Since its entrance into the American market, Hyundai Motor Company has transformed itself from an auto producer that was known for its poor quality and low price to one with a substantial market share, and stealing customers away from many industry veterans, as well as pushing into the luxury segment of the auto market. But how was this late-moving car maker able to gain an advantage in this extremely competitive market? This thesis attempts to answer this question through the method of archival research that results in a detailed history of the company as well as a case study that examines which factors were crucial to Hyundai Motor Company's success. This case study found that there were four key areas of the company’s business that assisted it in achieving the accomplishments that it did: a unique culture, a flexible production strategy, a constantly evolving positioning strategy, and an extremely perceptive marketing team.
The study undertaken in this paper will address the subject of the role of organizational culture in the success of GreatAmerica Leasing Corporation (GreatAmerica). This privately held commercial equipment finance firm has, against overwhelming odds, overcome serious competitive shortcomings to become one of the largest entities in a commoditized industry where brand name, cost of funds and expensive systems technology are thought to be overriding competitive advantages. The company has enjoyed a record of impressive financial success competing with some of the largest banking and other corporate giants while selling the exact same commoditized product; money.
Although they can be difficult to implement, employee-friendly workplaces, with generous compensation, schedule flexibility, and perks, foster more satisfied and productive employees than traditional work environments. Transforming a work environment from conventional to more liberal, and likely more satisfying, takes a certain type of leader. This study seeks to understand in what ways the “100 Best Companies to Work For” CEOs differ from traditionally successful, Fortune 500 CEOs. Using political affiliation as a proxy for openness to change, we test our hypothesis that Best Company CEOs are more open to change, and therefore, more left-leaning than Fortune 500 CEOs. We use campaign contributions of CEOs from the top 100 Fortune 500 companies and the “100 Best Companies to Work For” to discern whether executive receptiveness to change differs between these two groups. Our OLS probit model provides strong evidence that companies in Republican industries (i.e. aerospace, defense, petroleum, etc.) and companies with right-leaning CEOs are unlikely to be Best Companies. We also find that being identified as a Best Company in the short-term is best achieved through inexpensive perks, while being identified as a Best Company in the long-term requires strong compensation, sabbatical options, and vacation time.