A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

Strategic Management
Group Assignment

A CASE STUDY ON

FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

1


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

We would like to express our gratitude to ……………. for the useful comments, remarks
and engagement through the learning process of this topic. Furthermore, we would like to
thank all team member work together. Also, we would like to thank the classmates in this
case study, who have supported us throughout entire process, both by keeping us
harmonious and helping us putting pieces together. We will be grateful forever for your
help.

All team members

2


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

ABSTRACT

This is an assignment of a case analysis for Ford Motor Company. First and foremost, we
need to understand and research on Ford Motor Company and its existing vision, mission,
objectives and strategies are identified. Then, the vision and mission statements for Ford
Motor Company are developed. Other important factors that we have analyzed are to
identify the organization’s external opportunities and threats.
Three major competitors of Ford are GM, Chrysler AG and Toyota which have been
analyzed with Competitive Profile Matrix (CPM). These companies are global extension.
The External Factor Evaluation (EFE) Matrix is constructed to illustrate the external
factors for Ford Company.
The organization’s internal strengths and weaknesses are identified in order to construct an
Internal Factor Evaluation (IFE) Matrix. The SWOT matrix, SPACE Matrix and Grand
Strategy Matrix are prepared to analyze and evaluate the organization’s current situation
and strategies to be adopted for the portfolios. Besides, the QSPM is constructed to
evaluate the pros and cons for the alternative strategies.
In addition, specific strategies and long-term objectives are recommended. These included
the costs for each projected year. Our recommendations are compared to the actual
strategies that have been planned by the company. Meanwhile, we have specified how our
recommendations can be implemented and the results we expected. Lastly, we have
recommended specific annual objectives and policies as well as the procedures for
strategy review and evaluation for Ford.

3


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

LIST OF TABLE

LIST OF FIGURES


4


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

TABLE OF CONTENT

THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY BACK GROUND:
Ford Motor Company was founded in 1903 by Henry Ford in Detroit, MI. Not only did
Ford revolutionize the development of the automobile as a product, he is also the visionary
behind the idea of mass production. Ford's ability to make automobiles affordable for the
masses is cited as a driving force behind both the automobile industry and the creation of a

middle class in America.
Name

Ford Motor
Company

Logo

Type

Public company

Found June
16,
ed
1903 (110 years
ago)

Found Henry Ford
er(s)
Indust
ries
Automotive
served
5


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

Geogr
aphic
Worldwide
areas
served
Headq
Dearborn,
uarter
Michigan, U.S.
s
Curre
nt
Alan R. Mulally
CEO
Produ Automobiles
cts
Automotive parts
Bayerische
Motoren Werke

AG, Chrysler
Group LLC,
Daimler AG,
General Motors
Company, Honda
Main Motor Company,
Comp
etitors Nissan Motor,
Tata Motors, Ltd.,
Toyota Motor
Corporation,
Volkswagen AG
and many other
automotive
companies.

William Clay Ford, Jr.
Executive
Alan Mulally
President and CEO

The Management:
Michael E. Bannister, Exec, V.P.
Chairman/CEO, Ford Credit

John Fleming,
Lewis W.K. Booth,
Exec. V.P & Exec V.P. & Chief Financial Officer
Chairman/CEO
Ford of Europe


Mark Fields,
Exec V.P. &
President,
The Americas

John G. Parker,
6
Exec V.P. Asia
Pacific & Affrica


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

Figure 1: The Ford's Management

1.

IDENTIFY THE FIRM’S EXISTING VISION, MISSION, OBJECTIVES,
AND STRATEGIES:

ONE FORD MISSION:
 ONE TEAM

People working together as a lean, global enterprise for automotive leadership, as
measured by:
Customer, Employee, Dealer, Investor, Supplier, Union/Council, and Community
Satisfaction
 ONE PLAN
•


Aggressively restructure to operate profitably at the current demand and
changing model mix

•

Accelerate development of new products our customers want and value

•

Finance our plan and improve our balance sheet
7


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009
•

Work together effectively as one team

 ONE GOAL
•

An exciting viable Ford delivering profitable growth for all.

Figure 2: Ford’s Vision – Mission

8


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009


VISION:
To become the world's leading consumer company for automotive products and services.
MISSION:
We are a global family with a pround heritage passionately committed to providing
personal mobility for people around the word. We anticipate consumer need and diliver
outstanding products and services that improve people’s lives.
VALUES:

Our business is driven by our consumer forcus, creativity, resourcefulness, and
entrepreneurial spirit.
We are an inspired, diverse team. We respect and value everyone’s contribution. The
health and safety of our people are paramount.
We are a leader in environmental responsibility. Our intergrity is never compromised and
we make a positive contribution to society. We constantly strive to improve in everything
we do. Guided by these values, we provide superior returns to our shareholders
OBJECTIVES:
Ford identified three goals that needed to be accomplished:
•

Return the company to profitability,

•

Achieve a competitive share price and dividend, and

•

Restore the brand identity to its previously-held position


With clear direction from the magement board, Ford identified six objectives that must be
met to achieve the three goals:

9


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009
•

Build cash reserves of $15 billion (ultimately $23 billion) to allow the company to
weather the storm and make targeted investments in long-term viability,

•

Temporarily eliminate dividends to guarantee that all available cash is directed at
assuring the future of the company,

•

Limit production to market demand to eliminate expenses associated with
manufacturing models that are inventoried because they can’t be sold,

•

Downsize operations to production requirement levels to adjust production costs to
market demand,

•

Eliminate management silos to increase effectiveness by eliminating redundancy

and encouraging the collaborative use of resources, and

•

Sell off non-ford brands to focus attention on ford products.

STRATEGIES:
•

Utilizing their advance technology

•

Building of smaller vehicle

•

Cost reduction

•

Market expansion through joint venture and strategic alliance

Ford’s business strategy is embodied in our ONE Ford plan. ONE Ford expands on our
Company’s four-point business plan for achieving success globally. The four-point
business plan consists of the following:
•

Aggressively restructure to operate profitably at the current demand and changing
model mix


•

Accelerate development of new products our customers want and value

•

Finance our plan and improve our balance sheet

•

Work together effectively as one team
10


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

Building on this plan, ONE Ford encourages focus, teamwork and a single global
approach, aligning employee efforts toward a common definition of success. It emphasizes
the importance of working together as one team to achieve automotive leadership, which
is measured by the satisfaction of our customers, employees and essential business
partners, such as our dealers, investors, suppliers, unions/councils and the communities.

The goal of ONE Ford is to create an exciting and viable company delivering profitable
growth for all. We are focused on building:
•

Great Products, a full family of vehicles – small, medium and large; cars, utilities
and trucks – with best-in-class quality, fuel efficiency, safety and smart design


•

Strong Business, based on a balanced portfolio of products and global presence;
and

•

2.

Better World, accomplished through our sustainability strategy

DEVELOP VISION AND MISSION STATEMENTS FOR THE
ORGANIZATION

VISION
Become the world’s leading automotive maker by being strategic planners, dealing with
daily chaotic situations in a fast paced environment and effectively managing conflict and
team dialogue.
 Strategic Planning
 Teamwork
 Management team with shared vision
 Technology
 Dedicated Employees

11


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

MISSION

ONE TEAM
 At Ford Motor Company, all people work together on challenging assignments
to develop and execute brand strategies, including advertising and sales
promotional initiatives for our products. Additionally, our team represents the
face of Ford Motor Company to our dealer partners and retail customers
ensuring "Best-in-Class" customer service.
ONE PLAN
 We are working to create a more contemporary automotive company by our
brands as culturally and emotionally relevant in the ever evolving tech savvy
universe.
 We are committed to delivering excellence that enables our customers to drive

high quality, green, safe and smart vehicles using state-of-the art technology.
ONE GOAL
 To attract high caliber individuals who possess strong consumer instincts and
innovative ideas, who thrive at working on a team in a business casual
atmosphere and who have a passion for the automotive industry.
3.

IDENTIFY THE ORGANIZATIONS EXTERNAL OPPORTUNITIES AND
THREATS
 OPPORTUNITIES
•

Consumers demand hybird and fuel efficient vehicles:

•

Increase in consumer spending trends: the society develops, people have high
income, many of them can buy a car.


•

Consumer demand more innovative vehicles

12


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009
•

Global expansion: to increase Ford’s participation in these fast-growing markets:
China, India, Mexico… Ford are significantly increasing the production capacity,
directly or through joint venture.

•

Industry experiences slow and steady growth

•

Environmental friendly with cleaner engine: the need of improve the quality of
products and technology development.

•

Investing in solar power so Ford will become market leader

•


Use wed strategy to cut cost further

•

Take advantage of their perceived generosity giving to more charities

•

Opportunities to new markets: Ford have just open many factories in Asia and
South America, they can penetrate into new markets and

 THREATS
•

Weak USD: the economy does not stable, it is effected to Ford’s bussiness

•

Increase in steel and resin pricing: Price of materials are increasing day by day

•

Increase gasoline prices: the petrol is constrained, so the price is changed
rapidly.

•

Stricter CO2 emission standards: the government issue more strickly laws or
regulations to control the air pollution


•

Increasing mortgage rates: Banks adjust the interest rate due to inflation

•

Competitive is huge: There are many big competitors such as GM, Toyota,
Chrysler, Honda… the competitiveness is serious fierce.

•

Internal strife will hurt the company

•

Threats of substitute product such as natural gas, vegetable oil

•

Intensity of rivalry among competitors worldwide
13


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009
•

4.

World wide markets threatened due to the "war of terrorism"


CONSTRUCT A COMPETITIVE PROFILE MATRIX (CPM)

The automotive industry is noted for its intense rivalry, and within the United States
market Ford faces five major competitors: GM, Toyota, Chrysler, Honda, and Nissan.

Figure 3: US Market Share by Company

Let’s take a look at the Figure 3, we can see very clearly about the US Market Share of the
company. In there, most company has the market share over 10 percent that only have four
companies such as General Motors, Chryler, Ford and Toyota.
The 2008 Harbour Report found extreme differences in profit per vehicle between The Big
Three (General Motors, Chrysler, and Ford) and the foreign automobile producers within
the U.S. markets. Whereas Toyota makes approximately $922 profit per vehicle sold,
estimates show that Ford lost $1,467 per vehicle in 2008 and General Motors lost $729.3
Toyota is now the undisputed lead in vehicle production worldwide. In 2008, Toyota sold
nearly nine million vehicles, compared to General Motors’ 8.3 million. In recent years
14


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

Toyota has not only been one of the most profitable producers, but also the most efficient:
in 2008, it took an industry shortest average of 30.37 hours to produce a vehicle from start
to finish.

Therefore, we have the competitive profile matrix as below:
Critical
factors

Success


Ford
Weights

GM

Chrysler LLG

Rating

Weighted
Score

Rating

Weighted
Score

Rating

0.05
0.1
0.09
0.12
0.1

2
2
3
2

3

0.1
0.2
0.27
0.24
0.3

4
4
2
4
3

0.2
0.4
0.18
0.48
0.3

1
2
1
1
2

0.05
0.2
0.09
0.12

0.2

3
3
4
3
4

0.15
0.3
0.36
0.36
0.4

Product Quality

0.1
0.12
0.13

4
3
2

0.4
0.36
0.26

3
2

4

0.3
0.24
0.52

1
1
2

0.1
0.12
0.26

2
4
3

0.2
0.48
0.39

Price
Competitiveness

0.14

4

0.56


2

0.28

1

0.14

3

0.42

0.05
1

2
27

0.1
2.79

4
32

0.2
3.10

2
14


0.1
1.38

3
32

0.15
3.21

Global Expansion
Financial Position
Growth
Market Share
Customer Loyalty
Hybrid/Fuel
Efficient Vehicles
Advertising

Management
Experience
Totals

Weighted
Score

Toyota
Weighted
Score


Rating

Table 1: Ford’s CPM

The CPM identifies a firm’s major competitors and its particular strengths and weaknesses
in relation to a sample firm’s strategic position. Critical success factors in a CPM include
both internal and external issues; therefore, the ratings refer to strengths and weaknesses,
where 4= major strength, 3 = minor strength, 2 = minor weakness, and 1 = major
weakness. In a CPM, the ratings and total weighted scores for rival firms can be compared
to the sample firm.
The table showed the critical success factors between Ford, GM, Chrysler LLG and
Toyota. In this table, Price Competitive and product quality are the most important critical
15


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

success factors, as indicated by a weight of 0.14 and 0.13. GM and Toyota’s global
expansion is very well, as evidenced by a rating of 4 and 3; customer loyalty of Ford is
fair, as indicated by a rating of 3; Toyota is the best, Chrysler AG is the lowest, as
indicated by a rating of 2. GM’s market share is the highest, as evidenced by a rating of 4,
Ford’s market share is behind Toyota and GM, as evidenced by a rating of 2.
Besides, by using this table, note that GM has the best market share and production
quality; Ford has the best Price competitiveness and hybrid vehicles; and Toyota has the
best growth as indicated by the ratings. For a total weighted score, GM achieves the
highest weighted score of 3.1, Ford’s weighted score of 2.79, Toyota‘s weighted score is
3.21 and Chrysler AG‘s weighted score is 1.38.

5.


CONSTRUCT AN EXTERNAL FACTOR EVALUATION (EFE) MATRIX

Key External Factor

Weight

Rating

Weighted
Score

Opportunities
Consumers demand hybird and fuel efficient
vehicles
Increase in consumer spending trends
Consumer demand more innovative vehicles
Global expansion
Industry experiences slow and steady growth
Environmental friendly with cleaner engine
Investing in solar power so Ford will become

0.075
0.045
0.06
0.07
0.04
0.05

4
2

3
2
1
3

0.3
0.09
0.18
0.14
0.04
0.15

market leader
Use wed strategy to cut cost further
Take advantage of their perceived generosity

0.075
0.035

4
1

0.3
0.035

0.05
0.05

1
2


0.05
0.1

0.03
0.04
0.065
0.05

2
2
4
3

0.06
0.08
0.26
0.15

giving to more charities
Opportunities to new markets
Threats
Weak USD
Increase in steel and resin pricing
Increase gasoline prices
Stricter CO2 emission standards

16



A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

Increasing mortgage rates
Competitive is huge
Internal strife will hurt the company
Threats of substitute product such as natural gas,

0.025
0.065
0.04

2
2
2

0.05
0.13
0.08

vegetable oil
Intensity of rivalry among competitors worldwide
World wide markets threatened due to the "war of

0.06
0.05

3
4

0.18

0.2

0.025
1
1
Table 2: Ford’s External Factor Evaluation Matrix

0.025
2.60

terrorism"
Total

The total weighted score of 2.60 is above the average (midpoint) of 2.5, so Ford Motor is
doing pretty well, taking advantage of the external opportunities and avoiding the threats
facing the firm. There is definitely room for improvement, though, because the highest
total weighted score would be 4.0.

6.

IDENTIFY THE ORGANIZATION’S INTERNAL STRENGTHS AND
WEAKNESSES
 INTERNAL STRENGTHS
•

Strong and globally positioned brand names: Ford’s brand value gained 19%
last year globally, despite the fact that brand value dropped overall in the car

17



A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

category by 15%; this was in part due to the fact that they were the only
American car company not to accept federal bailout money.
•

Large employee base with highly educated engineers and good R&D
department

•

One of the largest automotive manufacturer (along with a long history)

•

Huge increase in total equity

•

Affordability due to Brand Name

•

Increase in net cash

•

Good Market Share in Europe


•

Producing Hybrid Car since 2007

•

Several Name of Brands

•

Targeting all classes Customers

•

Support Racing Teams including Formula 1 and etc

As one of the three major automobile manufacturers in the United States with

E

their pronounced history of manufacturing, their brand value as an American company
is a recognizable strength.
Ford Motor Credit Company is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Ford Motor

E

Company that operates both nationally and internationally. In the current recession
when many consumers who are credit-worthy are having difficulty securing credit for
automobile loans, Ford as one of the leading U.S. auto finance companies can finance
the purchase of their own vehicles, (Hoovers, n.d.).

 INTERNAL WEAKNESSES
•

A lot of time spent to actually put the product on the market

•

Recording continuous losses (net income) from 2006
18


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009
•

Low quality of new products (recalls - causing losing customers)

•

Bad management of the company

•

EPS very bad - in negative numbers (unattractive for the investors)

•

Continue Decline in Market Share

•


Downsizing

•

Weak Financial Position: Although they have witnessed a gradual increase per
year for the previous five years, at 5.5% in 2009, Ford still has a dismally small
share of the U.S. market for automobiles which is a great loss for its
shareholders. Additionally the trading value of their stock at $6.00/share upon
the filing of their annual report represents additional shareholder losses that the
company needs to recover from.

•

E

Closing more than 10 manufacturing units in USA

Ford is still seen internationally as an intensely American brand rather than an
international brand. As Ford introduces different models in different environments
designed to compete with local manufacturers, rebranding the company so that other
cultures will have the perception that they are not buying a local rather than an
“American” automobile will be a difficult but necessary task.

E

While other automobile manufacturers gain brand recognition from producing
other motorized vehicles in addition to automobiles, Ford currently produces only cars
and trucks. There are a myriad of motorized products that Ford could use their
technological know-how to produce including, but not limited to, recreation vehicles,
all terrain vehicles, golf carts, motorcycles, scooters, water vehicles, and snow

vehicles.

19


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009
7.

CONSTRUCT AN INTERNAL FACTOR EVALUATION (IFE) MATRIX

IFE matrix used to evaluate the strength and weakness of the internal factors within the
enterprise in order to help the business to compare their overall competitiveness to main
competitors in the industry. Since, they can recognize the strengths of weakness, consider
the possibility of reaction to exploit the strengths and find ways to surmount, improve the
weakness.
Key Internal Factors
Internal Strengths
Strong and globally positioned brand names
Large employee base with highly educated engineers

Weights Rating

Weighted
Score

0.13

4

0.52


and good R&D department
One of the largest automotive manufacturer (along with

0.12

3

0.36

a long history)
Huge increase in total equity
Affordability due to Brand Name
Increase in net cash
Good Market Share in Europe
Producing Hybrid Car since 2007
Several Name of Brands
Targeting all classes Customers
Support Racing Teams including Formula 1 and etc

0.09
0.11
0.1
0.09
0.12
0.1
0.04
0.05
0.05


2
3
2
2
4
2
1
2
1

0.18
0.33
0.2
0.18
0.48
0.2
0.04
0.1
0.05
2.64

0.1

2

0.2

Recording continuous losses (net income) from 2006
Low quality of new products (recalls - causing losing


0.12

4

0.48

customers)
Bad management of the company
EPS very bad - in negative numbers (unattractive for the

0.12
0.08

3
3

0.36
0.24

investors)
Continue Decline in Market Share
Downsizing
Weak Financial Position
Closing more than 10 manufacturing units in USA
Totals

0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1

0.05
1

2
2
3
3
1

0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.05
2.33

Totals
Internal Weaknesses
A lot of time spent to actually put the product on the
market

1

20


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

Table 3: Ford’s Internal Factor Evaluation Matrix


Accordingly, if the total scores of the entire list of factors which are taken into IFE matrix
equal 2.5 or more, the businesses have strong internal factors. Reactivity, competitiveness
are higher than average level and vice versa. Through the matrix above, we found that
Ford’s IFE is 2.33 < 2.64, the difference is 0.31 (2.64-2.33). Ford has the internal strength
higher than the internal weakness. They have a rather strong competitiveness in the
industry.

8.

TOOLS FOR MATCHING STAGE AND DECISION STAGE
8.1. Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT) Matrix

Strengths – S
1.Strong globally positioned
brand names
2.Large employee base with
highly educated engineers and
good R&D department
3.One of the largest
automotive manufacturer
(along with a long history)
4.Increase in net cash
5.Huge increase in total equity

Weaknesses – W
1.A lot of time spent to
actually put the product on the
market
2.Recording continuous losses
(net income) from 2006

3.Low quality of new products
(recalls - causing losing
customers)
4.Lack of management of the
company
5.EPS very bad - in negative
numbers (unattractive for the
investors)

21


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

Opportunities – O
1. Consumers demand hybrid
and fuel efficient vehicles
2.Increase in consumer
spending trends
3.Consumers demand more
innovative vehicles
4.Global expansion
5.Industry experiences slow
and steady growth
Threats – T
1.Weak USD
2.Increase in steel and resin
pricing
3.Increasing gasoline prices
4.Stricter CO2 emission

standards
5.Increasing mortgage rates

SO
1.Developing new vehicles on
alternative fuels (S1, S2, S4,
O1, O3. O5)
2.Offer new innovative
products – increase market
share - motorbikes (S1, S2,
S3, O2, O3, O5)
3.Concentrate on making the
best fuel efficient cars (S1, S2,
S3, S4, O1, O4, O5)
ST
1.Build eco-friendly products
from alternative materials
(S2, S3, S4, T2, T3, T4)
2.Produce more cars for
foreign market (S1, S2, S4,
T1, T4)

WO
1.Relocate the production to
cheaper country with lower
taxes (W2, W4, O4, O5)

WT
1.Merge with competitors
(W1, W2, W5, T2, T3, T5)

2.Manufacture only parts for
automobiles (W1, W2, T1, T2)

Table 4: Ford’s SWOT Matrix

8.2. Strategic Position and Action Evaluation (SPACE) Matrix

Two Internal Dimensions
•

Financial Strength (FS)

•

Competitive Advantage (CA)
Two External Dimensions
Environmental Stability (ES)
Industry Strength (IS)
Internal Strategy Position
Financial Strength (FS)
Return on Investment
Leverage Ratio
Income Employee
Inventory Turnover
Liquidity
14/5 = 2.8

3
3
3

2
2

External Strategy Position
Environmental Stability (ES)
Technological Changes
-1
Rate of Inflation
-2
Demand Variability
-3
Barrier To entry
-4
Competitive Pressure
-1
-11/5 = -2.2
22


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009

Internal Strategy Position
Competitive Advantage (CA)

External Strategy Position
Industry Strength (IS)

Market Share
-5 Growth Potential
Service Quality

-3 Financial Stability
Loyalty
-4 Technological know how
Competitor capacity utilization
-4 Resources Utilization
Technology
-3 Goodwill
-19/5 = -3.8
17/5 = 3.4
Table 5: Ford’s SPACE Matrix

3
3
5
3
3

Conclusion:
FS Average is 14/5 = 2.8
ES Average is -11/5 = -2.2
IS Average is 17/5 = 3.4
CA Average is -19/5 = -3.8
Directional Vector Coordinates:
x-axis: 3.4 + (-3.8) = -0.4
y-axis: 2.8 + (-2.2) = 0.6

23


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009


Conservative

Aggressive

(-0.4; 0.6)

Defensive

Competitive
Figure 4: Ford’s SPACE Matrix

The company that suffers from major competitive disadvantages in an industry that is
technologically stable.

24


A CASE STUDY ON FORD MOTOR COMPANY - 2009
8.3. Grand Strategy Matrix

Rapid Market Growth
Quadrant II

Quadrant I

1. Market development

1. Market development


2. Market penetration

2. Market penetration

3. Product development

3. Product development

4. Horizontal integration

4. Forward integration

Weak

5. Divestiture

5. Backward integration

Strong

Competitive

6. Liquidation

6. Horizontal integration

Competitiv

7. Related diversification
Quadrant IV


e Position

Quadrant III
1. Retrenchment

1. Related diversification

2. Related diversification

2. Unrelated diversification

3. Unrelated diversification

3. Joint ventures

Position

4. Divestiture
5. Liquidation
Slow Market Growth
Table 6: Grand Strategy Matrix of Ford

Ford has good product development. They produce hybrid vehicles on 2007. Ford also has
strong competitive position and good business in Russia, Brazil, China and India. Based
on this grand strategy matrix, Ford is positioned in quadrant II need to evaluate their
present approach to the market-place seriously. Therefore it can consider using strategies
such as market development, market penetration, product development, horizontal
integration, divestiture and liquidation.


8.4. Quantitative Strategic Planning Matrix (QSPM)
25