Glanbia is an international nutritional solutions and cheese group. The Company is a global player in the foods ingredients, nutritional and consumer foods industry. It operates in 17 countries and its products are sold in more than 130 countries worldwide. It operates serving business customers and consumers globally. The US and Europe represents companies largest markets. The Company employs 4,900 people across 17 countries. Approximately 48.3% of Glanbia is owned by Glanbia Co-operative Society Limited. The remaining shareholding is held by institutional and retail investors. The Company is competing with other global brands in the growing market. For example, the international players such as “DANONE” have provided stiff competition to companies’ brands such as “Avonmore” and “Premier Milk”. Notably, in Ireland, the competition in the customer products divisions has intensified. Companies’ distinctive competences lie in its high focus on development of technically superior products. Its key competitive advantage is believed to be the ingredient technologies strategic knowledge of whey. In relation to day-to-day running of the business, Glanbia has implemented a comprehensive cost rationalisation programme, which helps to reduce costs and streamline the business. For example, Glanbia Performance System is leading to cost efficiencies through process improvements and waste reduction. Glanbia is facing number of drawbacks at present, the main one is the challenging food retail environment, reflecting Irish economic conditions, on-going price competition and volatile costs. Consumer in Ireland is very price sensitive, this fact benefits discount retailers, hence branded products maybe at the disadvantage.
The majo...
... middle of paper ...
... Root Out Waste and Pursue Perfection. Harvard Business Review. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 12 November 2013]
• Jeffrey A. Miles, 2012. Management and Organization Theory. A Jossey Bass Reader. [pdf] Available through: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology web site [Accessed 12 November 2013]
• Kerry Group, 2013.www.kerrygroup.ie [online] Available at:< www.kerrygroup.ie> [Accessed 12 November 2013]
• Maureen Melvin, 2013. Organisational Life Cycle. 45436 Organisational Theory. Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology. Unpublished.
• Sanjay K. Pandey, David H. Coursey, Donald P. Moynihan, 2007. Organizational Effectiveness and Bureaucratic Red Tape.[pdf] Available through: Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology web site [Accessed 12 November 2013]
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing Organizations (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Currently, the company lacks of focus as it has a diverse product line with too many varieties of cheese products. With so many products it cannot be sure to decide as to which market segment to target in order to take the advantage of the growing market.
Mullins, L. J. (2005). Management and organizational behavior (7th ed.). Harlow, England: Prentice Hall/Financial Times.
Boje, D. M. , Luhman, J. T. , and Cunliffe, A. L. “ A Dialectic Perspective on the Organization
Robbins, S. P., & Coulter. M. (2014). Management (12th ed.). Retrieved from: Colorado Technical University eBook Collection database.
Organisational Structure, Culture, and Management Style of a Business C2 An Analysis of How the Organisational Structure, Culture And Management Style of the Business Affects its Performance and Operation and Help It to Meet Its Objectives The organisation structure of Wednesbury IKEA The organisation structure in the ‘Appendix section’ belongs to the Wednesbury branch of IKEA. Wednesbury IKEA is a large formal organisation and it is best suited to a hierarchical organisational structure. This is because; there are more employees as it goes downwards from each level.
PRIMIS MNO 6202: Managing Organizations. 2007. The 'Secondary' of the ' Reprint of the book. McGraw-Hill Education, 2013.
Jones, G. R. (2010). Organizational theory, design, and change. 6th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
Miles, R. (1975) Theories of Management: Implications for Organisational Behaviour and Development. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Compare and contrast the management theories of Frederick Taylor, Henri Fayol, Elton Mayo, and Douglas McGregor. In what sense(s) are these theories similar and/or compatible? In what sense(s) are these theories dissimilar and/or incompatible? How would a contingency theorist reconcile the points of dissimilarity and/or incompatibility between these approaches? The twentieth century has brought in a number of management theories which have helped shape our view of management in the present business environment.
There are several theories that examine an organization and it’s approach to managing work in an effort to develop efficiency and increase production. Two classical approaches to management are Taylor’s scientific management theory and Weber's bureaucratic management theory. Both men are considered pioneers of in the study of management.
This competitive advantage has been rendered sustainable as other players have found it difficult to catch up with the company's competitive strategy. In spite of this clear advantage, it was noted that the company faces some challenges being the world leader in soft drink distribution. The canning and bottling of the product which is done in many countries have now fallen into the hands of independent companies, thus it becomes hard for a given company to control the quality of the packaging
Greenwood, R., & Miller, D. (2010). Tackling Design Anew: Getting Back to the Heart of Organization Theory. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24 (4), 78-88.
In a research article on organizational performance the authors David Parker and Keith Hartley says that they went through the study of 10 organizations in the U.K. which underwent changes in their organizations. Their focus of ...
Bureaucracy is an organizational design based on the concept of standardization. “It is characterized by highly routine operating tasks achieved through specialization, very formalized rules and regulations, tasks that are grouped into functional departments, centralized authority, narrow spans of control, and decision making that follows the chain of command” (Judge & Robbins, 2007, p.