Topic 1: What Are Some Big-Name Companies That Recently Stop ✓ Solved

Topic 1 What Are Some Big Name Companies That Recently Stopped Produc

Identify big-name companies that have recently ceased producing certain products following the entry of aggressive Asian or European competitors into their markets. Discuss at least two companies, focusing on their approaches and the outcomes in comparison to each other. Additionally, analyze whether these Asian or European entrants employ lean practices, and examine how these practices influence market dynamics and company decisions.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The landscape of global manufacturing and production has undergone significant transformation over recent years, characterized by increased competition from international players and strategic shifts within established companies. The aggressive entry of Asian and European producers into markets traditionally dominated by American firms has led to notable decisions among big-name corporations to cease certain product lines. This paper examines two such companies, analyzing their responses to international competition, their strategies, and the influence of lean manufacturing practices adopted by their competitors.

Case 1: General Motors’ Discontinuation of Sedan Models

General Motors (GM), a prominent American automobile manufacturer, announced in recent years the discontinuation of several sedan models, notably the Chevrolet Cruze and Buick Cascada. This strategic move was primarily prompted by declining sales in traditional sedan segments, exacerbated by the entry of cost-effective Asian competitors, especially Japanese and South Korean automakers such as Toyota, Honda, and Hyundai.

These Asian automakers embraced lean manufacturing principles, notably the Toyota Production System (TPS), which emphasizes waste reduction, continuous improvement (kaizen), and just-in-time (JIT) inventory management. By adopting lean practices, these producers optimized efficiency, reduced costs, and enhanced product quality, allowing them to capture significant market share in North America and Europe.

GM’s decision to shift focus towards SUVs and electric vehicles reflects a strategic repositioning that considers the competitive landscape shaped by lean-oriented Asian firms. The outcomes included a decline in traditional sedan sales but an overall strategic alignment with market trends and consumer preferences. The comparison indicates that while GM’s approach was reactive and demarcated by product discontinuation, Asian competitors’ lean practices fueled their aggressive market penetration and operational efficiency.

Case 2: Nokia’s Withdrawal from Smartphone Production

Nokia, once a dominant player in the mobile phone market, dramatically reduced its manufacturing portfolio and exited certain smartphone segments following intense competition from Asian manufacturers, particularly Apple, Samsung, and Chinese brands like Huawei and Xiaomi. These Asian companies employed lean manufacturing techniques, leveraging economies of scale and supply chain efficiencies.

Apple and Samsung, in particular, utilized lean principles—such as standardized components, strategic inventory management, and continuous process improvements—to outmaneuver competitors and diminish costs. Nokia’s traditional emphasis on feature phones and its inability to adapt swiftly to this lean-oriented competition contributed to its decline and eventual withdrawal from certain product lines.

The outcome illustrated how lean manufacturing practices by Asian firms, coupled with rapid innovation cycles, adversely affected Nokia’s market position. The contrast underscores that lean practices facilitated Asian firms' swift product development and cost management, leading to the phasing out of companies like Nokia in certain segments.

Comparison of Approaches and Outcomes

Both GM and Nokia faced challenges due to Asian and European producers utilizing lean manufacturing principles, which offered them competitive advantages. While GM responded by discontinuing specific models and shifting towards new segments (electric vehicles, SUVs), Nokia reduced production of certain smartphone lines, focusing on core strengths and strategic repositioning.

The key difference lies in the strategic responses: GM’s approach was to adapt and invest in future technologies, whereas Nokia’s strategy was to retreat from competitive segments. The outcomes reflect the effectiveness of lean practices in enabling Asian competitors to produce high-quality, low-cost products rapidly, thus reshaping market dynamics. GM’s pivot exemplifies adaptation, while Nokia’s experience underscores the risks of inability to effectively respond to lean-driven competition.

Conclusion

The entry of Asian and European lean-practice-driven manufacturers has profoundly impacted American corporations, prompting cessation of certain product lines. Companies like GM and Nokia exemplify different strategic responses—diversification and innovation versus retreat—highlighting the influence of lean practices in shaping competitive outcomes. Understanding these dynamics is essential for future strategic planning and operational excellence in global markets.

References

• Holweg, M. (2007). The Evolution of Lean Manufacturing. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27(5), 480-505.
• Ohno, T. (1988). The Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. CRC Press.
• Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (2003). Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation. Free Press.
• Liker, J. K. (2004). The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World's Greatest Manufacturer. McGraw-Hill.
• Choi, T. Y., & Liker, J. K. (2004). Leading Global Lean Supply Chains. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(2), 53-59.
• Suzuki, S. (2004). An Introduction to Lean Production. International Journal of Production Research, 42(4), 713-722.
• Spear, S., & Bowen, H. K. (1999). Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System. Harvard Business Review, 77(5), 96-106.
• Flynn, B. B., Sakakibara, S., & Flynn, E. J. (1994). Restructuring the Manufacturing Strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 37(2), 339-371.
• Shah, R., & Ward, P. T. (2003). Lean Manufacturing: Context, Practice Bundles, and Performance. Journal of Operations Management, 21(2), 129-149.
• Naylor, J. B., Naim, M. M., & Berry, D. (1999). Leagility: Integrating the Lean and Agile Manufacturing Paradigms in the Physical Supply Chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 62(1-2), 107-122.