Change is inevitable to all companies hence the need to for the company to be always prepared to accommodate and implement changes that might arise in the process of their operation and production. Director image assumes that all the proposed change that is introduced to the company is achievable. Therefore, the manager is responsible for directing the forces and assets in such a way to achieve the intended change. The change has been shown to fail to recognize the importance of external influences; hence it is not very realistic (Seyhan, 2013). The N-step and contingency theories are the most suitable theories to explain this image. In the navigator image, the manager plays the essential role to achieve the desirable outcomes but partially intended change will occur as a result. The manager should navigate the sources to reduce the influence of the external forces to attain greater part of intended change (Voigt, 2003). The contextualize and the processual theories of change are the most suitable to explain this image. The caretaker image, on the other hand, assumes that the manager is still in charge of controlling the change but the forces that will, in fact, cause the change are beyond his control. The outcome is often unintended change. Life-cycle theory, population ecology theory, and institutional theory are most suitable to explain this image.
The two companies have invested heavily to ensure that they remain competitive in the industry. Coca-cola is one of the publically traded corporations, selling over 500 brands of refreshments across the globe since the year 1888 (Cooper, 2017). Currently, Coca-cola is one of the most known soft drink brands across the world. Pepsi is also a publically traded corporation and sells over 400 brands of liquid refreshment in various parts of the world. Pepsi has managed to remain as the top seller of liquid refreshment beside the ranges of food their offer to the market. Pepsi has remained operational in this industry for over 110 years.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The two companies have been able to gain competitive changes in this industry and have further been forced to push their sales volume up. In order, to facilitate the speed and direction of change, the two firms had to acquire procurement required for independent bottlers. According to Cooper (2017), Pepsi spearheaded the fundamental process in the year 2008. They had a plan that would have ensured that by the end of the years 2010, all their bottles will be produced and branded under the name, PepsiCo. On the other hand, Coca-Cola Company immediately adopted the same strategy, to ensure that all their bottles are produced under one name, the Coca-Cola Refreshment. It was completed in the year 2013. The two mergers by Pepsi and Coke was a strategy for the two companies to control the process of manufacturing (Seyhan, 2013). The merger had massive positive and adverse impact, and the two were engaged in competition resulting from innovating strategies and competitive pricing. The two giants adjusted their beverage mixtures to accommodate a law in California. The process that was adopted, mixture adjustment was meant to modify the additional of the caramel coloring in their soft drinks. It was, however, to ensure that the change would not affect the taste of the drinks or even result in a financial decline.
The three image of change that can be used to understand Pepsi and Coca-cola are a caretaker, director, and navigator. Based on director image, Pepsi and Coca-cola corporations were making use of their limitations to deal with the change in their company’s arrangement. According to Cooper (2017), Pepsi had spearheaded the change, and this was through revealing that customers were interested in the delicious drink. One of the problems was that it required extra finance to make so in return, the customer prices further rose affecting the competitiveness of the company. For the company to avoid possible financial loss, Pepsi Company was forced to consolidate all their facilities into a single branch. As director, Pepsi and Coca-Cola firms had ultimate power over their fates, especially when handling the alteration in the company’s organization. Pepsi initiated the modification process through identifying the fact that after the year 2005 customers would become health conscious hence would prefer health conscious drinks (BBC News, 2012).
On the other hand, Coca-Cola Company was tagged along because they had discovered the opportunities in the market through the change of Pepsi. This was believed to be critical since it would enable Coca-Cola Company to obtain a majority of the market shares (Coca-Cola Company, 2012). However, it is important to note that this did not work well with the company owners, therefore; they were made as navigators in what they considered to be the huge procedure of both businesses and in the process made certain drastic strategies. Coca-Cola has to take up measures to upgrade the bottle of the beverages looks. All the manufacturing companies accessed funding for significant upgrades. The update specifically gained huge attention by Pepsi, and in the process, the company began upgrading their production facilities. After serious upgrades that were required, it came to be realized that the financial capital was very huge, but the two corporations came to the agreement that the product of the firms would mean reduced cost of production (Seyhan, 2013).
Pepsi and Coca-Cola became the caretakers of their mixture’s adjustment for the caramel coloring. The government had demanded that the two companies make an overall change to their brands (Coca-Cola Company, 2012). Based on the scenario of the best image that would have effectively facilitated the described changes between Pepsi and Coca-Cola is the director image. The change analysis, therefore, established that the image that most of the changes resulted into in both corporations was a director. Pepsi and Coca-cola had a firm grasp on their internal business irrespective of massive exterior pressure by the state for them to transform (Ankit, 2011). The two companies had the idea that the external forces could affect their operation hence were able to change accordingly. The two companies went through a reorganization process on their production locations and altering their cameral color as required by the state. The modifications seemed pragmatic and very simple to fix, but on the other hand, it brought with it customer’s worries to the organization.
In conclusion, the essay has critically analyzed the image change by focusing on three specific management images including navigator, director, and caretaker. Further, the essay has focused on the application of these three change images to Pepsi and Coca-cola two of the global liquid refreshment companies globally. Based on the analysis of the two companies, it is evident that the best image that would have efficiently facilitated the described changes between these corporations is the director image.
Director , Navigator and Caretaker Images
| Change image | basis of image | application to company #1 Pepsi | application to company #2 Coca-Cola | pressure for change | Unintended consequences from Image |
| Director | To conform to government law | Change in the company’s arrangement | Change in the company’s arrangement | Government law to adopt mixture adjustment | Increased cost of operation |
| Navigator | To conform to the government law | upgrade the bottle of the beverages looks | Upgrade the bottle of the beverages looks. | Government law to adopt mixture adjustment | financial capital was very huge |
| caretaker | To conform to the government law | mixture’s adjustment | mixture’s adjustment | Government law to adopt mixture adjustment | customer worries to the organization |
References
Ankit (2011). Pepsi Vs. Coke: An analysis. Retrieved from : http://ankitmarketing.blogspot.com/2011/11/pepsi-vs-cokeanalysis.html.
BBC News . (2012). Coke and Pepsi change manufacturing process to avoid cancer warning - BBC News . Retrieved 14 March 2017, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada- 17308181
Coca-Cola Company (2012). About the Comapny. Retrieved from http://www.thecoca- colacompany.com/? WT.cl=1&WT.mm=footer1-about-red_en_US.
Cooper, J. (2017). Pepsi Forces Coke to Make Changes (PEP). Is Your Estate Safe? Make Changes to Your Will in 6 Easy Steps . InvestorGuide . Retrieved from http://www.investorguide.com/article/20671/estate-safe-make-changes-will-6- easy- steps/
Seyhan, O. (2013). A primer for transformational leadership in nonprofit sector.
Voigt, D. P. B. F. (2003). Managing Change.
