The Evolution of a Global Cash Management System

Global competition is a general trend, and new types of organizations are emerging to service international markets.1 Companies are coordinating manufacturing, distribution, and marketing strategies on a global scale. Information systems are a key part of these globalization strategies because computer networks move large volumes of data across great distances almost instantaneously, thereby negating the importance of geographic location.2 Therefore managers on different continents can share data and applications easily and quickly. European manufacturing and sales data can be easily collated with data from Japan. Similarly, a manager using a terminal in Europe can access a mainframe computer in the United States. These trends present new opportunities for managers to redesign their organizations and also their relationships with trading partners.

In this paper, we trace the changing role of treasury management at Motorola over a period of sixteen years. We present the organizational, strategic, and information technology shifts. In the context of manufacturing and marketing trends such as increased integration between organizations and just-in-time product flows, cash management is an important business process because of the potential benefits and inevitable outcome of cash flows moving to align with product flows.3 Our research methodology is based on Eisenhardt’s framework and focuses on the importance of theory development from case research.4 This case study of Motorola is part of a larger study on competition and IOSs in business markets.

Treasury Management at Motorola

Motorola is one of the world’s leading providers of wireless communications, semiconductors, and advanced electronic systems and services. Separate Motorola companies act autonomously and trade with each other, often across national boundaries. An internal information systems infrastructure that enables data to be shared easily between Motorola companies has been in place since 1976. It is used in logistics and manufacturing management to reduce costs and improve the quality of manufacturing operations in a continuous improvement program.

In parallel with these developments, the treasury management function has evolved to manage nearly $5 billion of intracompany payments. The company has implemented an internal “currency netting” system and reorganized the treasury function to take control from local management and centralize all foreign currency payments. The company now uses the system, once primarily for worldwide inter-Motorola payments, as a vehicle to pay suppliers across borders.

Read the Full Article:

Sign in, buy as a PDF or create an account.

References

1. M.E. Porter, “The Competitive Advantage of Nations,” Harvard Business Review, March–April 1990, pp. 73–93.

2. M. Manheim, “Global Information Technology,” International Information Systems 1 (1992): 38–67.

3. J.R. Freeland and H.L. Ashby, “An Exploratory Study of Just-In-Time Purchasing in Japan and the United States,” presented at the Joint Meeting of the Institute of Management Sciences and Operations Research Society of America, New Orleans, Louisiana, May 1987.

4. K.M. Eisenhardt, “Building Theory from Case Study Research,” Academy of Management Review 14 (1989): 532–550.

5. In mathematical notation:

For company x,

6. E.K. Clemons and M.C. Row, “Rosenbluth International Alliance:

Information Technology and the Global Virtual Corporation,” in J.F. Nunamaker and R.H. Sprague, eds., Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences IV (1992): 678–686;

N. Venkatraman and J.E. Short, “Baxter Healthcare: Evolution from ASAP to ValueLink in the Hospital Supplies Marketplace,” in Nunamaker and Sprague (1992): 666–677; and

J.E. Short and N. Venkatraman, “Beyond Business Process Redesign: Redefining Baxter’s Business Network,” Sloan Management Review, Fall 1992, pp. 7–21.

7. J.I. Cash and B.R. Konsynski, “IS Redraws Competitive Boundaries,” Harvard Business Review, March–April 1985, pp. 134–142;

H.R. Johnston and M.R. Vitale, “Creating Competitive Advantage with Interorganizational Information Systems,” MIS Quarterly, June 1988, pp. 153–165;

R.I. Benjamin, D.W. de Long, and M.S. Scott Morton, “Electronic Data Interchange: How Much Competitive Advantage” Long-Range Planning 23 (1990): 29–40; and

N. Rackoff, C. Wiseman, and W.A. Ullrich, “Information Systems for Competitive Advantage: Implementation of a Planning Process,” MIS Quarterly 9 (1985): 285–294.

8. G.P. Huber, “A Theory of the Effects of Advanced Information Technologies on Organizational Design, Intelligence, and Decision Making,” Academy of Management Review 15 (1990): 47–71;

P.G.W. Keen, Shaping the Future (Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press, 1991), pp. 105–108;

T.L. Whisler, Information Technology and Organizational Change (Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1970);

S. Zuboff, In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power (Oxford, England: Heinemann Professional Publishing, 1988); and

N. Bjorn-Andersen, K. Eason, and D. Robey, Managing Computer Impact, An International Study of Management and Organizations (Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1986).

9. Bjorn-Andersen et al. (1986).

10. Keen (1991).

11. J.F. Rockart and J.E. Short, “IT in the 1990s: Managing Organizational Interdependence,” Sloan Management Review, Winter 1989, pp. 7–17.

12. R. Johnston and P.R. Lawrence, “Beyond Vertical Integration —the Rise of the Value-Adding Partnership,” Harvard Business Review, July–August 1988, pp. 94–101; and

B.R. Konsynski and F.W. McFarlan, “Information Partnerships —Shared Data, Shared Scale,” Harvard Business Review, September–October 1990, pp. 114–120.

13. T.W. Malone, J. Yates, and R.I. Benjamin, “Electronic Markets and Electronic Hierarchies,” Communications of the ACM 30 (1987): 484–497;

T.W. Malone, J. Yates, and R.I. Benjamin, “The Logic of Electronic Markets,” Harvard Business Review, May–June 1989, pp. 166–172; and.

T.W. Malone and J.F. Rockart, “Information Technology and the New Organization,” in Nunamaker and Sprague (1992): 636–643.

14. Johnston and Vitale (1988);

Johnston and Lawrence (1988); and

Konsynski and McFarlan (1990).

15. P.W. Turnbull, “Tri-Partite Interaction: The Role of Sales Subsidiaries in International Marketing,” in P.W. Turnbull and S.J. Paliwoda, eds., Research in International Marketing (London: Croom Helm, 1986), pp. 193–212.

16. K.R. Harrigan and W.H. Newman, “Bases of Inter-organization Cooperation: Propensity, Power, and Persistence,” Journal of Management Studies 27 (1990): 417–434; and

R.M. Kanter, When Giants Learn to Dance (London: Unwin, 1989).

17. E.K. Clemons and M.C. Row, “Information Technology and Industrial Cooperation,” in Nunamaker and Sprague (1992): 644–653;

P. Hart and D. Estrin, “Inter-Organization Networks, Computer Integration, and Shifts in Interdependence: The Case of the Semiconductor Industry,” ACM Transactions on Information Systems 9 (1991): 370–398; and

C.P. Holland and A.G. Lockett, “Forms of Association in Business Markets: The Impact of Inter-Organisational Information Systems,” in D.D. Sharma, ed., Advances in International Marketing (Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press, 1993), pp. 125–143.

18. Venkatraman and Short (1992); and

J. Meier and R.H. Sprague, “The Evolution of Interorganizational Systems,” Journal of Information Technology 6 (1991): 184–191.