Leadership Failure That Has Impacted

¶ … Leadership Failure That Has Impacted Large Numbers of People in Any Organization Leadership Problem Today's life is constantly influenced by modifications in the micro and macro environments and all these changes lead to an increasing need for adaptation. In the situations where companies fail to adjust to the new requirements, they stand to suffer tremendous losses. Such a case is American automobile producer Ford Motors Corporation. Once a leader of the industry, Ford has ended the latest fiscal year with a deficit as their sales continue to drop.

The present article looks at the matter from a strategic standpoint and analyzes the causes of the problem, alongside with its effects and the strategies that could have been implemented in order to avoid a negative outcome. The signs of what was coming had been present for years, but the corporate officials chose to neglect them. The standpoint taken by the operational management at Ford was somewhat similar to lassie fair or the informal ignore it and it will go away.

The general economic instability, the violent conflicts in the Middle East, the OPEC regulations which reduced the amounts of extracted and exported crude oil, the weakening of the dollar in the background of a strengthening euro or the record high price of oil and the continually increasing federal deficit, were all signs of a macroeconomic change that needed adjustments. The once highly consumerist, speed, size and luxury driven America was turning its attention towards smaller size and fuel efficient cars.

But after having invested large sums of money into the technological advancements and their integration into the trucks and sports utility vehicles, Ford officials believed that the losses would be far too great if a change in the design and manufacturing process was to occur. Therefore, betting on Americans' desire for luxury and comfort, they carried on with the production of large size vehicles, hoping the economic and oil crisis would decrease in intensity and they would register the desired return on investment.

However, the outcome they had hoped for failed to materialize. And as drastic consequence, the lives of thousands and thousands of people were affected. What basically happened was that the American drivers turned their attention towards the Japanese vehicles, such as Toyota, Mitsubishi, Honda or Nissan; they came in smaller sizes, but were extremely fuel efficient and as such cheaper to upkeep. As a result, Ford's customer base had begun to shrink. Fewer Americans choose luxury and comfort over reduced consumption and reduced upkeeping costs.

Therefore, as sales of Ford vehicles begun to decline, the company began to struggle. With the financial difficulties encountered, with the accumulation of unsold cars and also with the declining orders, the company found no use for all staff members. And this was not only valid for production personnel, but also top executive positions were dissolved. In the second semester of 2001 for instance, Ford had fired 5,000 white-collar staff members (Randall, 2001). In 2005, the producer closed down 10 plants and laid off 30,000 workers (Burgos, 2005).

The following year, the American automobile manufacturer continued their actions of closing down plants and dissolved 10,000 white-collar positions (Burgos, 2006). All these layoffs had tremendous implications which revealed poor leadership decisions, from which numerous individuals would suffer. Aside from the obvious impact upon the Ford employees who found themselves out of jobs, a general effect was the increased unemployment rate. And this was not only because of the positions lost within Ford, but also because of the jobs indirectly lost due to the crisis at the American manufacturer.

In a more simplistic formulation, the automobile maker had ongoing contracts with various suppliers and other intermediaries, purchasing various technologies and vehicle components. Once the demand for Ford automobiles had decreased and their supremacy was lost to the Japanese producers, they no longer required the services of all of their purveyors. Then, as the demand and production became reduced, there was also limited need for dealers store to sell the cars. Ergo, additional jobs were lost and the lives of more and more individuals were impacted.

The negative outcome could have been avoided had the company been more receptive to the changes affecting the environment. They should have realized the potential implications of the economic instability in the background of sky-rocking oil prices and they should have developed strategies to implementing change as an ongoing process strengthening and increasing the capabilities of Ford Motor Corporation. The battle is not lost however.

The American manufacturer possesses decades of expertise in the industry, has access to various resources and still possesses the highest skilled workforce and the latest technologies. Therefore, their revival is nothing farfetched. But even so, words and desires are insufficient to make an actual recovery and re-become America's number one employing and profit generating industry.

Clear courses of action must be developed and implemented, and they must all promote change and adjustment to the new requirements; otherwise, Ford risks becoming a niche industry, producing large size vehicles for the few ones who choose comfort over price efficiency. All in all, the problem revolves around.