Fiat-Chrysler case study

1. Make a PESTEL analysis, trying to identify the key drivers of change can have an impact on the car manufacturing industry.

2. What are the key success factors in the car manufacturing industry?

3. Compare the Daimler-Chrysler alliance with the Renault-Nissan one.
How have they worked? What does it take to make an alliance successful in this industry? Michaël

First of all, Daimler-Chrysler believed that the merger would resolve all problems that they faced whereas Renault and Nissan have another thinking about alliance.
Indeed, it was designed to be a collaborative partnership, the alliance was also attended to maintain separate brand and corporate identities. This is an important point, particularly for the customer. Indeed, traditional Daimler consumers were accustomed to paying premium prices for luxury whereas the Chrysler ones purchased moderately prices. So the Daimler consumers perceived their brand to be tarnished by the association.

An another point is the fact that Renault and Nissan stayed separate group and there was only one chief executive (Carlos Ghosn) of both companies whereas there were two chiefs (Jurgen Schrempp and Eaton) for Daimler Chrysler. This point led to some differences in leadership styles, decision making and even behaviour at work for Daimler-Chrysler.

Then, Renault and Nissan were able to work together, to share platforms, technologies and manufacturing methods. For Daimler-Chrysler, cost-cutting was limited by the incompatibility of parts because Daimler was focused on luxury cars whereas Chrysler is more focused on pick-up, minivans...
Moreover, they designed a team especially to oversee these synergies were captured which was not the case with Daimler Chrysler. Using a team to oversee the synergy between the two group is a very good idea which make you sure that everyone is working together and the link between the two groups is efficient.

Finally, Renault and Nissan,