Search results

The main purpose of this paper is to analyze the market entry strategies for companies which are involved with Chemicals in Foods, Agriculture, Irrigation aspects, which equally have cultural effects in different regions.

The case contains a careful analysis of the literature about the Monsanto Company, articles and journals have been reviewed to supply the information on the problems being faced by Monsanto.

The analysis or the suggestions are the view points of the author, basically involving the Transnational approach for such companies. The suggestions or opinions are the responses like “What it could or would have done”, “This should be implemented” and so on so forth.

Since this paper is associated with the suggestions by the author, the only limitation can be personal judgments.

In this respect, the paper combined various aspects of TNCs, Strategy and apply these concepts to the company to proceed in not only home country but also in host countries.

There have been few articles already written with respect to Monsanto, but sole aim of all these articles was to identify the problems faced by Monsanto and criticisms faced by it. But the articles conducts a company analysis, identifies problems and provides possible theoretical solutions in order to overcome the problems.

In 1979, the company's Annual Report stated that Monsanto operations included “more than 180 manufacturing plants, laboratories, and technical centers in 20 nations. The company's products [were] sold in 123 nations.” According to the April 30, 1984, Fortune, “Monsanto hit its nadir in 1980; though sales increased 6 percent to $6.57 billion, earnings plunged 55 percent to $149 million….[The company] lost over $300 million on old‐line businesses, with fibers and styrene proving the worst performers.” Its return on stockholder equity was 5.3 percent.

Purpose – The objective of this chapter is to examine and provide new perspectives on the contributions of public and private R&D to biotech crop improvement.

Methodology/approach – The chapter examines a set of topics that have affected the way that research is undertaken on plant germplasm improvement and how it has changed with the genetically modified (GM) trait revolution.

Findings – Although the basic science providing the foundations for GM crops was undertaken in the public sector, GM traits and GM crop varieties have been developed almost exclusively by the private sector. The biotech events leading to GM traits are currently being developed largely by five companies – all having ties to both the chemical and the seed industries. The GM crop revolution started in North American in 1996 and has spread slowly to the largest developing countries that have large agricultural sectors, including Argentina, China, Brazil, and India, but not to Europe or Japan.

Practical implication – To shed new light on the economic reasons for private sector dominance in GM crop varietal development in selected crops but not in others.

Social implication – Shows how GM traits have contributed to technical change and declining real food prices.

Environmental scanning is “the study and interpretation of what is happening in society at large today in order to forecast developments in the business operating environment of tomorrow,” according to the excellent definition used by the Daniel Yankelovich Group.

Here are eight more people solidly behind the eight ball and their plans for setting up winning shots.

Marley Floors Ltd, based at Maid‐stone, Kent has adopted the Heraeus Xenotest 150S light and weather fastness tester as a research and development tool for assessing the colour stability of materials such as the Marley range of cushion vinyl floor coverings.

Demonstrates that one of the most important elements required to ensure the success of any organization is to retain and motivate its employees, from the CEO down to the productionline worker. Argues that profit incentives can be a way to squeeze quality and productivity improvements from its remaining workers, while giving them greater control over their financial fates. Suggests ways to make incentive play plans work, and lists a number of types of incentive pay plans.

Pharmacia’s Corporate Services organisation (which consists of Global Real Estate, Facilities Management, and various other internal service functions) recently commenced an initiative aimed at driving operational excellence throughout all functional areas and geographic sites. Apart from greatly improving both financial and operational results, this initiative also led to the collapse of existing functional and geographic ‘silos’. By breaking down these ‘silos’ (which developed partially as a result of Pharmacia’s recent merger activity), Corporate Services has begun to achieve breakthrough results. These results are largely attributable to the application of a comprehensive, management‐sponsored undertaking, referred to as the Continuous Improvement (CI) Initiative. The CI Initiative has helped to minimise disparity, drive process optimisation and ensure enterprise‐wide alignment with organisational objectives. This paper outlines the various tools, processes and resources that Corporate Services’ management used in design and execution of the CI Initiative. Most notably, the paper describes the use of ‘scorecards’ to communicate and drive performance in a balanced context. Further, the paper provides numerous real‐life examples of how these scorecards are leveraged in the identification and prioritisation of process improvement opportunities.

Large agricultural producers often demand seed with high yielding genetics along with specialty traits specific to their particular needs. Dairyland Seed Company prides itself on its superior genetics and a research program that adds specialty traits while retaining the qualities of the original variety. Dairyland sources specialty trait technology from two competing suppliers – DuPont and Monsanto. Each of these suppliers is currently pursuing a strategy of forward integration through aggressive marketing programs and acquisitions. The implications for access to future technologies and long‐term survival are profound, and leave Dairyland and other smaller seed companies with strategic decisions to make. This paper examines a channel of distribution for agricultural biotechnologies and the decisions faced by a small, reputable seed company when dealing with its large multinational biotechnology suppliers. Who should Dairyland be partnering with, and can Dairyland balance supplier dependency in an attempt to avoid being eliminated from the channel?