Case of SM

INDUSTRY FOUR:
wCiuw I U> -@;-V.-:':/i;:;;;.:;.:::v:.;.;i;:;
U.S. Major Home Appliance
Industry In 2002: Competiti

Becomes Global
/. David Hunger
successful in keeping prices low and in improving the value of its products. Compared to 1982, major home appliance prices had increased more slowly than the increase in U.S. earn ings and the Consumer Pr ice Index. Thus, the average American consumer in 2002 could earn a new appliance in fewer hours on the job than a half-century ago. From 1991 to 2001, after aHimtin* fnr inf lation, rpfail nriroc arfiialTv ^K^^v^.W. fal] n @? . J@~ jm@-J
. Sales had also been increasing. More appliances "were made and sold in the United States in 2001 than in any preceding year (see Exhibit 1 for U.S. shipments of major home appliances). The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers were predicting slight, increases during 2002 in each category of "white goods"@refrigerators, freezers, washing machines, dryers, ranges, microwave ovens, and dishwashers.2 The major home appliance industry faced some significant threats as well as opportuni ties. After more than 50 years of rising sales, both in units and dollars, the U.S. and Canadian market had reached maturity. (Annual unit shipments of appliances in the United States were a little over 70 million compared to 4.3 million units in Canada.) Aside from some normal short-term fluctuations, future unit sales were expected to grow only 1.9% annually from 2000 to 2005 in the U.S. and Canadian markets. Operating margins had been dropping as appliance manufacturers were forced to keep prices low to be competitive even though costs kept increasing. The situation was the same in Western Europe, a market 25% larger than the U.S. major home appliance market, where unit sales were expected to grow only 1.7% annually during the same period. Markets in Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America had become
between zUUU and zUUd, JLne industry was under pressure rrom governments around tne world to make environmentally safe products plus significantly improve appliance efficiency in terms of energy usage and water consumption. This case was prepared by Professor ]". David Hunger of Iowa State University foi SMBP-9tfi edition. All rights ay the author. Copyright @ 2002 by J. David Hunger. f
18-1
SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES
mm n
U.S. Manufacturers' Unit Shipments of Major Home Appliances1 (Amounts in thousands)
PRODUCT
Compact ors ; Dishwashers,built-m @ .' '@' Dishwashers, pprtabie ' .. Disposers' :. "':-@ ' '@@'@@ :Dryers, compact"-:;-; ' @- @ Dryers, electric--'/? -,.;: .' Dryers/gas-' v^sf tV'^\ @':''. . Freeiers, phest, Ji",^^,.;^1^, @ @@Frpeze.cs,"c6mpicl?r^t"v{i'^:' '@Freezers/upright'^'Vt^^vJv: Microwave 6veijSf,'iil*an1es?"~ @' .Microwave ov4^!e^jj"iil;e|:.tpp,;.: @ Microwave/conye.cti,oniovejis". Microwave oye^s^yer raJigeC' Rar ige/oven hoods!*!' *"':^V v@:. Ranges, electric.'bu^t-iin-'V; "' @ @ Ranges, electric; freestanding ' Ranges, electric;.surface;cq.oking. . @Ranges, electrici:;g}a^s/cefarnic? : ' Ranges, gas,"bullt|iii">".v ';@@ >;@@; '@ @ @ @@ Raiiges/gas, Ereef ita)^|ng-';;;.:,v /' Ranges, gas,:sarfqi;e).copldng, .@ Raiiges/gas, âsr f/,c^r.arîcj-;---":-'. @ Ref rigera^s,b^ll^;;.^y(^;.' .
2001
- 2000,
1999
.1990 1S5 ' 3,419 . 217 @4,137 275 @ . 3,318 @-.1,002 @ @ 723 @ , 351 ' .. 573 ' . ' 146'. @.8,193 @. .303 @ '@@. "780" " 2,450" -@631 ' @ 2,358 ' 455 ' S5' .' ;iO6 2,061 ' 262
1980
235 2,354 384 2,962 2072,287
Ref rigerators, îâc^J>";:: .

Ref rigeratbrs, ^t'ajhârcL'/y^C'.' 'V \ ashers, autorn^fit^j-f@;@@'.' @'-;f;.@-?"@ Washers, cornp.actT-f'^'^V;;,.-''.'!- @ Water heater's,/electric: \ y@ @ Waterheaters/gas.^V'.-CV;;.- .' Water soitenersj'::i-;""-.- : :.;.' Total' -^ ^:^';'^,y-' Notes: 1.Exports not included.' 2.Figures not included in industry total.
H7 ..'@@ ' 118' ". 115. @ 5,542; " .4,327 5478 @ 5,663 '' 170' . " 154'.' @ 149 226 5,547 :' :5,485 . 5,369-' 4,519 NA' @'@ @ NAB . @J70J @ V602 5,117.' ..5,035 ' @ 4,865 . 4,020. 1,205 ' .1,443-' 1,384 ',' : 1,480' 1,285 ..' 1,075 .1,058 .. .'934.. :":i33'.':- @@@@35?. 490' @-. " "473\ '; 888 @ : 757 . 930'. @929'. @82:' @'.:.-' " 82Si'' : 8O-; 9,264; '.. '7,76010,220.5 @.i"-ip,i-l4. @ clJ6.'' 115'.' .200.; :0f @,.155> . @2;9,4&: ,2,162 '.@ uoo'aSixf t @';-"'3-'isp-'- ' 3,000,' '] 2,740 @723-' @' @'@-Wos-;-' :: ' --T>i--:"-: ' 619 @ 3,84i": '3;.785,: ;''- 3,004 498-/ @''-.- ;-A94j: :';:433:;"'' -@'425' @2,035' :' .' 955 2,314; i-., '2,057'" :-'~,'-72f- -': ' '-8S @ @'. 71v 2,860 : @'@@'@^2,729 @:@ . 2,698V- -@@ 2,490;.": l :?77!:; :v''36?-.-:-.' : '?78.. . @'@ 384- . f . :34.;...";58,--. \ 1-137; -ii:.,;:133 ': ., J15:.i-.:.-.-.--,-S3-; . '@ i,4si;, l. 1,032' @@ @.1,355".' *:i \iW" 9,305''; ;@@.;.; ,9,217 "...@ ' 7,3.62': 'J'-7i495 '".'@ ?7,3li:-!'i;6;s(ll;-, @.;;j9$?.;>.^'.':2Qci^-; @ n/a;--^25f!':T .@'@4',2!f f.->:@?.'3^517' "4,333? *.f ' 4;931': '@i7.;l,'&o7':V ..'@A93tV-:;-'4-,453.-.'' '935 ' .@'--' -989:- @: -I|''951*.r-'I''A?18 1
682
963 @310/
78?
265 ' .3,320. @ N/A : N/A.. 2,400. @ 555: 1,975 .@ N/A : @ 155 . 102' . 1,437.' N/A-1,
.'@ . 932 @@ .543 ;'i.7.'l01 . 5,124;' @?'6ii92"-:' 4,426 ;'v:V344.''.'266. @v3,2'26 ' '. 2,451'
' v3;906- : 2,818. @@'.@'@ 574".. N/A 70;381'; ' ;60,476 @ . '53,726@' 37,010' 73,300 @- 72,492 >,>:
Source: "Statistical Review," Appliance, April, 2002,1993, and 1990, p. 50.
ilswst ojpiaaoiii m if e i.S, IMt eij* L-t eee .f tiplliiaiw@ BmjilHsf iirsy
In. 1945, there were approximately 300 U.S. major appliance manufacturers in the United States. By 2002, however, the "big four"@Whirlpool, General Electric, Maytag* and AB Electrolux@controlled 99% of the U.S. market. Although the German-based Bosch-Siemens entered the U.S. major home appliance industry in 1996, it had yet to earn a signif icant mar ket share in any appliance category. The consolidation of the industry over the period was a result of fierce domestic competition. Emphasis on quality and durability coupled with strong price competition drove the surviving firms to increased eff iciencies and a strong concern for customer satisfaction.
.;@ @ @ ':i
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL HI
All of the major U.S. automobile firms except Chrysler had participated at one time in th< major home appliance industry. Giants in the consumer electronics industry had also beer involved heavily in appliances. Some of the major auto, electronics, and diversified companie; .active at one time in the appliance industry were General Motors (Frigidaire), Ford (Philco) American Motors (Kelvinator), Studebacker-(Franklin), Bendix, International Harvester General Electric, RCA, Emerson Electric, Westinghouse, McGraw Edison, Rockwell, Unitec Technologies, Raytheon, Litton, Borg-Warner, and Dart & Kraft. Only General Electric and Emerson Electric remained in major home appliances in 20Cff. Emerson Electric continued through its In-Sink-Erator line of disposers as well as being a major supplier of electronic parts (primarily motors) to the remaining appliance makers. Most of the other firms divested their appliance business units, many of which were acquired by White' Consolidated Industries, which itself was acquired by the Swedish firm AB Electrolux in 1986 and subse quently renamed Frigidaire as its North American Division. Pr ior to World War II, most appliance manufacturers produced a limited line of appli ances derived from one successful product. General Electric made refrigerators. Maytag focused on washing machines. Hotpoint produced electric ranges. Each offered variations of its basic product, but not until 1945 did f irms begin to offer full lines of various appliances. By 1955, the major appliance industry began experiencing overcapacity, leading to mergers and acquisitions and a proliferation of national and private brands. The industry almost doubled in size during the 1960s, as sales of several products grew rapidly. Dishwasher unit sales almost quadrupled. Unit sales of clothes dryers more than tripled. Product reliability improved even though real pr ices (adjusted for inf lation) declined around 10%. Although the 1970s were a time of high inflation and high interest rates, the major home appliance industry continued to increase its unit sales. Profit margins were squeezed even more, and the industry continued to consolidate around fewer f irms. Although antitrust con siderations prevented GE and Whirlpool from acquiring other appliance units; White was able to buy the troubled appliance divisions of all the automobile manufacturers, along with Westinghouse's, as they were put up for sale. The market continued to expand in the 1980s, thanks partially to the acceptance by the U.S. consumer of the'microwave oven. By the 1990s, U.S. appliance manufacturers offered a full range of products even if they did not make the item themselves. A company would fill the gaps in its line by putting its own brand name on products it purchased from another manu facturer. For example, Whirlpool made trash compactors for Frigidaire (AB Electrolux), InSink-Erator (Emerson Electric), Jenn-Air, Magic Chef (Maytag), and Sears. Caloric (Amana) not only made gas ranges for its in-house Amana brand, but also for Whirlpool. General Electric made some microwave ovens for Caloric (Amana), lenn-Air (Maytag), Magic Chef (Maytag), and its own Hotpoint and RCA brands.
Innovations in the industry tended to be of four types: (1) new products that expanded the appliance market, (2) new technologies and designs to increase eff iciency and effectiveness, (3) new customer-eriented features, and (4) process improvements to reduce manufacturing costs. New products historically drove the growth of major home appliances. The washing machine and the refrigerator were the founding products of the industry. A survey by the Harris Corporation in 1999 revealed that the top technological achievements of the 20th cen tury were the computer and television, followed closely by the refrigerator, microwave oven, and washing machine.4 New home appliances that had strongly increased industry unit sales were dishwashers in the 1960s and microwave ovens in the 1980s.
it eSsli SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

New technologies and designs were being introduced into major home appliances. Due to gover nmental pressure, appliance manufacturers were introducing energy-efficient versions of refr igerators and washing machines at the dawn of the 21st century. Examples of these were Maytag's Neptune front-loading clothes washer and Whirlpool's top-loading Calypso washing machine. Both of these used less energy and water and resulted in more effective cleaning action than traditional washers. Research was being conducted to replace current technologies with more efficient ones. One example was the use of microwave energy in clothes dryers so that clothes could be dried faster, at a lower temperature (thus less shrinkage and damage), with less energy use than a conventional dryer. Unfortunately, the technology needed further development before it could be marketed: Microwaves had a tendency to heat metal objects to such a point that they caused fabric damage. In another example, researchers at Iowa State University, in cooperation with Astronautics Corporation of America, were developing a refrigerator using magnets. The cooling apparatus consisted of a wheel containing gadolinium powder moving through a high-powered, rare earth permanent magnet. The result was a vir tually silent, vibration-free refr igerator instead of the traditional ozone-depleting refrigerant and noisy, energy-consuming compressor.5 Other researchers were experimenting with sound waves to clean clothes. Customer-oriented features included the self-cleaning oven, pilot-less gas range, auto matic ice-cube-making refrigerator; warming drawers in ranges, and dishwashers with halfload washing capability. In most cases, features were introduced on top-of-the-line models and made available on lower-priced models later. Manufacturers' own brands usually had the newest and most elaborate features, followed by national retailers such as Sears Roebuck, whose offerings usually copied the most successful features from, the previous year. In this competitive industry, aside f rom patented features, no one producer could successfully keep a new innovation to itself for more than a year. In 2002, three trends continued to be evident in customer-oriented features. First, design aesthetics were becoming more important in product development and marketing. Appliances were being given a more prominent place in the home. For example, washers and dryers were increasingly being placed not in the basement, but on the main f loor. As a result, the washer and dryer were expected'to be quieter and more aesthetically pleasing, comple menting the decor of the room in which they resided. As the kitchen evolved into a hub of household activity, the refr igerator and range began to take on a greater importance in the household. European visual product design was having a strong impact on appliance design worldwide. Stainless steel was used like a color in high-end appliances to connote quality@ especially to those people desiring ranges similar to those used by professional cooks. Refrigerators could be built in to various parts of the kitchen as drawers for distinct uses instead of as a large box with a door. Second, manufacturers were introducing "smart" appliances with increasingly sophisti cated electronic controls and self-diagnostic features. The Japanese firms Matsushita, Hitachi, Toshiba, and Mitsubishi had pioneered the-use of "fuzzy logic" computer software in the 1980s to replace the many selector switches on an appliance with one start button. By 2000 all of the U.S. major home appliance manufacturers were using fuzzy logic to some extent in the mak ing and marketing of their products. Whirlpool's "Sixth Sense" oven could determine the nec essary settings for reheating or defrosting food, with no guesswork from the cook. The user simply pressed a single button for defrost@the oven then calculated on its own the correct time and power output. By 2002, these "smart appliances" were being connected to the Internet. For example, Haier, a Chinese appliance maker, demonstrated Internet-enabled refrigerators, washing machines, dishwashers, microwave ovens, air conditioners, and water heaters at the 2001 Domotechnica trade show in Cologne, Germany. These appliances could call for service, download programs, contact security providers in case of gas leaks or fire, pay utility bills, and be programmed remotely to start and stop when needed.
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL IMSl
Third, there was an increasing global emphasis on environmentally safe products, such as the use of CFC-free refrigerant, and on greater efficiency in the use of water and energy. Since 1980, U.S. appliance makers have invested more than$l billion to improve refrigerator energy efficiency. For the average home appliance customer, the appliance would cost less to operate and be better for the environment. Process improvements for more efficient manufacturing of current products (com pared to new-product development) tended to dominate research and development efforts in the U.S. major home appliance industry. Although modern appliances were much more effective and efficient, a refrigerator or a stove in 2002 still looked and acted very much the same as it did in the 1950s. It was built in a far different manner, however. The appliance industry historically had been characterized by low intensity in product research and devel opment because of intense cost competition and demand for higher reliability. Until the late 1990s, the basis for effective competition had been producing the fewest basic components necessary in the most efficient plants. Although individual designs might vary, the compo nents inside the appliances were becoming more universal and were being produced in highly automated plants, using computer-integrated manufacturing processes. Examples of this emphasis on product simplification were Maytag's "Dependable Drive" and Whirlpool's frame fabrication for its "Eye Level" ranges. Maytag's washer transmission was designed to have 40.6% fewer parts than the transmission it replaced. Fewer parts meant simplified manufacturing and less chance of breakdown. The result was lower manufacturing costs ar id higher product quality. Most industry analysts agreed that continual process improvements had kept U.S. major home appliance manufacturers dominant in their market and competitive globally. The emphasis on quality and durability, coupled with a reluctance to make major design changes simply for the sake of change, resulted in products with long average life expectancy. The aver age useful life of a refrigerator or range was 15 to 20 years and those of washers, dryers, and dishwashers were around 12 to 14 years, (see Exhibit 2 for life expectancy by appliance.)
Average Life Expectancy of Major Home Appliances
Appliat e*. < W^1$,
$%<@*>$*
>m&
Source: "20tli Annual Portrait of the U.S. Appliance Industry," Appliance, September 2001, Special Insert, pp. 5-6.
SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES @
iSAiWAO f TRING AMD PURCHASiWG '

Although many manufacturing operations took place in an appliance factory, much of the process focused on proper preparation of the metal frame within which the washing, drying, or cooking components and elements would be attached. Consequently, appliance manufac turers could be characterized as "metal benders" who fabr icated different shapes of metal boxes out of long coils of metal. As a result, the U.S. major home appliance industry purchased 22% of total coated-coil metals, second only to the building and construction industry.6 Sophisticated machines would form and even weld the frames, and automated assembly lines and robots would add porcelain to protect the metal and add color to the f inish. People were usually still needed to install the internal components in the frame and to wire sophisticated electronic controls. Quality control was of ten a combination of electronic diagnostics and per sonal inspection by employees. Manufacturing costs were generally in the range of 65%-75% of total operating costs. Although direct labor 'costs were still an important part of the cost of completed goods (around'10%), most companies were carefully examining material costs, general administra tion, and overhead for cost reduction. Traditionally, the optimal size of an assembly plant was considered to be an annual capacity of 500,000 units for refrigerators, ranges, washers, dryers, and dishwashers. Even though production costs were believed to be 10%-40% higher in smaller-sized plants, the use of robots suggested that the optimal plant could be even smaller than previously believed.7 The trend continued toward "dedicated" manufacturing facilities combining product line production in fewer larger plants to gain economies of scale. Although a plant's production line dedicated to the production of washing machines could be adjusted to make many different models, it could still only be used to make washing machines. Each product category required its own specialized manufactur ing equipment. All of the major home appliance manufacturers were heavily engaged in renovating and building production facilities to gain economies of scale, improve quality, and reduce labor and materials costs. For example, Electrolux's Frigidaire division in the United States spent over $600 million upgrading its current factories and building new refrigerator and dish washer plants. It then invested $100 million each in its Anderson, South Carolina, and Greenville, Michigan, plants in 2001 to manufacturer its new Next Generation line of refrig erators. The General Electric Appliance (GEA) division spent around $1 billion over a fouryear period (1994-1998) in product development and capital equipment (a 50% increase over previous spending levels) to upgrade its 40-year-old "appliance park" in Louisville, Kentucky. It then invested over $800 million during 2001 and 2002 in its 42 manufacturing plants in Mexico.8 To ensure global quality standards, appliance manufactures have been going thr ough the process of International Organization for Standards (ISO) 9000 series certif ication. Key mater ials purchased by the U.S. appliance industry were steel (primarily in sheets and coils), plastics, coatings (paint and porcelain), motors, glass, insulation, wiring, and fasteners. By weight, major appliances consisted of about 75% steel. Sales to the major home appliance industry of steel and aluminum together accounted for 10% of total industry sales.9 As the major home'appliance industry had consolidated, so too had its suppliers. A. O. Smith, best known in the United States for its water heaters, acquired MagneTek's worldwide electric motor operations in 1999. Siebe and BTR merged in 2000 to form Invensys Appliance Controls and Invensys Climate Controls. Siebe had already purchased Eaton Corporation's @ worldwide controls'business, Robertshaw Controls, Paragon Electric, and Ranco. The pur chasing function and relationship with suppliers had changed considerably f rom the 1980s as more companies used fewer suppliers and more long-term contracts to improve quality and ensure JIT (just-in-time) delivery.
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL @S
The 2000 update to the ISO 9000 series pushed appliance manufacturers to further inte grate their supply chains to ensure total quality management. Along with its increasing global orientation, Whirlpool was putting emnhasi't nr> w^r!.-;@ i.m+v. î^t@n 1:@ @* --'@
x j_ , ...- -a ; @ -juuui, uj. juaitiiois, pr fiLi, uiiu suDassemDiies when they were needed. Full-line, full-service suppliers had an advantage over one-dimensional suppli ers. Appliance makers continued to put pre'ssure on their suppliers to institute cost-saving productivity improvements. On the other hand, they were much more willing to involve sup pliers earlier in the design stage of a product or process improvement. Alliances between appliance makers and their suppliers were one way to speed up the application of new technology into new products and processes. For example, Maytag Corporation was approached by Honeywell, one of its suppliers, which offered its expertise in fuzzy logic technology@a technology Maytag did not have at that time. The resulting partner ship in product development resulted in Maytag's new IntelliSense dishwasher. Unlike previ ous dishwashers, which had to be set by the user, Maytag's fuzzy logic dishwasher automati cally selected the proper cycle to get the dishes clean based on a series of factors, including the amount of dirt and presence of detergent. Although most U.S. appliance makers used both the Internet and extranets to communi cate with their suppliers and distributors, there was no overall electronic marketplace between appliance makers and their suppliers (as there was in the auto industry) currently in existence in the United States.
(MARKETING AMD DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS

Due to relatively high levels of saturation in the United States, the market for major home appliances was dr iven primarily by the demand for replacements. Washers, ranges, refrigera tors, and even microwave ovens were in more than 90% of U.S. households, (see Exhibit 3 for saturation by product category.) Generally speaking, replacements accounted f or 75% of sales, new housing for 20%, and new household formation for about 5% of sales of major home appliances. Replacement demand was usually driven by existing housing turnover, remodeling,
Saturation of Selected Major Home Appliances in the United States, Western Europe, and Japan1 (Percentage of households with at least one of a particular appliance) @@ . ..@.,@ @@@@,@ .'@.: ';;*'?@@@((@@@ @'@ ""@@--@;" ',@@'@-: @?!,@@ r -.;-^\ f t? @@@ Appliance .. . - @.. . ...'. 'United-States, ^" ,,. ; ^WesternEufope Compactor'; ; ' @ Cooker. ;:. .: @ Dishwasher @.'@;@Disposer @ @Pryer @ ; ;. Freezer . ... @ @Microwaveoven ,'@,._ Kaijge ., '@ > Refrigerator .@ Vacuumcleaner ' Washer' : @ @@@,@;.. ;-:-Ms;-vi@@.-,-@i.i--.yv @@?@ 1 '. N/A-'..: V:;.'. .;-1.N/J^.v?.@@@@@;;vVi;.^,-"K;<' ; :. @;95-.t t--. @ . .@ -.- @ . ...v .@@S5,;-.;-;. .- @. .@!;-; ;a:**. M: - @@@@;39,-.:',- .'".' . ' , .. @'@@@&' . '@}... , ... :.'-:V- @'.@' ,;iv @@@@.WA @' @ : . , @59i(E)";id-.(bj'. . '...@ @ . @@@@ ^ .@@@@V?s'!-;. .@ @@@;.'-@:.:-@@ ^.s-f!.; . @.^:.;fj- &,>-:5i;@@..@.- :. @ ~ Japan
N/A N/A
@ . N/A . . N/A 22
i:-X-9s^'-: .. . ' .' @@ @.@@'^@@@@! @ " @@'@@@'@:;'1'--'^ @@-@'ittlA--' @@ " @@ @ @ @@ hi: @ @-@ -@ @@-@ :.@@ ; @ @ 94 @ @ @ @
N/A N/A N/A

98 93 . 99
Note: 1. (E) = electric, (G) = natural gas. Source: "24th Annual Portrait of the U.S. Appliance Industry," Appliance, September 2001, Special Insert; "Portrait of the European Appliance Industry," Appliance, November 2001, p. 50; "Portrait of the Japanese Appliance Industry," Appliance, March 2002, p. 50.
'i SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

changes in living arrangement trends, introduction of new features, and price levels in the economy. Although each new house had the potential to add four to sixnew appliances, the sale of an existing house also had an impact. According to J. Richard Stonesifer, President and CEO of GE Appliances, "About 4 million existing homes are sold eacli year, and approximately one new appliance is sold for every existing home that changes hands."10 The National Kitchen and Bath Association estimated that about $4 billion of the total $25 billion spent annually on kitchen remodeling was for home appliances. Both the new housing and remodeling markets currently tended to emphasize more upscale appliances in contrast to the previous tendency for builders to economize by buying the cheapest national brand appliances. A study by Simmons Market Research Bureau for New Home magazine revealed that more than $13 billion was spent annually by new-home owners on household goods, especially appliances. In order of importance, the appliances typically bought within the first 3 months of owning a new home were the refrigerator, washer, dryer, microwave oven, vacuum cleaner, dishwasher, coffeemaker, and range.11 This phenomenon provided sales opportunities for well-positioned appliance makers because brand loyalty in the appliance industry was only 35%.12 Changes in U.S. demographics favored the highly profitable, high-end, high-profile seg ment of the business. This trend was detrimental to the mass-market business, which empha sized cost over features. The aging of the baby boomers and the increase of two-income fami lies had increased the upscale market, which demanded more style and costly features. According to Ken Gronbach, president of KGA Advertising, appliance manufacturers should continue to court the 80 million aging baby boomers because generation X contains only 50 million people. "[Baby boomers] want the high-end appliances and that's why companies that cater to that generation are doing well/'13 Appliance manufacturers responded by expanding product lines that emphasized quality and features. Those brands most identified in cus tomers' minds with high product quality, such as Maytag and KitchenAid, were achieving good sales. (See Exhibit 4 for ratings of brands by perceived quality.) Gronbach further pro posed that the best way for appliance makers to appeal to the younger generation X was to offer new and unique products. "Ifyour product is neither unique nor new it will be sold only on price because the demand will be pale compared to the supply." Exporting was reasonably strong for high-quality U.S.-made refrigerators, vacuum clean ers, and laundry appliances but was much less than the importing of microwave ovens from Asia. For a number of reasons, exporting was not a significant factor for the U.S. major home appliance industry. The weight of most of these appliances meant high transportation costs, which translated into higher prices to the consumer. In addition, U.S.-made major appliances tended to be fairly large, whereas European and Asian markets preferred smaller appliances. As a result, most people around the world tended to buy appliances made locally, if they were available. Thus, those appliance companies wanting a significant presence in other parts of the world were either acquiring local companies, engaging in joint ventures, or building new man ufacturing facilities in those regions in order to have a local presence. There were two major distribution channels for major home appliances in the United States: contract and retail. A third, but less important, distribution channel was the commer cial market, comprising laundromats and institutions. Contract sales were'inade to large home builders and to other appliance manufacturers. Direct sales accounted for-around 80% of contract sales. Firms sold appliances to die contract segment both directly to the large builders and indirectly through local builder suppliers. Since builders were very cost conscious, they liked to buy at the middle to low end of a well' known appliance brand. Consequently, appliance manufacturers with strong offerings in this range, such as General Electric, Whirlpool, and Frigidaire, tended to do very well in this mar ket. (See Exhibit 5 for appliance sales by market segment.) In contrast, companies such as Maytag (except for the lower-priced Magic Chef brand) and Bosch-Siemens, which tradition-
@@@f t
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL
Ratings of Brands in T&rms of Consumer Perception of Quality According to U.S. Dealers (Percentage of n?sponses by 300 appliance dealers f rom excellent to .poor quality)
$falers; &y i. j <iT, i * \ ealers f Appliance grairu< ^ "" -i'' ^ , * String Brapd (%)
WOMi
Excellent :,_77.; @ 76 ;':s6J-@@M
Poor
spus
1 2
3
2 4 13 3 17 7 10 10
M %<
m me
@:yi3--:
m*
22,',
w>
1
15 15 13 22 19 29
26
'^VV1/.:*'-','":'. Note: 1. Owners of brands shown in parentheses. Source: J. J.-mcsurak, "What Retailers and Consuir s Want Most," Appliance Manufacturer, May 1998, pp. 39-40. ally emphasized high-end products, sold little to builders. Whirlpool and GE designed whole kitchen concepts and sold the entire package@including their appliances@to builders. To farther its advantage, Whirlpool opened a 35,000-square-foot customer center at its Benton Harbor, Michigan, headquarters in 1993 to demonstrate its offerings to retailers and contrac tors@the f irst such customer center in the industry. Retail sales in the United States were made to three major kinds of outlets: (1) national chain stores and mass merchandisers; (2) department, furniture, and discount stores; and (3) independent appliance dealers. 30
Revenue by Market Segment of Major While Goods Producers (Dollar amounts in billions)
i^^^&:^^^s^^M" ^sV^0My ' <@@ ^P"@ ..Premium

-:Mqriufa,ctUre^ Elictiof ot-p. v, "Whirkiodl V ^ ,i ,. , QenefiiEIectiis -r'H * Bo ch SiSijieh * Mi} tie, tl7 ' 04 i i "i2 ;~~ @ ^ '@ , ''@1.3 ' @ o:-8 i.4 .-3.7 @ 2.5
@ ;.@@ @ @ @Segment . Segment .
Segment Segment
Pr emium Premium
Super
$0.9 0.1
a: Goldman Sadis, "Brand Challenge." The Economist, April 6,2002, p. 54.

National chain stores and mass merchandisers usually sold the most well-known brands and private brands promoted by die retailers. For example, "Whirlpool has traditionally been the sole supplier of Sears and Kenmore washers and dryers to Sears Roebuck. Magic Chef sold similar private brand appliances to Montgomery Ward until Ward's bankruptcy in 1998. Almost half of U.S. white goods were traditionally sold through this mass merchandiser chan nel. Sears Roebuck has been so strong in major home appliance sales that it alone sold nearly two out of every five major appliances sold in the United States.14 Department stores, furniture stores, and discount stores were another important channel for major appliances, selling about 25% of white goods sold in the United States. These stores usually purchased well-known brands to offer their customers. As department stores tended to alter their product offerings to more sof t goods (clothing items) and fewer hard goods (furni ture and appliances) dur ing the 1980s, discount stores became more important in major home appliance sales. Their concern with price, however, put even more pressure on manufacturers to sell in large quantity at low price. Lowe's, Home Depot, and Best Buy were becoming important outlets for appliances. Home Depot, for example, sold appliances not only from instock products, but also by using Internet-connected kiosks on the sales floor. Although Circuit City decided in 2001 to no longer sell major appliances, Wal-Mart's decision to offer selected GE appliances in alow-cost format suggests that appliance sales through discount and home improvement stores should continue to increase. Independent appliance dealers had traditionally been an important retail outlet for white goods. Around 25% of major home appliances continued to be sold through this chan nel, although the amount was steadily declining. Many locally owned stores were being replaced by national chains and discount stores. By 2000, the so-called "power retailers"@ Sears, national chains, and discount stores-@were selling over 60% of all retail appliances in the United States. Commercial sales were through an additional distribution channel. Never as important to manufacturers as the contract and retail channels, this channel nevertheless provided an important set of customers for sales of washing machines and dryers. Laundromats and insti tutions, such as colleges for their dormitories, typically bought the most durable appliances made for the home market. Manufacturers simply added coin meters to the tops of the wash ers and dryers destined for use in these commercial or public establishments. Although these home laundry appliances adapted for the commercial market comprised over 50% of sales to this channel, there were some indications that this market might be moving to commercial washers built to last two to three times longer than would a home washer used commercially. With regard to the makers of freezers, refrigerators, and ranges for use in business establish ments such as restaurants, these were usually a different group of U.S. manufacturers (for example, Welbilt, Traulsen, Hobart, and Glenco) f rom those manufacturing home appliances. Contrasted with home appliances, commercial appliances were typically larger and more durable, with fewer convenience features. They were sold through different marketing chan nels. In addition, the commercial market was far smaller than the home market. Unit ship ments of commercial major appliances in 2001 totaled only 2.6 million in the United States, compared to 73.3 million major home appliances. By 2002, all of the major U.S. appliance makers used their own Web sites to market their products and provide consumer-related information via whirlpool.com, maytag.com, ge.com, and frigidaire.com. The independent applianceadvisor.com provided industry information regarding individual brands for potential buyers, with links to manufacturer Web sites. Maytag introduced online appliance shopping in 2001 to enable consumers to purchase @ Maytag appliances online from local dealers. Sears was said to have the busiest appliance e-commerce site at sears.com.15 In 2001, Bosch Siemens Hausgerale, AB Electrolux, and Whirlpool formed a business-to-business (B2B) electronics marketplace for European house hold appliance makers, distributors, and retailers called Tradeplace. For the convenience of the
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL iSHJl
dealers, Tradeplace provided one common access point connected to the manufacturers' exist- '" ing portals without having to log in every time.16 BuildNet, Inc., of fered Internet commerce for homebuilders in the United Stales. General Electric, the top supplier of major home appli ances to builders, owned a part of BuildNet and sold its appliances through that Web site.17 Nevertheless, a true B2J3 electronic marketplace similar to Tradeplace had yet to be established in North Amer ica. Appliance manufacturing shifted in the'1990s from its pr imary emphasis on quality and reliability to speed and agility. (See Exhibit 6 for reliability data by appliance brand.) This
LS2"iUUUUJJUIl If l f Reliability Ratings of Selected Major U.S. Home Appliance Brands (Listed in order of frequency, from fewest to most repairs by percentage of appliances purchased) Washers (Top Loaders)Roper(7%) Whirlpool@tiedior2nd@ Dryers (Electric) Dryers (Gas) '.' 'Whirlpool(7%) V'@.. 'Ker imore .KitchenAid @@@'. Maytag ' Amana GeneralElectric(10%)
/ -\ ' ... .;:"Wliir]pbol(6%) '
: '. .'@ .'@ Roper Maytag@tiedfor2nd "' ,@ @ _ Maytag ' Kent epte'r 'V'f ; "' ; "Y:\ .." ;. : ' /._@" .Ktinmore'' -Hotpquit@tiedfor"5th - "@@: @ '@@@@@ @ @ @' @" KitchenAid " Fr igidaire@tiedf6f-5th @@@"'@. '@@.@"@@@@@ @ .@ @@@ Hotpbint Amaha '' @@ .' @@. ''.. Amana' KitchenAid , @@'; . @.. ..-. @ @. ;@_@ -. - ''. Frigidaire. ;-General.Electnc(14%).@ -@ ". ;@@@@ . GeneralElectric(9%) 'Refrigeraf bVfrbpf teeit ir/Ha.IceMakerorDispenser) ;.' ! .Hotpbint@1tied.'f or1st;(4%); @Kitch,enAi4--ii:ied.'for.lst ^ ,. /Wtirlpoo'lVtJedfdrlst _ \ er imore^-f ted.fo'r lst @@ '@' . @GeneralElectnc':-V-'', "v i:'" Amaha:bottomf reezer. @ @ Miytag' ; V" \ "' '@ . Ffigidaire '! ' @ " '@' ". ; Amana(7%). @@:-@ - @ @V
!@@@.:.H;-:' ':@@' -@ @@ . ' *>@:@ ' . @
@,;:''V"-: @ '" @@ ' . Refrigerator'(Top Refrigerator(Side-By , @ @@ .;,'F;ee?er/lceMakerOnly).;^ .@@'@rr^: @ - Side/lcemaker&Dispenser) ! V-. ;- ; @;.-:..,viCenriio;re(7%). '. ?.:.M'Q, .' . ,. " .... .: :;-.;KifckenAid.' ' '. ,;.> .." . _ ( .' @ @ @"..@'"GeperalElectric @ ' '-'':K '' ' " ' @ '"@'.'.,-Amana ' @ @ ' ' ;:;.;': .^Maytag ; @@ .'@ '. . @ Wliirlppol(9%) @ @ ICitchenAid @ :&.&& @. !,-'. Kenmore ' @'@ GeneralElectric '@@@ . Amana : . :;.Frigidaire .';Maytag(33%) 'y-'.y'-1?''/' '- @ )"$'@/@ @@
@ @. @@ '@ @@" @'@Amana:bottomfreezer '@ @' - @@ '';Frigi'daire"" ' @ @ '@"V @. . -. . ,, _@-- Sub-Zero:built-inbottpnf //V '.:!'. : @':.freezer(26%) @ @@ . 'V . ' .@ . -@i:. Ran9es(E'ectr ic) Vj--
!'Ranges(Gas)
:- ;
Dishwashers Whirlpool (7%) Ken more ICitchenAid Maytag Hotpoint GE Monogram@tied for 6th Bosch@tied for 6th Magic Chef General Electric Jenn-Air@tied for 10th Amana@tied for 10th Asko@tied for last Prigidaire@tied for last (18%)
General Electric@Lied for l'si (8%) Hotpoint@tie for'1st Kehmore @ _@ ' Frigidaire , . . ' @ . "Whirlpool . .' . @ Tapp'an Magic Chef KitchenAid . ' Maytag ' @ @@ ' @'@@ @ Jenn-Air Amana(21%)' ' @ @,.
\ 'v:Genf erai"Electr ic(5%) ' ' ' @' 'Hotpoint ' . . ' Kenmore@-tied for 3rd. WMrlpool@tied for-3rd @ - Frigidaice Magic Chef@tied for 6th ' Aniaha@tied for 6th " Maytag KitchenAid Jenn-Air (15%)
Sources: "Washing Machines and Dryers," Com Consumer Reports, February 2002, p. 34.
:r Reports, July 2002, pp. 42, 44; "Refr igerators," Cor, r Reports, January 2002, p. 47; "Ranges,1

meant that manufacturers worked to improve their use of logistics in order to provide better service to their distributors. Concepts similar to JIT had been applied in the 1990s to distribu tion and marketing. For example, Whirlpool introduced "Quality Express" in 1992 as part of its revamped distribution system. Quality Express used dedicated trucks, personnel, and ware housing to deliver Whirlpool appliances to 90% of all dealer and builder customers within 24 hours and 100% within 48 hours. As part of the service, dr ivers delivering product unloaded units from, the truck and put them where the customer wanted them. This service even included uncrating, customizing, and installation if desired. Other appliance companies soon followed Whirlpool's lead. A 1998 survey of 2,000 North American appliance dealers ranked appliance manufacturers in terms of how well they serviced retailers: 1. Whirlpool Corporation 2. Maytag Corporation
3. GEA
4. Frigidaire (AB Elecholux's U.S. appliance unit) 5. Goodman (Amana; subsequently sold to Maytag)18 In the early years of the 21st century, U.S. appliance manufacturers were moving toward a stronger product-market orientation. Appliance makers had long known that their emphasis on quality and reliability meant that people replaced their appliances only when the appli ances wore out or when they changed houses. By 2002, a survey of 500 residential U.S. households found that energy ef iciency had f replaced price as the top appliance-purchasing consideration. Roughly 25% of the population said that they would be willing to pay 15%-25% above the standard price for higher-energysaving appliances.19 Uniquely differentiated products, such as May tag's Neptune washer, Gemini double oven, and Accellis range, Whirlpool's Calypso washer, and GE's Advantium oven, were successfully motivating people to replace their current working appliances. To continue to compete suc cessfully in the 21st century, it had become essential to invest heavily in product development (not just process R&D) and in more sophisticated marketing. This meant that appliance mak ers could no longer rely on their traditional engineering orientation to create a competitive advantage. When the Wolf Appliance Company, an affiliate of Sub-Zero Freezer Company (a niche manufacturer of premium, built-in refrigerators and freezers), launched a new upscale built-in cooking appliance line, it conducted significant market research, using focus groups and conjoint analysis, to determine which combination of attributes and features would be most attractive to a specific market segment. To build its competence in marketing, Whirlpool had begun to hire brand management people from consumer products firms such as Kraft and General Foods to oversee the development of new brands.
ENVIRONMENTAL DSSUIEiS AND GOVERNMENT REGULATION

Home appliance manufacturers around the world faced increasing regulation regarding their products. One example was ref rigerators and freezers. On the one hand, governments were requiring less use of refrigerants, which might cause global warming. On the other hand, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) was requiring energy conservation improvements for refrigerators and f reezers. These appliances had traditionally beerrnotorious energy hogs@ consuming about 20% of the electricity used in the Amer ican home. The appliance industry @had worked significantly to make products more energy efficient over the decades. For exam ple, from 1972 to 1990 for a typical top-mount, automatic-defrost refrigerator (the most pop ular U.S. refrigerator), the amount of energy consumed declined from 1,986 kilow.att hours per year to 950 kilowatt hours per year (kwh/yr). Chest freezer energy consumption dropped
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL m|
during the same period, from'1,2'68 kwh/yr to 575 kwh/yr. Nevertheless, the U.S. DOE stan dard in effect on July 1,2001, required that the amount of energy used by a typical refrigerator equal no more than that used by a 55-watt light bulb.20 According to a-2001 DOE minimum energy efficiency standard, U.S. clothes washers manufactured in 2004 were to be 22% more efficient than those in 2001 and 35% more efficient by 2007.21 Units imported into the United States were also required to meet the regulations-. Another issue facing appliance manufacturers was the presence of widely different stan dards for major appliances in countries around the world. The emergence of a true global market in major home appliances required the development of common world standards. There were at least three categories of standards: safety/environmental, energy efficiency, and testing procedures. Existing standards had been drafted by such bodies as the British Standards Institute (BSI) in the United Kingdom, Japanese Industrial Standards Committee CJISC), AFNOR in France, DIN in .Germany, CSA in Canada, and UL in the United States. These standards had traditionally created entry barriers that served to fragment the major home appliance industry by country. The International Electotechnical Commission (IEC) standards were created to harmonize-'standards in the European Union and eventually to serve as worldwide standards, with some national deviations to satisfy specific needs. In addition, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) was tasked with preparing and pub lishing international standards. These standards provided a foundation for regional associa tions to build upon. CANENA, the Council for Harmonization of Electrotechnical Standards of the Nations of the Amer icas, was created in 1992 to further coordinate the harmonization of standards in North and South! America. Efforts were also under way in Asia to harmonize standards. By 2002, it appeared that the industry was working toward achieving international standards with some allowance'being made for regional differences.22 With the dawn of the 21st'century, major home appliance manufacturers faced a new set of certification standards beyond the-ISO 9000 series. While ISO 9000 standards dealt with quality management systems; ISO 14001 covered environmental management systems (EMS) and addressed the need for one international environmental management standard. Some international markets, such as the European Union, could require certification as a prerequi site for doing business.
Major home appliances, or white goods, as they were commonly called, were generally classi fied as laundry (washers and dryers); refrigeration (refrigerators and freezers), cooking (ranges and ovens), and other (dishwashers, disposals, and trash compactors) appliances. (See Exhibit 7 for U.S. market share by appliance'category.) In addition to making white goods, some appliance manufacturers also"made and-sold floor care appliances (Maytag), room air conditioners (Whirlpool and Electrolux), or lawn and garden equipment (Electrolux). The majority of U.S. heating and cooling appliances (water heaters, furnaces, and central air con ditioning) were made by other manufacturers, such as Rheem, A.O. Smith, Lennox, and Carrier.
Four major home appliance manufacturers controlled around 99% of the U.S. market for white goods. In order of-2001' market share, Whirlpool led, with 39.2%; followed by General Electric, with 23.2%; Maytag, with-21.6%; and A.B. Electrolux (Frigidaire), with 15.0%. The remaining 1% belonged to the foreign firms of Bosch-Siemens and Haier, which had recently begun to produce in North America, and to various manufacturers of a single type or category

U.S. Major Home Appliance Market Shares by Category . (By percentage of total U.S. sales)
.26 : - .@ -24@ . . '".'ll.S'--' @;'id ' ".@" . @ 7.5' @ ; 5-5 @'. ' 4.5 .; :. @ 3 @ ,:'.@'7 .,-@.@@ @'. @ .'@'85 @ '@'.-. 6' , 5. ;.ii.4?,
18 29 12 15 5 7 5 3 8 65 11
.@.;.
@ 5
40 '@"'& - @ @ . . 19 '@@:'2i ::";: . @ @ 34 i:'l-. @@. "@ 7 'i.-:41@@:!@' @ '. -. ,i26- @ "' @@"jlS. '.' @@@, : ::-.14 . "! .. @ 49 19
}hl '@@@@@'@ @@'@'
9
20. '3
;;;.;i;;.v @;..
"."'5l'.5v'" '
52 @ 25 . 24 ."15 " 17 V',. 7.5 ;@:-.@ 7 %@" I-.'.''-' @' - 0 Note: 1. Raythcon's 1996 Amana appliance share totals included with Maytag share totals. Source: "Special Report: 2002 Market Profile" Appliance Manufacturer, April 2002, p. 11.
of appliance, such as Sub-Zero (built-in refrigerators and freezers and Wolf's professional ranges) and Emerson Electric (garbage disposals). (See Exhibit 8 for overall U.S. and Western European, market shares by company.) The strongest competitors in the United States during the five-year period from 1996 to 2001 were Whirlpool, Maytag, and Electrolux. Whirlpool had increased its market share by almost five points, from 34.9% five years earlier. Maytag had been steadily increasing its market share (about 1% per year), from 15.2% in 1996 to 20.8% in 2000. Its purchase of Aniana's home appliances from Goodman in 2001 raised Maytag's total market share an additional point, to 21.6% in 2001. Frigidaire, AB Electrolux's North American home appliance division, increased its market share over five points from 9.6% in 1996. In contrast, General Electric had lost about nine points of market share (almost 2% each year!), from 32.0% in 1996. By the time Maytag bought Amana home appliances, Amana's market share had been 2.9% in 2000, down f rom 6.7% in 1996.
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL
Shares of U.S. and Western European Market in White Goods (Including dishwashers, dryers, ranges, refrigerators, and washers)
Gji *J Crpo n J;^pnQgi,ar t" ProfLe !RCA
l^tc * 6$e|j
*t5 O^W^^.9 6%^,^w"i gldî^re d$so6$&& in jiiij^|,jO T>^*^'bite-Westilighouse
eMfv^p|i tîS^Ms ' ?,B^ *i*s*?i'*&f@@@"@@ B-o%

Aid Me* IGDA @ ,
( it IjA;
VR <,
* tiljlek <I , f f*
^ S 0 ^liy.\ '@. @ @:' . @ @

'.&%^J'{-: C @ .-;...;. 3.8%
Note 1. Includes Amana. Source: "Special Report: 2002 Markev Prof ile," Appliance Manuf acturer, April 2002 and 1997, Special Insert; "Portrait of the European Appliance Industry" Appliance, November 2001, pp. 49-53, and November 1997, pp. 59-64.
When viewed in terms of total world sales, the U.S. major home appliance manufacturers were major contributors. The top 10 global appliance makers, in order of units sold world wide, were Whirlpool (U.S.), AB Electrolux (Sweden); General Electric (U.S.), Matsushita (Japan), Bosch-Siemens (Germany), Maytag (U.S.), Sharp (Japan), Toshiba (Japan), Haier (China), and Hitachi (Japan).23 Of these 10, only Whirlpool and AB Electrolux had strong positions in all the key world markets of North Amer ica, Western Europe, Latin America, and Asia (particularly China and India). For example, AB Electrolux was first in market share in Western Europe, with 16.2% in 2000. Whirlpool was third, with 9.4% share, following BoschSiemens, with 14.4%. General Electric placed ninth, with 3.6% market share, before it sold its half ownership of the British joint venture General Domestic Appliances (GDA) to the Italian appliance maker Merloni Electrodomestici in 2002. The GDA joint venture had been success ful in the United Kingdom but had achieved only minimal sales to the European continent. The Japanese appliance f irms were well entrenched in Asia but had no real competitive presence (outside of microwave ovens) in the rest of the world. This was similar to Maytag's being strong only in North America. Earlier Maytag had purchased Hoover to obtain Hoover's major appliance facilities in the United Kingdom (thus gaining access to the European mar ket), but the enormous costof upgrading the plants combined with Hoover's low sales outside Britain caused Maytag to sell Hoover's European operations to Candy, the Italian appliance firm. Although Bosch-Siemens was attempting to grow its presence throughout the world, it

was overshadowed outside Europe by Whirlpool and Electrolux and by various strong regional competitors, such as Maytag in the United States and Haier in China. Nevertheless, Bosch-Sier aens's recent investments in the Americas was likely to soon move it to fourth place in global unit sales. Haier, the dominant appliance maker of China, followed the BoschSiemens strategy by working diligently to establish itself in Europe and the Americas. Since 1987, Haier's sales had increased faster than those of any other home appliance company in the world. In terms of their competitive orientation in 2002, major home appliance manufacturers could be placed in one of the following categories: Global Players Whirlpool (U.S.) AB Electrolux (Sweden) General Electric (U.S.) Global Aspirants Bosch-Siemens (Germany) Haier (China) LG Electronics (Korea) Strong Regional Players Matsushita, Sharp, Toshiba, and Hitachi (Japan) in Asia Maytag (U.S.) in North America Candy and Merloni (Italy) in Western Europe Miele (Germany) in Western Europe Samsung and Daewoo (Korea) in Asia Strong Local Players with Some Regional Presence Arcelik (Turkey) Mabe (Mexico) Multibras (Brazil) Fisher & Paykel (New Zealand) Domestic and Niche Players Sub-Zero/Wolf (U.S.) Guangdong Midea Group (China) Many others Many of the.rnajor home appliance manufacturers, such as Whirlpool and Maytag, had fairly narrow product lines, concentrating on home appliances. Some, like Electrolux and Haier, also sole} related appliances such as air conditioning and commercial appliances. Other competitors were part of a larger, highly diversif ied corporation. General Electric Appliances, for example, was a division of the General Electric Company. Bosch-Siemens Hausgerate was a joint subsidiary of Robert Bosch GmbH and Siemens AG. Matsushita, Sharp, Toshiba, and Hitachi of Japan and Samsung and Daewoo of Korea were appliance units of larger, much diversif ied, global corporations. Even though the Japanese and Korean appliance f irms did not have strong positions in major home appliances in every key world market in 2002, they were broadly diversif ied and well established globally in brown goods (consumer electronics) and other product lines. As the major home appliance industry became increasingly global, industry analysts won dered if regional and domestic major home appliance companies concentrating on white goods, such as Maytag in North America and Miele in Western Europe, would continue to be
a;
~r~
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL if iH f
successful as independent f irms. Appliance expert Paul Roggema wondered if such a company was big enough to play the global game, in terms of purchasing and advertising power. Would Miele's technological leaderslup and quality brands allow it to survive; despite globalization, or would it be the perfect f it for Electrolux's brand portfolio?24 The construction in 1997 of a 200,000-unit-capacity dishwasher plant in New Bern, North Carolina, by the powerful German-based Bosch-Siemens Hausgerate to serve the North American market signaled that the U.S. major home appliance industry was changing signifi cantly. This aggressive move was soon followed by Haier, the number-one Chinese appliance manufacturer. Haier's construction of a refrigerator plant in Camden, South Carolina (with plenty of room for expansion), in 2000 was one indication of the company's desire to join Bosch-Siemens as a major player in the U.S. market.25 Until the entry of Bosch-Siemens, the only foreign home appliance manufacturing pres ence had been in floor care. Whirlpool Corporation had arranged a joint venture in 1990 with Matsushita Electric Industrial Company, Ltd., to own and operate Whirlpool's current manu facturing plant in Danville, Kentucky, to provide vacuum cleaners for Sears.
@ WHIRLPOOL
Whirlpool and General Electric had traditionally dominated the U.S. major home appliance industry. (In 1991, Whirlpool's US. market share had been 33.8%; GE's had been 28.2 %.) Unlike General Electric, major home appliances were Whirlpool's primary business. Whirlpool's market share had been steadily increasing to almost 40% in 2001, whereas GE's share had recently fallen to 23%. Whirlpool owed its leadership position to its 50-plus-year relationship with Sears, to which it has been the sole supplier of Kenmore (Sears's own brand label) washers and dryers, the principal supplier of trash compactors and microwave/hood combinations, and a major supplier of dishwashers, ranges, refrigerators, and freezers. Sears's movement away from a heavy reliance on its Kenmore brands toward offering all lines of major home appliances had serious implications for Whirlpool. Nevertheless, even though it no longer dominated Whirlpool's sales, Sears continued to be the firm's largest single cus tomer in 2002 and accounted for around 21% of Whirlpool's sales. @ With the completion of its purchase of Dutch-based Philips Electronics's appliance oper ations in 1991, Whirlpool became a serious competitor in the emerging global major home appliance industry. Sales and market share consistently increased annually in every geographic section of the company@North America, Europe, Latin America, and Asia. It was first in North America and third in Western Europe in terms of market share. The company's market ing strategy was to focus on making the Whirlpool name a global brand. (Even though the company ranked only third in Europe in terms of overall market share of its Philips, Whirlpool, Backnecht, and Ignis brands, management liked to point out that the Whirlpool brand alone had the highest share of any brand in Europe.) In 2002, Whirlpool purchased Polar SA, a leading appliance maker in Poland, and was in the process of bidding for the wash ing machine and cooking appliance plants of the bankrupt French appliance maker MoulinexBrandt.26 Whirlpool manufactured appliances in 44 locations, 34 of which were outside the United States, in 12 countries. Whirlpool had developed a series of joint ventures and equity arrange ments with appliance manufacturers throughout Asia and South America. Although its share of the Asian market was still fairly small, Whirlpool, together with its aff iliates in Argentina and Brazil, had the largest manufacturing base and market share in South America. (Whirlpool owned 94% of the Brazilian appliance companies Brasmotor and Multibras.) In cooperation with its affiliates in Brazil and joint venture partners in India and Mexico, Whirlpool built facilities in those countries to produce what the company called the "world washer." Five years after acquiring Kelvinator of India in 1995 to gain entry into the Indian
Hill SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

market, Whirlpool had established itself as'the market leader in refrigerators and washing machines.27 Fifty-nine percent of Whirlpool's 2001 sales were in North Amer ica. The company's top management believed that the f irm's global position provided a competitive advantage "by reason of its.ability to leverage engineering capabilities across regions, transfer best practices, and economically purchase raw mater ials and component parts in large volumes "28 Whirlpool's global expansion carried a signif icant cost in eff iciency. It posted losses of $70 million in 1996 and $55 million in 1997 in Asia: Consequently, the company undertook a global restructuring program in 1997 to revive its sagging European and Asia operations. It cut 10% of its 46,000-person workforce, increased its presence in South America, pulled out of two troubled joint ventures in China (leaving it with two remaining joint ventures), and sold its financing business.29 Whirlpool revealed its excellence in product development when it successfully built a pro totype to win the Super Efficient Refrigerator Program (SERP) award. Another example of new product development was in washing machines@the category in which Whirlpool owned over half of the U.S. market. Even when Frigidaire and Maytag announced that they were developing radically new front-loading washing machines to meet tightening energy and water usage requirements, Whirlpool chose to build a new type of top-loading machine. The resulting washing machine, to reach the market in late 2000, was a huge success, both as the Whirlpool Calypso and the Kenmore Elite. Like Maytag's front-loading Neptune'washer, the Calypso/Elite used less energy and water and was gentler on clothes than traditional top loaders.30 Even though Whirlpool continued to expand throughout the world, it was also diversify ing into other products. Whirlpool began this process with the introduction in 2000 of its Cielo brand plumbing and bath appliance line, including jetted and soaking spas. According to Kelley Akre, National Accounts Manager for the Cielo brand, "The vision for Whirlpool Corporation is to be in 'Every Home, Everywhere' on the appliance side of the business. . . . We're taking on rooms in every home, everywhere."31 It was rumored that the company would soon be introducing a line of products for the garage, such as workbenches, sinks, and storage systems. (See Exhibit 9 for operating financial results for primary U.S. competitors.)
Exhibit 9
Major Home Appliance Operating Results for Primary U.S. Competitor; (Dollar and Swedish krona amounts in millions)
rc^pif!
^'yi^bJ5?|i)^Sj*^^^fSLJK Cêwf al ^
Notes: 1.Figures for Electrolux given in Swedish kronor (SEK). U.5.S1 r oughly equals SEK9. 2.Results f or Electrolux's consumer durables area, GE's appliance business unit, and Maytag's home appliar mcnt. Above results include worldwide sales, profits, and assets in home appliances area. Source: 10-K reports of companies.
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL I11JI
GENERAL ELECTRIC APPLIANCES

General Electric, with a U.S. major home appliance market share of-23.2% in 2001, was a strong and prof itable competitor in many industr ies but was failing to keep up with the indus try in major home appliances. As a business unit, GE Appliances accounted for 4.6% of the corporation's total sales in 2001, down from 14% in 1996. General Electric had a powerful name and brand image and was the most vertically integrated of the major home appliance manufacturers. For example, General Electric Plastics was an important supplier to the indus try. GEA was the only appliance producer to own its entire distribution and service facilities. Realizing that GE's manufacturing facilities at its 40-year-old Appliance Park near Louisville, Kentucky, were slowly losing their competitiveness, management spent $100 mil lion in the mid-1990s to modernize the washing machine plant. The Park's refrigerator plant was next in line for a $70 million makeover. Overall, the company invested around $1 billion over a four-year period in appliance product development and capital equipment@a 50% increase over previous spending levels. It then invested over $800 million during 2001 and 2002 in its 42 plants in Mexico. Committed to performing its own research, the company invested $100 million in 2002 to modernize its corporate research and development center in Niskayuna, New York. Thirty percent of GE's appliance sales were currently outside the United States.32 In 1989, GE paid $580 million for a joint appliance venture and other ventures with the UK's General Electric Corporation. (GEC). Perhaps frustrated by the venture's inability to make significant sales inroads in the rest of Europe and by the growing saturation of the Western Europe appli ance market, General Electric sold its half interest in the venture to Merloni Electrodomestici in 2002. Nevertheless, the company was heavily involved with international partners in Mexico (48% of MABE), Venezuela (Madosa), Brazil (majority interest in DAKO S.A.), India (40% of joint venture with Godrej 8cBoyce), the Philippines (Philacor), and Japan (Toshiba). These ventures have generally been successful. Although most appliances manufactured by the joint ventures were planned originally for sale in the country of origin, MABE gas stoves had been heavily exported into the United States, signif icantly cutting into Magic Chef's (a Maytag unit) dominance in this product line. More than one-third of all gas ranges and mini-refriger ators sold in the United States were being manufactured in MABE plants in northern Mexico.33 Since 1995, GE Appliances had been actively implementing a Six Sigma quality initiative throughout its many operations. Partly as a consequence of this program, GE refrigerators were rated in 1999 by U.S. property management personnel as being number one in quality compared to all other brands.3'1 This rating further reinforced GE's reputation as the appliance sales leader to the North Amer ican builder market.
MAYTAG
Maytag Corporation, with a U.S. market share of 21.6% in 2002, had been steadily growing its share from 14.2% in 1991. It had moved past Electrolux into third place in the industry in 1995 and was now nipping at the heels of GE for second place in the North .Amer ican home appliance market. Realizing that the company could not successfully compete in the major home appliance industry as just a manufacturer of high-quality laundry products, the company embarked during the 1980s on the acquisition of Hardwick Stoves, Magic Chef, and Jenn-Air. These acquisitions provided Maytag the full line of laundry, cooking, and refrigeration appliances it needed to compete effectively in the U.S. market. Realizing that the industry was going global as well, Maytag purchased Hoover Company, a successful floor care company in the United States and a strong white goods producer in the United Kingdom and Australia. Increased debt

from the acquisition, coupled with the heavy amount of investment needed to upgrade anc integrate its newly acquired facilities and operations, put a big strain on Maytag's prof itability Consequently, Maytag sold as losses Hoover Australia in 1994 and Hoover Europe in 1995. Maytag then undertook a joint venture with the Rongshida appliance company of China in 1996 but ended its involvement in 2001, after continuous losses. In 1995, Maytag invested $13.7 million to expand its recently completed state-of-the art dishwasher plant in Tennessee. At that time dishwasher sales were increasing at twice the rate of the rest of the industry.35 This investment plus the corporation's decisions to spend $ 160 million upgrading its Admiral refrigerator plant (part of the Magic Chef purchase) and $50 million to build a new plant for its front-loading, horizontal-axis Neptune washer plant indi cated that Maytag had no intention of being out-maneuvered by others in North America. The company finally decided in 1998 to offer its full line of Maytag brand appliances through Sears. (It was the last major U.S appliance maker to do so.) Maytag also established 10 . Maytag retail stores in die late 1990s for the purpose of allowing consumers to use Maytag's appliances before buying them. The stores were independently owned but supplied by Maytag and were larger on average than the 550 independently owned Maytag dealers. Management decided to open 16 more stores in 2002. These stores were to also offer brands from other manufacturers. Uninterested in being a takeover target, Maytag spent $325 million in 2001 to acquire Ajnana, a respected major home appliance brand noted for its excellence in refrigeration tech nology. Amana had earlier been the major home appliance unit of Raytheon before being sold to the Goodman' Global Holding Company, a Texas heating and air conditioning company, in 1997. As a unit of Raytheon, the Amana appliance unit had been composed of the Amana, Speed Queen, and Caloric brands. (Speed Queen's commercial appliance unit was sold sepa rately.) Goodman's Amana and Caloric brands posted a market share of 5.2% in 1998 but dropped to only 2.9% in 2000. Maytag had purchased in 1997 the G. S. Blodgett Company, a leading commercial food service equipment maker in Burlington, Vermont'. Blodgett made ovens, fryers, and charbroilers for restaurants and hotels. After the acquisition of Amana, Maytag sold Blodgett in order to reduce its debt and to concentrate on North American major home appliances. As part of its consolidation ofAmana and Maytag operations, management sold the f irm's com ponents parts business in Jefferson City, Missouri, and moved limited refrigeration manufac turing to Amana's refrigeration plant in Amana, Iowa, in 2002. To further reduce manufac turing costs, management invested $2 million in a new subassembly plant in Mexico in 2002. Until this decision, subassembly work had either been done at Maytag's U.S. facilities or by outside suppliers. According to William Beer, President of Maytag Appliances, Maytag's strategy was to focus on delivering a constant stream of innovative products, such as the Neptune washer, Gemini oven, and Wide-by-Side refrigerator. Although CEO Ralph Hake agreed that innova tive products were very important, he felt that for the company to return to sustainable and attractive levels of profitability would require shoring up channels of distribution and even thinking beyond the "Core 5" major appliance product categories: dishwashers, dryers, ranges, refrigerators, and washers. "We're not going to have product hits each and every year like Neptune and Gemini," warned Hake.36
US ElEC TROllK
Along with Whirlpool, AB Electrolux of Sweden was an established global competitor. With its purchase of White Consolidated Industries in 1986, Electrolux became a major part of the U.S. major home appliance industry. Electrolux sold approximately 17 million appliances with over 40 brand names in countries around the world. Electrolux had a strong presence in every
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL 111111
European country from Finland to Portugal and extended eastward with production facilities in Hungary, Estonia, and Russia. With Electrolux's purchase of Brazil's second largest appli ance maker, Refrigeracao Parana (Refripar); Email, Ltd., the largest producer of appliances in Australia; and the Indian appliance f irm Voltas, the company had a solid presence in Latin America and Asia. In 1991, the WCI Major Appliance Group was renamed Frigidaire Company in order to provide AB Electrolux's U.S. subsidiary the'recognition earned by its pioneering namesake brand. Previously, the company's brands had competed against one another and had not been designed for automated manufacturing. Consequently, the quality of many of its well-known branded products had deteriorated over time. Its share of the U.S. market dropped signifi cantly from 16.9% in 1994 to 13.5% in 1995 and had caused the company to drop from its tra ditional third place in the U.S. market to fourth place, behind Maytag. To reverse this situa tion, the company invested more than $600 million to upgrade its existing plants and build new refrigerator and dishwasher plants. Top management also introduced benchmarking and total quality management io boost production quality and efficiency. The company aggres sively advertised its products and was successful in regaining some of the market share it had earlier lost. Electrolux was heavily involved in restructuring its many activities. For example, it cut 2,800 jobs worldwide in 2001 and closed or relocated four plants in Europe and Asia as a way to cut costs and boost productivity. This brought the total cuts to 4,900 jobs, roughly 5.6% of the company's total workforce. It also sold its three motor operations plants in Europe and its compressor plant in Mexico. The Electrolux Group was divided into two business areas: consumer durables and pro fessional products. The consumer durables business unit included American Yard Products, Frigidaire, and Poulan/Weed Eater and was composed of white goods (including room air conditioners) plus floor care, sewing machines, garden equipment, and light-duty chain saws. White goods composed 75% of sales in the consumer durables area. Management indicated that the marked decline in U.S. white goods operating income was due to retail scock-outs and to the phase-in of a new generation of refrigerators@costing the firm SEK (Swedish krona) 1,050 million (US$100 million).37 @ In 2002, Electrolux was first in white goods market share in Western Europe, with a 16.2% market share (down f rom 23.9% in 1994), and fourth in North America, with a 15.0% market share (up from 13.5% in 1995). Europe accounted for about 50% of its major home appliance sales. North America accounted for approximately 35%. The rest was scattered throughout Asia, Latin America (especially Brazil), Oceania, and Africa. @ Careful planning was needed by Electrolux to properly take advantage of a proliferation of brands worldwide without getting bogged down with competing internal demands for attention to each brand. After noticing Whirlpool's success with one brand across all of Europe, the company began the introduction of its own pan-European brand using the Electrolux name. The company spent SEK 600 million over a five-year period to market the Electrolux products throughout Europe. It also invested $50 million in Southeast Asia, with an objective of becoming one of the top three suppliers of white goods in the region. The com pany then acquired the Electrolux name and trademark in North America in 2000 from Electrolux LLC, maker of canister vacuum cleaners. AB Electrolux had given up the name when it had sold its share of the U.S. vacuum manufacturer in 1968. The much-smaller American vacuum cleaner company changed its name to Aerus, and the Swedish firm- once again had full worldwide control of the company name and brand. Rumors had circulated in 2000 that Electrolux pursued Maytag as an acquisition in order to add a high-quality brand to its stable of mid- to low-quality brands in the United States. Electrolux's commitment to use the Electrolux name throughout the world suggested that the company would likely introduce the Electrolux brand as its premium line of home appliances in North America.
Wf M MB SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

U niryco PAiii/iir airini'iriniir cif f* The remaining 1% of U.S. market share in major home appliances was accounted for by a number of other competitors. Two of these, Bosch-Siemens and Haier, were large, global com petitors recently establishing themselves in North America. Others were smaller firms manu facturing one or more unique products sold to a premium niche in die market.
Although not new to North America, Bosch-Siemens and Haier had recently switched f rom importing to manufacturing in North America.
Bosch-Siemens Hausgerate GmbH (BSH)

BSH was an equally held joint venture of Robert Bosch GmbH and Siemens AG. Like Whirlpool and Maytag, it concentrated on manufacturing and selling major home appliances. With 32,0.00 employees distributed among 90 companies around the world, BSH viewed itself as a global competitor marketing 15 brands. Although its market share in North America was very small in 2002, it had the second largest market share (14.4%) in Western Europe. Over the past 20 years, BSH has acquired 400 companies, some of which have since been sold or closed. The company earned around 60% of its profits outside of its base in Germany. According to Dr. Herbert Worner, Chairman of BSH, "Right from its inception, with just four German pro duction facilities, BSH pledged itself to the path of internationalization."38 The construction in 1997 of a 200,000-unit-capacity dishwasher plant in New Bern, North Carolina, initiated Bosch-Siemens's entry into the North American market. As the European market leader in dishwashers, BSH intended to expand sales of its high-end dish washers from the 40,000 units it was exporting to North America in 1995 to a 5% dishwasher market share.39 The company optimistically expanded its New Bern location with a washing machine plant in 2000, even though it not yet accomplished its share objective in dishwashers. BSH management claimed in 2001 that the company had achieved third position in the world rankings of major home appliance manufacturers since 2000. (A report in 2000 placed Bosch-Siemens fifth, after GE and Matsushita.) According to company sources, BSH claimed to be behind JEIcctrolux and "Whirlpool but just ahead of General Electric. The company also intended to be the market leader in Europe.40 BSH reported total net earnings for 2001 had leaped by 47.3%, from 311.8 million @ to 459.4 @. The company posted a total sales f igure for 2001 of 6.1 billion @.
Haier Electrical Appliance International

Ranked China's number-one consumer electronics maker, Haier accounted for nearly 40% of China's refrigerator sales and one-third of its washing machine and air conditioner sales. According to President Zhang Ruimin, it wanted to become "a famous global brand like Japan's Matsushita." During the per iod from 19S7 to 2001, Haier's sales had increased faster than those of any other home appliance company in the world. By 1997, the company was sell ing washing machines to Japan, air conditioners to France, and refrigerators to the United States.41 A poll of Chinese executives revealed Haier to be the domestic company most respected by Chinese executives. Respondents admired die company's business globalization, advanced management methodologies and systems, brand recognition, and consistent busi ness strategy.42 . In 2000, Haier built a brand new refrigerator plant in Camden, South Carolina, followed by its purchase of an Italian refrigerator manufactur ing plant. Previously, it had established a research center in Los Angeles and a U.S. sales network. It had also formed an alliance with India's Bestavision to manufacture and market clothes washers in India. As a result of these
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL HHi
and other actions, Haier operated 48 manufactur ing plants and sold products in more than 160 countries. Haier took the lead in China by establishing a B2B service and selling Haier products on the Internet. In 2002, Haier opened its $15 million U.S. headquarters in New York City. The off ices housed corporate of ices, R&D labs, a restaurant, and showrooms. f Haier announced that profits for 2001 were'more than 50% higher than in 2000. As part of CEO Zhang Ruimin's strategy to join the Fortune Global 500, Haier has continuously expanded its business scope. Growing from a small regional refrigerator factory in China through a series of joint ventures, it had expanded to appliances in every category and had a strong presence throughout China. It was not only expanding globally, it was diversifying into other products, such as kitchen cabinets, life insurance, personal computers, and mobile phones.43 The company attempted to transfer some of the technology used in one part of its organization to another. For example, it was the first major home appliance company to intro duce a complete line of Internet-enabled appliances at the 2001 Domotechnica trade show.
There were a number of smaller major home appliance companies operating in North America, such as Sub-Zero, Viking Range, W.C. Wood, and Brown Stove Works. Most of them manufactured and sold one category of appliance, such, as specialized ranges or freezers.
Sub-Zero Freezer Company

Founded in Madison, Wisconsin, in 1945, the company made high-end built-in refrigerator and freezers. It offered a comprehensive line of built-in refrigerators and freezers, including under-the-counter models and wine storage drawers. In 2000, it bought Wolf Gourmet, pre mier maker of residential ranges, cook tops, grills, and ventilation equipment. Wolf stated that its products were hand-built for exceptional quality. Like Sub-Zero, Wolf's products appealed to the super-premium niche of the home appliance market.
Viking Range Corporation

Founded in 1984 to manufacture a commercial-type range for the home, Viking Range offered a complete line of super-premium, professional-type kitchen appliances, including ranges, ventilation equipment, and dishwashers. The company added refrigerators in 2000, with the purchase of Amana's built-in refrigeration unit. Viking owned a cooking products plant, a ventilation products plant, and a newly opened refrigeration plant in Greenwood, Mississippi.
According to an analysis by The Freedonia Group, world demand for major home appliances was expected to increase 3.6% annually through 2005, reaching 337 million units. Particularly favorable prospects would be in the Asia/Pacific region, where there would be above-average urban population growth and increasing personal incomes. Latin America should also provide growth opportunities because of continuing industrialization and urbanization of the region. Above-average growth was also expected in the Africa/Middle East region and in most of Eastern Europe. Gains in the developed nations should result more from consumer demand for more convenient and energy-efficient appliances. Rising consumption expenditures in Europe should boost demand. The gains in the developed nations should be modest because of the increasingly saturated market and because demographics should not result in a high level of new household formation. Microwave ovens should post strong sales gains through 2005 due to untapped market potential in the developing regions. Conventional ranges were expected to post only modest gains due to market saturation. Dishwashers and clothes dryers
1 SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

should also exhibit growth, although price, size, and cultural considerations should prevent these items from becoming commonplace in areas where they were not already established. Because of rising industrialization and personal income levels in the developing nations, refrigerators and f reezers should experience above-average sales gains.44 (See Exhibit 10 for forecasted major home appliance demand by region and by product line.) According to Robert Holding, president of the Association of Home Appliance Manu facturers (AHAM), several industry trends were defining the industry's future in North America: o Industry consolidation was raising the competitive stakes. a Market maturity was leaving limited avenues for home market growth. A greater emphasis on new products was emerging. d Free trade opened market opportunities but brought new competition. International stan dards and nontariff trade barriers were becoming more important. d Globalization by some manufacturers created significant differences in strategic situations. ? Stronger, niche producers were emerging in traditional product categories.
Actual (1998J and Forecasted (2008) Major Home Appliance Demand by Region and by Product
* ^ ?J I -'If "f Source:]. Jancsujak, "Majors: Good (Not Great) Times Ahead Worldwide," Appliance Manufacturer, February 2001, p. G-I5.

27. A. Chaticrjee, "Whirlpool's Market Leadership Gameplan," Appliance (May 2000), p. 24. 28. Whirlpool Corporation, 2001 Form 10-K, p. 3. 29. C. Quintanilla and J. Carlton, "Whirlpool Unveils Global Restructuring Effort," Wall Street Journal (September 19, 1997), pp. A3, A630. R; J. Babyak, "The Sway of Calypso," Appliance Manufacturer (February 2001), pp. 35-40. 31. L. Bonnema,"The Luxury Appliance," Appliance {]vHy 2002), p. 32. 32. S. Stevens, "Executing Stretch," Appliance (June 1997), pp. GE-l-GE-6. 33. H. W. Lane, M. B. Brcchu, and D. T. A. Wesley, "MABE's President Luis Berrcndo Avalos on Teams and Industry Competitiveness," Academy ofManagement Executive (August 1999), pp. 8-14. 34. "GE Refrigerators Rated Highest Quality in U.S.," Appliance (Januaiy2000),p. 19, 35. "Maytag to Expand Dishwasher Plant," Appliance (December J994),p. 29. 36. J. Jancsurak, "New CEO; New Agenda Signal Changes Ahead," Appliance Manufacturer (November 200J). 37. AB Electrolux, 2001 Annual Report, pp. 23-25. 38. H. Worner, "Newsquotes," Appliance (May 1998), p. 32. 39. "BSH to Build U.S. Plant"Appliance (]ammy 1996),p. 17; "Bosch Targets U.S. Niche," Appliance Manufacturer (April 1996), p. 26. 40. "Bosch-Siemens Hausgerate: Saturated? Innovate!" Appliance (August 2001), p. 24. 41. K. Chen, "Global Cooling: Would America Buy a Refrigerator Labeled 'Made in Qingdao'?" Wall Street Jour nal (September 17, 1997),pp.Al,A14. 42. D.Ritchey, "Aiming Haier and Haier... ,"p.S. 43. C. Stevens, "Top of the Pile and Going Haier in Cluna," Appliance (April 2002), p. 22. 44. The Fredonia Group, World Major HouseholdAppliances (January 2002), as reported in "World Major Household Appliances," Appliance (April 2002), p. 19. 45. R. I. Holding, "30th Anniversary Reflections," Appliance Manufacturer (April 1997), p. 16. 46. M. Ashjaee, "Newsquotes," Appliance (November 1999), p. 34. 47. J. lancsurak, "Global Trend for 1995-2005," Appliance Manufacturer (June 1995),p.A-3.
CASE EIGHTEEN U.S. MAJOR HOME APPLIANCE INDUSTRY IN 2002: COMPETITION BECOMES GLOBAL ISMl
a Much faster product development times and the need to have unique features accelerated time frames for industry decision making when government regulations or product stan dards were involved.45 Even though the major home appliance industry continued to become more global, cul tural differences should continue to make it impossible to create one type of appliance for all markets. "Whirlpool's concept of one "world washer" that it could make and sell around the world collapsed when not only did the manufacturing processes have to be changed to suite local conditions, but also local preferences demanded a differentiated product. In cooking appliances, for example, over 90% of the ranges purchased in Germany were electric, whereas gas prevailed through the rest of Europe. Also, 65% of German ranges were built-in, while the percentage of built-ins outside Germany was considerably less. Top-loading washers domi nated North American, but front-loaders dominated Europe, where washers and dryers must fit into a kitchen under a work surface or in a bathroom. Although built-in refrigerators formed only a small part of refrigerator sales in most of Europe, they comprised over 50% of the German market. The large, freestanding home appliances preferred by Americans were much less popular in Europe and Asia, where smaller, energy-efficient units were generally preferred. The Japanese market was most interested in appliances that minimized water usage. Top-loading washers using agitators to clean the clothes were not preferred in India because they tended to tear the long saris preferred by women. The cooking habits in Asia, Africa, and many other parts of the world dictated that the distance between burners be larger and the control knobs be put on the same surface as the burners.'16 Hans G. Backman, President of Frigidaire Company and Vice-President of AB Electrolux commented on industry globalization: Globalization of the product and globalization of the company are two different things. The appli ance industry is becoming global, but the products and the consumers are still local. The more the world comes together, the more national dif ferences get emphasized,117
the 21st Century," Appliance Manufacturer (November 1994), 1. U.S. Department of Labor, as reported by D. Delano, "It's Off icial; Now What?" Appliance Manufacturer (January, 2002), p. 82. p. 59. 1.3. D. Rkchey, "The Worst Consumer?" Appliance (May 2002), p. 11. 2. J. Jancsurak, "It's All Good," Appliance Manufacturer (July 2002), 14. D. Ritchey, "Appliance Retail Speaks," Appliance (March 2001), p. 5. "White goods" is the traditional term used for major home p. 11. Kenmore is Sears's private-label appliance brand. appliances. The contrasting term "brown goods1' refers to home electronics products, sucli as radios and televisions. 15. Ibid.,?. 11. 16. L. Bcnncma, "Tradeplace@A Retailer's Dream Come True," 3. Frecdonia Group, World Major Household Appliances, summa Appliance (April 2002), p. 49. rized in Appliance (April 2002), p. 19. 17. "GE to Begin Selling Appliances Online," Daily (Ames, IA) 4. Harris Web site, at harris.com (July 11,2002). 5. "Ames Laboratory Testing First Magnetic Refrigerator," Appliance Tribune (June 22,1999), p. C8. 18. ]. Jancsurak, "What Retailers and Consumers Want Most," (February 2002), p. 14. 6. N. C. Remich, Jr., "Appliances Use About 20% of Coated Coil" Appliance Manufacturer {May 1998), pp. 39-44. 19. D. Ritchey,"Craving for Energy," Appliance (February 2002), p. 9. Appliance Manufacturer (December 1996), p. 14. 20. J. M. McGuire, "Energy Use an AHAM Priority," Appliance 7. C. R. Christensen, K. R. Andrews, J. L. Bower, R. G. Hamermesh, and M. Porter, "Note on the Major Home Appliance Industry in Manufacturer (August 2001), p. 14. 21. "Manager's Updue? Appliance Manufacturer (Mirdi 2001), p. 13. 1984 (Condensed)," Business Policy, 6th ed. (Homewood. IL: 22. L. Swatkowski, "Building Towards International Standards," Irwin,1987),p.34O. S. "GEto Invest in Mexico," Appliance (November 2001), p. 13. Appliance (December 1999). p. 30. 23. J. Jancsurak, "Majors: Good (Not Great) Times Ahead 9. D. Ritdiey, "Recycle America?" Appliance (July 2002), p. 9; "For Worldwide," Appliance Manufacturer (February 2001), p. G-13. Appliances, Coated Coil Grows by 14.6%," Appliance 24. P. Roggema! "European Consolidation," Appliance (June" 2001), Manufacturer (June 1993), p. 10. 10. D. Davis, "1996: A Soft Landing," Appliance (January 1996), p. 52. p. 30. 25. D. Ritchey, "Aiming Hajer and Iiaier ... ,J' Appliance (November 11. "Buying Power@Home Purchase Triggers Sales of Appliances," Appliance Manufacturer (Febtuaiy L989),p. 31. 2001), p. 8. 26. "Whirlpool Corporation Bids for Parts of Brandt," Appliance 12. C. Miller, Vice President of Marketing, North American (January 2002), p. 13, and "Whirlpool News," Appliance (May Appliance Group, Whirlpool Corporation, quoted by R. J. Babyak and J. Jancsurak in "Product Design & Manufacturing Process for 2002), p. 15.

Case of SM

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case of SM

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case of SM

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INDUSTRY FOUR:

wCiuw I U> -@;-V.-:':/i;:;;;.:;.:::v:.;.;i;:;

U.S. Major Home Appliance

Industry In 2002: Competiti

SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

Ref rigerators, ^i^ac^J>";:: .

Source: "Statistical Review," Appliance, April, 2002,1993, and 1990, p. 50.

it eSsli SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

Average Life Expectancy of Major Home Appliances

Appliat e*. < W^1$,

SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES @

iSAiWAO f TRING AMD PURCHASiWG '

(MARKETING AMD DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS

N/A N/A N/A

'i SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

Excellent :,_77.; @ 76 ;':s6J-@@M

i^^^&:^^^s^^M" ^sV^0My ' <@@ ^P"@ ..Premium

@ ;.@@ @ @ @Segment . Segment .

a: Goldman Sadis, "Brand Challenge." The Economist, April 6,2002, p. 54.

SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

/ -\ ' ... .;:"Wliir]pbol(6%) '

!@@@.:.H;-:' ':@@' -@ @@ . ' *>@:@ ' . @

SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

ENVIRONMENTAL DSSUIEiS AND GOVERNMENT REGULATION

SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

}hl '@@@@@'@ @@'@'

Gji *J Crpo n J;^pnQgi,ar t" ProfLe !RCA

*t5 O^W^^.9 6%^,^w"i gld^i^re d$so6$&& in jiiij^|,jO T>^*^'bite-Westilighouse

eMfv^p|i t^iS^Ms ' ?,B^ *i*s*?i'*&f@@@"@@ B-o%

^ S 0 ^liy.\ '@. @ @:' . @ @

SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

Hill SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

GENERAL ELECTRIC APPLIANCES

SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

Wf M MB SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

Bosch-Siemens Hausgerate GmbH (BSH)

Haier Electrical Appliance International

Sub-Zero Freezer Company

Viking Range Corporation

1 SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

SECTION C INDUSTRY FOUR: MAJOR HOME APPLIANCES

You might also like

t5 O^W^^.9 6%^,^w"i gld^i^re d$so6$&& in jiiij^|,jO T>^^'bite-Westilighouse

eMfv^p|i t^iS^Ms ' ?,B^ is?i'&f@@@"@@ B-o%