* Views expressed in this report are those of the authors.

COMMGMT 3001

INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT III

NISSAN IN EUROPE

AUTHORS:

MATT WOOLLEY

SIANG (CHRISTINE) LOW

JOEL IRWIN

ROSLYN HAYNIE

ii

Executive Summary

This report analysed Nissan's operations in Europe. The current vehicle industry in

Europe was analysed in detail along with potential cultural differences. The report

then looked into the internal and external environment which Nissan currently is in

within Europe. It was found that Nissan is performing relatively well. This is

particularly due to the strong Nissan-Renault alliance that is providing Nissan with

considerable competitive advantage. However, it was also found that Nissan was at

risk of cultural conflict which could threaten this alliance. Furthermore, it was found

that the Central and Eastern European markets pose a great opportunity for Nissan in

the region. However, Nissan lacks the diesel technology to compete in the European

market where diesel is strongly preferred over petrol. Thus, it was recommended that

Nissan increase its expenditure on diesel technology and seek to gain competency in

this area through Renault. Finally, it was recommended that Nissan obtain ISO 9001

accreditation to ensure that any quality issues with their vehicles are overcome.

1

Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................... I

CONTENTS............................................................................................................................................1

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................2

RENAULT-NISSAN ................................................................................................................................2

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES...............................................................................................................3

COMPETITOR ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................6

INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL ANALYSIS ..................... ..................................................................7

INTERNAL FACTORS.........................................................................................................................7

STRENGTHS .........................................................................................................................................7 Global Financial Position..............................................................................................................7 Manufacturing Processes ..............................................................................................................9 Local Management Development Programs .................................................................................9 Partnership with Renault .............................................................................................................10

WEAKNESSES....................................................................................................................................11 Product Recalls ............................................................................................................................11 Lack of Diesel Technology...........................................................................................................11

EXTERNAL FACTORS......................................................................................................................13

OPPORTUNITIES ................................................................................................................................13 Eastern and Central Europe ........................................................................................................13 Renault-Nissan Purchasing Organisation ..................................................................................13 Distribution Network....................................................................................................................13

THREATS ...........................................................................................................................................14 Market Saturation ........................................................................................................................14 Cross-Cultural Disharmony.........................................................................................................14 Commodity Prices ........................................................................................................................14 Competitive Rivalry ......................................................................................................................15

RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................................................................................................17

APPENDIX A – INTERNAL FACTOR ANALYSIS SUMMARY (IFAS ).....................................21

APPENDIX B – EXTERNAL FACTOR ANALYSIS SUMMARY (EFAS )...................................22

APPENDIX C - MEETING MINUTES AND COMMUNICATION SUMM ARY.............ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

2

Introduction

Nissan is a globally competitive automobile manufacturer, and through their alliance

with Renault, has become part of the fourth largest manufacturer worldwide. But

whilst Nissan is present in all continents of the world, their presence in Europe is

relatively small. It widely believed that Nissan Europe’s success will be determined

by their utilisation of their local based partner Renault and their ability to gain

competitive advantages in this saturated and mature market.

Nissan’s operations in Europe entail a degree of cross cultural interactions; in addition

to their interaction with their counterparts in Renault they will also have to interact

with representatives from nations throughout Europe. This report aims to find the

causes of these issues at Nissan Europe and make recommendations to improve

Nissan’s performance. The cultural differences, industry position and both internal

and external strategic factors at Nissan Europe will be analysed as a basis for these

recommendations.

Renault-Nissan

Nissan is currently involved in a long-term alliance with Renault – this is especially

important when considering Nissan’s European operations. The alliance, which began

in 1999, is an equity sharing venture between the two companies: Renault owns 44%

of Nissan and Nissan own 15% of Renault – however, to ensure the interests of each

company are protected this stock has no voting rights (Saint-Seine, 2004). Recently,

Renault and Nissan’s shareholders elected to share a CEO - Carlos Ghosn. This has

led to a convergence of their strategic direction and a tightening of the relationship

such that there is frequent transfer of staff between the organisations.

Many of the formal interactions are facilitated by Renault Nissan B.V. which is

equally owned by Renault and Nissan. Renault Nissan B.V. also operates two

subsidiary companies – the Renault-Nissan Purchasing Organisation (RNPO) and the

Renault-Nissan Information Systems (RNIS). These subsidiaries ensure that Renault

and Nissan have increased power over suppliers and freedom of information

respectively.

3

Cultural Differences

Europe is a culturally diverse region, with several countries each with their own

specific culture and subcultures. To analyse all of these cultures individually against

the native culture of Nissan (Japanese) would be beyond the scope of the report, thus

our analysis only compares Japanese culture with French (important due to the

alliance) and the European average, which despite cultural convergence in the

European Union is only a rough indicator of European values.

Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are highly regarded as tools to identify the primary

differences between cultures. Thus, Hofstede’s cultural dimensions were used to

compare French culture, the European cultural average and the Japanese culture.

Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions

68

47

86

43

71

31

6567

41

80

9295

46

54

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PowerDistance

Individualism Masculinity UncertaintyAvoidance

Long-TermOrientation

Rat

ing

France European Average Japan

Figure 1: Hofstede Cultural Dimensions Comparison (Hofstede, 1983)

4

According to Hofstede’s analysis, there are three cultural dimensions that are

significantly different between French and Japanese culture – power distance,

individualism and masculinity (Hofstede, 1983).

A country’s ‘Masculinity’ represents the degree to which society reinforces “the

traditional masculine role model of male achievement, control and power” (Hofstede,

1983). Due to the difference in masculinity scores, it would be expected that Japanese

employees have a different conception of gender compared to their European and

French counterparts. Potentially this could lead to relational stress between female

European employees and Nissan’s staff. Japanese gender differentiation could also

create legal problems, due to the anti-discrimination legislation in Europe.

A high ‘Power Distance’ score is closely correlated with an autocratic management

style. The difference between Japan and France would indicate that French managers

have a more centralised, less consultative approach than their Japanese colleagues. It

should be noted that the European average power distance is far below that of both

Japan and France, suggesting that the autocratic style of management in these

countries would be unusual throughout Europe.

Whilst both countries have high power distance scores, the source of these strong

hierarchies is different. The Japanese place high importance on the age of the

employee; Deller and Flunkert (1996) state that "even capable junior staff will not be

given preference over older colleagues". So Japanese employees understand that

progression upwards in their organization is a matter of persistence and commitment

to the group achievements. The importance of seniority is also associated with the

Japanese ideal of life-long tenure, with most employees committing to one firm which

they work for their whole life.

In contrast, the French system of hierarchy is based on the educational background of

the individual. The French education system is highly structured, with the most

talented pupils being accepted to exclusive schools, the ‘grands écoles’. Acceptance

to these schools is a status symbol that will prevail through the life of the individual,

with the French concept of success being judged by a person’s ‘educational level,

family background, and financial status rather than by direct accomplishment’

5

(Newson-Ballé & Gottschalk, 1996). This may cause conflict if Japanese do not

respect their younger French counterparts and the French do not respect their

(possibly) uneducated Nissan colleagues.

A country’s ‘Individualism’ represents the degree to which society reinforces

individual over collective achievement. Employees with a high level of individualism

typically work better individually than those with low scores. Fitting closely to the

European average, France has an individualism score of 71 compared with Japan’s 46.

Thus, in its European operations, Nissan must provide the ability for individuals to

‘prove’ themselves and achieve personal success. If implemented, this will lead to

increased motivation and performance in Nissan’s European operations.

The ‘Long-Term Orientation’ represents the degree to which the members of a society

focus on long-term goals over short-term. French data for this criterion is unavailable

but the European average indicates a much shorter time focus than in Japan. It is

important that Nissan’s managers reach a balanced compromise when designing

strategies particularly when working with Renault.

6

Competitor Analysis

With the exception of Eastern Europe, the European automobile industry is mature

and saturated. Thus, Nissan will be competing against both European firms that are

well established in the area and international car markers that bring their own

expertise and competitive advantages into the region. Two local manufacturers (VW

and PSA), three international manufacturers (General Motors, Ford and

DaimlerChrysler) and two Japanese manufacturers (Mitsubishi and Toyota) were

deemed to be the primary competitors of Nissan Europe. Table 1 highlights key

aspects of these competitors in relation to Nissan.

Table 1: Competitor Analysis Summary

Competitor Key Aspects

General Motors - Largest manufacturer in the world

- Excellent portfolio of brands

DaimlerChrysler - Divided by cultural tension

Ford - Large losses from European operations

- May withdraw from Europe

Toyota - Excellent manufacturing technology

- Known for reliability

Mitsubishi - Strong European Sales Growth

VW - Highly successful

- Well established in European market

- Strong market knowledge and experience

PSA - Core market in Europe

- Fashionable in Europe

7

Internal and External Analysis

When analysing an international company, it is important that both internal and

external factors are considered. Along with the cultural and environmental situation,

strengths and weaknesses (internal factors) and opportunities and threats (external

factors) are key determinants of appropriate company strategy and structure. External

Factor Analysis Summary (EFAS) and Internal Factor Analysis Summary (IFAS)

were conducted to determine the most important factors for Nissan Europe. The most

important factors are discussed below.

Internal Factors

Please see Appendix A for the complete Internal Factor Analysis Summary. Overall

Nissan Europe was deemed to be performing slightly below average (2.95/5)

internally. This indicates that new strategies and possibly a new company structure

are required in order to ensure that performance is improved in the mid-long term.

Strengths

Global Financial Position

One of Nissan Europe’s key strengths is its global financial position. Although,

Nissan’s European operations (including France) are presently unprofitable (Nissan

Motor Company, 2004), Nissan globally has a strong enough position to withstand

these difficulties until Nissan can establish itself in Europe.

8

Table 2: Five Year Financial Summary from 2004 Annual Report1

From this table we are able to analyse Nissan’s financial position in 3 key areas –

profitability, solvency and liquidity. Return on Assets (ROA) is a key indicator of

profitability and thus, overall financial position and management. Since 2000, Nissan

has a ROA of 5.1% which is quite high for a company of such a large size.

Furthermore, Nissan has had an Assets/Long Term Liabilities Ratio of between 0.2

and 0.22. This is an excellent figure and indicates that Nissan will be able to

withstand tough economic conditions. This is verified by an AAA rating issued by

Standard and Poor’s (2006).

One final indicator of the strong financial position held by Nissan is its overall

growth. Despite a lack of European growth (Nissan Motor Company, 2004), from

2000 to 2004 inclusive, Nissan experienced an annual average of 8.94% revenue

growth, 11.53% net income growth and 11.16% asset growth. These figures strongly

support the argument that Nissan globally is in a strong financial position and will be

able to provide Nissan Europe with backing to compete in the saturated European

market.

1 This table is sourced from Nissan’s Annual Report (2004) but has been adapted into AUD for convenience using 1AUD = ¥86.58.

9

Manufacturing Processes

One of the key strengths of Nissan Europe is its manufacturing processes and

technology. Nissan has worked hard to foster a culture of continual improvement

which is in many ways similar to Total Quality Management (TQM) (Drummond,

2001). TQM and related strategies have been shown to have the potential to provide

sustainable competitive advantage - this is true in Nissan’s case (Reed et. al., 2000).

In 2004, Nissan’s European operations were rewarded financially for their culture of

improvement. Works Management (2004) found that there were examples of line

workers enabling Nissan to cut 70% of their floor space requirements and 0.16

minutes per vehicle in their European operations. It has been a combination of

utilising and developing all elements of their workers and machinery that has led

Nissan Europe to develop a core competency in this area. Line workers even spend

five days training in the use of a screwdriver to ensure that they are as efficient as

possible (Glover, 2006). The gains by improvements such as these have resulted in

Nissan Europe being awarded the Best Factory Award in Europe (T&P, 2004).

This strength that Nissan holds within the European market has resulted in

quantifiable differences between the performance of Nissan and the ‘Big Three’

(Ford, DaimlerChrysler and General Motors). According to Welch (2003), the ‘Big

Three’ are forced to ‘play catch-up’ because of their inferior manufacturing processes.

For example, it requires 15.7 hours of labour for Nissan to manufacture a car

compared with 44.2 for Ford, 33.8 for DaimlerChrysler and 29.9 for General Motors.

Additionally, Nissan’s plants can build-to-order different vehicles on the same line

resulting in no costly inventory requirements (Treece, 2005).

Local Management Development Programs

The third key strength of Nissan Europe is its continuing investment in management

development programs. These focus around increasing both the quality and speed of

decision making (Datamonitor, 2005). As these two goals are being realised, Nissan

has been able to attain the competitive advantage associated with coordinated

10

management training (Winterton & Winterton, 1997). These include rotations of 12-

18 months incorporating training with high performance benchmarks that the manager

must achieve within this time (Nissan Motor Company, 2005).

Furthermore, recently Nissan Europe has, in conjunction with Renault, developed a

program that all managers must complete (known as the ‘Alliance Business Way’).

Managers across the Nissan-Renault Alliance are formed into cross-functional and

cross-cultural teams to solve specific problems. This has three key outcomes that all

lead to competitive advantage. Firstly, Nissan Europe achieves solutions that are,

according to Tucker et. al. (1996), superior to those produced by individuals or intra-

functional teams. Secondly, the managers are given a broader view which they can

then apply to subsequent problems that they face in their roles. Thirdly,

communication channels are developed across the Alliance and organisation which

results in increased performance (Lee & Rajdeep, 2004).

Partnership with Renault

As described in the Introduction, Nissan and Renault are part of an equity, capital and

knowledge sharing alliance. This has even reached the level where they share a

common CEO – Carlos Ghosn. As a part of this, they both jointly own the RNPO and

RNIS. Despite the possible threat of cultural disharmony between the organizations,

there are significant signs that the alliance is proving mutually beneficial. Overseen

by 7 steering committees, Nissan and Renault are amalgamating the competitive

advantages that they had each formed over their past history. This alliance should

ensure that new levels of competitive advantage are achieved and is a core strength of

Nissan.

11

Weaknesses

Product Recalls

In 2004, Nissan recalled more than 2.5 million cars worldwide and more than 300

million in Europe alone, due to an engine defect (Business Manager, 2004; Bowden &

Austin, 2003). Aside from the direct cost (estimated to be approximately €1.5bn),

significant harm has been done to Nissan Europe’s brand image (Rupp, 2004).

Unfortunately for Nissan, the engine defect occurred in their diesel engines – their

most popular engines within Europe. Government-initiated product recalls (such as in

this example) generally lead the consumer to believe that any product from the

manufacturer is of inferior build quality and has low reliability. This quality problem

may not only halt Nissan’s European expansion but might also reduce current market

share. Although there have been no reports of accidents caused by the defect in the

engines, Nissan’s image as a major keiretsu has been severely affected.

Lack of Diesel Technology

In the Japanese market, diesel accounts for only 0.4% of vehicles sold (Rowley,

2006). In contrast, diesel is very popular in Europe and in 2004 roughly 46% of all

vehicles sold in Europe used diesel fuel (Bensaïd, 2004). This percentage is increasing

rapidly – in the year ending 1st January 2006 the number of diesel cars sold increased

by 7.5% compared to a sales fall of 7.4% for unleaded (Seguin, 2006). Some analysts

believe that the diesel market will account for more than 80% of total vehicle sales in

Europe by the end of 2008.

Diesel technology has been improving significantly over the past decade reducing

emissions, fuel consumption and cost. As Nissan’s home country has a low demand

for diesel engines, Nissan lacks the technology and experience to produce diesel

engines of comparative quality. This has been reflected in the segment market share

that Nissan has, which is currently less than 2% (see below).

12

Figure 2: Share of European Diesel Car Sales (Ricardo Plc., 2005)

13

External Factors

Please see Appendix B for the complete External Factor Analysis Summary.

Opportunities

Eastern and Central Europe

Eastern and Central European nations, many of which have recently joined the

European Union, are currently undergoing significant economic growth and thus, the

demand for non-essential goods such as vehicles is increasing rapidly. This provides

significant opportunity for Nissan Europe to expand their market presence. Many of

Nissan's direct rivals are currently experiencing large growth in these markets

(Mitsubishi reported an increase of more than 100%) and it is essential that Nissan

seizes this opportunity before these rivals establish themselves.

Renault-Nissan Purchasing Organisation

The RNPO, which was established in 2001 in the early stages of the alliance, was one

of the key ways in which Renault-Nissan would combine their resources to create a

more efficient organization. Currently Nissan and Renault share 60% of the same part

and raw material suppliers. This has led Nissan to achieve greater purchasing power

and has served to reduce costs and reduce the bargaining power of suppliers. There

still remains significant opportunity through the RNPO to decrease costs and provide

increased competitive advantage.

Distribution Network

Nissan Europe has sales networks in 19 separate countries across Europe. As a result,

Nissan lacks market presence in many countries within Europe. Whilst it is

prohibitively expensive for Nissan to setup its own distribution within these countries

(as it has such a low market share), there is opportunity for Nissan and Renault to

setup a joint distribution network. This would serve to reduce the costs of both Nissan

14

and Renault and would enable Nissan to gain increased market exposure across

Europe.

Threats

Market Saturation

The Eastern European car market is roughly stagnant with regards to sales and growth

prospects are poor. For example, in 2005 the volume of car sales in Europe fell by

0.6% (PWC, 2006). Currently Nissan is losing money from its European operations. If

the market fails to grow then Nissan Europe's viability is threatened and Nissan may

be unable to retain its market presence.

Cross-Cultural Disharmony

Nissan Europe could face a number of cultural problems in Europe, as discussed in

the above cultural analysis. As Nissan and Renault become further integrated with one

another, the risk of cross-cultural disharmony increases. If disharmony occurs then, as

occurred at DaimlerChrysler, overall company performance may be reduced and the

current strengths that the Alliance provides may become instabilities. Nissan is

currently working to reduce the likelihood through its 'Business Way' program but

corporate and national culture takes a long time to change.

Commodity Prices

Due to the economic expansion of China, changes in commodity prices could affect

the costs incurred by Nissan Europe. Over the past 12 months, the price of steel used

in car production has risen by nearly 30% (London Metal Exchange, 2006). Nissan

has taken steps to reduce the effect of rising steel prices; in 2000, Nissan began using

hot dip zinc coated steel and converted to a less expensive steel in 2002, which saved

about $16 million per year (Nissan Motor Co., 2004). This however, has done little to

reduce the upward pressure on vehicle costs and prices. As this increase in cost has

been passed on to the consumer, demand for new vehicles has reduced. This threatens

Nissan's viability in the region.

15

Competitive Rivalry

Because the European market is so saturated, Nissan will face a high level of

competition as rivals attempt to increase their market share. The Senior Vice

President of Nissan Europe, Colin Dodge, defines Nissan’s positioning strategy:

‘Europe is an incredibly competitive market, with 15 companies trying to gain market

share. We decided not to compete directly in fundamental segments. Instead, we

chose to build unique, profitable vehicles’ (Nissan Motor Company, 2004). Nissan

has anticipated difficulties increasing market share in Europe, so instead of attempting

to increase their market share have instead chose to focus on making their operations

more profitable and differentiate themselves from their competitors by creating

unique vehicles. Furthermore, their strategy of continual improvement allows Nissan

to maintain its competitive advantage.

16

Conclusion

Despite making a loss in 2005, Nissan’s operations in Europe appear to have strong

growth potential. Their alliance with Renault is providing Nissan with a new source of

competitive advantage and should provide Nissan with sufficient market leverage to

compete with larger manufacturers. However, there is risk associated with potential

cross-cultural conflict across the alliance. This is being addressed through the

‘Alliance Business Way’ program. There are two weaknesses that may prevent Nissan

from achieving its potential in Europe. Firstly, they have been suffering from product

recalls that has harmed Nissan’s European brand image. Secondly, they have a lack of

diesel technology relative to their competitors.

Eastern and Central Europe offers new markets and a local centre of production for

Nissan and if capitalised on will allow Nissan to increase their market share. Nissan’s

focus on profitability and continual improvement in Western Europe should allow

Nissan Europe to continue growth despite market saturation. Commodity prices pose

a threat to Nissan but they have reduced this effect by altering their input materials.

17

Recommendations

1. Eastern Europe offers Nissan with prospective new markets that should be

capitalized on. Nissan should focus primarily on these emerging markets

rather than the saturated Western European markets.

2. Nissan’s Alliance should be further developed to continue to provide

competitive advantage. This should include a shared distribution network to

increase Nissan’s presence whilst reducing costs.

3. Nissan should greatly increase their expenditure on the development of their

diesel technology and apply diesel technology to their whole range. This

would increase their market potential within Europe which is severely limited

due to their lack of diesel products.

4. Programs such as the Alliance Business Way and personnel transfers appear to

adequately address the cultural conflict issues however; there is a lack of

control of the effects of these programs. It is recommended that Nissan engage

in a continual review process of these programs to measure their effectiveness

and adapt their programs accordingly.

5. It is recommended that Nissan aim to achieve ISO 9001 accreditation for their

European manufacturing processes. By ensuring that their business processes

and manufacturing processes are following best practice, Nissan should ensure

that product recalls are limited in both scope and frequency.

18

Bibliography

Bensaïd, B. (2004), ‘Road Transport Fuels in Europe: The Explosion of Demand for

Diesel Fuel’, Panorama, Available from http://www.ifp.fr/IFP/en/files/cinfo/IFP-

Panorama05_10-CarburantsRoutiersVA.pdf, Last Accessed 19/05/06

Bowden, P. & Austin, A. (2003), ‘Product risk and liability news’, Freshfields

Bruckhaus Deringer, Available from

http://www.freshfields.com/practice/productliability/publications/pdfs/200312.pdf,

Last Accessed 19/05/06

Business Manager (2004), ‘Nissan in Huge Car Recall’, Business Manager, Available

from http://www.bm.com.np/bm/news/international.php?newsid=1320, Last Accessed

8/04/06

Datamonitor (2005), ‘Company Profile’, Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. SWOT Analysis, Ref.

Code 1210

Drummond, H. (2001), ‘Introduction to Organizational Behaviour’, Oxford University

Press, London

Glover, M. (2006), ‘Quality Partnership’, Automotive Engineer, Vol. 31, Issue 1

Hofstede, G. (1983), ‘National Cultures in Four Dimensions: A Research-based

Theory of Cultural Differences among Nations’, International Studies of Management

and Organizations, Vol. 13, Issue 1

Lee, R. & Rajdeep, G. (2004), ‘Strategic Responses to New Technologies and Their

Impact on Firm Performance, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68, Issue 4

London Metal Exchange (2006), ‘Commodity Exchange Prices’, Available from

http://www.lme.co.uk/dataprices.asp, Last Accessed 22/05/06

19

Newson-Ballé, L. & Gottschalk, A. (1996) ‘Negotiating with the French’, Career

Development International, Vo1. 1, Issue 5

Nissan Motor Company (2004), ‘Annual Report for the Year Ended 30 March 2004’,

Nissan Motor Company, Tokyo

Nissan Motor Company (2005), ‘Inside Nissan – Leadership Programs’, Available

from http://www.nissanusa.com/about/careers/nrdp/index.html, Last Accessed

18/04/06

PWC (2006), ‘Diesel Set to Overtake Petrol’, PriceWaterhouse Coopers, Available

from

http://www.pwc.com/extweb/ncpressrelease.nsf/docid/72796E9223F9030C8025710A

00461718, Last Accessed 22/05/06

Reed, R., Lemak, D. & Mero, N. (2000), ‘Total Quality Management and Sustainable

Competitive Advantage’, Journal of Quality Management, Vol. 5, Issue 1

Ricardo Plc. (2005), ‘The 2005 Ricardo Diesel Report’, Ricardo Plc., Available from

http://www.ricardo.com/gallery/Media/PressReleases/medPR_diesel2005_download0

02.jpg, Last Accessed 19/05/06

Rowley, I. (2006), ‘Green Diesel? Mercedes Takes on Japan’, BusinessWeek Online,

Available from

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/apr2006/gb20060403_441926.htm?c

ampaign_id=rss_daily, Last Accessed 08/04/06

Rupp, N. (2004), ‘The Attributes of a Costly Recall: Evidence from the Automotive

Industry’, Review of Industrial Organization, Vol. 25, Issue 1

Saint-Seine, S. (2004), ‘Automakers feed off one another’s resources’, Automotive

News, Vol. 78, Issue 6089

20

Seguin, C. (2006), ‘Diesel car sales set to overtake petrol in Europe’, Available from

http://www.eurocarprice.com/releases/cqer/France.pdf, Last Accessed 11/04/06

Standard & Poor’s (2006), ‘Nissan Auto Receivables 2006 Owner Trust’, Available

from

http://www2.standardandpoors.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=sp/sp_article/Article

Template&c=sp_article&cid=1138220445933&b=10&r=1&1=EN, Last Accessed

14/04/06

T&P (2004), ‘Delcam software helps keep Nissan on’, T&P: Tooling and Production,

Vol. 70, Issue 9

Treece, J. (2005), ‘Nissan draws closer to build-to-order in Japan’, Automotive News,

Vol. 79, Issue 6161

Tucker, M., Meyer, G. & Westerman, J. (1996), ‘Organizational Communication:

Development of Internal Strategic Competitive Advantage’, Journal of Business

Communication, Vol. 33, Issue 1

Welch, D. (2003), ‘How Nissan laps Detroit’, Business Week, Issue 3863

Winterton, J. & Winterton, R. (1997), ‘Does Management Development add value’,

British Journal of Management, Vol. 8, Issue 2

Works Management (2004), ‘Chain of improvement for Nissan’, Works Management,

Vol. 57, Issue 12

21

Appendix A – Internal Factor Analysis Summary (IFAS)

Internal Strategic Factor Weight Rating Weighted Score Comment

Strengths

Global Financial Position 0.1 4 0.4 Able to be supported in the short-mid term

Management Development

Programs 0.15 4 0.6 Should provide competitive advantage

Manufacturing Processes 0.1 5 0.5 Significantly better than competitors’

Branding 0.05 4 0.2 Better than Japanese Rivals

Partnership w/ Renault 0.15 4 0.6 Provides Market Influence

Weaknesses

Lack of Market Knowledge 0.1 3 0.3 Renault partnership provides market information

Product Recalls 0.1 1 0.1 Potential to harm brand image

Lack of Hybrid Technology 0.05 1 0.05 Long-Term Risk if not pursued

Lack of Diesel Technology 0.2 1 0.2 Costing market share as Europeans strongly

prefer diesel over unleaded

Total Score: 2.95/5 (Slightly Below Average)

22

Appendix B – External Factor Analysis Summary (EFAS)

External

Strategic

Factor

Weight Rating Weighted

Score Comment

Opportunities

Eastern and

Central Europe 0.15 3 0.45

Lacks clear strategy to

penetrate market

Renault-Nissan

Purchasing

Organization

(RNPO)

0.1 4 0.4

Has reduced the

bargaining power of

suppliers

Distribution

Network 0.15 2 0.3

Potential for large cost

savings

Threats

Market

Saturation 0.2 1 0.2

Deliberate decision to

not segment market

Cross-Cultural

Disharmony 0.15 4 0.6

Management training

programs aid cultural

awareness

Commodity

Prices 0.1 4 0.4

Little ability to affect

prices

Political

Influence 0.05 4 0.2

Advantage over other

non-European

manufacturers due to

Renault alliance

Competitive

Rivalry 0.1 5 0.5

Continual

improvement strategy

Total Score: 3.05/5 (Slightly Above Average