Research Unilever and Proctor and Gamble Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words

Research Unilever and Proctor and Gamble - Essay Example The research aims to bring forth the comparison and contrast of the above principles between the two organizations, Unilever and Proctor and Gamble. Major similarities and differences would be brought forth between the two organizations on the two principles. Fayol’s 14 Principles of Management- Comparison and Contrasts between Unilever and Proctor and Gamble (P&G) Division of work Division or specialization of work is chosen as the first topic to compare between the two organizations. In Proctor and Gamble, division of labor has begun right from the beginning of the company. Since the mid 1850s the company has reinforced division of labor with the initiation of moving operations to Western Row. While Proctor handled the financials and sales, Gamble supervised the factory productions. Now it is seen that the company has four major pillars which account for the main corporate structure of the organization, namely, the global business units, market development organizations, cor porate functions and the global business services (P&G, 2011). The division of labour in Unilever can also be seen from the fact that labor is employed in such activities like food production, distribution, and marketing etc. Its labor division strategies are also seen to be aimed at increasing employment and generating job opportunities. For example, in Indonesia, while the company employs 5000 individuals, an estimate of 300,000 more jobs were supported both in the fields of production as well as distribution (Pfitzer & Krishnaswamy, 2007, p.7). Despite the fact that both organizations demonstrate division of labour as a main component of their corporate structure, however, the degree or extent of specialization and division of tasks is much more in Proctor and Gamble in comparison to Unilever. This is because it represents a highly bureaucratic structure characterized by an authority hierarchy, explicit rules, clear division of labor and impersonality (Andersen & Taylor, 2010, p. 141). On the other hand, there is less labor division in Unilever, which emphasizes more on maintaining a geographical structure where the head in each geographic region is responsible for maintaining profitability in the region while the country managers are responsible for the local sales and marketing of products. Rather it can be said that Unilever reflects both of a geographic as well as a multidivisional structure. In fact now it is even recommended that the company implements a matrix structure in order to tightly coordinate between the geographic regions and the various specializations or divisions (Hill, 2008, p.197). Centralization According to Fayol centralization is considered essential for all organizations and is said to occur as a natural consequence of the organizat

All mentioned in the details Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

All mentioned in the details - Research Paper Example Thesis statement: The after-effects of the ongoing uprising in Egypt prove that the best possible way to restore peace in this region is to introduce federal form of government in Egypt. Egyptian Revolution: The Egyptian Revolution proves that non-democratic rulers cannot survive in the modern world because dictatorship is an outdated political form. In the modern world, the dictators cannot suppress the people by implementing strict laws and regulations. For instance, Hosni Mubarak’s rule in Egypt crushed the positive initiatives undertaken by the former president, Anwar Sadat. One can see that Anwar Sadat undertook the responsibility to create co-operation with neighboring nations, especially with Israel. He was aware of the fact that co-operation can help Egypt to move towards development. But he totally ignored the growth of political Islam in Egypt. On the other side, Hosni Mubarak utilized his influence on the Egyptian military to implement non-democratic ideas. For inst ance, Mubarak made use of the Central Security Forces to suppress those who protested against him. Brownlee (2012) states that, â€Å"Under the aegis of antiterrorism, Mubarak consolidated his rule and blocked alternative movements from gaining control of government† (p.43). ... Instead, he considered the religious fundamentalists as an imminent threat to his regime. Darraj (2007) states that, â€Å"The problem for Mubarak of the rise of Islamic fundamentalism continued to intensify, as fundamentalists called for an Islamic government run by Islamic law† (p.66). During Mubarak’s regime, the governance was under the security chiefs because Mubarak did not give much importance to his ministers. This negative attitude towards ministers, transformed Mubarak to an autocrat. He did not try to solve the problems faced by the people. Instead, he extended his influence on the bureaucratic backbone of Egypt. This helped him to get re-elected more than twice as the president of Egypt. On the other side, the emergency laws implemented by Mubarak limited the individual freedom of the Egyptian citizens. The national political framework became a tool for corruption. Gradually, the people accepted corruption as an easy way to solve the bureaucratic problems. T his helped most of the bureaucrats to enjoy their supremacy in the national politics. On the other side, the people were facing illiteracy and poverty. One can see that poverty is the grass root level reason behind almost all evils in a society. In Egypt, during Mubarak’s rule, illiteracy eventually led to unemployment. Besides, population explosion was another problem in Egypt. The Mubarak government was so interested to implement the Emergency Law because the president feared that the former president’s (say, Anwar Sadat’s) fate may follow him. Currivan (2011) makes clear that, â€Å"After vicious assaults by Mubarak loyalists, the army refused to fire on its own citizens and sided with the people against Mubarak, who eventually stood down on 11 February† (p.178).