The Chrysler and Daimler merger of 1998 was certainly a power struggle between two companies of different cultures and leadership objectives that led to hardships and ethical dilemmas for many stakeholders involved in the two companies. Ethics based on cultural expectations crated clashing perspectives on both sides of the merger negotiations and transition. This tension was established between Chrysler and Daimler in culturally based standards of leadership styles, ethics perspectives, and decision framing.
First, distinctions between the American Chrysler and German Daimler leadership strategies created a hostile situation between these companies. Naturally there’s a sense of uneasiness to open up in cooperation between the American company and the German company after being enemies in World War II and being in a complicated relationship during the Cold War. Daimler chairman Jurgen Schrempp didn’t improve the situation of the merger by hiding objectives from German hierarchical and order structure to change senior management and production practices. Nor did Chrysler CEO Robert Eaton take adequate precautions in negotiations to preserve vital aspects of his company.
Clarifying would’ve improved the outcome by allowing both companies to understand the objectives desired from both sides and collaborate toward undertaking tasks to satisfy the desires of both parties (Hierarchical Taxonomy of Leadership Behavior, pp. 19). Consulting is another valuable initiative that could’ve