Ford Motor Company Case Study

Looking for Ford industry analysis? Find it here! We’ve prepared Ford Motor Company case study that contains analysis of the company’s financial condition and provides recommendations to its management.

Introduction

  • Industry Analysis
  • Environmental Scan
  • Financial Condition
  • Recommendations

Works Cited

The current report provides an in-depth analysis of the motor vehicle industry based on the Ford Motor Company case study. It also analyzes Ford Motor Company using SWOT analytical tool. Moreover, strategies that could be adopted by Ford Motor Company for the next five years have been provided. The study is divided in several sections with the first section being the motor vehicle industry analysis.

The industry analysis explores the industry structure, major environmental changes, competitors, and Ford’s competitive position in the industry. The second section gives an environmental scan with major focus on the major opportunities and threats. The third section explores the company’s key strengths and weaknesses. The last section gives viable strategic recommendations which can be adopted for the next five years.

Ford Industry Analysis

The motor vehicle industry is very competitive and characterized by changes in vehicles design and technology (CLLES 7. Just like any other industry, the motor vehicle industrial structure and landscape have been changing and reshaping operationally, functionally, and geographically.

The increase in competition has been as a result of new emerging automotive and vehicle industries in South American, Eastern and Central European, and Asian countries (CLLES 7). The industry’s major structures are the motor vehicle and the motor vehicle parts sections.

These two sections provide employment to more than one million people in U.S. The motor vehicle industry is a loosely connected industry and diversified in terms of supply chain structure, employment levels and compensation. Lastly, the market is characterized with excess capacity which is a major structural problem.

The industry was highly affected by the 2007/2008 global financial crisis. Major players such as Chrysler and General Motor were majorly affected that it took the intervention of the government to bail them out.

However, based on the case study, Ford Motor Company was the only major company which was not affected by the financial crisis. The company has been described by as the only automaker company which has survived the major crises that have hit the motor industry without financial bailout by the government (The New York Times 2012).

The major competitors of Ford Motor Company are BMW, Chrysler, Toyota, General Motors, Honda, Nissan, Mercedes Benz, and Hyundai-Kia among others. In U.S, General Motors (GM), Toyota, and Honda are the main competitors of Ford (Canis and Yacobucci 6). Different automakers use different strategies to increase their competitive advantage.

Based on the case study, Toyota uses lean production to increase its effectiveness and efficiency in production. Toyota’s lean production encourages just-in-time scheduling, flexible production, teamwork, and quality production. In addition, the company avoids material wastage and inventories. Another company like Hyundai produces quality products to meet the demands outside Korea.

For instance, the company has recently established a production line in Alabama, U.S to near KIA to benefit from economies of scale (Canis and Yacobucci 6). In addition, the company offers the longest warranties which are geared towards the attraction of customers from the Japanese and US cars. In general, all the major competitors have brand product portfolio which are part of product diversification and cost differentiation.

General Motors which is the largest competitor of Ford Company has adopted a new strategy which has been borrowed from Toyota Company (Ferrell & Hartline 30). The new strategy is based on new auto designs which meet the expectations and demands of emerging market segments.

The company has acquired the Toyota’s design which involves synchronization of production, platforms, and parts from different parts of the world. This new globalization strategy encourages flexible manufacturing. Based on checks and benchmarking carried by Henry (91), the competitors in the automobile industry are grouped in four groups.

The first group is of high price and low range automobiles and it consists of Rolls Royce and Bentley. The second group comprises of Ferrari, Ashton Martin and Porsche while the third group contains BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus. The last group is composed of Ford, Renault, Honda, Volkswagen, GM, Nissan, Toyota, and Daimler Chrysler (Henry 91).

The Lexus, BMW and Mercedes group produces highly priced and quality products but of a lower product range. The Last group produces a broad range of products which have considerably low prices and quality compared to other groups. In this group, competitors compete in the market based on reliability, price, and the design of their products (Henry 92).

Ford is the second largest automaker after General Motor. The American automaker has found its niche in car and truck production. The company has a strong brand which has improved its competitive advantage. Product diversification has been the major competitive advantage thus increasing its competitive position in the industry.

To maintain its competitive position, Ford brands product portfolio comprises of Ford Ikon, Ford Fiesta, Ford, Fusion, Ford Endeavor, and Ford Figo. Its survival under numerous financial crises has increased the confidence and trust from different stakeholders especially consumers (The New York Times 2012). In North America, Ford remains as the largest market shareholder.

However, the company receives high competition in new emerging markets in Asia and Europe. Nonetheless, the American automaker has continued to defend its position in the industry and in 2008, it closed the gap that existed between itself and Toyota. The company was able to sell over 55,301 vehicles compared to Toyota in 2009 (Canis and Yacobucci 6).

Based on the current statistics, Ford has a market share of 15.5% after GM which has a market share of 19.8 percent (Canis and Yacobucci 6). The fall of GM and Chrysler was beneficial to Ford as many buyers between 2008 and 2009 preferred Ford cars thus increasing its financial and competitive position in the market.

As other companies market shares declined, that of Ford increased. To remain competitive, the company has provided new models which are affordable, competitive, and environmentally friendly.

Ford Company Analysis: Environmental Scan

Environmental scan has been carried through the use of SWOT analysis to give the major opportunities and threats that Ford Company has.

Company analysis

Ford Company Analysis: Financial Condition

The company is in a better financial position compared to other players such as Chrysler and GM. In 2008, the company survived the U.S and Europe financial crises (The New York Times 2012). In addition, as other companies’ market share reduced, Ford’s market share increased to 15.5% while that of GM’s dropped to 19.8 % (Canis and Yacobucci 6). In 2009, Ford increased its sales by 55,301 vehicles compared to Toyota.

In 2011, Ford increased its small cars sales in U.S by 25 percent (Ford Motor Company 2012). The annual operating profits of Ford increased in 2011 and as a result, the company announced an operating pre-tax profit of $8.8 billion (Ford Motor Company 2012).

In a third year in a row, the company has announced improved annual operating profits which show that the company is in a better financial position. According to Ford Motor Company 2011 annual sustainability report, the company has increased its annual automotive gross cash which is a sign of financial progress (Ford Motor Company 2012).

The revenues of Ford have grown from USD 119.3 billion in 2011 to USD 128.2 billion in 2012 (Bloomberg Businessweek 2012). In addition, the company has reduced its sales pegged on income tax expense to -0.90% from -0.505 thus leading to a bottom line growth of USD 20.2 billion from USD 6.6 billion (Bloomberg Businessweek 2012).

Because of its financial position, the automaker plans to invest $16 billion in the U.S production plants with the objective of designing, engineering and producing upgraded vehicle components. Therefore, Ford Motor Company financial position is strong despite the recession and economic downturns.

Ford Case Study: Recommendations

Based on the industry and company analysis, some suggestions have been provided which can be applied for the next 5 years as part of strategic plan management. First, Ford needs to expand its market operations in emerging economies in Africa, Middle East, and Asia so as to reduce overreliance of the U.S market. This would expand its market share and meet new demand in new market segments.

Second, the company needs to diversify its products to meet the demands and expectations of consumers in the 21 st century. Ford needs to carry out market and consumer demand research to determine the major emerging market trends and patterns. Product diversification can be achieved through the production of more fuel efficient and environmentally clean cars which are small in size.

This would meet the demand in the new segment of environmentally sustainable and green fuel motor vehicles. Ford can adopt the strategy adopted by Toyota of producing a variety of cars annually which fit different market segments. For example, it can design cars that meet the income capacity of consumers in developing nations.

Drawing from the case study analysis, Ford is the second largest American based automaker in the world. In addition, the company operates in a very competitive and saturated market. As a result, the company faces high level of competition from major players such as BMW, GM, Toyota, Honda, Chrysler, and Mercedes Benz among others.

When grouped, Ford lie at the lowest group which produces broadest range of cars which affordable prices. The company is a strong brand which is globally known. Its financial capacity and presence has increased its market share. The major weakness of the company is that it highly depends on the U.S market. Financial crisis in Europe and U.S have threatened its performance and market share.

Financially, Ford is stable and in a better position. The company has increased in sales and revenues as well as pre-tax operating profits in a consecutive period of three years. it has been recommended that the company ought to increase its presence in emerging markets and produce diversified products

Canis, Bills and Brent D. Yacobucci. “The U.S. Motor Vehicle Industry: Confronting a New Dynamic in the Global Economy.” Congressional Research Service 26 Mar. 2010: 1-66. Print.

CLLES. Benchmarking Analysis for the Motor Vehicle Industry. Center for Lean Logistics and Engineered Systems. University of North Carolina, 2009. Print.

Bloomberg Businessweek. “Ford Motor Co (F: New York).” Bloomberg Businessweek 6 Dec. 2012: 1. Print.

Ferrell, O C, and Michael D. Hartline. Marketing Strategy . Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western, 2008. Print.

Ford Motor Company. “ Financial Health – Sustainability 2011/12 .” PDF file. 7 Dec. 2012. < https://corporate.ford.com/homepage.html >.

Henry, Anthony. Understanding Strategic Management . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.

Schwed, Joel. Ford: History and Corporate Profile . 12 Dec. 2011. Web. < http://www.valueline.com/Stocks/Highlight.aspx?id=12047 >.

The New York Times. “Ford Motor Company.” The New York Times 30 Oct. 2012: 1. Print.

  • Chicago (A-D)
  • Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, August 1). Ford Motor Company Case Study. https://ivypanda.com/essays/company-analysis-ford-motor-company/

"Ford Motor Company Case Study." IvyPanda , 1 Aug. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/company-analysis-ford-motor-company/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Ford Motor Company Case Study'. 1 August.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Ford Motor Company Case Study." August 1, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/company-analysis-ford-motor-company/.

1. IvyPanda . "Ford Motor Company Case Study." August 1, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/company-analysis-ford-motor-company/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Ford Motor Company Case Study." August 1, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/company-analysis-ford-motor-company/.

  • Chrysler Corporation Business
  • The 2009 Chrysler-Fiat Strategic Alliance
  • Financial Problems at GM: One of the Largest Automakers in the World
  • Chrysler Sold to Fiat
  • The Chrysler Corporation: History and Strategy Analysis
  • BMW’s CRM: Case Study
  • The Future of Fiat-Chrysler
  • Chrysler’s Speed Merchant and Marchionne’s Leadership
  • GM Executive Summary: Major Markets for GM Brands
  • Microeconomics of Ford, General Motors, Chrysler
  • Saudi Basic Industries Corporation (SABIC)
  • The Emirates Airline Company
  • Amazing Cars Market Position
  • Mitsubishi Motors
  • Adam Aircraft Industries Challenges

Cart

  • SUGGESTED TOPICS
  • The Magazine
  • Newsletters
  • Managing Yourself
  • Managing Teams
  • Work-life Balance
  • The Big Idea
  • Data & Visuals
  • Reading Lists
  • Case Selections
  • HBR Learning
  • Topic Feeds
  • Account Settings
  • Email Preferences

How Ford Is Thinking About the Future

  • Mark W. Johnson

ford motor company case study analysis

It’s developing a portfolio of new business models.

Dealing with the uncertainty of new, disruptive business models is one of the biggest challenges that faces any large, established company. To gain insight into how to think through these obstacles, the author offers five lessons from Ford’s approach to recent advances in the mobility industry: First, be ambitious with new projects, but don’t over-invest in any one idea. Second, be sure to think not just about the physical functionality of your product, but also about the social and emotional roles it fulfills. Third, constantly examine and update your business model. Fourth, be openminded about creating new rules and metrics for your organization. Finally, to reduce risk, consider building a portfolio of new business models. While there’s no predicting the future, these strategies can position you to take advantage of new opportunities as they emerge.

Everyone’s talking about a future in which vehicles are shared rather than owned, autonomous rather than driven, and where car companies make large shares of their profits on digital “mobility services.” But if you are the Ford Motor Company and face the prospect of investing billions in new technology while your century-old business model is overturned, you might first have a few questions. How are consumers going to react to all of this? What do they really want? How can you tell which opportunities are real and which are science fiction?

ford motor company case study analysis

  • Mark W. Johnson is co-founder and senior partner of the strategy consulting firm Innosight and author of  Lead from the Future   (HBR Press, 2020).

Partner Center

  • Deutschland
  • Asia, Australia & New Zealand
  • Europe, Middle East & Africa
  • United States & Canada
  • Latinoamérica

How a century-old brand is transforming the auto industry

Before the pandemic, automakers were already facing massive disruption, including driverless cars, electric vehicles, and shared mobility. But COVID-19 dealt another blow: Automotive was one of the hardest hit sectors in 2020, especially in the U.S., where auto sales sank by 15% .

In the midst of these unprecedented challenges, however, 118-year-old Ford Motor Company leaned in and began to reinvent itself.

As the virus accelerated, dealerships were forced to close their lots and shift to servicing and selling cars online , while larger supply chain concerns caused shortages in critical parts like microchips, which slowed vehicle production.

In the midst of these unprecedented challenges, however, 118-year-old Ford Motor Company leaned in and began to reinvent itself. Under the leadership of two new executives — Jim Farley as CEO and Suzy Deering as global CMO — the company saw an opportunity for business transformation and started mapping out a strategy.

Questioning everything, from its organizational structure to its customer experience, Ford made difficult decisions to put technology at the center of its business and get ahead of auto consumers’ evolving needs.

While still in the early stages of its journey, Ford has developed something of a blueprint for auto brands of the future. Recently, I spoke to Farley and Deering about the company’s transformation strategy. They shared three key changes they’re focused on.

1. Reimagining what auto brands do

Business transformation has been a buzzword for decades, but for years, it wasn’t an urgent reality for Ford. Then along came the pandemic, and its significance accelerated.

We have to invest in electric architectures and build software know-how in the company. And we need to integrate that know-how in ways we’ve never had to before.

“Events of 2020 made it clear that modernization is required to be a sustainable company,” explains Farley. A critical factor to modernizing has been disrupting its organizational model to aid the shift toward vehicle electrification and other digitally connected products. Since consumers expect more safety and convenience from automakers, the future of the auto industry will increasingly exist outside the doors of the vehicle.

According to Farley, this has required Ford to “unglue” its organization to allow for a new way of being. “The biggest transformation for us is to a software services–dominated company and brand,” he explains. “We have to invest in electric architectures and build software know-how in the company. And we need to integrate that know-how in ways we’ve never had to before.”

Such a fundamental pivot, Deering acknowledges, impacts company culture. “We have to make sure that we bring people along with us, and at the same time, give them the space to fail. There is strength in knowing that change is not going to be easy, but we’re going to do it together, and we’re going to look forward.”

2. Driving the connected car experience forward

By committing to look forward, the automaker is building on Henry Ford’s original vision — that every American consumer can own a vehicle — by reimagining what vehicle ownership looks like. Through software and other technology, Ford is working to ensure that it’s a fully connected, always-on experience.

When we have the ability to update our products dynamically with software, the customer relationship is no longer episodic. It’s every day.

“For so long, cars have really been isolated from the rest of people’s lives. We can change that by making them digital products,” Farley explains. To facilitate this shift, Ford has tapped into strategic partners like Google and is integrating software into its vehicles. Beginning in 2023, for example, millions of Ford and Lincoln models will be powered by the Android operating system, with Google apps and services built in.

Beyond offering drivers more assistance and convenience, connected vehicles also give Ford the ability to deepen its customer relationships. “When we have the ability to update our products dynamically with software, the customer relationship is no longer episodic. It’s every day,” says Farley.

3. Transforming the customer relationship model

To deliver on its vision of an always-on customer experience, Ford is also evolving how it approaches relationship-building. While many automakers stick to a traditional acquisition model to attract consumers through ads and rebates, Ford is bringing customer relationships to the forefront by shifting to a loyalty-based model.

“Another big transition for us as a company — and an industry — is to stop being obsessed with conquest and start putting all of our resources into taking care of the customers who already love the brand and own the product,” Farley explains. “This is a model that is available because of the always-on nature of digital. Our products and services are now integrated.”

We want to know our customers well enough to meet their needs while they’re in the vehicle, while they’re outside the vehicle, and before they even think about buying a vehicle.

Gearing marketing efforts to meet people’s ongoing needs in a more personalized way is critical to Ford’s loyalty-based push, because, as Deering points out, “The customer expects us to know them.”

For Deering and her team, this means relying more than ever on first-party data and signals to create an ecosystem that nurtures deeper relationships. “We want to know our customers well enough to meet their needs while they’re in the vehicle, while they’re outside the vehicle, and before they even think about buying a vehicle from us,” she explains.

While Deering and Farley both readily admit that Ford’s business transformation is a yearslong journey, they’re committed to playing the long game and continuing to drive brand love and loyalty through the 21st century.

Others are viewing

Marketers who view this are also viewing

How Carvana reimagined the automotive customer experience

How kia is boosting business by focusing on first-party data, the car-buying process: one consumer's 900+ digital interactions, how jaguar land rover generates high-quality leads in today’s omnichannel auto experience, as people resume planning for life’s big moments, brands have a role to play, it’s time to electrify auto marketing, thomais zaremba, others are viewing looking for something else, complete login.

To explore this content and receive communications from Google, please sign in with an existing Google account.

You're visiting our United States & Canada website.

Based on your location, we recommend you check out this version of the page instead:

  • Harvard Business School →
  • Faculty & Research →
  • April 2021 (Revised July 2023)
  • HBS Case Collection

The Turnaround at Ford Motor Company

  • Format: Print
  • | Language: English
  • | Pages: 19

About The Author

ford motor company case study analysis

Amy C. Edmondson

Related work.

  • Faculty Research
  • The Turnaround at Ford Motor Company  By: Amy C. Edmondson and Olivia Jung

Business Ethics

Case: the ford pinto.

  • 1.1 Benefits
  • 1.3 The End

The Ford P​into

From: Moral Issues in Business 8th ed. Shaw & Barry (pp. 83-86)

There was a time when the “made in Japan” label brought a predictable smirk of superiority to the face of most Americans. The quality of most Japanese products usually was as low as their price. In fact, few imports could match their domestic counterparts, the proud products of Yankee know-how. But by the late 1960s, an invasion of foreign-made goods chiseled a few worry lines into the countenance of the U.S. industry. In Detroit, worry was fast fading to panic as the Japanese, not to mention the Germans, began to gobble up more and more of the subcompact auto market.

Never one to take a back seat to the competition, Ford Motor Company decided to meet the threat from abroad head-on. In 1968, Ford executives decided to produce the Pinto. Known inside the company as “Lee’s car,” after Ford president Lee Iacocca, the Pinto was to weigh no more than 2,000 pounds and cost no more than $2,000.

Eager to have its subcompact ready for the 1971 model year, Ford decided to compress the normal drafting-board-to-showroom time of about three-and-a-half years into two. The compressed schedule meant that any design changes typically made before production-line tooling would have to be made during it.

Before producing the Pinto, Ford crash-tested various prototypes, in part to learn whether they met a safety standard proposed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to reduce fires from traffic collisions. This standard would have required that by 1972 all new autos be able to withstand a rear-end impact of 20mph without fuel loss, and that by 1973 they be able to withstand an impact of 30 mph. The prototypes all failed the 20-mph test. In 1970 Ford crash-tested the Pinto itself, and the result was the same: ruptured gas tanks and dangerous leaks. The only Pintos to pass the test had been modified in some way–for example, with a rubber bladder in the gas tank or a piece of steel between the tank and the rear bumper.

Thus, Ford knew that the Pinto represented a serious fire hazard when struck from the rear, even in low-speed collisions. Ford officials faced a decision. Should they go ahead with the existing design, thereby meeting the production timetable but possibly jeopardizing consumer safety? Or should they delay production of the Pinto by redesigning the gas tank to make it safer and thus concede another year of subcompact dominance to foreign companies? Ford not only pushed ahead with the original design but stuck to it for the next six years.

What explains Ford’s decision? The evidence suggests that Ford relied, at least in part, on cost-benefit reasoning, which is an analysis in monetary terms of the expected costs and benefits of doing something. There were various ways of making the Pinto’s gas tank safer. Although the estimated price of these safety improvements ranged from only $5 to $8 per vehicle, Ford evidently reasoned that the increased cost outweighed the benefits of a new tank design.

How exactly did Ford reach that conclusion? We don’t know for sure, but an internal report, “Fatalities Associated with Crash-Induced Fuel Leakage and Fires,” reveals the cost-benefit reasoning that the company used in cases like this. This report was not written with the pinto in mind; rather, it concerns fuel leakage in rollover accidents (not rear-end collisions), and its computations applied to all Ford vehicles, not just the Pinto. Nevertheless, it illustrates the type of reasoning that was probably used in the Pinto case.

In the “Fatalities” report, Ford engineers estimated the cost of technical improvements that would prevent gas tanks from leaking in rollover accidents to be $11 per vehicle. The authors go on to discuss various estimates of the number of people killed by fires from car rollovers before settling on the relatively low figure of 180 deaths per year. But given that number, how can the value of those individuals’ lives be gauged? Can a dollars-and-cents figure be assigned to a human being? NHTSA thought so. In 1972, it estimated that society loses $200,725 every time a person is killed in an auto accident (adjusted for inflation, today’s figure would, of course, be considerably higher). It broke down the costs as follows:

Putting the NHTSA figures together with other statistical studies, the Ford report arrives at the following overall assessment of costs and benefits:

Thus, the costs of the suggested safety improvements outweigh their benefits, and the “Fatalities” report accordingly recommends against any improvements–a recommendation that Ford followed.

Likewise in the Pinto case, Ford’s management whatever its exact reasoning, decided to stick with the original design and not upgrade the Pinto’s fuel tank, despite the test results reported by its engineers. Here is the aftermath of Ford’s decision:

  • Between 1971 and 1978, the Pinto was responsible for a number of fire-related deaths. Ford puts the figure at 23; its critics say the figure is closer to 500. According to the sworn testimony of Ford engineers, 95 percent of the fatalities would have survived if Ford had located the fuel tank over the axle (as it had done on its Capri automobiles).
  • NHTSA finally adopted a 30-mph collision standard in 1976. The pinto then acquired a rupture-proof fuel tank. In 1978 Ford was obliged to recall all 1971-76 Pintos for fuel-tank modifications.
  • Between 1971 and 1978, approximately fifty lawsuits were brought against Ford in connection with rear-end accidents in the Pinto. In the Richard Grimshaw case, in addition to awarding over $3 million in compensatory damages to the victims of a Pinto crash, the jury awarded a landmark $125 million in punitive damages against Ford. The judge reduced punitive damages to 3.5 million.
  • On August 10, 1978, eighteen-year-old Judy Ulrich, her sixteen-year-old sister Lynn, and their eighteen-year-old cousin Donna, in their 1973 Ford Pinto, were struck from the rear by a van near Elkhart, Indiana. The gas tank of the Pinto exploded on impact. In the fire that resulted, the three teenagers were burned to death. Ford was charged with criminal homicide. The judge in the case advised jurors that Ford should be convicted if it had clearly disregarded the harm that might result from its actions, and that disregard represented a substantial deviation from acceptable standards of conduct. On March 13, 1980, the jury found Ford not guilty of criminal homicide.

For its part, Ford has always denied that the Pinto is unsafe compared with other cars of its type and era. The company also points out that in every model year the Pinto met or surpassed the government’s own standards. But what the company doesn’t say is that successful lobbying by it and its industry associates was responsible for delaying for seven years the adoption of any NHTSA crash standard. Furthermore, Ford’s critics claim that there were more than forty European and Japanese models in the Pinto price and weight range with safer gas-tank position. “Ford made an extremely irresponsible decision,” concludes auto safety expert Byron Bloch, “when they placed such a weak tank in such a ridiculous location in such a soft rear end.”

Has the automobile industry learned a lesson from Ford’s experience with the Pinto? Some observers thought not when, in February 1993, an Atlanta jury held the General Motors Corporation responsible for the death of a Georgia teenager in the fiery crash of one of its pickup trucks. At the trial, General Motors contended in its defense that when a drunk driver struck seventeen-year-old Shannon Moseley’s truck in the side, it was the impact of the high-speed crash that killed Moseley. However, the jury was persuaded that Moseley survived the collision only to be consumed by a fire caused by his truck’s defective fuel-tank design. Finding that the company had known that its “side-saddle” gas tanks which are mounted outside the rails of the truck’s frame, are dangerously prone to rupture, the jury awarded $4.2 million in actual damages and $101 million in punitive damages to Moseley’s parents.

What undoubtedly swayed the jury was the testimony of former GM safety engineer Ronald E. Elwell. Although Elwell had testified in more than fifteen previous cases that the pickups were safe, this time he switched sides and told the jury that the company had known for years that the side-saddle design was defective but had intentionally hidden its knowledge and had not attempted to correct the problem. At the trial, company officials attempted to paint Elwell as a disgruntled employee, but his testimony was supported by videotapes of General Motors’ own crash tests. After the verdict, General Motors said that it still stood behind the safety of its trucks and contended “that a full examination by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the technical issues in this matter will bear out our contention that the 1973-1987 full size pickup trucks do not have a safety related defect.”

Since then, however, the Department of Transportation has determined that GM pickups do pose a fire hazard and that they are more prone than competitors’ pickups to catch fire when struck from the side. Still, GM has rejected requests to recall the pickups and repair them. Meanwhile, the Georgia Court of Appeals has thrown out the jury’s verdict in the Shannon Moseley case on a legal technicality–despite ruling that the evidence submitted in the case showed that GM was aware that the gas tanks were hazardous but did not try to make them safer to save the expenses involved.

Panmore Institute

  • About / Contact
  • Privacy Policy
  • Alphabetical List of Companies
  • Business Analysis Topics

Ford Five Forces Analysis (Porter’s Model)

Ford Five Forces Analysis, competition, power customers, suppliers, threat substitution, new entry, automotive business case study

Ford Motor Company maintains its position as one of the biggest automobile manufacturers in the world by reforming its strategies to address the issues shown in this Five Forces analysis. Michael Porter developed the Five Forces analysis model for analyzing the external factors in firms’ industry environments. Ford needs to develop policies and approaches that respond to the most significant forces based on the external factors in the global automotive industry. This Five Forces analysis of Ford Motor Company identifies the most important external factors and how they impact the business, thereby providing input for managerial decision-making. The achievement of strategic objectives based on Ford’s corporate mission and corporate vision depends on how the Five Forces shape the competitive pressure on the company.

Ford Motor Company needs to prioritize the most significant of the Five Forces, which in this external analysis is shown to be competitive rivalry. The other forces are also significant but with lower intensities of impact on the automaker. The differences among the Five Forces influence the priorities and objectives of Ford’s generic competitive strategy and intensive growth strategies . For instance, the weakness of the threat of new entry determined in this Five Forces analysis means that the automotive company’s strategies tend to prioritize the effect of the other forces, such as competition and the bargaining power of customers.

Summary: Five Forces Analysis of Ford

This Five Forces analysis of Ford Motor Company shows that competitive rivalry or competition is the most significant external force in the automotive industry environment. The following are the intensities of the Five Forces in influencing Ford’s business:

  • Competitive rivalry or competition: Strong force
  • Bargaining power of buyers or customers: Moderate force
  • Bargaining power of suppliers: Moderate force
  • Threat of substitutes or substitution: Moderate force
  • Threat of new entrants or new entry: Weak force

The results of this Five Forces analysis of Ford Motor Company show that competition or competitive rivalry is the most significant issue for the business. For long-term viability in the automotive industry environment, Ford must prioritize strategic solutions to develop competitive advantage. For example, innovative products can boost the company’s sales performance. As such, Ford must prioritize R&D investment to maximize innovation processes. Moreover, competitive strategies must effectively use business strengths, like innovation capacity and the other competencies shown in the SWOT analysis of Ford . These automotive business strengths can limit the adverse effects of the competitive situation determined in this Five Forces analysis.

Competitive Rivalry or Competition with Ford (Strong Force)

Ford Motor Company faces tough competition. This aspect of the Five Forces analysis refers to competing firms that influence the industry environment. The following are the external factors that contribute to the strong force of competitive rivalry affecting Ford:

  • High aggressiveness of firms (strong force)
  • High exit barriers (strong force)
  • Moderate number of firms (moderate force)

Ford competes with other large multinational automobile manufacturers, such as Toyota , General Motors , and Tesla . These competitors aggressively innovate and market their products. Also, the automotive industry has high exit barriers, which means that firms would rather keep competing with Ford than to close their business, in consideration for the high cost of investment. Such a condition exerts a strong force of competition against the company. In addition, the automaker must compete against a moderate number of firms, especially a few large ones. Based on this aspect of the Five Forces analysis, Ford must maximize its competitive advantage to address the external factors linked to competition.

Bargaining Power of Ford’s Customers/Buyers (Moderate Force)

Ford’s customers significantly influence the business. This aspect of the Five Forces analysis pertains to the effects of buyers on businesses and the industry environment. The external factors that contribute to the moderate bargaining power of Ford’s customers are as follows:

  • Moderate switching costs (moderate force)
  • Moderate size of individual purchases (moderate force)
  • Moderate availability of substitutes (moderate force)

Ford Motor Company’s customers face moderate switching costs, which are the consequences of moving from one firm to another. In this case, customers can easily transfer to other firms, although infrequently because automobiles are big-ticket items. Also, each purchase of Ford’s products is moderate in terms of its price and contribution to the company’s revenues. Thus, even a small change in customer preferences and the corresponding market demand can have significant consequences for the automotive company. In addition, the moderate availability of substitutes gives customers the option to move away from Ford. Thus, the automotive business must maximize customer satisfaction to mitigate the effects of the external factors in this aspect of the Five Forces analysis. To limit the impact of buyer power, the company’s strategic development must consider the sociocultural trends that affect customers’ perception and buying decisions. The PESTEL/PESTLE analysis of Ford presents the numerous trends that can influence how customers use their bargaining power, as defined in this Five Forces analysis.

Bargaining Power of Ford’s Suppliers (Moderate Force)

Suppliers exert moderate influence on Ford Motor Company. The impact of suppliers and their demands on firms are considered in this aspect of the Five Forces analysis. In Ford’s case, the following external factors contribute to the moderate bargaining power of suppliers:

  • Moderate overall supply (moderate force)
  • Moderate population of suppliers (moderate force)
  • Suppliers’ low forward vertical integration (weak force)

The moderate overall supply and moderate population of suppliers give suppliers significant but limited bargaining power over Ford. Also, many of these suppliers have low forward vertical integration, which means that they do not own or control the distribution and sale of their products to Ford. The suppliers’ bargaining power is further weakened because of the company’s backward vertical integration through its facilities, such as the ones in the Ford River Rouge Complex. Through this vertical integration, the company produces some of the materials it uses to manufacture cars and related finished products. Thus, this aspect of the Five Forces analysis shows that Ford must consider the significant but limited external factors linked to suppliers’ effect on the business. The automaker can implement strategies that limit the effects of suppler power. For instance, supply chain management in Ford’s operations management can push for a more diversified supply chain to reduce the bargaining power of individual suppliers determined in this Five Forces analysis.

Threat of Substitutes or Substitution (Moderate Force)

Ford Motor Company experiences the effects of the substitutes to its products. This aspect of the Five Forces analysis refers to the extent that substitution threatens firms. The following external factors contribute to the moderate threat of substitution to Ford:

  • Moderate switching costs for buyers (moderate force)
  • Low performance of substitutes (weak force)

There are considerable substitutes to Ford’s products, including public transportation, bicycles, and motorcycles, like those from Harley-Davidson . However, these substitutes are not always available or appropriate in certain areas or situations. In addition, the switching costs are moderate because, even though Ford’s customers can shift to using these substitutes, they are unlikely to readily do so when they are still paying for their car loans. Also, in many instances, these substitutes have lower performance than Ford’s products, in terms of convenience and safety. Based on this aspect of the Five Forces analysis, Ford needs to address substitutes as a second-priority external threat.

Threat of New Entrants or New Entry (Weak Force)

Ford Motor Company feels the effects of new entrants on its industry environment. The impact of new firms is considered in this aspect of the Five Forces analysis. The external factors that contribute to the weak threat of new entrants to Ford are as follows:

  • High capital costs (weak force)
  • High cost of doing business (weak force)
  • High cost of brand development (weak force)

Automotive companies, like Ford, commit to huge spending to set up and maintain their businesses and facilities. These costs are a barrier to entry that weakens the threat of new entrants. In addition, it is costly to develop a strong brand comparable to Ford’s. This condition makes it difficult for new entrants to effectively compete against industry giants. Based on this aspect of the Five Forces analysis, external factors present only a weak threat against Ford. Although new entry is a weak threat, the company can apply measures to further reduce or limit this threat. For example, Ford’s marketing strategy and its implementation in the marketing mix (4P) can involve aggressive campaigns to augment the existing entry barriers described in this Five Forces analysis.

  • Fedotov, P. (2022). Critical Analysis of the Electric Vehicle Industry: Five forces and strategic action fields. Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10 (1), 43-56.
  • Ford Autonomous Vehicles & Mobility .
  • Ford Motor Company – Form 10-K .
  • Ford Motor Company – Governance and Policies .
  • Lenort, R., Wicher, P., & Zapletal, F. (2023). On influencing factors for sustainable development goal prioritisation in the automotive industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 387 , 135718.
  • U.S. Department of Commerce – International Trade Administration – Automotive Industry .
  • Copyright by Panmore Institute - All rights reserved.
  • This article may not be reproduced, distributed, or mirrored without written permission from Panmore Institute and its author/s.
  • Educators, Researchers, and Students: You are permitted to quote or paraphrase parts of this article (not the entire article) for educational or research purposes, as long as the article is properly cited and referenced together with its URL/link.

ford motor company case study analysis

  • Free Case Studies
  • Business Essays

Write My Case Study

Buy Case Study

Case Study Help

  • Case Study For Sale
  • Case Study Service
  • Hire Writer

Ford Motor Company Analysis

Ford Motor Company, founded in 1903, has been a global multi-business company since the 1920’s. Currently Ford has major manufacturing facilities in the United Kingdom, Canada, Mexico, Germany and many other countries, 200,000+ employees and automobiles distributed in over 200 markets across 6 continents (Ford Annual Report 2009). Ford has utilized its product portfolio, brand strategy and global business structure to withstand recent financial disasters in the auto industry and strive towards its vision to be the world’s leading consumer company for automotive products and services.

Ford began its manufacturing with mass production assembly lines in the first part of the 20th century.

We Will Write a Custom Case Study Specifically For You For Only $13.90/page!

Now, one of the world’s largest automakers, Ford the brand is world renown. Ford Motor brands, or marques, include Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury (the latter to be dropped later this year). The brands Land Rover, Aston Martin, Jaguar and Volvo were also under the Ford umbrella but have recently been sold off to create a leaner business structure. The company still manufactures a vast array of cars, trucks, vans as well as vehicle chassis and engines at its numerous facilities.

Until recently Ford was manufacturing 97 distinct vehicle models, however chief executive Alan Mulally has whittled that down to 40. In a recent Branding Strategy Insider article (Ritson 2009) Mulally claims “Fewer models means better economies of scale and significantly improved profitability, as well as enabling better marketing support for the remaining products and a more coherent segmentation, targeting and positioning approach.

” In addition to being streamlined Ford focuses on marques that are successful in each of its global markets.

Auto sales provide the bulk of the income but Ford also provides other automotive products and services. For instance Ford’s finance unit, Ford Motor Credit, is one of the US’s leading auto finance companies. Ford also owns OEM parts producer Motorcraft as well as Hertz, the rental car company. It’s the company’s diversity that provides critical financial resources when markets change.

It is this strategic balancing of brand diversification and manufacturing focus that has enabled Ford to stay profitable in the recent economic downturn.

Ford’s global structure consists of about 90 plants worldwide and numerous joint ventures. The list includes; Ford of Argentina, Ford of Australia, Ford of Brazil, Ford of Britain, Ford of Canada, Ford of Europe, Ford of France, Ford of Germany, Ford India, Ford Lio Ho (Taiwan, ROC), Ford Motor Company Philippines, Ford of Russia, Ford Performance Vehicles (Australia), Arabian Motors Group, AutoAlliance International, AutoAlliance Thailand, Automobile Craiova, Chang’an Ford, Jiangling Motors, Mazda, Ford-Otosan, Getrag Ford Transmissions, Premier Automotive Group.

The majority of these are wholly owned subsidiaries but strategic joint ventures help Ford to push technological advancements or to enter emerging markets. In Asia, Ford has managed to establish market position with joint ventures, like AutoAlliance, that facilitate localized sale opportunities. Products are also strategically exported within developing regional markets from locations such as Ford of Brazil to fledgling South American markets.

Mark Fields, executive vice president and President of the Americas said, “Ford will leverage its global scale to achieve timing and development costs to rival the company’s best competition. Ford Motor Company has also forged strategic relationships with other industry leaders. For instance, Ford has put huge resources into high-tech “infotainment” features in recent years, leveraging partnerships with tech giants like Microsoft and Sony to create its SYNC “infotainment” suite. SYNC, which is a combination of audio, communication, smartphone-integration, and navigation features, is available on most Ford models in the U.

S. “The profit-per-sale bit is important. Ford has held incentives to a reasonable level and upped margins by adding content and creating must-have options.

Options, of course, are where the big profits are in the auto world, and Ford has made it a priority to create particularly desirable packages on nearly all of its models” (Rosevear 2010). These ventures and strategic partnerships have proven to differentiate Ford from its key global competitors like General Motors, Toyota , and Honda. Streamlining the manufacturing process has been at the core of Ford’s strategy from the very beginning with its revolutionary mass production assembly lines. Now Ford is developing common plant layouts and manufacturing practices to create a flexible manufacturing strategy. Ford Motor Company is the only automotive manufacturer executing a truly global powertrain strategy, in which engine plants thousands of miles apart are getting the same floor plans – the same manufacturing machinery in the same layouts – in order to standardize production. When we are finished, someone walking onto the plant floor will not be able to tell whether they are looking at an assembly line in Europe, Mexico or the United States,” said Kevin Bennett, who is director of Manufacturing Engineering, Ford Powertrain Operations (Ford 2004).

Ford has also utilized Six Sigma approaches to tweak product development on components such as exhaust manifolds and hoods. They have leveraged meta-modeling to foresee possible postproduction consumer issues, which in turn prevents resource waste and establishes consumer loyalty. This focus on refinement of structure has allowed Ford to trim billions of dollars from the production cycle and keep its extremely large organization flexible and agile. Ford Motor Co continued to move forward during the second quarter of this year, reporting a profit of $2. billion with each of its major business operations around the world posting large profits. CEO Alan Mulally commented, “Our progress is being led by the strength of our new products and our leaner, global structure.

Customers are responding to our strongest ever product lineup – a full family of vehicles with world-class quality, fuel efficiency, safety, smart design and value” (Szczesny 2010). By focusing on building automobiles that people want, leveraging its global structure, creating strategic partnerships and streamlining operations Ford proves its worth as a world manufacturing leader and moves closer towards realizing its vision.

Hunt, Katherine. “Ford Realigns Corporate Structure. ” www. marketwatch. com . N. p.

, 14 Dec. 2006. Web. 23 Sept. 2010. Ford Motor Company.

Consolidated Statement of Income. N. p. : n. p.

, 2009. 64. Web. 23 Sept. 2010. Ford Motor Company, .

“Global Manufacturing Strategy Gives Ford the Competitive Edge. ” www. media.

Related posts:

  • Ford Motor Company
  • General Motors and Ford Motor Company
  • Ford Motor Company: A Restructuring Plan
  • Ford Motor Company, General Motors and Daimler Chrysler
  • Week 4 Assignment-Ford Motor Company Case Study
  • Ford Motor Financial Analysis
  • Honda Motor Company, Ltd.

' src=

Quick Links

Privacy Policy

Terms and Conditions

Testimonials

Our Services

Case Study Writing Service

Case Studies For Sale

Our Company

Welcome to the world of case studies that can bring you high grades! Here, at ACaseStudy.com, we deliver professionally written papers, and the best grades for you from your professors are guaranteed!

[email protected] 804-506-0782 350 5th Ave, New York, NY 10118, USA

Acasestudy.com © 2007-2019 All rights reserved.

ford motor company case study analysis

Hi! I'm Anna

Would you like to get a custom case study? How about receiving a customized one?

Haven't Found The Case Study You Want?

For Only $13.90/page

Site Search

Search our website to find what you’re looking for.

Select Your Language

You can select the language displayed on our website. Click the drop-down menu below and make your selection.

Past Forward

Activating the henry ford archive of innovation.

  • Archive Insight
  • Innovation Impact

Facebook

Henry Ford: Case Study of an Innovator

Portrait of man with wavy hair wearing suit

Henry Ford did not invent the automobile. But more than any other single individual, he was responsible for transforming the automobile from an invention of unknown utility into an innovation that profoundly shaped the 20th century and continues to affect the 21st. Innovators change things. They take new ideas—sometimes their own, sometimes other people’s—and develop and promote those ideas until they become an accepted part of daily life. Innovation requires self-confidence, a taste for taking risks, leadership ability, and a vision of what the future should be. Henry Ford had all these characteristics, but it took him many years to develop all of them fully.

Portrait of the Innovator as a Young Man

Framed painting of a number of boys working with wood, machinery, and fire

Early Automotive Experiments: Failure and Then Success

Green cushioned seat on top of platform containing mechanics with four wheels and rudder

The Automobile: A Solution in Search of a Problem

Street scene with pedestrians and carriages; tall buildings line both sides of street

One Innovation Leads to Another

Page with text and image of car at top

What We Have Here Is a Failure to Innovate

Green car with black top, with text on side: "The Fifteen Millionth Ford"

Detroit , Michigan , Dearborn , 20th century , 19th century , quadricycle , Model Ts , manufacturing , Henry Ford , Ford Rouge Factory Complex , Ford Motor Company , entrepreneurship , engines , engineering , cars , by Bob Casey , advertising

Sign Up For Our eNewsletters

Get the latest news from The Henry Ford. From special offers to our series of popular Enthusiasts eNewsletters, you can tailor the information you’d like us to deliver directly to your inbox.

Facebook Comments

Events & exhibits.

ford motor company case study analysis

As a nonprofit, we need your support now more than ever. Please consider making a donation today. Your contribution is greatly appreciated.

Special Exhibits at The Henry Ford

  • Detroit '67
  • Bitter/Sweet
  • Diego Rivera, Frida Kahlo and Edsel Ford

Sign Up for Blog Alerts

Brought to you by:

Harvard Business School

Ford Motor Co.: Supply Chain Strategy

By: Robert D. Austin

Describes Ford's examination of its supply chain to evaluate whether the company should "virtually integrate" on the Dell Computers model.

  • Length: 9 page(s)
  • Publication Date: Mar 3, 1999
  • Discipline: Operations Management
  • Product #: 699198-PDF-ENG

What's included:

  • Teaching Note
  • Educator Copy

$4.95 per student

degree granting course

$8.95 per student

non-degree granting course

Get access to this material, plus much more with a free Educator Account:

  • Access to world-famous HBS cases
  • Up to 60% off materials for your students
  • Resources for teaching online
  • Tips and reviews from other Educators

Already registered? Sign in

  • Student Registration
  • Non-Academic Registration
  • Included Materials

Learning Objectives

To examine the challenges of virtually integrating supply chains in established industries.

Mar 3, 1999 (Revised: Dec 21, 2001)

Discipline:

Operations Management

Geographies:

Industries:

Automotive industry

Harvard Business School

699198-PDF-ENG

We use cookies to understand how you use our site and to improve your experience, including personalizing content. Learn More . By continuing to use our site, you accept our use of cookies and revised Privacy Policy .

ford motor company case study analysis

  • FREE ACCOUNT

Ford Motor Company

mTab unveils insights that drive innovation.

Founded in 1903, Ford Motor Company is a global leading U.S.-based automotive manufacturer which produces a spectrum of industry-leading retail and commercial vehicle models.

Ford Motor Company

The Challenge

With a history of relying on survey data analysis tracing back for more than 50 years, Ford has purchased and developed many analytical solutions for managing and analyzing the wide array of survey data collected over the years and across the globe.

In the past 10 years, facing increasing competitive pressure and global overcapacity, Ford has restructured to cut costs in search of continued profitability. Ford needed a solution that would support their hundreds of product planners, market researchers and strategic planners located across the globe, without dedicating internal staff and resources to development.

The Solution

mTab’s ability to analyze research studies of any size and complexity, combine structured and unstructured survey results, and trend, compare and combine studies from multiple markets is the ideal solution for Ford.

Hundreds of analysts at Ford can access the rich history of their survey program using mTab. Product planners, responsible for developing product platforms across global consumer markets, can conveniently combine and compare survey results from multiple markets to identify unmet needs and new opportunities.

Using mTab’s convenient means of trending data, money spent on prior year’s research programs can be continually recouped by using prior research results to bring perspective to current results.

“I work extensively with multiple data sources and various data-mining tools to drive out and support product strategy decisions, consumer targeting and marketing segmentation analyses. I have found mTab to be an intuitive, simple to use and yet powerful tool allowing me to be maximally effective and efficient. Moreover, I really like the fact that mTab continuously looks to improve. They consistently demonstrate dedication, expertise and a true heart for the customer. I can tell that relationship still means something to mTab, just as I know it does here at Ford. I highly recommend them.”

Jeff Holt, Automotive Marketing Analyst

Get started today

Accelerate insights with mTab Insight Cloud

ford motor company case study analysis

Study of modified VVER and typical PWR fuel in the HBWR reactor (Norway)

  • Published: 21 December 2012
  • Volume 113 , pages 171–178, ( 2013 )

Cite this article

  • B. Yu. Volkov 1 ,
  • W. Wiesenack 1 ,
  • V. V. Yakovlev 2 ,
  • E. P. Ryazantsev 2 ,
  • A. K. Panyushkin 3 ,
  • A. V. Ivanov 3 ,
  • O. V. Kryukov 3 ,
  • P. I. Lavrenyuk 4 &
  • Yu. V. Pimenov 4  

124 Accesses

3 Citations

Explore all metrics

Two experiments studying the standard and modified VVER fuel fabricated at the Machine-Building Plant (in Elektrostal) and PWR fuel produced according to the typical specifications were performed on the HBWR research reactor (Halden, Norway) from 1995 to 2005. The objective of these experiments was to study the effect of the structural-technological parameters on the behavior of VVER fuel in comparison with the typical PWR fuel. These studies made it possible to expand the in-reactor data base on the behavior of VVER uranium oxide fuel as well as to develop recommendations for improving the technology of its production in order to increase fuel stability under irradiation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

B. Yu. Volkov, E. P. Ryazantsev, V. V. Yakovlev, et al., “Studies of the behavior of VVER and PWR irradiated in the HBWR reactor (Halden, Norway),” At. Énerg. , 111 , No. 6, 342–348 (2011).

Google Scholar  

B. Volkov, E. Ryazantzev, and V. Yakovlev, The Thermal and Mechanical Behaviour of Modified WWER Fuel Compared with PWR Specification Fuel in IFA-503.2 , HWR-637, December 2000.

B. Volkov and T. Tverberg, “Irradiation performance of modified WWER fuel compared with typical PWR fuel in the Halden Reactor Test,” in: 4th Int. Conf. on WWER Fuel Performance, Modelling, and Experimental Support , Bulgaria, Varna, Oct. 15, 2001, pp. 186–196.

B. Volkov and E. Kolstad, “Review of WWER fuel and material tests in the Halden reactor,” in: 6th Int. Conf. on WWER Fuel Performance, Modelling and Experimental Support , Bulgaria, Albena, Sept. 19–23, 2005, pp. 214–221.

K. Vinjamuru and D. Owen, “Helium fill gas absorption in pressurized UO2 fuel rods during irradiation,” Nucl. Technol ., 47 , No. 1, 119–124 (1980).

G. Small, “Densification of uranium dioxide at low burnup,” J. Nucl. Mater. , 148 , No. 3, 302–315 (1987).

Article   MathSciNet   ADS   Google Scholar  

M. Freshley et al., “Irradiation-induced densification of UO2 pellet fuel,” ibid ., 62 , No. 2, 138–166 (1976).

W. Wiesenack and T. Tverberg, “Thermal performance of high burnup fuel – in-pile temperature data and analysis,” in: Int. Topical Meeting on LWR Fuel Performance , Utah, USA, April 10–3, 2000, pp. 626–633.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Halden Reactor Project, Halden, Norway

B. Yu. Volkov & W. Wiesenack

National Research Center Kurchatov Institute, Moscow, Russia

V. V. Yakovlev & E. P. Ryazantsev

Machine-Building Plant, Elektrostal, Moscow Oblast, Russia

A. K. Panyushkin, A. V. Ivanov & O. V. Kryukov

TVEL Company, Moscow, Russia

P. I. Lavrenyuk & Yu. V. Pimenov

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Additional information

Translated from Atomnaya Énergiya, Vol. 113, No. 3, pp. 140–145, September, 2012.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Volkov, B.Y., Wiesenack, W., Yakovlev, V.V. et al. Study of modified VVER and typical PWR fuel in the HBWR reactor (Norway). At Energy 113 , 171–178 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10512-012-9613-7

Download citation

Received : 14 February 2012

Published : 21 December 2012

Issue Date : January 2013

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10512-012-9613-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Fuel Element
  • Uranium Dioxide
  • Fuel Kernel
  • Experimental Fuel
  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

IMAGES

  1. Ford Motor Company Supply Chain Strategy Case Study Solution

    ford motor company case study analysis

  2. Ford Motor Company Case Study by Sidhartha Verma

    ford motor company case study analysis

  3. 🐈 Case study ford motor company. FORD MOTOR COMPANY Case Solution And

    ford motor company case study analysis

  4. Case Study Presentation: Global Industrial Relations at Ford Motor Co…

    ford motor company case study analysis

  5. Ford Motor Company Case Study: Financial Condition & Ford Industry

    ford motor company case study analysis

  6. 💣 Ford motor company case study. Henry Ford: Case Study of an Innovator

    ford motor company case study analysis

COMMENTS

  1. Ford Motor Company Case Study

    The current report provides an in-depth analysis of the motor vehicle industry based on the Ford Motor Company case study. It also analyzes Ford Motor Company using SWOT analytical tool. Moreover, strategies that could be adopted by Ford Motor Company for the next five years have been provided. The study is divided in several sections with the ...

  2. FORD MOTOR COMPANY CASE STUDY. 1.INTRODUCTION

    This case study is about Ford Motor Company's strategic analysis which covers the years 1999 and 2003. ... In that case study, Ford Motor Company's strategic analysis was made which covers the ...

  3. How Ford Is Thinking About the Future

    Mark W. Johnson. Summary. Dealing with the uncertainty of new, disruptive business models is one of the biggest challenges that faces any large, established company. To gain insight into how to ...

  4. The Ford Motor Company Strategic Management: Case Study Analysis

    Ford Case Analysis. Ford Motor Company is an American multinational automaker headquartered in Dearborn, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit. It was founded by Henry Ford and incorporated on June 16, 1903. The company sells automobiles and commercial vehicles under the Ford brand and most luxury cars under the Lincoln brand.

  5. Ford business transformation case study

    In the midst of these unprecedented challenges, however, 118-year-old Ford Motor Company leaned in and began to reinvent itself. Under the leadership of two new executives — Jim Farley as CEO and Suzy Deering as global CMO — the company saw an opportunity for business transformation and started mapping out a strategy.

  6. The Turnaround at Ford Motor Company

    Abstract. This case describes the corporate turnaround of the Ford Motor Company under the charismatic leadership of Alan Mulally. Ford was in deep trouble in the early 2000s as its prices and debt ratings plummeted and employee morale suffered. In 2006, the company anticipated a loss of $17 billion.

  7. Case: The Ford Pinto

    In the Richard Grimshaw case, in addition to awarding over $3 million in compensatory damages to the victims of a Pinto crash, the jury awarded a landmark $125 million in punitive damages against Ford. The judge reduced punitive damages to 3.5 million. On August 10, 1978, eighteen-year-old Judy Ulrich, her sixteen-year-old sister Lynn, and ...

  8. Ford Five Forces Analysis (Porter's Model)

    Michael Porter developed the Five Forces analysis model for analyzing the external factors in firms' industry environments. Ford needs to develop policies and approaches that respond to the most significant forces based on the external factors in the global automotive industry. This Five Forces analysis of Ford Motor Company identifies the ...

  9. Ford Motor Company Analysis

    Ford began its manufacturing with mass production assembly lines in the first part of the 20th century. We Will Write a Custom Case Study Specifically. For You For Only $13.90/page! order now. Now, one of the world's largest automakers, Ford the brand is world renown. Ford Motor brands, or marques, include Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury (the ...

  10. Mitigation strategies against supply disruption risk: a case study at

    Mitigation strategies against supply disruption risk: a case study at the Ford Motor Company. Ece Sanci a Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA;b School of Management, University of Bath, ... This multi-period analysis allows them to reflect the evolution of the disrupted suppliers' capacity over time.

  11. Henry Ford: Case Study of an Innovator

    Henry Ford's first official Ford Motor Company portrait, 1904. / THF97952 Henry Ford did not invent the automobile. But more than any other single individual, he was responsible for transforming the automobile from an invention of unknown utility into an innovation that profoundly shaped the 20th century and continues to affect the 21st.

  12. PDF Improving the Performance of Six Sigma at Ford Motor Company

    A case study of the Six Sigma process at Ford Motor Company . Steven James THOMPSON . A thesis submitted to the University of ... a process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) of the project selection and scoping process, a control plan that ensures that ... 1.3.1 Ford Motor Company ...

  13. A Case Analysis Report on Ford Motor Company

    Company Hourly Pay Annual Pay Ford $70 $141, General Motors $73 $146, Chrysler $75 $151, Japanese motor companies in US $48 $96, Table 1: Comparison on pay of workers of automobile companies in US Sources: work.chron/average-pay-auto-workers-union-member-24071.html. 2.3 Opportunity Since 2005, several major car companies such as Toyota, General ...

  14. Ford Motor Co.: Supply Chain Strategy

    Ford Motor Co.: Supply Chain Strategy. By: Robert D. Austin. Describes Ford's examination of its supply chain to evaluate whether the company should "virtually integrate" on the Dell Computers model. Length: 9 page (s) Publication Date: Mar 3, 1999. Discipline: Operations Management.

  15. Group Case Analysis 1

    Running head: FORD MOTOR COMPANY 1. Group Case Analysis 1 Liberty University BUSI 400-D10: Strategic Management April 13, 2020. ... "A longitudinal study of the relation of vision and vision communication to venture growth in entrepreneurial firms", Baum and his colleagues chose not to define vision in advance, but to accept the term as ...

  16. Ford Motor Company Case Study

    The Challenge. With a history of relying on survey data analysis tracing back for more than 50 years, Ford has purchased and developed many analytical solutions for managing and analyzing the wide array of survey data collected over the years and across the globe. In the past 10 years, facing increasing competitive pressure and global ...

  17. Case-Analysis-FORD

    Ford Motor Company, an American automotive corporation founded in 1903 by Henry Ford and11 associate investors. In 1919 the company was reincorporated, with Ford, his wife, Clara, and his son, Edsel, acquiring full ownership; they, their heirs, and the Ford Foundation which is formed in 1936 were sole stockholders until January 1956, when ...

  18. Dodge v. Ford Motor Co

    Ford Motor Co., 204 Mich. 459, 170 N.W. 668, 1919 Mich. LEXIS 720, 3 A.L.R. 413 (Mich. 1919) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff shareholders, Dodge et al., brought an action against Defendant corporation, Ford Motor Company, to force Defendant to pay a more substantial dividend, and to change questionable business decisions by Defendant. Synopsis.

  19. Study of modified VVER and typical PWR fuel in the HBWR ...

    Two experiments studying the standard and modified VVER fuel fabricated at the Machine-Building Plant (in Elektrostal) and PWR fuel produced according to the typical specifications were performed on the HBWR research reactor (Halden, Norway) from 1995 to 2005. The objective of these experiments was to study the effect of the structural-technological parameters on the behavior of VVER fuel in ...

  20. TRAID PLYUS, OOO Company Profile

    Find company research, competitor information, contact details & financial data for TRAID PLYUS, OOO of Elektrostal, Moscow region. Get the latest business insights from Dun & Bradstreet.

  21. BETA GIDA, OOO Company Profile

    Find company research, competitor information, contact details & financial data for BETA GIDA, OOO of Elektrostal, Moscow region. Get the latest business insights from Dun & Bradstreet.

  22. ELLOGISTIK, OOO Company Profile

    Find company research, competitor information, contact details & financial data for !company_name! of !company_city_state!. Get the latest business insights from Dun & Bradstreet. ... Systems Warehousing and Storage Other Support Activities for Transportation Support Activities for Rail Transportation Motor Vehicle and Motor Vehicle Parts and ...