Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T11:40:01.410Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Markets, Networks, and the Rise of Chrysler in Old Detroit, 1920–1940

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

Michael Schwartz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

During the two decades before World War II, as this article demonstrates, the relationship between the Big Three American automakers and their parts suppliers was remarkably similar to the celebrated cooperation of Japanese auto assemblers and their trading partners after 1980. Unlike the arms-length multisourcing that characterized American firms after 1960, the prewar Detroit production culture featured collaborative development, cost sharing, and long-term innovative relationships. This system nurtured the rise of Chrysler, which not only grew from a standing start in 1920 to convert the General Motors-Ford duopoly into the “Big Three” by 1930, but also established itself as the industry's leader in innovation and profitability.

Type
Articles
Information
Enterprise & Society , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , March 2000 , pp. 63 - 99
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2000. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Business History Conference. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bibliography of Works Cited

Books

Abernathy, William J. The Productivity Dilemma: Roadblock to Innovation in the Automobile Industry. Baltimore, Md., 1978.Google Scholar
Abernathy, William J., Clark, Kim B., and Kantrow, Alan M.. Industrial Renaissance: Producing a Competitive Future for America. New York, 1983.Google Scholar
Altshuler, Alan, et al. The Future of the Automobile: The Report of MIT’s International Automobile Program. Cambridge, Mass., 1984.Google Scholar
Automobile Manufacturers Association. Automobile Facts and Figures, 23rd Edition. Detroit, Mich., 1941.Google Scholar
Baran, Paul, and Sweezy., Paul Monopoly Capital: An Essay on the American Economic and Social Order. New York, 1966.Google Scholar
Barclay, Hartley W. Ford Production Methods. New York, 1936.Google Scholar
Beasley, Norman. Knudsen: A Biography. New York, 1947.Google Scholar
Chrysler Corporation., Chrysler Corporation: The Story of an American Company. Detroit, Mich., 1955.Google Scholar
Chrysler, Walter P. (in collaboration with Boyden Sparkes). Life of an American Workman. New York, 1937.Google Scholar
Cray, Ed. Chrome Colossus: General Motors and Its Times. New York, 1980.Google Scholar
Fine, Sidney. Sit-Down: The General Motors Strike of 1936-1937. Ann Arbor, Mich., 1969.Google Scholar
Ford, Henry (in collaboration with Samuel Crowther). Today and Tomorrow. Garden City, N.Y., 1926.Google Scholar
Hall, R. W. Driving the Productivity Machine: Production and Control in Japan. Falls Church, Va., 1981.Google Scholar
Hounshell, David A. From the American System to Mass Production, 1800-1932: The Development of Manufacturing Technology in the United States. Baltimore, Md., 1984.Google Scholar
Katz, Harold. The Decline in Competition in the Automobile Industry, 1920-1940. New York, 1977.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Edward D. The Automobile Industry: The Coming of Age of Capitalism’s Favorite Child. 1941; rpt., Clifton, N. J., 1972.Google Scholar
Kraus, Henry. The Many and the Few: A Chronicle of the Dynamic Auto Workers. Los Angeles, 1947.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Arthur J. GM Passes Ford, 1918-1938: Designing the General Motors Performance-Control System. University Park, Pa., 1986.Google Scholar
MacManus, Theodore F. , and Beasley, Norman. Men, Money, and Motors: The Drama of the Automobile. New York, 1929.Google Scholar
Nevins, Allan, and Hill, Frank E.. Ford, Decline and Rebirth, 1933-1962. New York, 1963.Google Scholar
Piore, Michael J., and Sabel, Charles F.. The Second Industrial Divide: Possibilities for Prosperity. New York, 1984.Google Scholar
Pound, Arthur. The Turning Wheel: The Story of General Motors Through Twenty-Five Years, 1908-1933. New York, 1934.Google Scholar
Rae, John B. American Automobile Manufacturers, The First Forty Years. Philadelphia, Pa., 1959.Google Scholar
Seltzer, Lawrence H. Financial History of the American Automobile Industry. Boston, 1928.Google Scholar
Sloan Alfred, P. Jr., My Years with General Motors. Garden City, N.Y., 1964.Google Scholar
Sloan Alfred, P. Jr. (in collaboration with Boyden Sparkes). Adventures of a White-Collar Man. New York, 1941.Google Scholar
Sorensen, Charles E. My Forty Years with Ford. New York, 1956.Google Scholar
Womack, James P. , Jones, Daniel T., and Roos, Daniel. The Machine That Changed the World. New York, 1990.Google Scholar

Articles and Essays

Asanuma, B. “The Contractual Framework for Parts Supply in the Japanese Automotive Industry.” Japanese Economic Studies 13 (Summer 1985): 69–70.Google Scholar
Clark, Kim. “Project Scope and Project Performance: The Effect of Parts Strategy and Supplier Involvement on Product Development.” Management Science 35 (Oct. 1989): 1247–62.Google Scholar
Flugge, Eva. “Possibilities and Problems of Integration in the Automobile Industry.” Journal of Political Economy 37 (April 1929): 150–74.Google Scholar
Helper, Susan R. “Comparative Supplier Relations in the U.S. and Japanese Auto Industries: An Exit/Voice Approach.” Business and Economic History. 2d ser., 19 (1990): 153–62.Google Scholar
Helper, Susan R. “An Exit-Voice Analysis of Supplier Relations.” In Morality, Rationality, and Efficiency: New Perspectives on Socio-Economics, ed. Coughlin, Richard M.. New York, 1991, 355–72.Google Scholar
Helper, Susan R. “Strategy and Irreversibility in Supplier Relations: The Case of the U.S. Automobile Industry.” Business History Review 65 (Winter 1991): 781–824.Google Scholar
Helper, Susan R. and Levine, David I., “Long-Term Supplier Relations and Product-Market Structure.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 8, no. 3 (Oct. 1992): 561–81.Google Scholar
Klein, Benjamin. “Vertical Integration as Organizational Ownership: The Fisher Body–General Motors Relationship Revisited.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 4 (Spring 1988): 199–213.Google Scholar
Klein, Benjamin, Crawford, Robert, and Alchian, Armen A.. “Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process.” Journal of Law and Economics 21 (Oct. 1978): 297–326.Google Scholar
Knudsen, W.S. “For Economical Transportation: How the Chevrolet Motor Company Applies Its Own Slogan to Production.” Industrial Management 74 (Aug. 1927): 65–68.Google Scholar
Langlois, Richard N., and Robertson, Paul L.. “Explaining Vertical Integration: Lessons from the American Automobile Industry.” Journal of Economic History 49 (June 1989): 361–75.Google Scholar
Menge, John A. “Style Change Costs as a Market Weapon.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 76 (Nov. 1962): 632–47.Google Scholar
Thomas, R.P. “Style Change and the Automobile Industry during the Roaring Twenties,” in Business Enterprise and Economic Change: Essays in Honor of Harold F. Williamson, ed. Cain, Louis P. and Uselding, Paul J.. Kent, Ohio, 1973, 118–38.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Michael, and Drew, Fish. “Just-in-Time in Old Detroit.” Business History 40 (July 1998): 48–71.Google Scholar

Magazines and Newspapers

Automotive Industries. 1933-1934Google Scholar
Business Week 1937 Google Scholar
Fortune 1933-1940, 1948.Google Scholar
New York Times. 1994.Google Scholar