Twelve months earlier, GM had revealed AUTOnomy, a radical rethink of what an automobile could look like if freed from the constraints of conventional technologies. Combining fuel-cell power with drive-by-wire technology, AUTOnomy comprised a “skateboard” mannikin containing all the main vehicle systems, on top of which a variety of body types could be attached. While the concept had captured headlines, prosecute such a radical approach would require major(ip) changes to GM’s existing competencies. Should Burns push this intrepid new vision or something much conservative? Complicating the picture, firms were devising different bets with regard to alternative- cater cars. Toyota and Honda had made significant investments in “hybrids”—vehicles that unite electric and gasoline power—selling over 60,000 of them in the United States, despite the fact that the economics of such vehicles did non seem to make sense there (they cost more to build than customers would pay). Burns wondered if GM should revisit its strategy of be a follower in hybrids or continue to hold its limited resources to the end goal—a vehicle powered solely by hydrogen.
The decisions he made would deeply imprint the future of GM and perhaps the entire industry.
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
Professor Alan MacCormack and inquiry Associate Kerry Herman, Global Research Group, prepared this case. HBS cases are certain solely as the basis for class discussion. Cases are not intended to serve as endorsements, sources of primary data, or illustrations of impressive or ineffective management. Copyright © 2003 President and Fellows of Harvard College. To rate copies or request permission to reproduce materials, call 1-800-545-7685, publish Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA 02163, or go to...If you ask to get a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my essay .
No comments:
Post a Comment