Proctor & Gamble Organizational Evolution

After our discussion of various organizations, I ran across an article published in The Economist entitled “From baron to hotelier.” The published date was May 9th of 2002. In the article, the main discussion centered on how multinational corporations were redefining the roles of country managers, those corporate heads who were responsible for management of the corporation’s assets within a specific country.

Following the downsizing of many corporations in the mid-1990s, the responsibilities of many of these country managers were eliminated and handed off to global business division managers in hopes of creating a unified global strategy. Some of the corporations included Visa, Oracle, and Proctor & Gamble.

However, P & G has reversed itself and given some decision-making responsibility back to country managers. According to P & G representative Kerry Clark, “This is an area we have been struggling with.”

P & G’s new model differentiates between high-income markets and low-income markets and handles the decision-making for each market differently. In richer countries, management is handled by the global division. For smaller markets, which include China and Eastern Europe, country managers have more control.

The new model also differentiates between product usage, and manages those lines differently. For products which are used in similar ways all over the world, like Pantene shampoo, management is handled at the global level. For products such as laundry detergent, where local habits determine how the product is used, control is given to the regional managers.

According to Clark, the goal is to be globally efficient as well as locally sensitive.

How can P & G handle such a complex organizational model? One key to success is a comprehensive information management infrastructure which allows for the speedy exchange of information between managers at all levels. Local managers can exchange information about neighboring resources to avoid conflict and redundant behavior, while global managers can extract information from the periphery.

Rich Brown

Institutionalize Me! A valuable theory for library managers

I believe that today’s library can really benefit from the work of the Institutional Theorists in understanding how to bolster its position in the community. As our world becomes more and more mobile, we are constantly faced with the pressure of reacting to expectations and experiences that patrons have in other places. In a very real way, if I get good information doing a simple Google search, why should I use such a dusty old dinosaur of a place like a library? While many of us can answer this question convincing for the library, many of the potential patrons cannot. Enter Institutional theory.

I really liked Berger and Luckmann’s (from the Symbolic-interpretive school) argument in The Social Construction of Reality as summed by Hatch in the textbook as that “human social order is produced through interpersonal negotiations and implicit understandings that are built up via shared history and shared experiences” (p. 42).

Scott in his book Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems defines institutionalization as “the process by which actions are repeated and given meaning to self and others” (p. 117). I like this concept a lot, as well as Meyer and Rowan’s concept, taken from their article “Institutionalized organizations” from American Journal of Sociology, of “Rationalized Myth,” which gives social legitimacy to organizations based on how people view an organization in the context of the world.

Library managers could use these concepts in building long-term strategic plans for their institutions. If we accept that what people believe about a library is both important and manageable, then we have the foundation for organization goals. This foundation, I believe, is already at work in many libraries today.

For another class, I interviewed a senior manager of a public library system. She related that the single biggest push for her and her system was outreach. She wanted individuals who wanted to be engaged with the world outside of the library walls. Why? It is easier to have a good relationship with a community if you attempt to meet them first where they are, build trust, and invited them to use your services. You create the idea of a library that extends beyond the physical walls and the reference desk. The manager is already seeing results.

What would happen if the focus is removed from improving the library image or “rationalized myth” within the society? Google is only a click away.

Dave H.

Introduction

Given the diversity and pluralism of organizations, library and information agency managers must be able to make sense of and use multiple perspectives.  They must bring their knowledge to a wide range of decisions each day.  Organization theory can help managers to think abstractly and to apply abstract reasoning to concrete situations.  Examples of applying theory to every-day practice (for problem-solving and creating new ideas and opportunities to learn) can increase learning capacity and inspire us to think, speak, and act broadly and wisely. Sharing examples using a web log provides another public forum to “speak” and to receive feedback.   

The following entries are published  by Master of Library Science students, School of Library and Information Management, Emporia State University, Emporia, KS, USA.  Scholarly contribution are encouraged.