction would be achieved. In terms of its different formative period and background, observing from a developing viewpoint, the usefulness of those 3 motivational theories has its own limitation: Tylor’s theory stress on money only; the sequence of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is not always true; Herzberg’s two-factor theory cut the connection between job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction. On the other hand, as I mentioned before, regardless of the limitation, considering from special areas like sales, manufacture, innovations, and project making, each theory has its own suitable place. Therefore, as a manager, choosing the proper motivational theory owing to the specific period and condition is most important. I am assuming this part of debate is based on managers from large mature organisations like Nissan or Siemens AG, owing to the similar sustainable long term steady character of these global powerhouses.

3.6 Impact of technology on team functioning within Siemens
Technology has been viewed as one of the most essential elements of the social development, including organisations. So, how technology affects team functioning within Siemens AG is an issue open to debate. To start with, communication manners is playing an essential role through team functioning. Telephone, cell phone, fax, telegram, email, video conference has been requisite for many years. Teams inside Siemens, regardless of it is a sales team, a research team, or even a security team, modern technology bind its team members together, to enhance communication, to make profit. Back to the old days, It might took a messenger 10 days to deliver a mail from Siemens UK to Siemens Head Office Germany, but now it just needs less than 1 second by email.
Highly advanced Transportation is another main aspect to analyse. Logistics departments of Siemens should be the most beneficial part owing to the progress. Large powerhouse usually involves great amount of cargo transportation, while the train, aircraft, ship and truck delivery provide multiple options for the health equipment, digital chips, and infrastructures made by different sectors and teams of Siemens. Refer to globalisation, the mature airline makes it possible that the representatives from different sectors and teams of Siemens across the world could attend the Round Table and discuss policies together physically. Therefore, the development of technology has brought plenty of benefits.

Reference

Nissan Motor Company. 2012. Our Company. [online] Available at: http://www.nissan-global.com [Assessed November 5 2013]

Siemens Global. 2013. About Siemens. [online] Available at: http://www.siemens.com [Assessed November 5 2013]

The Times 100 Business Case Studies. 2013. Planning for quality and productivity: A Nissan case study. [online] Available at: http://businesscasestudies.co.uk/nissan [Assessed November 12 2013]

Herzberg, Frederick; Mausner, Bernard; Snyderman, Barbara Bloch. 1959. The motivation to work. 2nd ed. New York; London: J. Wiley and Sons. (Motivation versus Hygiene 113-120)

Maslow, A. H. 1954. Motivation and Personality. 1st ed. New York; Evanston; London: Harper & Row. (80-106 A Theory of Human Motivation)

Mind Tools. 2013. Leadership Styles, Choosing the Right Style for the Situation. [online]. Available at: http://www.mindtools.com [Accessed November 20 2013]