Project Shakti - Hindustan Lever - Case Study Example

PROJECT SHAKTI - HINDUSTAN LEVER Department Governments and companies across the globe give much attention to corporate social responsibility to ensure well-being of workers, societies, and the environment. Corporations are seeking to leverage corporate social responsibility that generates business benefits and is financially sustainable. Project Shakti of Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) is a project that aims to penetrate rural markets in India and at the same time empower women and the rural poor (Krishnan, 2012).

Project Shakti is helping the stagnant society by increasing the female awareness and engaging and making them independent. Specifically, the project empowers families live with respect in a healthy and clean environment. Consequently, there is a general improvement in the living standards of around 90 million rural households. The project has formed a win-win relationship between HUL and the rural communities for their mutual benefit and development. Project Shakti engages underprivileged rural women in income generating activities (Krishnan, 2012).

However, the successful implementation of the agricultural project faced some challenges. First, penetrating the rural markets was difficult, not just due to accessibility, but also due to the lack of adequate education on personal and oral hygiene. Additionally, the HUL products were very new to the lifestyle of the rural communities. To deal with the challenge, HUL used SHGs, which the government was indefatigably promoting at grass root level all over India. By 2000, India had a substantial number of SHGs and presence of a ready SHG system were an extraordinary opportunity.

Consequently, the SHGs aided the making and arrangement of a successful marketing strategy in rural places while generating jobs (Krishnan, 2012).The general impact of the Shakti project is irrefutably positive. HUL profited with new markets and customers and villagers, particularly rural women, got economic empowerment. The project helped sustain development of rural towns since it was a business activity with social benefits. Project Shakti is a case of an enterprise that benefits while enhancing the lifestyles and livelihoods of its customers.

The project made HULs market share in the hygiene products increase. Project Shakti is a right mix of the sales objectives with societal objectives and thus a "social business initiative". It brought about an entrepreneurial improvement, financial empowerment, furthermore social empowerment (Krishnan, 2012).In comparing the incentives of Grameen and Shakti concerning sustainability, there is little distinction. Both have high motivators to run legitimate budgetary strategies and to overcome and keep up a large market share.

The major difference is the impetuses for social sustainability. Grameen has minimal enthusiasm to put resources into training for all its borrowers, as it would have excessively little return. Training those with significant debt service records is pointless, as these borrowers are the best performers who have slightest to gain from training. Grameen does not need to apprehend that they flee either, as they will lose all their excellent financial records. Women at Grameen need to substantiate themselves each time and are in charge of their prosperity.

Shakti needs to invest as an organization in the micro-entrepreneurs but screens ahead of time if the woman is worth the investment.In conclusion, notwithstanding numerous challenges, Project Shakti today provides lifestyle improving opportunities for many women in all Indian states and provides access to hygiene products to more than 3 million families consistently. Shakti is not just a channel for expanding the market; the Shakti entrepreneurs are additionally ambassadors for all HUL brands in rural towns in India.

Their association with customers is driven by their home-to-home contacts and goes far in building brand loyalty.ReferencesKrishnan, D. (2012). Project Shakti And Corporate Social Responsibility. IJSR, 1 (4), pp. 18-19.