Mahindra & Mahindra - Art of Growing with Joint Ventures

1. M&M and the art of growing with
JV’s

2. Mahindra & Mahindra - Snapshot

3. Mahindra Group Business Leadership
Market leader in UtilityVehicles in India
Market leader in Tractors in India – Number One global
manufacturer (Single legal entity)
Mahindra Finance : Leader in rural financing
TechMahindra : Leader in Telecom Software
Mahindra Holidays : Leader in ‘Time Share’

4. Before 1983 - License Raj
The Import Substitution Phase 1950s-1981
Four features characterized this early phase of the auto industry
1. Limited number of players and high degrees of government control
Firms needed licenses to operate, and the government restricted capacity in all
product lines—e.g., trucks and heavy vehicles for Telco, Buses and trucks
2. Small volumes, slow growth, slow technical change.
With no new players coming into the market, and little direct competition, volumes
grew very slowly; and technology changed very slowly
Most technology was licensed—as in the case of Fiat and Premier Auto, Standard Auto
and even Ambassaor-Morris.And production was characterized by high degrees of
vertical integration.
3. Confrontational industrial relations, and hierarchical, arms-length supplier relations.
The big manufactures used the “exit” strategy of supplier development, and
encouraged the development of a large number of suppliers to bid down prices as low
as possible.“
Buyers thought cultivating multiple competing sources of supply was the cheapest way
to buy components” (Rane interview, March 2000)
4. Focus on the domestic market.
High tariff barriers and import restrictions led to minimal exports, and a primary
focus on the domestic market.

5. M&M -License Raj
Weakness
Production quotas were given by the government
Technological influences from outside were banned by
restrictions on imports of machinery or know-how
Company lacked resources due to fixed prices
Strength
Limiting Imports pushed M&M to produce parts domestically
Developed capability to produce all parts indigenously
Developed engines for tractors
Build Knowledge base
“Hence there was No-need & No-Opportunity for the company to excel
Production, Product Quality or Shine through Innovative moves”

6. Changes in Automotive Sector (1983 -1993)
50% JV of Suzuki with the Government of India (Maruti Udyog Ltd) brought
three key changes
With public pressure to make this JV succeed, the government gave Suzuki
quite a free hand.
It introduced the concept of volume production and economies of scale to local car
manufacturers as opposed to capacity fragmentation encouraged by the policy of licensing
MUL introduced the industry to a new approach to quality
Maruti “brought in a sea change in the industry’s approach to quality by introducing
modern elements of manufacturing, such as continuous improvement and zero defect
manufacturing, rapid product development and the introduction of new models
Transformed vendor relations (Alliance)
MUL pioneered the introduction of Japanese-style supplier relations in India
Even though they remained limited to MUL, this exposed firms to new practices
Especially the tiering of suppliers, single sourcing, long-term supplier relations
JV’s at the first tier level, and a tight localization of key suppliers around the assembler, and massive
transfer of technology and continuous technical assistance to its key suppliers.

7. Prior to liberalization
Cars were inefficient, expensive, and rare as a
result of heavy licensing restrictions and high
tariffs

8. Mahindra & Mahindra Automobile
The Company started its business by assembling US jeeps
under the license of Willys Overland Corporation – 1947
(Only assembly of the Jeeps)
Required Low-Technical Skills
Required Low Know-How

9. India 1993 - liberalization
De-control
De-licensing
De-regulation

10. Opportunities - Auto Industry
The introduction of a new Automobile Policy in 1993
which coincided with the liberalisation of the Indian
economy reduced the barriers to foreign entry
considerably
M&M entered India’s new economic era with a small
but solid, even though obsolete, Primary knowledge
base

11. Ansoff’s Product/Mission Matrix in wake of
Opportunities in India
Present
product
New
Product
Present
Mission
Market
penetration
Product
Development
New Mission
Market
Development
Diversification
Global
Companies
Domestic
Companies

12. Mahindra Ford India Limited
50:50 Joint Venture
Formed
October
1995
Ended
March 1998
30 months
operation

13. Scope of Opportunity in India
Ford M&M
Strategic Scope Global Reach Diversification
Economic Scope Enlarged Revenues
New Source of
Revenue
Operational Scope
Untapped Market -
India
Huge Opportunity
Constraint
Political & legal
constraints
Technology
Capability Technology
Infrastructure; Labor
& Legal relations

14. Market Entry Strategies
Greenfield Investment
M&M did not have the required Know-How for in-
house development of New Products in the new
Era
Foreign Companies were apprehensive due to
restrictions and red-tape in India
Merger & Acquisitions
There weren’t much companies in India who could
have given the technical edge to M&M for the New
Opportunity of liberalization and growth

15. M&M and the latecomer strategy
Linkage
LeverageLearn
Latecomer firms, are able to
exploit their late arrival to tap into
advanced technologies, rather than
having to replicate the entire
previous technological trajectory
They can accelerate their uptake
and learning efforts utilizing
various forms of collaborative
processes and state agencies to
assist with the process, bypassing
some of the organizational inertia
that holds back their more
established competitors
The strategic goal of the
latecomer is clear: it is to raise
real incomes through catching up
with the advanced firms, and to
move as quickly as possible from
imitation to innovation

16. Linkage
In the context of globalisation, latecomer firms are faced
with new opportunities for linking up with emergent
institutions and networks.
Through linkage, the latecomer firm can secure more
than just a stream of revenue.
It can tap its links with more advanced firms to acquire
knowledge, technology, and market access – things that
would otherwise be beyond the firm’s limited resources

17. Entry barriers – Promoting Linkage
The reason why joint venture mode was the main choice
during these years was due to continuing government
restrictions on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) of over
51% despite considerable de-licensing post 1993.
This made obtaining approval for a wholly-owned
subsidiary a challenging task.
Instead of getting entangled with the government over
regulatory issues, collaborations with a domestic car
maker were a more favourable and hassle-free option

18. Leverage
“It is this capacity to secure more
from a relationship than the firm
puts in that in the strategy is referred
to as Leverage”

19. Leverage
Type of Alliance between M&M and Ford Motors
Horizontal Complementary Alliance
The JV was a 50:50 partnership, and they utilized each
others complimenting capabilities to develop a major
business force challenging the mighty and became the 3rd
largest manufacturer in India (1st Maruti & Suzuki, 2nd Tata)
Mahindra offered Market knowledge & capacity for an
incumbent (Ford)
Ford offered Process know-how in producing a car & Overall
advancement

20. Ford and M&M JV - Entry
Entry Barrier reduced
Got the land and approvals in less then 6 months as Tamil
Nadu government was an ally in the Central government
Investment Incentive
Initial investment 800 crore
50% term loan by Government (400 crore)
25% Ford investment (200 Crore)
25% M&M investment (200 Crore)
SalesTax concession – Estimated 29 crore
Development of infrastructure like road to the plant developed
by the government
Got land 350 acres of land from the government on a
discounted rate of 30 crore

21. Learning
These sequences of linkage and leverage can be repeated
over and over again until a firm, or collection of firms
within an industry, enhance their capabilities and become,
potentially, advanced players themselves.
The sustained and repeated practice of these strategies
by groups of firms can be described as a form of industrial
learning

22. Learning for M&M
M&M got a peek in ModernTechnology
Able to bring its engineering capability from 19th century to
21st Century
M&M gained knowledge about
Assembly technology
Production systems
Assembly line layouts
Training of M&M employees at Ford
Tacit knowledge about
Purchase Management
Quality Systems

23. Change in Ambition
Ford had complete control over the factory management and
Production – M&M was just a silent partner in the Alliance
“After a lot of soul searching we decided we did not want to become
an Indian subsidiary of a large multinational.We wanted to grow
ourselves into a global player for sports utility vehicles in the low and
medium segments”– Mr. Pawan Goenka, Head of Product
development M&M
Ford did not want to collaborate with M&M in R&D
M&M wanted to grow global but Ford did not want any
alliance with M&M outside India

24. Change in Strategy of Parent Companies
Ford
Ford wanted to expand its operations in India and hence
needed a lot of investment
Mahindra & Mahindra
Mahindra wanted to focus more on SUV segment (Scorpio)
that will take them global and did not want to invest more in
the expansion

25. Change in Commitment
H
i
g
h
B
Power Battle
A
High
Commitment
L
o
w
C
Low
Commitment
D
Lack of
Support
Low High
Pre 2000
Ford (High Entry Barrier) - A
• Strategic Importance of Alliance – High
• Need for a Partner – High
M&M (Low Capability) - A
• Strategic Importance of Alliance – High
• Need for a Partner – High
Result – AA (High Commitment)
Post 2000
Ford - C
• Strategic Importance of Alliance – Low
• Need for a Partner – Low
M&M - C
• Strategic Importance of Alliance – Low
• Need for a Ford as a Partner – Low
Result – CC (Low Commitment)
Need for a partner
StrategicImportanceofthe
Project
AA= High commitment
BB= No partnership
CC= Low Commitment
DD= Very low commitment
AB= Potential Conflicts
AC= Potential Conflicts
AD= High Conflicts

26. Issues in Alliance
Product Market Fit
Ford Fiesta was priced out of the reach of most buyers
Operational
Marred by quality problems
Financial
Large investment requirement – M&M could not afford
Strategic
Change in Ambition of Parent Companies
Change in Strategy of Parent Companies
Change in Commitment of Parent Companies

27. End of Ford and M&M JV - 1998
Ford took its ownership to 72 per cent in March 1998 and
later increased its holding further, even as Mahindra &
Mahindra restrained additional investment
"The automotive industry requires significant investment, particularly
at the initial stages, coupled with a lengthy product development
cycle,“
"Such capital intensiveness can be burdensome on partnerships, and
the need for large investment and R&D can be difficult to maintain if
it's not your core business.“
Michael Boneham, president of Ford Motor Co's wholly-owned India unit told Reuters.

28. Ingredients of Failure
Hindrances of Ford motors sharing knowledge with M&M
Refusal to share R&D
Refusal to make M&M part of product development team
Inability of parent companies to compromise on difficult
issues
Refusal to develop a car for India market in the event of failure
of Ford Fiesta
Changes in Ambition; Strategy & Commitment of parent
companies led to disagreements and made decision making
complicated

29. New Era – Post 2000

30. Post 2000
2002 officially ended all restrictions and regulatory clauses of
the previous Auto Policy
It now allowed for 100% FDI
This encouraged foreign automobile manufacturers to either
increase their stakes to 100% in their current joint ventures or
end the joint venture agreement with their domestic partners
Ford Motors India and General Motors increased their share to
100%
The most striking example is that of Fiat India which had an entry
equity of a mere 2.51%; today it has 100%.
Post 2000, instead of entering the Indian auto market through
joint ventures, foreign companies began to adopt the
Greenfield method
Global giants like Nissan andVolkswagen who arrived late in the
Indian market, entered with wholly-owned units

31. To emerge as an autonomous car
producer and move from “Imitation
to Innovation” -- Mr. Pawan Goenka, Head of Product development M&M

32. M&M in the New Era of Automobile Industry
The learning' idea of Mahindras came in handy, for they
designed, produced and sold the MUV, Scorpio which was a
great success
Scorpio was a 100% indigenous design, with inputs from world-class
automobile and equipment manufacturers
It was conceptualised and designed by M&M’s in-house IDAM
(integrated design and manufacturing) team led by Pawan Goenka of
the GM Detroit fame.
It shared the face with Cherokee, the head lights with the Japanese
Pajero and the rear end with the Range Rover.
The machine, equipment and dies came from Fukui and Fuji of Japan
and jigs and fixtures in the body shop from Wooshin Korea.
Fori Automation, U.S., supplied the tester line for the chassis. It had
the latest technology incorporated into the automobile with 2.6-litre
petrol engine coming from Renault churning out 116 BHP and 18.7
kg of torque and had the latest electronic fuel management system

33. Mahindra Renault Limited
51:49 Joint Venture
Formed
October
2005
Ended April
2010
55 months
operation
Linkage
LeverageLearning
New Cycle of Linkage-
Leverage-Learning

34. Linkage – M&M view
After the success of Scorpio, M&M wanted to go global
and showcase a product to rival the best offerings of
global auto giants
But there was one problem.The group did not have
access to modern technology, especially those related to
production of a moncoque platform
In moncoque technique the external frame supported the
building of the car, rather then older method where everything
relied on the chassis
This new technique had revolutionized the global
automobile industry with large scale benefits
M&M needed to acquire the technology to become a
global power

35. Linkage – Renault View
Renault wanted operation in the Indian market which is
highly emerging market with respect to automotive
sector
Renault had no experience with the needs of Indian
customer JV with M&M was seen to help to create the
first right hand drive version of Logan
Renault was also eyeing to mark its presence in Indian
market in short period of time

36. Objectives
Renault M&M
Technology
Exploit the technology and
economies of Scale
An opportunity for learning a new
technology
Resources Technology Market Knowledge
Strategy Global Expansion Develop Core Cometency
Opportunity
New Market Development New Product Development
Boost up the creeping sale
Expand customer base
Renault was looking for major global expansion; along with
India it was also starting its operations in Romania, Russia,
Morocco, Colombia and Iran
M&M wanted to go global and showcase a product to rival the
best offerings of global auto giants

37. Leverage – M&M brand
Mahindra Group a US $ 2.5 billion company is the market leader in
multi-utility vehicles and tractors in India
Mahindra and Mahindra had 55 years of manufacturing experience
M&M had built its high network of distributors and suppliers in India
efficiently
High presence in automotive components, information technology &
telecom (Mahindra British Telecom), and infrastructure development
(Mahindra GESCO, Mahindra Holidays & Resorts India Ltd.)
Mahindra had a reputation of providing TATA Motors the platform
to harness the automotive growth in India
M&M had not much presence in Sedan segment i.e. C-segment so
Renault had no fears of having conflicts of interest
Mahindra as a brand was a trusted brand in India
With the leverage of Mahindra as a brand Renault was also
leveraging its own brand in Logan, as the joint venture was called
Mahindra-Renault

38. Leverage - Renault
Technological capability
Ready design of a low-cost car that was to retail for
under Euro 5000 had robust and trustworthy compared
to the sleek beauties manufactured by the Japanese and
the Koreans
Very successful products in most parts of Europe
Snatching the opportunity and mark its presence in Indian
market in unison with Renault and started building and
selling the Logan in India

39. Benefits of Alliance
Internal Benefits
Reducing cost and risk of new market & new product development
Obtaining Scarce resources
Technology – Renault
Production & Sales Network – M&M
Obtaining cheap factors of production with the help of M&M
Develop economies of scale by gaining access to each other's financial resources
Renault can acquire new customer base and gives access to Technology, knowledge, skills
and better management
Competitive Benefits
Defensive strategy in response to the converging markets
Reducing the time cycle of new product to the market
Strategic Benefits
Creation and exploitation of synergies among the Renault and M&M
Building knowledge to expand into key markets
Develop new products and improve productivity by shared expertise and lower costs
Help them in accumulating money and people to work in short time
Reduced exploration and production costs and thereby increase in the profit margins

40. Issues in Alliance
When Logan was launched in April 2007, the joint venture was targeting sales of
30,000 cars a year, or 2,500 a month
Actual sales have been just under 500 cars a month. In October 2008, that number fell to
401, a 68 per cent drop from the figure a year ago
So what went wrong with the car?
The biggest problem was the price point.
The petrol range starts at Rs 4.43 lakh going up to Rs 5.32 lakh
The diesel variant (1.5 DLX) is priced at Rs 6.68 lakh (all prices ex-showroom Mumbai).
Stronger competing models in the market with aggressive price tags such as Maruti
Swift Dzire andTata Indigo CS and other models like Ford Ikon and Hyundai Accent
that were available in a price bracket close to the Renault model put pressure on
demand for Logan
Logan's failure to play the pricing game was because the localisation content (the
percentage of parts sourced locally) of the car, which is at 50 per cent, is much
lower than competition and thereby has pushed up the final cost of the car.
Logan has suffered also because of the dual structure excise duty, which is lower for
small cars ( up to 4 metres long) at 8 per cent while larger ones such as Logan
(4.24 metres long) face a heftier 20 per cent
Competitor Tata Motors has trimmed the length of Indigo to take advantage of the lower
excise for small cars, thereby bringing down the cost of the car.

41. End of Alliance
Financial Issue
The joint venture posted a loss of Rs 490 crore in the year
ending March 31, 2009 on sales of Rs 740 crore
Financial Crisis of the western world in 2008
Trust Issue
Ghosn had said at theTokyo Motor Show that amongst the
three separate ventures it has in India -- Ashok Leyland, Bajaj
Auto and Mahindra & Mahindra -- it was keen on continuing
with just one of these
Wind-up of JV
Renault paid 135 crore to get out of the JV
Offered M&M the Logan platform and the engine on license

42. Ingredients of Failure
Unsuccessful product
Development of Logan was a joint effort of Market information of
M&M and product knowledge of Renault
Product failed hence the teams started blaming each other for the failure
Loss of Trust
Open indication of the CEO of Renault about joining hands with
other competitor
Internal communication issues
Change in ambition
M&M – Wanted to focus on MUV segment and launch global product
Renault – After the failure of Logan and Financial losses they wanted
to enter India on their own

43. Learning
Mahindra & Mahindra gained engineering capabilities
for making superior engines and world-class
manufacturing practices to bring efficiency through
these joint ventures
Foreign partners learnt the lay of the domestic
market and ways of doing business in India