Mary Barra was named Gm CEO in 2014; she was the company’s first female CEO. Mary worked as an electrical engineer and employed with GM for 30 years. Her leadership style and skill were praised by the press. “After Barra reached her two-month mark, however, the news hit that General Motors had put over 1.7 million cars on the road with an ignition switch defect that was responsible for more than a dozen deaths”(CEO.com Staff, 2014).
I’m sure this had stakeholders and the public wondering what initiatives Barra would take, she’s only been a CEO for two months. However she’s been with the company for years, Barra immediately stepped into action. “With a massive recall on her hands, Barra was tasked with managing a PR catastrophe while still saving
…show more content…
After the incident became public over 50 more claims were filed alleging Diet Pepsi cans had been tampered. PepsiCo along with the FDA did not believe the accusations, they were confident the information been put out to destroy their company was false.
Craig Weatherup started to work close with David Kessler Commissioner of the FDA, which was a brilliant move on Weatherup behalf; working with the FDA would reassure customers. PepsiCo had the support of the FDA; PepsiCo began to fight back by making television appearances to prove this was a hoax. “Then the company caught a break. A surveillance camera in a supermarket in Aurora, Colo., captured a woman shopper apparently inserting a syringe into a can of Diet Pepsi” (Holmes, 1993).
Weatherup stood behind his company brand he never doubted his company he always believed it was impossible to insert a syringe in an unopen can. Although PepsiCo was struck with a crisis that immediately went public they had a great CEO, with remarkable crisis management skills. PepsiCo reputation survived this crisis and the individuals that filed false police reports were
The outcome of Talia’s letter got her fired. The internet responded with mixed review as some
This case refers to a decision made by the Supreme Court of California, pertaining to injuries suffered by the plaintiff when a bottle of Coca-Cola exploded in her hand as she was moving it from the case to a refrigerator.
Coke continuously out-stands Pepsi, even though they share a very similar taste and colour, however Coke should not be the drink that receives all the love and attention for what it offers. Despite their similar soda colour, the drinks actually contain some different ingredients, which produce a different taste, and affect the body differently. Furthermore, the way the companies markets their drinks makes a huge contribution to how successful their products will become. The major element for success however stems from their impact on society and how the companies utilize their social power to evolve. The two major soda companies are constantly head to head with one another, yet it is what they do that sets them apart.
This artifact was made to reach a broad audience because their targeted audience was not only consumers in Chicago, but also consumers worldwide. The consumers were their most important audience, however, the company also wanted to speak to the family members of those who lost loved ones due to the tampering, as well as, prove the company’s compliance with the Food and Drug Administration and the FBI. Reaching a broader audience helped the company during the time of the crisis because it impacted more people. Therefore, this artifact had a successful impact on the
Pepsi is a carbonated soda pop that is created & fabricated by Pepsico. Made & created in 1893 & presented as Brad's Drink, it was renamed as Pepsi-Cola on August 28, 1898, then to Pepsi in 1961, & in select ranges of North America, "Pepsi-Cola Made with Real Sugar" starting 2014. Pepsi was initially presented as "Brad's Drink" in New Bern, North Carolina, United States, in 1893 by Caleb Bradham, who made it at his drugstore where the beverage was sold. It was later marked Pepsi Cola, named after the digestive catalyst pepsin & kola nuts utilized as a part of the formula. The first formula additionally included sugar & vanilla. Bradham tried to make a wellspring drink that was engaging & would support in assimilation & help vitality (Tavis,
The Porter’s model of competitive advantage of nations is based on four key elements including factor endowments, demand conditions, related and supporting industries and firm strategy, structure and rivalry. This makes it suitable in understanding the competition existing in the soft drinks industry in the Asian markets. The factor conditions identify the natural resources, climate, location, and demographics. Coca cola and Pepsi enjoy the growing population in the Asian markets (Yoffie, 2002). A higher population guarantees the two companies adequate revenues. Other factors include communication infrastructure and availability of skilled workers. Most of the Asian countries are embracing new technologies that grow much knowledge of the diverse beverage drinks. Secondly, the demand conditions play a significant role in enhancing competitiveness for the firms. Both Coca cola and Pepsi are an
CASE 1-3: Coke and Pepsi Learn To Compete in India The political environment in India proved critical in that their government was unfavorable to foreign investors. They prohibited the import of soft drinks since they felt it could be gotten anywhere. They also prohibited the foreign brand name and wanted the name Lehar Pepsi and Coca-Cola India, an indigenous name. These effects couldn’t have be anticipated prior to entering the market because the trade policies, rules and regulations of India were difficult and unpredictable.
Unfortunately, after the events of World War I occurred Caleb Bradham after 17 years of success experienced financial difficulties forcing him into bankruptcy on May 31, 1923. He then sold his Pepsi Cola trademark and formula to Craven Holding Corp. Further into it’s history the Pepsi-Cola corporation was formed by merging with the Dominion Beverage Company. However, in 1931 the company was bought by the Loft Candy Company, whose president at the time was Charles G. Guth who moved headquarters to Long Island City,
The birth of Pepsi cola began in 1893. That was when the drink was first invented by Caleb Bradham, who was also a pharmacist, but lived in New Bern, North Carolina. The drink was named “Brad’s Drink” and was sold in Bradham’s pharmacy. It was renamed “Pepsi Cola” in 1898 when pepsin and cola nuts were added to the drink’s formula. The new name was trademarked in 1903. Bradham had succeeded in selling his drink for seventeen ye...
The major ethical issue face by Coca Cola in recent year was concerning sale of hazardous product which affected the health of few consumers including school children. This incident took place in Belgium where Coca Cola beverages found themselves in middle of an accusation of selling poorly processed batch of carbonated drinks which made initially 10 people ill and later the number swelled to 100 which also included school children. This was a contamination scare incident that took place in June 1999. This damaged Coca Cola customer base harming their confidence in the product as it was relating to the production and sale of hazardous product. Two main problems that were identified by the company relating to their production and distribution were ‘‘Off-quality’’ carbon dioxide that affected the taste and odor of some bottled drinks, and an offensive unusual odor on the outside of some canned drinks which were later identified as sulphur odor. This odor has an increasing intensity when the cans were placed in vending machines to sell.
By the leader and or leaders not stating that they need a new formula, members would have probably come up with ideas such as introducing a new product instead tailored to Pepsi drinkers taste and not tinker with a winning product already. They definitely should have used a devil’s advocate to argue why their changing the formula was a bad idea, I’m sure the point of what about the current Coca-Cola’s consumers that already like and drink Coke would have come up. The most important thing was of course that they should have considered their already loyal consumers views, and not have focused so much on winning such a narrow group of Pepsi consumers, better research through surveys of their loyal customers should have revealed their feelings about a change in their beloved product and that the customer is king and not the executives when it comes to success or failure of a
Barra worked her way up through the ranks at GM. She began working at GM
By defining “real stakeholders” as those who have a legitimate claim and firm has responsibility towards them and the influence and power are reciprocal (Fassin 2009), the following groups are real stakeholders for whom Coca-Cola HBC is responsible in terms of both management and ethical issues.
In 1893, pharmacist Caleb Bradham developed ‘Brads Drink’, a formula designed to aid in digestion. After strong interest from consumers in his pharmacy, Brad renamed the drink Pepsi-Cola in 1898 and purchased the trademark ‘Pep Cola’ for $100. The origins of Pepsi are very similar to that of Lucozade, which was also first produced for medicinal purposes. Although $100 does not appear much, that amount of money
During the 1990s, PepsiCo launched new products and engineered a global re-branding campaign in an effort to grow sales volume; reinvigorate their stagnant brand; and to close the increasingly large sales and market share gap between itself and its primary competitor, Coca-Cola. In 1993, Pepsi jump-started its marketing efforts by adding two brands to its portfolio: Crystal Pepsi and Pepsi Max. Crystal Pepsi, which was initially offered in the United States, failed to earn the company more than 2 percent volume share. Pepsi Max, which was launched in the United Kingdom, proved more successful, but because one of its primary ingredients was an artificial sweetener not yet approved by the Food and Drug Administration, it wasn't brought to market in the United States.