Expert answer:different concepts of collaboration that might hel
Expert answer:see the attached file for the exact details 1) Each collaboration needs certain foundations to achieve collaborative advantage. Without clearand shared bases the outcome might be collaborative inertia rather than collaborative advantage.Based on B325 course material, discuss the six main bases for collaborative advantage. With reference to the case, identify why BenQ initially wanted to join efforts with Siemens.What can you say about the bases for collaborative advantage of this collaboration? Finally,critically discuss what was the ultimate outcome of this collaboration . Word limit: 750 words.2) BenQ and Siemens come from two different backgrounds and cultures creating severalchallenges. Critically discuss the main challenges that multicultural companies might face withreference to B325 course material . What were the most obvious culture differencechallenges in the case of BenQ and Siemens? Were any actions taken to minimize the effect ofthese challenges? . Word limit: 750 words.3) Trust is an essential component for collaborative relations. To what extent was trust one of themain components between BenQ and Siemens? Based on what you have learned from yourcourse material, explain how trust can be built and restored for a better collaboration outcome.Word limit: 500 words.SEE THE ATTACHED FILE
b325_tma__fall_2017___q_assignment.docx
b325_tma_case_study___fall_2017.pdf
chapter_1___collaborative_advantage_what_why_how_and_why_not.pptx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Faculty of Business Studies
Arab Open University
Managing Across Organizational & Cultural Boundaries B325
Tutor Monitoring Assignment
Fall 2017
B325 TMA – Fall 2017 – LY
Page 1
This TMA has three questions. Read through the attached article: “Cheng, S.S. and Seeger, M.W. (2011). Cultural
Differences and Communication Issues in International Mergers and Acquisitions: A Case Study of BenQ
Debacle. International Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol. 2, No. 24, Special Issue – December 2011”.
You are supposed to answer your TMA in 2000 words. Only a 10% deviation from the word count limit is
acceptable. Critical discussion and link between theoretical frameworks and the article should be clearly
highlighted. You are also expected to refer to external references to provide more evidence to your discussion.
The questions in this assignment are about different concepts of collaboration that might help to achieve
collaborative advantage or collaborative inertia.
For all questions, your answer has to be in an essay format divided into introduction, body and
conclusion. Students have to provide critical analysis and be innovative in their answer and not only
descriptive.
B325 TMA – Fall 2017 – LY
Page 2
QUESTIONS
Question 1 (34 Marks)
Each collaboration needs certain foundations to achieve collaborative advantage. Without clear and
shared bases the outcome might be collaborative inertia rather than collaborative advantage. Based on
B325 course material, discuss the six main bases for collaborative advantage (20 Marks). With reference
to the case, identify why BenQ initially wanted to join efforts with Siemens. What can you say about
the bases for collaborative advantage of this collaboration? Finally, critically discuss what was the
ultimate outcome of this collaboration (14 Marks). Word limit: 750 words.
Question 2 (33 Marks)
BenQ and Siemens come from two different backgrounds and cultures creating several challenges.
Critically discuss the main challenges that multicultural companies might face with reference to B325
course material (20 marks). What were the most obvious culture difference challenges in the case of
BenQ and Siemens? Were any actions taken to minimize the effect of these challenges? (13 Marks).
Word limit: 750 words.
Question 3 (33 Marks)
Trust is an essential component for collaborative relations. To what extent was trust one of the main
components between BenQ and Siemens? Based on what you have learned from your course material,
explain how trust can be built and restored for a better collaboration outcome. Word limit: 500 words.
B325 TMA – Fall 2017 – LY
Page 3
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR STUDENTS
1. Cut-off date: Week 11 (9-14 December). If you feel that you are unable to meet the cut-off date of the
TMA because of unusual circumstances, please contact your tutor as soon as possible to discuss a possible
extension to the cut-off date. The exact cut-off date will be assigned in due date.
TMA weight: 20% of total course grade.
2. Course material:
–
Chapter 1: Collaborative advantage: What? Why? How? And Why Not?; from “Managing to
Collaborate” book.
–
Chapter 13: Managing multicultural teams; from “Organizational Collaboration” book.
–
Chapter 9: Coping with trust; from “Managing to Collaborate” book.
3. Format: You are expected to write your answers in essay format. You may, however, use bullet
points, diagrams, tables, or any graphs to support your arguments. Failing to do so could result in
grade deduction from presentation marks up to 5 marks.
4. Plagiarism: It’s imperative that you write your answers using your own words. Plagiarism will be
penalized depending on its severity and according to AOU plagiarism policy (Enclosed after
these instructions you will find the Arab Open University rules of cheating and plagiarism).
5. Word count: your answers are expected to be within the specified word count. A 10% deviation
from word count limit is acceptable. Not adhering to specified word count could result in grade
deduction from word count marks up to 5 marks.
6. Referencing: You are expected to use the Harvard referencing style for in-text referencing and
list of reference at the end. Failing to do so could result grade deduction of referencing marks up
to 5 marks. In addition, although text books assigned in the course may be used freely as
references, you are required to use a minimum of 2 external sources. It is recommended that you
use scholarly studies found in the E-library link at the LMS. Failing to do so could result in grade
deduction of referencing marks up to 5 marks.
B325 TMA – Fall 2017 – LY
Page 4
The Arab Open University Rules about Plagiarism
The Arab Open University Definitions of cheating and plagiarism
According to the Arab Open University By-laws, “The following acts represent studies of cheating and plagiarism:
•
Verbatim copying of printed material and submitting them as part of TMAs without proper
academic acknowledgement and documentation.
•
Verbatim copying of material from the Internet, including tables and graphics.
•
Copying other students’ notes or reports.
•
Using paid or unpaid material prepared for the student by individuals or firms.
•
Utilization of, or proceeding to utilize, contraband materials or devices in examinations.”
Examples of Plagiarism
Copying from a single or multiple sources, this is where the student uses one or more of the following as
the basis for the whole, or a good part, of the assignment:
1. Published or unpublished books, studies or reports
2. The Internet
3. The media (e.g.TV programmes, radio programmes or newspaper studies)
4. An essay from an essay bank
5. A piece of work previously submitted by another student
6. Copying from a text which is about to be submitted for the same assignment
B325 TMA – Fall 2017 – LY
Page 5
International Journal of Business and Social Science
Vol. 2 No. 24 [Special Issue – December 2011]
Cultural Differences and Communication Issues in International Mergers and
Acquisitions: A Case Study of BenQ Debacle
Shuhui Sophy Cheng
Assistant Professor
Department of Communication Arts
Chaoyang University of Technology
168 Jifeng E. Rd. Wufeng District
Taichung 41349, Taiwan
Matthew W. Seeger
Professor
Department of Communication
Wayne State University
585 Manoogian Hall
Detroit, MI 48201, USA
Abstract
BenQ, a Taiwanese-based company, grabbed the international headlines on June 7, 2005, when it acquired the
money-losing mobile phone division of Germany’s Siemens and launched the brand, BenQ-Siemens. Subsequently
the acquisition proved to be a strategic mistake, as the two companies could not successfully integrate. This
article tracks BenQ’s acquisition of Siemens, from the perspective of BenQ, through a qualitative case study. The
analysis focuses mainly on culture and communication issues in what became an unsuccessful acquisition. The
results indicate that the German Siemens and Taiwanese BenQ are different in important ways, from national
culture to organizational culture. BenQ’s failed acquisition of the Siemens handset was a wakeup call, providing a
valuable lesson to other companies planning to create their own global brand recognition. The issue here is the
extent to which the two companies’ incompatible cultures made it unlikely that they could add value and create
synergy. This study concludes that an international merger and acquisition has a better chance of success when
managers consider the host country’s culture and allocate enough time and resources for assimilation.
Furthermore, managers need to communicate and clearly define objectives and performance expectations during
the integration and implementation process.
Keywords: mergers, acquisition, intercultural communication
1. Introduction
Taiwan has spawned many top-tier electronic component vendors and contract manufacturers. As profit margins
for contract manufacturing begin to shrink, Taiwanese executives see moving beyond low-cost manufacturing as
vital for a profitable future. Taiwanese companies try to make a shift from being an anonymous contract
manufacturer to building their own brand names. One way to an immediate global presence is to acquire an
attractive existing brand. In this case, it was Siemens.
BenQ, a Taiwanese based company, grabbed the international headlines on June 7, 2005, when it acquired the
money-losing mobile phone division of Germany’s Siemens and launched the new brand, BenQ-Siemens. With
the merger, BenQ Mobile became the world’s fourth largest mobile phone brand after Nokia, Motorola, Samsung
(BenQ Press Release, 2005). However, the acquisition of Siemens’s mobile phone unit lost over 500 million euros
in 2005, with little sign of financial recovery. In late September, 2006, BenQ decided to stop investing in the
money-losing operation and filed for bankruptcy protection in Germany.
Barney (1988) indicates that an acquisition creates value for the acquirer when it achieves synergy and adds
unique and valuable resources that can be leveraged into the target organization. A common objective in
acquisition practice is to bring together companies and enhance the competitive position of the companies through
the transfer of complementary capabilities between them. This synergy is often used as a justification for mergers
and acquisitions (Fitzgibbon & Seeger, 2002).
62
The Special Issue on Business, Humanities and Social Science
© Centre for Promoting Ideas, USA
Similarly, Chairman K. Y. Lee told reporters at a press briefing in Beijing, China, that BenQ would be able to
make Siemens’s debt-ridden mobile handset unit profitable in two years.
He pointed out “We can achieve a profit quickly because we have sales and distribution channels globally. We
complement each other. What Siemens has, we don’t. What we have, Siemens doesn’t” (“BenQ boss sees Siemens
unit turning profit in 2007,” 2005, p.11). However, in the case of BenQ-Siemens, the merger failed to create
synergy and more value than each company could achieve alone.
As international mergers and acquisitions (IM&As) are usually very complex and demanding processes, they
result in unique organizational learning (Hitt, Harrison, & Ireland, 2001). There are many factors that link success
or failure to the process of IM&As. The existing literature, however, takes mostly a financial and/or economic
perspective, measuring the outcomes of IM&As in the market share or short term, while their long-term effects
and nonfinancial factors remain untouched (Andrad, Mitchell, & Stafford, 2001). Filling the gap left in current
literature, this article tracks this acquisition, from the perspective of BenQ, through a qualitative case study and
focuses mainly on cultural differences and communication issues manifest in this unsuccessful business marriage.
The aim is to provide a thick, detailed description of the effect culture and communication had on the outcome of
this BenQ-Siemens acquisition.
2. Background of BenQ’s Acquisition of Siemens
BenQ, established in 1984, was initially known as Acer Peripherals Inc., and later rebranded in December 2001 as
BenQ. For years, BenQ had been a consumer electronics contract manufacturer. It quickly expanded to include
clients such as the giant cell phone brands, Motorola and Nokia. Chairman Lee frequently cited Steve Jobs of
Apple as a key source of inspiration and especially admired the way Jobs nurtured the Apple brand (Einhorn,
2004). Lee noted that “technology changes so fast, and consumer habits are changing all the time. The only thing
a company has in the long term is the brand name and the management philosophy” (Einhorn, 2004, p. 26). With
this in mind, Lee not only shifted his focus away from being a contract manufacturer and more towards the
production of self-designed products, but he also promoted the BenQ brand image. Lee sought to develop a
globally recognized brand image, increase the product line and expand its contract manufacturing business.
When the opportunity came, Chairman Lee took a shortcut strategy to the global mass market. On June 7, 2005,
BenQ acquired the ailing mobile devices division of Germany’s Siemens. Lee said at the press conference, “BenQ
has been seeking ways to boost its economic scale and manufacturing capabilities to become a leading mobile
phone player. We think Siemens is a partner that will be complementary” (Wang, 2005, p. 1). On the other hand,
Siemens was expected to regain investor confidence through the selling of their money-losing mobile phone unit,
and shifting its focus to its more profitable industrial operations, including power turbines and automation
equipment.
Under the agreement, BenQ acquired 100% of Siemens’s mobile-devices unit without directly paying the German
company. Instead, Siemens provided BenQ with 250 million euros to help fund the business, and later paid 50
million euros to buy newly issued shares in BenQ. In addition, Siemens continued to carry the unit’s losses, about
1.5 million euros a day, until the transaction was completed in September 30, 2005 (Dean, Karnitschinig, &
Pringle, 2005). Siemens also continued to work with BenQ on developing handset technologies. As part of the
transaction, BenQ gained the exclusive right to use the Siemens trademark for mobile phones for an 18-month
period and co-branding rights to BenQ-Siemens for 5 years. It was estimated that this deal cost Siemens about 350
million euros. Meanwhile, BenQ agreed to fulfill Siemens’s labor contract agreements with the cell phone
employees through the end of 2006 (Dean, Karnitschinig, & Pringle, 2005). In response to this transaction, the
shares of Siemens jumped to 61.9 euros, up 3%. In contrast to the optimistic view of Lee, however, BenQ shares
went down 2.7% on the Taiwan Stock Exchange when the purchase of Siemens’s handset division was disclosed.
The new business division, BenQ Mobile, started its operation on October 1, 2005. The new company was
headquartered in Munich, Germany and had over 7,000 employees worldwide working on research and
development, design, sales, and marketing. BenQ, however, suffered from growing pains after its acquisition of
Siemens. Although Siemens’s handset operation increased BenQ’s strengths by allowing it to directly compete
with other leading brands, there was also a conflict of interest with BenQ’s current leading customers. By
September 28, 2006, BenQ announced that in order to manage the losses, it would stop pouring money into BenQ
Mobile – its German mobile phone subsidiary (BenQ Press Release, 2006).
63
International Journal of Business and Social Science
Vol. 2 No. 24 [Special Issue – December 2011]
The subsidiary filed for insolvency protection in a Munich court – a move to protect the interest of creditors. Its
management was handed over to a new team appointed by the German government leading to a public outcry in
Germany due to the loss of nearly 3,000 jobs.
3. Literature Review
IM&As operate within the two entities of their home (i.e., headquarters) and host (i.e., subsidiary) cultures. This
situation creates conflict over the degree of cultural adaptation. It has been argued that cultural differences can
create major obstacles to achieving integration benefits (Bjorkman, Stahl, & Vaara, 2007; Stahl & Voigt, 2008).
Consistent with this idea, Hofstede (1980, 2001) suggests that the conflicts, costs, and difficulties associated with
cross-border contact increase with growing cultural differences between two organizations. Clashes between
different organizational practices may arise from national cultural barriers, language problems, different legal
systems, and regulatory hurdles (Shimizu, Hitt, Vaidyanath, & Pisano, 2004).
When the acquiring company is foreign, both parties — the acquiring and the acquired — feel more uncertain about
the integration process. This, in turn, increases tension when trying to build relationships between employees of
the acquired company and the new employees of the acquiring company (Nikandrou, Papalexandris, & Bourantas,
2000). Cross-border acquisitions appear to be particularly difficult to integrate because they require “doublelayered” acculturation, whereby firms need to adjust not only to a different national culture but also to different
organizational values and practices (Barkema, Bell, & Pennings, 1996).
Communication and organizational culture are closely linked concepts. Communication practices influence
culture and vice versa. Language barriers and divergent communication practices can exacerbate cultural
differences. Fitzgibbon and Seeger (2002) found that cultural differences were one of the primary factors in the
failed merger of the Chrysler Corporation and Daimler-Benz. Among other things, pre-merger communication and
public relations created unrealistic expectations that simply could not be met. Cultural difference is a factor that
affects individual communication style and the communication process. Hall (1976) argues that individuals from
different societies and cultures communicate differently. Schweiger and DeNisi (1991) thus suggest that
communication problems can undermine the commitment required for effective implementation of the
acquisition. Sharing information and communicating to employees significantly influences the integration process
of the new culture and expectations of the employees (Appelbaum, Gandell, Yortis, Proper, & Jobin, 2000).
Papadakis (2005) further confirms that appropriate communications strategy is the area that can significantly
improve the odds of success in post-merger integration.
To understand culture, we must find ways to assess and compare cultures. There are two influential and accepted
comparison points for intercultural communication: 1) the idea of context (Hall, 1976), and 2) the value/belief
theory of culture (Hofstede, 1980, 2001). These theories are used in this study as the theoretical lenses for
understanding intercultural communication events and helping us describe the fundamental aspects of cultures.
Edward T. Hall (1976) proposed the concept of high versus low context as a way of understanding different
cultural orientations. The difference between high and low context cultures depends on how much meaning is
found in the context versus the code. The “code” is interpreted as message and “context” as setting or
circumstance, including the people, in which the message appeared. More specifically, context leads to differences
in how and what people communicate.
In Hall’s view, a high context culture is one in which people are deeply involved with each other. As a result of
intimate relationships among people, a structure of social hierarchy exists; individual inner feelings are kept under
strong self-control; and information is widely shared through simple messages with deep meaning. The
communication styles of Asian and Arab nations, for example, are high context cultures. In contrast, European
and American communication styles are considered low context cultures. A low-context culture is one in which
“people are highly individualized, somewhat alienated, and fragmented, and there is relatively little involvement
with others” (Hall, 1976, p. 39). As a consequence, social hierarchy, as well as society in general, imposes less on
individuals’ lives, and communication between people is more explicit and impersonal.
The work of Geert Hofstede (1980, 2001) has been widely quoted as foundational for understanding cultural and
business communication. Hofstede (1980) defines culture as the collective programming of the mind, which
distinguishes members of one human group from another.
64
The Special Issue on Business, Humanities and Social Science
© Centre for Promoting Ideas, USA
He points out that cultures are built on values and values create the collecti …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
How it works
- Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
- Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions
- Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
- Download the paper after the writer uploads it
Will the writer plagiarize my essay?
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
Is this service safe?
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades