某新势力智驾负责人遭排挤离职......

Group 1 - The core issue for autonomous driving company A is internal management problems leading to its operational halt, rather than just technical shortcomings [4][5] - Company A's decline was evident as early as April last year, triggered by a whistleblower report regarding a high-salaried employee's resume fraud, which uncovered significant financial issues [4] - Following the loss of trust from the parent group B, all operational permissions of company A were revoked, leading to its eventual takeover by group B [4] Group 2 - New energy vehicle company C's supply chain head was dismissed due to failure to stockpile memory chips during a price surge, which angered the CEO [6] - This incident was not isolated, as company C had previously faced similar issues with core component shortages, indicating a pattern of mismanagement [6] Group 3 - The departure of the autonomous driving head from new energy vehicle company D was triggered by plans to eliminate the existing mapping team, which led to internal conflicts and ultimately his resignation [7] - Despite D's significant investment in high-end technology and a large team, the challenges of developing a mapped route have hindered progress, leaving the company under pressure to deliver results [7] Group 4 - Logistics company E is investing 150 million in developing an L4 autonomous driving demo, but its internal team structure is causing inefficiencies due to merging teams with fundamentally different architectures [8] - The success of this demo is critical for attracting investment, but failure could lead to significant layoffs within the company [8] Group 5 - Autonomous vehicle company F's plan to split and seek independent financing failed due to difficulties in securing investment, despite its low valuation of approximately 1 billion RMB [9] - The company previously operated a fleet of nearly 1,000 autonomous vehicles but has since faced significant team instability and leadership changes, leading to a decline in operational effectiveness [9] Group 6 - A well-known automotive manufacturer G has adopted a "performance theater" culture, leading to ineffective innovation practices and minimal output from its large engineering team [10] - The company has only managed to successfully run two demo routes, despite having a substantial number of engineers, indicating a disconnect between innovation goals and actual productivity [10] Group 7 - Company H's management style is characterized by a lack of accountability and engagement among executives, leading to a disorganized and ineffective workforce [12] - The company has seen a decline in morale and productivity, with many core talents feeling undervalued and overworked [12] Group 8 - In a new energy vehicle company I, internal conflicts led by executive A have resulted in significant inefficiencies and a failure to adapt to industry trends, particularly in autonomous driving technology [13][14] - The CEO's decision to ignore advice to follow industry leaders in end-to-end technology has caused the company to fall behind competitors [14] Group 9 - Autonomous trucking company J is facing financial losses due to its L2 driving assistance model, which has not effectively reduced operational costs and has led to inventory issues [15] - The company's strategy of incentivizing usage through subsidies initially worked but has since resulted in customer dissatisfaction and vehicle returns due to supply chain issues [15]