2014公司战略管理英语原文及翻译.docxVIP

Corporate structure and strategy: the case of Nike (lecture prepared by Deron Ferguson, Department of Geography; see sources in notes at end) Why are contemporary corporations forced to restructure, and how are they doing it? How is the structure of a corporation related to its long-term competitive strategy? What are the geographic implications of this relationship with regard to multinational corporations and transnational production? In todays lecture, we will address these questions by looking at the case of Nike. (/jwh/207lec28.htm \l sourcesreferences for this material) SETTING THE CONTEXT: Post-Fordism, Flexibility, and the athletic footwear industry Before looking at the relationship between Nikes corporate structure and competitive strategy, it will help to review the changing business environment faced by large and small firms alike. The changing business environment faced by firms in advanced capitalist economies and societies is grounded in the transition from Fordism to post-Fordism. The chart below reviews the basic characteristics of this transition. Fordism (post-WWII to mid 1970s)Post-Fordism (past two decades)Productionlarge batches of standardized goods large inventories small batches of nonstandardized goods just in time deliveries of materials Laborcollective bargaining (unions) hierarchical management rigidly defined job descriptions implicit contract of workers benefits between the state, business, and labor individual contracts team management multi-skilling (high wage jobs) and de-skilling (low wage jobs) erosion of benefits and the growth of temporary labor Technologyinflexible machines incremental innovation programmable machines; CAD systems rapid and radical innovation Governmentmacroeconomic intervention (Keynesianism) and provision of a safety net regulation of industry and antitrust industry-government-union cooperation neoliberalism and dismantling the welfare state deregulation decreasing support for unions decline of the military i