I. Case title
PROCTER AND GAMBLE
William Procter, a candle maker, and James Gamble, a soap maker, formed this global and Fortune 500 Corporation in 1837 (corporate profile). Procter and Gamble (P&G) is headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio. These two entrepreneurs and inventors were immigrants from England and Ireland respectively; who have chosen for some reason to settle in the Cincinnati area. The company manufactures a wide variety of consumer goods including beauty, household, health and wellness products. According to CNN Money, “in the early parts of 2007,P & G was the 25th largest U.S Company by revenue, 18th largest by profit, and 10th in Fortune’s Most Admired Companies list”. “Touching Lives, Improving Life” is the corporate motto which is exemplified in their 138,000 employees and loyal customers worldwide. The worldwide demand for P&G’s products and services has forced management to focus on global marketing and innovation. This worldwide marketing and innovation success was achieved by making sure that what they produce is of highest quality and most importantly is what customers need. P&G is very adaptable to changing customer demands by crefully and clearly defining its innovative strategies; however, it almost lost its market dominance to competition in the mid 80’s had it not been its aggressive play-to-win strategy. II. Time Context
III. View Point
IV. Central Problem
The case takes us back in June 2000, facing two main issues slumping in stock price and leadership crisis when Jager the CEO at that time steps down and is replaced by Lafley. Jager initiated one year ago a reorganization of P&G called ‘Organization 2005’ in order to regain growth of sales. Mainly the new organization consists of a shift from geographical structure to a global product business division’s structure. But Wall Street seemed to punish this move in spring 2000 when the stock price felt by 50% from its peak. P&G internal low confidence was also punishing this move and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document