1. Does SK-II have the potential to become a global brand within Procter & Gamble’s worldwide operations? Why or why not?
2. Which of the three market options should Paulo Decesare recommendation to the GLT? What benefits do you expect to gain? What risks do you see?
3. How Should he implement your recommended option? What are the implications for P&G’s new post-O2005 organization? What support and/ or resistance do you expect? How will you manage it?
4. Why was SK-II so successful in Japan? How is it creating value and what is the business model?
5. How transferable is this model and what are barriers?
P&G Japan: The SKII Globalization Project
GLT – Global Leadership Team
GBU – Global Business Unit
Alan Lafley – head of P&G’s Beauty Care GBU
Paolo de Cesare – President of Max Factor Japan
Lafley’s organisation and budget, which would support the global expansion of SK-II
Need evidence of the transferability potential of a brand
Constraint – bold but disruptive Organization 2005 restructuring program
GBUs took over profit responsibility historically held by P&G’s country-based organisations
Principle set down by Vice President of overseas operations
Must tailor our products to meet consumer demand in each nation
Must create local country subsidiaries whose structure, policies and practices are as exact a replica of the US P&G organisation as it is possible to create
Built a portfolio of self-sufficient subsidiaries run by country general managers who grew their companies by adapting P&G technology and marketing expertise to their knowledge of local markets
1980s – 2 problems
1. Cost of running all the local product development labs and manufacturing plants was limiting profits
2. Ferocious autonomy of national subsidiaries was preventing the global rollout of new products and technology improvements
Resistance due to negative impact on profits, for which the