BY TEAM 6 Procter amp Gamble vs Unilever ID: 301907
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "CASE ANALYSIS" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
CASE ANALYSIS
BY : TEAM 6Slide2
Procter & Gamble
vs. Unilever
–
A case of Corporate EspionageSlide3
Procter & Gamble vs. Unilever , a case of corporate espionage . It details the covert operation conducted by P & G to gain competitive information about Unilever’s shampoo business in US. P & G appointed agents who misrepresented themselves as market analysts to collect information about Unilever’s
haircare
business.
INTRODUCTIONSlide4
Company ProfilesSlide5
Procter & Gamble
P&G
is
US based , no:1
maker & marketer of
household
products established by William Procter & James Gamble , who merged their small businesses.
ACQUISITIONS
Spic & Span, Duncan Hines, Clorox & Folgers Coffee
MAJOR BRANDS
Tide
, Pampers, Pantene, Vicks , Head & Shoulders,
Actenol
, Clairol
Herbal Essences
etc
ACHIEVEMENTS
Largest cosmetic company(1940)
Ranked 31
st
among the Fortune 500 companies(2003)
Slide6
Unilever
Formed in 1930 by merging Dutch Margarine Company, Margarine
Unie
& Lever Brothers.
ACQUISITIONS
Thomas
J.Lipton
,
Pepsodent
MAJOR BRANDS
Nestle,
Knorr
, Lipton, Dove, Calvin
Klien
, Surf, Axe,
Lux
, Close Up, Vaseline, Bird’s Eye,
Cornetto
.
ACHIEVEMENTS
2
nd
largest packaged consumer goods company
3
rd
largest food firm in the worldSlide7
P&G Vs UNILEVER
It is a case of Corporate Espionage.
It
details the covert operation conducted by P&G to gain competitive information about Unilever’s shampoo business in the US.
Here
in order to collect information about Unilever’s
haircare
business P & G appointed agents who allegedly misrepresented themselves as market analysts. Slide8
Aftermath…..
P&G admitted about the information collection episode, but without the knowledge of top mgt.
Refuted
Fortune
Magazine’s claim that P&G’s agents misrepresented themselves.
Also claimed that it had not indulged in any illegal activities & these were against its strict business policies.
Tried for negotiation but failed… & Unilever initiated legal proceedings.Slide9
Many analysts felt that what P&G did was right as it occurred in the intensely competitive hair care business in US. However some analysts argued that P&G had made a mistake by voluntarily disclosing its transgression to UNILEVER.
Slide10
Competitive
intelligence
A technique of applying industry/research expertise to
analyse
the information available on competition from public sources & draw conclusions based on this data.
Agent follow a set of legal & ethical guidelines formulated by the society of competitive intelligence professionals. Slide11
A technique of applying industry/research expertise to
analyse
the information available on competition from public sources & draw conclusions based on this data.
Agent follow a set of legal & ethical guidelines formulated by the society of competitive intelligence
professionals
Companies should be aware of competitor strategies & efforts to effectively counter the strategies & sustain in the marketSlide12
Corporate Espionage
It can be defined as spying on business competitors for acquiring
proprietory
information such as marketing plans , trade secrets, products designs, research objects, source code for new software, intellectual property, research info. & other business
strtegies
.
Agents do not abide by any legal or ethical guidelines , & do anything to get competitive information.
It includes dumpster diving, social engineering, interviewing disgruntled employees, bugging offices & hacking computer systems
.Slide13
P
& G and UNILEVER issue was considered as one of the most high-profile incidents of corporate espionage ever reported.
Though the goals of Competitive Intelligence & Corporate Espionage are similar , the methods adopted for both is different.
i
e
. CI is an ethical & legal method for collecting information but Corporate Espionage is unethical & illegal method.Slide14
Conclusion…..
Corporate Espionage is not a healthy practice and what P&G did is illegal & unethical.
To avoid such instances certain steps are to be followed:
Update security measures
Proper training for employees to prevent them from divulging sensitive info.
Law ,more stringent
increasing
the level of punishmentSlide15
Companies should commit themselves against indulging in illegal & unethical practices.
They should formulate an internal code of ethics & ensure that they are abided by the employees & remain within the domain of
of
true CI. It should not be maligned by Corporate Espionage, when it is done in the right way.
CI allows companies to compete fiercely & fairly.Slide16
THANK YOU