Re: Binary scheme of democracy and centralism

["Charles Jannuzi" <jannuzi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>   Why does  a large  firm like Ford  have many  different factories
>      which exchange  commodities (e.g. car parts) with  each other but
>      without using the market?

Interestingly enough, Toyota, always rated one of the most 'efficient' and
'profitable' of the Japanese automakers is the least vertically hierchical.
It passes risks and distress in the market onto its numerous suppliers and
acts as a center for design, marketing and final assembly (with intense
quality control processes). It's exact opposite would have to be GM.

Besides selling off parts divisions, Ghosn at Nissan is trying to Toyotatize
the firm. Actually, the two goals go together. He sells off a parts division
and it might get contracts with Nissan, but Nissan and its keiretsu bank are
no longer responsible for extending credit and that spun off company will
now be placed in direct competition with other possible suppliers.

I know that selling off the parts divisions and other holdings have been
profitable for Nissan, but I'm not sure about the rest. For example, sharing
platforms with Renault might mean more business for Nissan , if Nissan makes
the platforms. But it might mean Nissan has to shed even more workers if it
neither makes the shared platforms but is expected to pay US levels of
dividends to shareholders (the number one being Renault).


Charles Jannuzi