2. Driving Strategic Change at Saab AB: The Use of New Control Practices

See Chap. 1 for a thorough discussion regarding this.

This chapter is not about Saab Automobile, the automobile manufacturer, which was formed in 1990 from collaboration between Saab-Scania AB, as it was called at that time, and General Motors (GM). These two corporations each owned a 50 % share in the company, but in 2000 Saab Automobile became wholly owned by GM. In 2010 Saab Automobile was purchased by Spyker Cars before going bankrupt at the end of 2011.

The empirical data, analysis and conclusions in focus in the chapter were presented in their entirety in the doctoral thesis by Nilsson (2010).

In this paragraph figures in parentheses refer to corresponding data at the end of 1995.

The export share of 60 % in 1995 was the highest of any particular year in the 1990s. The average export share for the years 1994–1999 was 49 %, with the yearly figures as follows: 1994, 49 %; 1995, 60 %; 1996, 55 %; 1997, 51 %; 1998, 41 % and 1999, 38 % (Saab 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999)

The export share of 69 % is for 2009. Since 2010 the corporation has reported only the export share of total revenue.

At the turn of the year 2009/2010, the business units were assorted into five business areas. But since no empirical evidence has been collected for the period thereafter, the corporation’s development after that point is not considered.

‘By a home market is meant a country where Saab has operations that meet at least three of the following four criteria: (1) sales consistently above a certain level in the country, (2) local value added, (3) at least two of the segments have customers in the country and (4) Sweden has good political relations with the country’ (Nilsson 2010, p. 82, translated).

‘There are several different kinds of sensors, but all of them have the task to gather information, on light, sound or motion, for example, to convert it to a suitable format and in certain cases also to distribute the information to other subsystems’ (Nilsson 2010, p. 207, translated).

The term “control mechanism” refers to the principal general components of a control system. Each one includes processes of planning and follow-up for affecting behaviour in the organization. Aside from the budget and financial business plan, the Balanced Scorecard and the strategic business plan are examples of control mechanisms.

The three mentioned control mechanisms can be described as follows: ‘The strategic business plan includes a description of the firm’s strategic direction for coming years, whereas the financial business plan consists of annual income statements and balance sheets for the next 5 years. The budget includes an income statement, as well as selected key performance indicators, for the coming year of operations’ (Nilsson 2010, p. 98, translated).

‘A network-based defence consists of different actors, digitally linked both horizontally and vertically. A vertical link means that there is a digital connection the whole way from the individual soldier to the highest operational command. A horizontal link means that there is a digital connection between actors in different domains, such as air, land and sea. The vertical and horizontal links make it possible to create a real-time image that is at once congruent, comprehensive and detailed’ (Nilsson 2010, p. 80, translated).

The concept of software production is used in accordance with Nilsson (2010, p. 29, translated), that is, as ‘[…] a direct translation of Anderson’s (2003) use of software production instead of software development or software engineering […]. Software engineering and software production should therefore be considered synonymous […]. As I interpret the concept, Anderson uses it to indicate that there are a number of concepts in traditional production that can be used in software production to develop it further. My intent in using the concept is similar. Above all, it is about pointing out that it makes no difference whether the production of software or of goods is involved; a common set of concepts can be used in discussing all types of production. Such a set of concepts also facilitates discussion on how to coordinate production strategies with corporate and business strategies.’

For a more detailed discussion on the importance of culture as a control mechanism, see Chap. 3 on Atlas Copco’s strategies and control.

Model-based production is used in the same way as in Nilsson (2010, p. 133, translated): ‘The usual term for model-based production is model-based development. In accordance with the use of the concept of software production instead of software development, model-based production is used as a synonym for model-based development. The concept means that graphic models of the system serve as the basis for its design. From the models, moreover, documentation and codes can be generated automatically. As it is then a simple matter to reuse previously designed models, it is possible to achieve a higher degree of reutilization of previously delivered systems.’

For a thorough treatment of the importance of uniform IT systems for creation of integrated control, see Chap. 8 on Electrolux’ strategies and control.

For further discussion on the integration of management control and production control, see Chap. 4 on Scania’s strategies and control.

The marked decrease in Saab’s rate of return in 2008 was due largely to fund allocations and write-downs on civilian aircraft projects.

The content in this section is to a large extent an exact reproduction of parts of the concluding discussion in Nilsson (2010).

For a more detailed discussion on the relationship between different control mechanisms in the total control mix, see Chaps. 3 and 4 on Atlas Copco’s and Scania’s respective strategies and control.