新西兰项目管理学论文代写：卡特彼勒案例
卡特彼勒与系统制造有关，可以作为企业重组的好例子。该组织在1980年通过缩减规模进行了重组。本公司的三个主要制造部门如下：
制造重型施工机械
制造发动机
金融产品，包括保险和融资租赁业务。
为了重组卡特彼勒，以打击销售下降的趋势，当时的首席执行官（1985至1990），即舍费尔，决定采取有关卡特彼勒的分配机制的行动。该公司继续以预先确定的价格向批发商销售产品，使该公司在销售上只赚很少的利润（OI，2005）。成本太高，因此重组的计划是通过与“未来的计划是有名的高级管理层（pwaf）”（dencker，2008）。制造现代化计划是由该公司推出，它的成本约18亿美元的公司。这种降低成本战略帮助公司有点，因为它面临着严重的内部问题，低响应和缓慢增长。这是首席执行官舍费尔的努力，他研究成功的及时实现，他的公司卡特彼勒的压力将增加，这将不可能生存在一个成熟市场周期性公司（尼尔森和帕斯捷尔纳克，2005）。因此，他决定采取行动克服当时公司所拥有的结构性缺陷。不同部门的责任感，促进不同的部门负责他们的分区利润（汤姆斯，2002）。各部门的表现是经常在生成的资产回报率（ROA）分析的基础上，如果任何一个部门的ROA保持在15%的特定时期，那么 团结面临淘汰。
新西兰项目管理学论文代写：卡特彼勒案例
Caterpillar deals with the system manufacturing and can be used a good example of corporate restructuring. The organization was restructured in the year 1980 by downsizing itself. Three major manufacturing divisions of the firm are as follows:
Manufacturing of heavy construction machinery
Manufacturing of engines
Financial products that includes insurances and operating and financial leases.
To restructure Caterpillar in order to combat the downward trend in sales the CEO of that time (1985 to 1990) namely Schaefer, decided to take actions related to distribution mechanisms of Caterpillar. The firm continued to sale its products to the wholesalers at a pre-determined price that enabled the firm just to make minor profits on its sales (Oi, 2005). The cost was too high and thus the plan of restructuring was made by the top management with the famous name of “Plan With A Future (PWAF)” (Dencker, 2008). Manufacturing modernization programs were launched by the firm and it cost the firm about $1.8 billion. This cost reduction strategy helped the firm a little bit as it was faced with serious internal problems of low responsiveness and slow growth. It was the effort of CEO Schaefer, who examined successful to have a timely realization that the pressure on his company Caterpillar is going to be increased and it will become impossible to survive for the firm in a mature and cyclical market (Neilson & Pasternak, 2005). Therefore, he decided to take actions to overcome the structural deficiencies being possessed by the firm at that time. The sense of accountability was promoted among different departments of the business by making different divisions responsible for their divisional profits (Toms, 2002). The performance of each division was frequently analyzed on the basis of generated Return on Assets (ROA) and if the ROA of any division remained under 15% for the particular period then the unity faced elimination.
