Comparing Wal-Mart in the U.S. and Unilever Company in U.K - Essay Example

Comparing Wal-Mart in the U.S. and Unilever Company in U.K By Lecturer’s and Investors and entrepreneurs are on the hustle day in day out to put up companies of their choice all over the world. To some, this has come to pass through while some are still trying to make ends meet. The objective of any entrepreneur is to be financially independent, maximize their profit by minimizing cost and maximizing output, and satisfy their customers (TYSON, 1997). In my paper I will compare two companies, one from United States and the other one from United Kingdom. Wal-Mart Supplies Company This is an American multinational retail company that deals with supply chains of large discount department stores and warehouses. It is rated the world’s second largest corporation and the biggest private employer in the world controlled by the Walton family. It is the most profitable company in U.S. To achieve this Wal-Mart has made sure its culture is matched to it employees and more so good management and innovations (Gilbert, 2012. It has been contribution by the decentralization of its departmental stores all over which can be easily accessed by their customers. Unilever Company This is a company an Anglo-Dutch multinational consumer goods company with is headquarters in London, England and Netherland. Its deals with products such as, food, beverages, cleaning agents, and individuals care products. It was rated as third world consumer producer good company in year 2012. This can only be achieved by companies that are serious in the industry and which can cope with the changing trends in the world markets (FRANSEN, 1991). The two companies have similarities in their undertaking of the day to day functions and also in their formation. First is that both have their constitution in place that govern its operation. This helps the company not to act ultra-vires which is an offence and the company could be held liable. Second is that both are legal corporations that are independent from its stakeholders and liable of any illegal act. The company in both U.S and U.K are viewed as legal person who can contract and be liable of any breach (LEIDEN UNIVERSITY & RICKFORD, 2003). Third is that both companies are multinational companies that have gone global in their operations. This has been made successful by the availability of good management structures within the companies that are able to embrace changes in technology hence gaining competitive advantage (TYSON, 1997). Next is that their major aim to maximize their profit be reducing cost and maximizing output in all their operations. Being able to develop from tiny companies to very large multinational companies is key evidence that they have been able to maximize their shareholders wealth. Fifth is that they both have embraced different managerial styles from different scholars. For example both companies have embraced the division and specialization of work within their companies. This includes different departments with employees who can perform the task involved more effectively and efficient ways. In both companies the major target is the consumers. This has made companies spend huge amount of money trough advertisements to reach out for customers so that they can increase their sales and more also inform the on their supplies (TYSON, 1997). This has created good images to the company increasing their competitive advantage over their competitors. In both companies bribery is prohibited and viewed as lack of discipline. To ensure that they have achieved the best on this companies frequently perform risk assessment, ensure effective responsibility by top management to built up good cultures, ensures that there is integrity and zero tolerance on corruption, that directors practice due diligence in all their undertakings and more so vetting and monitoring third parties, putting in place policies, practices and procedures to govern issues on bribery and frequent revision of these policies. There exist some differences between them. Wal-Mart Company is not the actual producer of the goods that it deals with. Instead, it’s kind of contractual company in which supplies goods and services of different manufacturing companies to the ultimate consumers. This has been made easier by the company’s ability to build up very many store and warehouses making these goods readily available to the final consumer. Efficient and effective logistic services of this company are a major contributor of company’s success. On the other hand, Unilever is a manufacturing company of its variety consumer goods. This large base of production ability has been made possible by the company’s ability to merge with other smaller companies and take over. The company therefore unlike Wal-Mart Company that depends on other company for its survival Unilever, is independent and sells its goods worldwide. Both companies view their employees as valuable assets in their company. The companies try their best to satisfy their employees to minimize turnover rates. This has been achieved by matching the organization goals and the employees goals so that employees career goals are not distorted (FOLEY, BRADLEY & GHEMAWAT, 2002). By so doing the employees will balance their work life and personal life to achieve a work life balances. Both companies in this consideration train their employees so that they gain a competitive advantage over other companies by imparting new skills and abilities to their employees so that they can perform their duties more efficiently and effectively. For example, Unilever trains its production manager so that he can produce quality products in accordance to the world standards so that they can outdo other companies hence more sales. On advertisement they choose most appropriate Medias to reach many consumers. Also Wal-Mart ensures that their employees are very competitive through training. For example drivers are trained to be careful while driving so as to avoid accidents occurrences. These companies have gone global to ensure that their cultures are not contradictory with those of their consumers or employees. On this issue, the companies have employed metropolitan managers who understand different cultures of the world. This has enabled companies to gain competitive advantage. Such managers are able to integrate employee’s cultures to those of the company so as to reduce conflict of interest. This encourages employee satisfaction and attraction. In 2013 Wal-Mart was rated the second largest corporation and biggest private employer company in the world. It gets its incomes from shares and payment made by their clients on their efficient and effective services on supplies offered by them. While Unilever gets its incomes through sale of shares and their product sales. Despite these success companies do face a lot of challenges. For example both are facing environmental pressures from the NGOs as their operation has diverse effect on the environment such as green house effects (TUNG, 2001). On their perspective, they are greatly encouraging innovation on ways and strategies to reduce or even do away these environmental pollutions by being Corporate Social responsible. Reference List FOLEY, S., BRADLEY, S. P., & GHEMAWAT, P. (2002). Wal*Mart Stores, Inc. Boston, Mass, Harvard Business School Pub. FRANSEN, J. (1991). Subcontracting and inequality: the case of Hindustan Lever in India: a Unilever Company. Nijmegen, Catholic University of Nijmegen, Third World Centre. Gilbert, Sara. 2012. The story of Wal-Mart. Mankato, MN: Creative Education. LEIDEN UNIVERSITY UNILEVER PROGRAMME, & RICKFORD, J. (2003). The European company: developing a community law of corporations: collected papers from the Leiden University Unilever Programme, 2002. Antwerp, Intersentia. TUNG, R. L. (2001). Learning from world class companies. London, Thomson Learning. TYSON, K. W. M. (1997). Competition in the 21st century. Delray Beach, Fla, St. Lucie Press. Read More