P&G and Unilever Organization Structure Lesson’s to Learn Presented by Anuj Shinde Apoorv Shrivastav Dipen Jain Pratyusha Dash Sonali Shukla Upgeet Singh Vachanaditya

Introduction – Proctor & Gamble

1837 Estd.

$83.06bn Revenue

180

No. of countries -Global Presence

300 No. of Brands

Organizational Structure over the years Now

Then

GBU’s grouped into 4 Industry Based Sectors – Industrywise and geographic focus

Proposed by Jager, then CEO Followed a Geographic Divisional Structure

Streamlining the resources by concentrating on few brands

To increase production , innovation & technology To decentralize power referring decision making to lower level managers To encourage learning and sharing from each other yielding innovation, brainstorming & empowerment

Results

Forced Adoption

Decline in Profit

Focus on common consumer benefits, share common technologies, and face common competitors Lean Corporate Functions ensure ongoing functional innovation and capability improvement

Results

Wide Focus

Increased revenue

Unilever

1929

Euro53.3bn Revenue

Estd.

26

No.1 FMCG brand country wise

>400 No. of Brands

Organizational Structure over the years Now

Then tly owned by two parent companies; Unilever N.V. and Unilever PLC

Focus on big products, reduce stock keeping units (SKUs), improve working capital management, cut headcount.

Comprehensive restructuring of operations and businesses

Each level within the hierarchy serves a different function allowing the other levels of the organisation to concentrate on their core roles

Focus on fewer, stronger brands to promote faster growth. Acquisitions will also play a big role.

Acquisitions will continue to play a big role

Profit Increased by 16%, Share price recovered by 30% Resilience in challenging economic conditions

Its Leading brands now ed for 88%, up from 75%.

Results

Forced Adoption

Decline in Profit

Results

Organisation flexibility

Cross sectional representation

Strengths and Weaknesses • • •

Centralized structure Flattened structure of hierarchy Work specialization in Unilever to increase efficiency & productivity – by division of labor • Departmentalization – 5 types -Functional : in-depth specialization -Product : increased ability & product performance -Geographical : effective handling of specific regions -Process : efficient flow of work activities -Customer: Focus on customer needs • Retrenchment

max growth

Proposed Structure for Unilever

Consequences of Re-structuring

Recommendations 

Organizational changes are not implementable overnight, so adaptation to newer technology is crucial.



These technologies can workers in all areas  through advanced tools for market research, customer relations and internal communications.



Tannenbaum and Schmidt continuum-collaborative style has helped Unilever in managing and instilling change.



Increased decentralization of responsibilities to respond flexibly to internal and external changes Motivate and engage employees to extract constructive criticism and for growth of Unilever