A STUDY ON CUSTOMER PERCEPTION TOWARDS MINUTE MAID PULPY ORANGE AT

HCCBPL, MOULALI PLANT

Submitted by
P.MARUTHIPRASAD H.T.NO:1409-10-672-009

Master Degree in Business Administration

D.V.R PG INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES (Affiliated to Osmania University) KASIPUR, MEDAK.

CHAPTER-I

INTRODUCTION

1.1.ORGANIZATIONAL PROFILE The product that has given the world its best-known taste was born in Atlanta, Georgia, on May8, 1886. Dr. John Stith Pemberton, a local pharmacist, produced the syrup for Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola was initially sold as a patent medicine for five cents a glass at soda fountains. Coca-Cola was sold in bottles for the first time on March 12, 1894, and cans of Coke first appeared in 1955. Coca-Cola (also known as Coke) is a carbonated soft drink is produced by The Coca-Cola Company (NYSE: KO). Coke is one of the world's most recognizable and widely sold commercial brands. Originally intended as a patent medicine when it was invented in the late 19th century, Coca-Cola was bought out by businessman Asa Griggs Candler, whose marketing tactics led Coke to its dominance of the world soft drink market throughout the 20th century. Although faced with critiques of its health effects and various allegations of wrongdoing by the company, Coca-Cola has remained a popular soft drink to the present day. The company actually produces concentrate for Coca-Cola, which is then sold to various Coca-Cola bottlers throughout the world. The bottlers, who hold territorially-exclusive contracts with the company, produce finished product in cans and bottles from the concentrate in combination with filtered water and sweeteners. The bottlers then sell, distribute and merchandise Coca-Cola in cans and bottles to retail stores and various other outlets. The Coca-Cola Company has, on occasion, introduced other cola drinks under the Coke brand name. The most famous of these is Diet Coke, which has become a major diet cola but others exist, including Caffeine free Coke, Cherry Coke, Coke Zero, Vanilla Coke and limited editions with lemon and with lime, and even with coffee. The Coca-Cola Company owns and markets other soft drinks that do not carry the Coca-Cola branding, such as Sprite, Fanta, and others.

Various products of Coca-Cola

Brand portfolio

This is a list of variants of Coca-Cola introduced around the world. In addition to the caffeine free version of the original, additional fruit flavors have been included over the years. TABLE-1.2 Name Launch Discontin Notes ed ued Picture

Coca-Cola 1886

The original version of Coca-Cola.

Diet Coke/Coc 1982 a-Cola Light

The diet version of Coca-Cola.

CaffeineFree 1983 Coca-Cola

The caffeine free version of Coca-Cola.

Coca-Cola 1985 Cherry

Was available in Canada starting in 1996. Called "Cherry Coca-Cola (Cherry Coke)" in North America until 2006.

New Coke/"Co 1985 ca-Cola II"

2002

Still available Samoa

in Yap and American

Available in: Australia, American Samoa, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, China, Denmark, Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Iceland, Korea, Luxembourg, Macau, Malaysia, Mo ngolia, Netherlands, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Norway, Reunion, Singapore, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, Tunisia, United Kingdom, United States, and West Bank-Gaza Available in: Austria, Australia, China, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Malaysia, Sweden, United Kingdom and United States. It was reintroduced in June 2007 by popular demand.

Coca-Cola with 2001 Lemon

2005

Coca-Cola 2002; Vanilla 2007

2005

Coca-Cola 2004 C2

2007

Was available in Japan, States, and Canada.

the United

Coca-Cola 2005 with Lime

Available in Belgium, Netherlands, Singapore, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Coca-Cola June Raspberr 2005 y

End 2005

Was only available in New Zealand. of Currently available in the United States in Coca-Cola Freestyle fountain since 2009.

Coca-Cola 2005 Zero

A no calorie, no sugar version of CocaCola.

Coca-Cola Black 2006 Cherry Vanilla

Middle 2007

of Was replaced by Vanilla Coke in June 2007

Coca-Cola 2006 Blk

Only available in the United States, Beginning France, Canada, Czech Republic, Bosnia of 2008 and Herzegovina, Bulgaria and Lithuania

Coca-Cola 2006 Citra

Only available in Bosnia and Herzegovina, New Zealand and Japan.

Coca-Cola Light 2006 Sango

A blood France.

orange

flavor.

Available

in

Coca-Cola 2007 Orange

Was available in the United Kingdom and Gibraltar for a limited time. In Germany, Austria and Switzerland it's sold unter the label Mezzo Mix. Currently available in Coca-Cola Freestyle fountain outlets in the United States since 2009.

SLOGANS USED: The following is a sampling of the variety of slogans that has been used to advertise the Coca-Cola product for years. 886 - Drink Coca-Cola. 1904 - Delicious and refreshing. 1905 - Coca-Cola revives and sustains. 1906 - The great national temperance beverage. 1908 - Good til the last drop 1917 - Three million a day. 1922 - Thirst knows no season. 1923 - Enjoy life. 1924 - Refresh yourself. 1925 - Six million a day. 1926 - It had to be good to get where it is. 1927 - Pure as Sunlight 1927 - Around the corner from anywhere. 1928 - Coca-Cola ... pure drink of natural flavors. 1929 - The pause that refreshes. 1932 - Ice-cold sunshine. 1937 - America's favorite moment. 1938 - The best friend thirst ever had. 1938 - Thirst asks nothing more. 1939 - Coca-Cola goes along. 1939 - Coca-Cola has the taste thirst goes for. 1939 - Whoever you are, whatever you do, wherever you may be, when you think of refreshment, think of ice cold Coca-Cola. 1941 - Coca-Cola is Coke! 1942 - The only thing like Coca-Cola is Coca-Cola itself. 1944 - How about a Coke? 1945 - Coke means Coca-Cola. 1945 - Passport to refreshment. 1947 - Coke knows no season. 1948 - Where there's Coke there's hospitality. 1949 - Coca-Cola ... along the highway to anywhere. 1952 - What you want is a Coke. 1954 - For people on the go. 1956 - Coca-Cola ... makes good things taste better. 1957 - The sign of good taste. 1958 - The Cold, Crisp Taste of Coke 1959 - Be really refreshed. 1963 - Things go better with Coke.

1966 - Coke ... after Coke ... after Coke. 1969 - It's the real thing. 1971 - I'd like to buy the world a Coke. (basis for the song I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing) 1974 - Look for the real things. 1976 - Coke adds life. 1979 - Have a Coke and a smile (see also Mean Joe Greene) 1982 - Coke is it! 1985 - America's Real Choice 1986 - Red White & You (for Coca-Cola Classic) 1986 - Catch the Wave (for New Coke) 1989 - Can't Beat the Feeling. (also used in the UK) 1991 - Can't Beat the Real Thing. (for Coca-Cola Classic) 1993 - Always Coca-Cola. 2000 - Enjoy. 2001 - Life tastes good. (also used in the UK) 2003 - Real. 2005 - Make It Real. 2006 - The Coke Side of Life (used also in the UK) 2007 - Live on the Coke Side of Life (also used in the UK) 2009 - Open Happiness 2010 - Twist The Cap To Refreshment 2011 - Life Begins Here

COCA- COLA INDIA : A BRIEF INTRODUCTION Coca-Cola, the corporate nourishing the global community with the worlds largest selling soft drink concentrates since 1886, returned to India in 1993 after a gap of 16 years giving a new thums-up to the Indian Soft Drink Market. In the same year, the Company took over ownership of the nation's top soft-drink brands and bottling network. Its brands have now assumed an iconic status in the minds of the consumers. Ever Since, Coca-Cola India has made significant investments to build and continually consolidate its business in the country, including new production facilities, waste water treatment plants, distribution systems and marketing channels. Coca-Cola India is among the countrys top international investors, having invested more than US$ 1 billion in India within a decade of its presence and further pledged another US$ 100million in 2003 for its operations.

With virtually all the goods and services required to produce and market Coca-Cola being made in India, the business system of the Company directly employs approximately 6,000 people, and indirectly creates employment for more than 125,000 people in related industries through our vast procurement, supply and distribution system. The vast Indian operations comprise 25 wholly-ownedcompany-owned bottling operations and another 24 franchisee-owned bottling operations. That apart, a network of 21 contract-packers also manufactures a range of products for the Company. On the distribution front, 10-tonne trucks, open-bay threewheelers that can navigate the narrow alleyways of Indian cities constantly keep our brands available in every nook and corner of even the countrys remotest areas. The Company has shaken up the Indian carbonated drinks market, and given consumers the pleasure of world-class drinks to fill up their hydration, refreshment & nutrition needs.

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE BEVERAGES PVT LTD.

OF

HINDUSTAN

COCA-COLA

This project has been done under Coca-Cola India, Human Resource department at Ameenpur, Hyderabad. Overviews of the various units (offices & plants) of coke located in southern region are as follows: SOUTH REGION UNITS (PLANTS & OFFICES): Regional office, Moula Ali Hyderabad Moula Ali plant, Hyderabad Ameenpur plant, Hyderabad Marketing & Sales, Koimbatore Neemam Plant, Chennai Marketing and sales, Chennai Bidadi plant, Bangalore Bangalore office

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF COCA-COLA INDIA :

Chief Executive Officer

Vice President Supply Chain

Chief Finance Officer

Human Resource Director

Vice President BSG

Regional Vice President (North)

Regional Vice President (Central)

1.2 INTRODUCTION FOR THE STUDY

1. The aim of the study is to find whether the grievance handling mechanism ensures that employees problems are recognized and appropriately reviewed in a prompt and timely manner.

2. The grievance mechanism acts as a foundation for a harmonious and healthy relationship between employee and employer.

3. The grievance mechanism ensures a fair and just treatment of employees concerns and prompt resolution of grievances without discrimination, coercion, restraint or reprisal against any employee who may submit or be involved in a grievance.

CHAPTER-II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
GRIEVANCE Grievance is any discontent or dissatisfaction that affects

organizational performance. As such it can be stated or unvoiced, written or oral, legitimate or ridiculous. If the dissatisfaction of employees goes unattended or the conditions causing it are not corrected, the irritation is likely to increase and lead to unfavorable attitude towards the management and unhealthy relations in the organization. The formal mechanism for dealing with such workers dissatisfaction is called grievance procedure. All companies whether unionized or not should have established and known grievance methods of processing grievances. The primary value of grievance procedure is that it can assist in minimizing discontent and dissatisfaction that may have adverse effects upon cooperation and productivity. A grievance procedure is necessary in large organization which has numerous personnel and many levels with the result that the manager is unable to keep a check on each individual, or be involved in every aspect of working of the small organization. The usual steps in grievance procedure are 1. Conference among the aggrieved employee, the supervisor, and the union steward. 2. Conference leadership. 3. Conference between top management and top union leadership. 4. Arbitration. between middle management and middle union

There may be variations in the procedures followed for resolving employee grievances. Variations may result from such factors as organizational or decision-making structures or size of the plant or company. Large organizations do tend to have formal grievance procedures involving succession of steps.

Arbitration Arbitration is a procedure in which a neutral third party studies the bargaining situation, listens to both the parties and gathers information, and then makes recommendations that are binding on the parties. Arbitration has achieved a certain degree of success in resolving disputes between the labour and the management. The labour union generally takes initiative to go for arbitration. When the union so decides, it notifies the management. At this point, the union and company must select an arbitrator. Guidelines When processing grievances, there are several important guidelines to consider: Check the grievants title and employment status to determine if he / she are included in a union eligible classification.

Note the supervisors respondent obligation under the grievance procedure.

Review the requested solution to the grievance. Determine if the relief sought is beyond a supervisors authority to grant.

Review all policies or other information related to the grievance.

Conduct a thorough investigation of the allegations.

Prepare a written response including the reason for the decision and provide a copy to the grievant.

Grievance materials should be maintained in a separate file from either personnel files or records.

Articles related to grievance Measures of supervisory behaviors and supervisors knowledge of the collective agreement should, intuitively, be related to the occurrence of grievable events, but there has been no theory advanced to explain grievable events. Kliener , Nigkelsburg and Pilarski implicitly assumed that supervisor monitoring of employees will increase the number of grievable events, but a theoretical basis or rationale for this assumed relationship is not discussed. Grievants were less satisfied with their jobs, had poorer attitudes toward their line supervisors, had greater feelings of pay inequity, had stronger beliefs that workers should participate in decision-making, were less satisfied with their unions, and more active in their unions. The lower satisfaction with the union among grievant may be due to dissatisfaction with the processing of grievances. Grievants were more younger and had less education than nongrievants. Gordon and Miller, Allen and Keavney and Klass note the important role that expectancy theory could play in differentiating grievants and

nongrievants. Although not a complete test of expectancy theory, Lewin and Boroff did include the employees perceived effectiveness of the grievance procedure as an explanatory variable. Surprisingly, this was not significantly related to grievance filing. Further research focusing on expectancy theory and grievance filing that more fully develops testable hypotheses derived from expectancy theory seems appropriate. Bemmels, Reshef and Stratton-Devine included the shop stewards assessment of how frequently employees approach them with complaints. Although most grievances are formally filed by employees, the initiation of a grievance can come from employees or stewards. Complaining to the shop stewards is the employees role in the grievance initiation process. Both of these studies found the work group with employees who complained to the stewards more frequently had grievance rates. Employees complaining to their stewards is a precursor to grievance filing. The measure of consideration and structure were significantly related to frequency of employee complaints in Bemmels and the stewards assessment of the supervisors knowledge of the collective agreement was negatively related to complaints. Lewin and Peterson found a positive relationship with grievance procedure structure and grievance rates. They also found higher grievance rates under procedures that include provisions for expedited grievance handling. It was found that provisions allowing oral presentation of grievances was related to lower rates of written grievances, and screening of potential grievances was related to lower rates of written grievance, and screening of potential grievances by a committee or other union officials was associated with lower grievance rates. The number of steps in the grievance procedure and the length of time allowed for filing a grievance were not related to grievance rates.

Lewin and Peterson argued that evaluations of grievance procedure effectiveness should include subjective evaluations by the participants as well as objective measures reflecting the operation of the grievance procedure. They argued that subjective evaluations are the preferred method for evaluating grievance procedure effectiveness. Effectiveness was difficult to interpret from measures reflecting the operation of grievance procedures such as grievance rates, settlement levels and arbitration rates since it was not clear what the optimal magnitudes might be for these measures. Furthermore the purpose of grievance procedure is to resolve disputes about the interpretation and application of collective agreements. Grievance procedures exist for the benefit of the employees, employers and unions. If the parties were satisfied with the operation of the grievance procedure, it seems to more important than attaining some predetermined optimal magnitude of grievance filing or when, where, and how grievances are being resolved. Grievance procedures are related to other attitudinal measures and the behaviors of shop stewards in the grievance procedure. Grievance procedure effectiveness was related to union members overall satisfaction with the union. Grievance procedures have been found to relate to union commitment, employer commitment and dual commitment. Employer commitment has found to be negatively related to absenteeism and turnover and union commitment has found to have a positive relationship with union participation and with shop steward behavior in the grievance procedure. Many studies still report empirical analysis with no theoretical grounding, or only intuitive and ad hoc hypotheses. Grievance could be classified into 4 basic types: Discrimination charges, rules violation, general or unclassified complaints and discipline. Discrimination was spelled out as based upon race, sex, religion, color, national origin, age, veteran status, or handicapped.

Grievance corresponding rules violation was an employees interpretation of application of policies and procedures governing personnel policies, department work rules, unsafe or unhealthy working conditions, or other policies or procedures of a working nature. Disciplinary actions are the category least classified as a grievance. Legalistic approach was used to handle such cases. With the possibility of adverse legal action arising from unjust discipline, separate systems are often established in discipline cases to ensure the employees complete due process rights. Five types of grievance systems were typically noted in the literature. They were the open door policy, step-review method, peer-review also called the grievance committee or roundtable, ombudsman and hearing officer. In the public sector study, the predominant method of grievance adjudication was the step-review method used either singularly or in combination with a peer-review committee. The step-review method had characteristics similar to the grievance / arbitration procedures found in union contracts. The step-review method has a pre-established set of steps for reviewing employee complaints by succeeding higher levels of agency personnel.

Benefits of having Grievance procedure: The grievance procedure provides a means for identifying practices, procedures, and administrative policies that are causing employee complaints so that changes can be considered. They reduce costly employment suits.

A grievance procedure allows managers to establish a uniform labour policy. A grievance system can be a reliable mechanism to learn of, and resolve employee dissatisfaction. It can produce early settlements to disputes or provide for correction of contested employment issues.

Models of Grievance Proceedure: 1. Open Door Policy 2. Step Ladder method .

Open Door policy Under this policy, the aggrieved employee is free to meet the top executives of the organization and get his grievances redressed. Such a policy works well only in small organizations. However, in bigger organizations, top management executives are usually busy with other concerned matters of the company. Moreover, it is believed that open door policy is suitable for executives; operational employees may feel shy to go to top management.

Step Ladder Method Under this policy, the aggrieved employee has to follow a step by step procedure for getting his grievance redressed. In this procedure, whenever an employee is confronted with a grievance, he presents his problem to his immediate supervisor. If the employee is not satisfied with superiors decision, then he discusses his grievance with the departmental head. The departmental head discusses the problem with joint grievance committees to find a solution. However, if the committee also fails to redress the grievance, then it may be referred to chief executive. If the chief executive also fails to redress the grievance, then such a grievance is referred to voluntary arbitration where the award of arbitrator is binding on both the parties.

Process of Step Ladder Policy

Work with grievance

U N S A T I S F I E D W O R K E R

Verbal referring Immediate Superior Time limit for answering 48hrs Department head Time limit for answering 3days Grievance committee Time limit for answering 7days

Higher management for revision Union may ask for voluntary arbitration Voluntary Arbitration

Decision binding on both parties

CHAPTER-III

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE To study the effectiveness of grievance handling mechanism.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVES 1. To identify whether the employees are aware of the grievance handling mechanism.

2. To identify whether the grievance handling system leads to a favorable attitude towards the management 3. To identify that the grievance handling system leads to a mutual understanding between workers and the management 4. To know the level of satisfaction towards the grievance handling procedure of the organization 5. To identify the factors influencing the effectiveness of the grievance handling in the organization