Custom essays on Toyota Motors

Concerning structure and culture issues, it is possible to identify three major weaknesses of Toyota Motors hat contributed to current situation. Firstly, the former non-family government of Toyota made some intentions to change its corporate culture from collaborate to competitive (Borowski, 2010), especially in financial sphere. On one hand, this decision corresponds to the demands of time, and might increase efficiency of the company (which was witnessed for a decade). On the other hand, the shift from one culture to another should not be rapid, and should not be fragmentary, as in case of Toyota. Moreover, the direct shift from collaboration to competitiveness, in my opinion, is quite painful for the company, since collaboration focuses on flexibility and integration, while competitive style is based on differentiation and stability. It can be reasonable to use the culture of control as a transitional one.
The second weak side of Toyota Motors is common for both governments: they stick to one structure and one culture for the whole corporation, while, in my opinion, it is necessary to distinguish culture and structure between departments. Accordingly, methods of control should also be diversified within departments; such approach will add flexibility to Toyota structure and make it more efficient in the changed market environment.
One of principal failures of Hiroshi Okuda, former non-family President of Toyota, was the attempt to assign the competing culture to engineering departments. These departments have always been the strong side of Toyota, and changing their organizational culture and controls meant to lose major competitive advantage. Thus, it is one of the reasons of 2010 quality crisis.
Thirdly, Akio Toyoda has chosen the right direction in addressing the above-mentioned weakness, but he does not address the inappropriateness of Japanese-like management style in current economical situation. Indeed, stability and control need to be valued for quality management; however, this approach will be inefficient for financial and marketing departments, since they have to operate in the global environment and face competition with cost-efficient companies.
Moreover, I believe that the strategy of operational management (Toyota Motor Corporation, 2010), proclaimed by Fujio Cho, chairman of Toyota Motors, in Toyota Annual Report 2009, should be applied with respect to changing market conditions, and best practices of American and European car makers have to be analyzed. The decision of Mr. Toyoda to return to Japanese style of management is quite respectful, but it is necessary not to forget that Toyota is operating worldwide, and its position has to be considered in the context of global issues.

References
Aronson, Bruce. (2010). Learning from Toyota’s Troubles: Board Oversight and the Debate on Board Structure and Director Independence in Japan.
Borowski, Arkadi. (2010). Report on the Toyota Company. GRIN Verlag.
Liker, Jeffrey K. & Hoseus, Michael. (2007). Toyota Culture: The Heart and Soul of the Toyota Way. McGraw Hill Professional.
Shirouzu, Norihiko . (2010, April 14). Inside Toyota, Executives Trade Blame Over Debacle. Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition).