Presentation on theme: "Study Case : Donna Dubinsky & Apple Computer, Inc."— Presentation transcript:
1 Study Case : Donna Dubinsky & Apple Computer, Inc. Buku : Managing Change; Case & Concept, Todd D. Jick, McGraw Hill, second edition, p
2 Donna Dubinsky Dubinsky, a yale graduate and MBA from Harvard. In 1981, started as customer support liaison in departmen distribution,service and support group .April 1985, became director of distribution and sales administration.Her management style, caring and honest relationship with her subordinated.
3 Company Background Founding in 1976 1977, release Apple II, a home and educational computer.In 1983, Cofounder, Steve Jobs, hired John Sculley as presidency at AppleIn 1984, Macintosh first introducedBy 1985, Apple II sales failed to reach projected planning levels, causing profitability problems.Tension were mounting between Apple IIApple attempted to create and solidify a sense of identity by developing a statement basis of basic value
4 Apple Value Empathy for customers Achievement / Aggressiveness Positive Social ContributionInnovation/visionIndividual PerformanceTeam SpiritQuality/excellenceIndividual rewardsGood management
5 Product Distribution At Apple Donna Dubinsky in 1984 became distribution manager with responsibility 6 fields warehouses and sales adm., inventory control, and customer relations.Because Apple’s operation was primarily design and assembly, warehousing control for parts, work in process and finished good were potentially costly and critical to Apple profits.Planning and analysis were luxuries for product distribution in Apple.
6 The Distribution Conflict ; September to December 1984 The conflict began in September 1984, when Dubinsky and her boss, Weaver presented the distribution, services and support for 1985’s plan.Jobs, the president complaining that he not receive a good explanation for current distribution, service and support cost levels and structure.A few later, Jobs meet Fred Smith, CEO of Federal Express. They talked about Just in Time (JIT) distribution which been used by IBM for their computer components.Jobs saw a potential for reducing cost in this JIT, which could eliminate the need for Apple’s warehouse, carrying costs and extensive inventory.
7 JIT projects was been investigated by Job and Debi Coleman, Director of manufacturing that JIT could efficiently in corporate the distribution function.The project is more attractive to Jobs because Macintosh sales were down.Dubinsky, however, believed the change proposed by Jobs was a mistake. She and Weaver had diffuculty taking this new distribution idea seriosly.
8 The Distribution Task Force, January – April 1985 The conflict sharpened when Coleman would be presenting her distribution proposal in executive meeting in Pajoro Dunes.That meeting is messed up, The disagreements grew between Jobs and Sculley and Jobs was pressuring Sculley to accept Coleman’s proposal.The conflict was resolved by entrust the distribution problem to task force composed of the parties involved and a few “neutral” individuals.This form of task force disappointed Dubinsky, she still believe that distribution is her job and Coleman’s proposal is not just simply suggested improvements, but it was total change in distribution and manufacturing strategy, taking Apple from supply driven to demand driven procedures and reducing the distribution and warehouse centers from six to zero.
9 The Ultimatum; April 19, 1985In April 1985, Dubinsky meet Campbell, in their meeting she acknowledge her previous blind spot, and she asked for 30 days to get her own distribution strategy, but without the interference of task force.Campbell doesn’t agree about no interference by task force.Dubinsky give ultimatum: If Campbell did not agree to her terms, she would leave Apple.
10 Campbell was frustrated because he knew that Jobs was pushing Sculley to accept Coleman’s plan and Campbell had no alternative plan from his group to offer Sculley.The task force group made finally report that they agree that JIT concept was the best direction for Apple to pursue, but it had not agreed on feasible implementation plan.This report was reject by Dubinsky