UNILEVER COMPANY report
The company is listed both in the Netherlands and in the United Kingdom but surprisingly, it operates as a single entity with one senior team and one board. The structure offer flexibility as well as adaptability all over the world. It also ensures that the production is maintained at a high level (Dale, 1975). The company chose this structure following the proposals of scholars such as Taylor who brought about the theories which can be used to increase company efficiency as well as workforce efficiency by using certain management structures. In this report, the challenges faced by the Unilever Company are highlighted and discussed, as well as bring about the solutions that are viable in the solution of this problems. The diversification helps this company to survive, in all markets.
Social Factors. Unilever has constantly fight to maintain its reputation. It produces many products on personal care. This has made it to demonstrate a will to help people to look as well as feel good. Bargaining power of customers (strong force) The following factors leading to bargaining power of Unilever customers has to be addressed: Switching costs being low (strong force) Information of high quality being in existence (strong force) Individual buyers being of small size (weak force) 3. Bargaining power of suppliers (moderate force) The moderate force in the bargaining power of suppliers at Unilever are as follows: Individual suppliers’ moderate size (moderate force) Suppliers’ moderate population (moderate force) Overall supply being moderate (moderate force) (Orlovic, 2003). Threat of substitutes The following are external factors which causes the threat of substitution’s force to be weak at Unilever: 3 Switching costs being low (strong force) Availability of substitutes being low (weak force) Ratio of performance to that of price being low (weak force) 5.
Threat of new entrants The factors mentioned below act as new entrants’ threat against Unilever Company: Switching costs being low (strong force) Brand development costs being high (weak force) Economies of scale being high (weak force) SWOT analysis of Unilever Unilever strengths 1. Top brand- It has been able to fix the brand to be on top of its customers’ minds. This makes it loose market due to wooing of unsuspecting customers. Narrow diversification space 3. Retailers being of high dependence too Unilever. Retailers are affect the behavior of buyers directly. There is large and wide variety of substitute products that make Unilever products replaceable. Imitation of products is becoming rampant. Some are hard to totally control, thus leading to ‘snatched’ profits (Creative Educational Video, Inc, & Insight Media Firm, 2009).
There has been a recent growth in the use of Ayurveda products. Label brands which are private are rising in popularity. Challenges of Unilever Company Structure The Unilever has had a lot of strategic acquisitions and mergers, which not all were friendly. Less control: The divisional structures bring about less control of all the Unilever by their top most management team. This leads to just putting trust in other individuals, that they will deliver after all. In the end, some country executives have sometimes failed the topmost management team. Poor communication: Since the organization structure of Unilever is large, communication is a complex matter that has sometimes seen unrealized conduct as far as instructions given from the top downwards are concerned.
The message also a times reaches the destination having been distorted. Instead of focusing on divisions, Unilever could opt to change into a subsidiary which is free standing. Unilever needs to raise geographical divisions’ focus so that it gives strength to regional management staff. Consumer goods markets will improve due to improvement of strategic effectiveness. Frequent meeting between topmost management and the Unilever country top managers to align thoughts and allow keeping of a single mission. The meetings will be meant to measure oneness of views and detect any ideas that could depict an initial flaw. References Arbib, M. A. , Érdi, P. , & Szentágothai, J. Neural organization: Structure, function, and dynamics. A. , & Kelly, P. Management theory and practice. Creative Educational Video, Inc, & Insight Media (Firm).
From $10 to earn access
Only on Studyloop