英语论文网

For many years, Eastman Kodak had a virtual monopoly in film production. This market power resulted in large profits. It also permitted Kodak to control the timing for introducing new products to the marketplace and responding to changes in consumer demands.

By the 1980s, Kodak’s market environment had changed materially. The Fuji Corporation produced high-quality film that eroded Kodak’s market share. Increased competition also came from generic store brands. In addition, the 1980s witnessed a technological explosion. Improved communications, design capabilities, and robotics allowed companies to bring new products to market within months rather than years.

These changes in the market environment placed significant pressures on Kodak. Kodak’s stock price dropped from over $85 per share in 1982 to just over $71 in 1984. This 16 percent decline in stock price appears particularly dramatic when it is compared to the substantial increase in stock prices for the market as a whole. Earnings per share at Kodak dropped substantially. The company realized it had to change its organisation to regain profits and market share. To quote Colby Chandler, former CEO of Kodak, at the 1984 annual meeting:

Like many companies, we are not used to working in an environment where there is rapid technological transfer from laboratory to the marketplace. But we know that will be important in our future.

During 1984, Kodak undertook a major corporate restructuring. Prior to the restructuring, decision making at Kodak was quite centralized. Top-level approval was required for most major decisions. The restructuring created 17 new business units with profit-and-loss responsibility. Business-unit managers were given increased decision-making authority for new products, pricing, and other important policy choices. By decentralizing decision rights, senior management hoped to make the company more responsive to changing customer demands and market conditions. To quote the 1984 annual report:

In short, Kodak is finding new ways to stimulate the innovative nature of its people. The result: a spirit of independence, new ideas and a quickened pace in the process which turns new ideas into commercial realities.

Unfortunately for Kodak, changing the assignment of decision rights did not have a significant impact on the company’s performance. In response, Kodak adopted the Management Annual Performance Plan (MAPP) in 1987. Under this plan, the base salary of management employees was reduced by 10 percent and replaced with a variable bonus. The bonus was to average 10 percent, ranging from 0 to 20 percent. Bonus payments were based on individual, unit, and company objectives.

The idea behind MAPP was that changing the performance-evaluation and reward systems would motivate managers to be more creative and industrious. The plan, however, did not have a large impact on managerial incentives or corporate profits. In 1993, Kodak officials were quoted as saying (1) that management has really been held accountable for its failure to deliver results, (2) that management had to develop tougher work standards and demote failing employees, and (3) that in the past, managers who advance at Kodak excelled in office politics but not necessarily leadership. Frustrated by the continued lack of success, Kodak’s board of 本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。