Chapter 11: Organizational Structure and Controls 375
In alignment with marketing growth goals, Unilever
has initiated the Unilever Nutrition Network. This
organization has divided the world into six regions and
focused on providing world-class nutrition and health
innovation. Its goal is to generate ideas to facilitate sus-
tainable product launches and improve existing products
while strengthening their brand value. As part of this
overall strategy, Unilever has used Salesforce’s Chatter
technology in the implementation of its new social mar-
keting platform. This technology allows local markets
and distributors of Unilever products to share insights
and best practices with the marketing team from Unilever
to help drive its “crafting brands for life” strategy.
In a recent Sustainable Living Plan report, Unilver
described how it is working with a number of nonprofit,
nongovernment organizations (NGOs) to help address
real issues, facilitate solutions for suppliers for improv-
ing sustainable living, and reach customers in society at
large who need information to improve their sustain-
ability approaches to life with better food security and
poverty alleviation. Initiatives include partnering with
the following NGOs: the Consumer Goods Forum; the
World Business Council for Sustainable Development;
the World Economic Forum; the Tropical Forest
Alliance 2020; Refrigerants, Naturally; the Global Green
Foundation Forum; and Zero Hunger Challenge and
Scale-Up Nutrition initiatives supported by the United
Nations.
Interestingly, Unilever no longer provides quar-
terly earnings guidance reports and suggests that this
has allowed it to focus shareholders on its longer-term
goals. Furthermore, since Pullman took over in 2009,
Unilever has sustained its positive growth trajectory with
better income performance and associated stock market
performance. As can be seen, it is accomplishing these
things through better organizational design, lofty objec-
tives, but also by using a number of cooperative strate-
gies with many organizations outside the organization,
such as Jacobs Engineering and many NGOs.
Sources: 2013, In the green corner: How IBM, Unilever and P&G
started winning again: Why big business is wising up to sustainability,
Strategic Direction, 29(5): 19–22; 2013, Our nutrition network,
http://www.unilever.com, accessed June 17; 2013, Unilever drives efficiency
in capital investment program, http://www.unilever.com, accessed June 17;
2013, Unilever Sustainable Living Plan, http://www.unilever.com, accessed
June 17; 2013, Unilever Annual Report 2012, http://www.unilever.com,
accessed June 17; S. Anand & N. Gopalan, 2013, Consumers in India
are an M&A target, Wall Street Journal Online, http://www.wsj.com, May 1;
M. Gunther, 2013, Unilever’s CEO has a green thumb, Fortune, June 10,
124–128; R. Shields, 2013, Unilever boosts international collaboration
with social rollout, Marketing Week, http://www.marketingweek.com, May 2;
A. Ignatius, 2012, Captain planet, Harvard Business Review, 90(6):
112–118.Case Discussion Questions
- Why have consumer product companies headquartered in
Europe historically used the multidomestic strategy? In your
view, is this an effective choice of international strategy for
these firms? Why or why not? - To implement its “sustainable business model,” what types of
strategies is Unilever considering for use and why?
3. What organizational structure will Unilever need to use to
reach its sustainability objectives?
4. What issues about organizational structure surface as a result
of Unilever’s proposed strategies and objectives regarding
sustainability?
NOTES
- A. Arora, S. Belenzon, & L. A. Rios, 2014,
Make, buy, organize: The interplay between
research, external knowledge, and firm
structure, Strategic Management Journal, 35:
317–337; T. Felin, N. J. Foss, K. H. Heimeriks, &
T. L. Madsen, 2012, Microfoundations of
routines and capabilities: Individuals,
processes, and structure, Journal of
Management Studies, 49: 1351–1374;
K. M. Eisenhardt, N. R. Furr, & C. B. Bingham,
2010, Microfoundations of performance:
Balancing efficiency and flexibility in
dynamic environments, Organization
Science, 21: 1263–1273. - D. A. Levinthal & A. Marino, 2015, Three
facets of organizational adaptation:
Selection, variety, and plasticity,
Organization Science, in press; R. Wilden,
S. P. Gudergan, B. Nielsen, & I. Lings, 2013,
Dynamic capabilities and performance:
Strategy, structure and environment,
Long Range Planning, 46: 72–96;
R. E. Miles & C. C. Snow, 1978,
Organizational Strategy, Structure and
Process, NY: McGraw-Hill. - C. Heavey & Z. Simsek, 2015, Transactive
memory systems and firm performance: An
upper echelons perspective, Organization
Science, in press; M. A. Valentine &
A. C. Edmondson, 2015, Team scaffolds:
How mesolevel structures enable
role-based coordination in temporary
groups, Organization Science, in press;
Y. Y. Kor & A. Mesko, 2013, Dynamic
managerial capabilities: Configuration
and orchestration of top executives’
capabilities and the firm’s dominant logic,
Strategic Management Journal, 34: 233–244;
E. M. Olson, S. F. Slater, & G. T. M. Hult, 2007,
The importance of structure and process to
strategy implementation, Business Horizons,
48: 47–54.