PROJECT REPORT ON FINDING MARKET SHARES AND STUDY OF COMPETITORS FOR JAI BEVERAGES PVT. LTD.

UNDER PROJECT GUIDE MR. RAHUL GUPTA (TERRITORY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER) SUBMITTED BY: GOURAV SINGH SUBMITTED TO: MR. NITIN SINGH

CENTRE FOR MANAGEMMENT STUDY GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY NOIDA PREFACE In order to achieve practical results the classroom learning need to be effectiv ely feed to the realities of situation existing outside the classroom. With the view positive and concrete PGDM is stepping stone to management career . For important practical nowledge and experience the PGDM students are as ed t o conduct an overall view of any company. It is believed that study of any company in an intelligent and accurate learnin g instrument for the actual world of business. I have done summer training at JAI BEVERAGES PVT. LTD. (PEPSI GROUP) J&K. Projec t is FINDING MARKET SHARES AND STUDY OF COMPETITORS FOR JAI BEVERAGES PVT. LTD.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT A tas of this nature involves see ing variety of help and sound advice from var ious experts in the fields. Than s and gratitude is owed to various individuals for the help by various ways. Gratitude is the hardest of emotions to express and often does not adequate word s to convey what one feels. I am trying to express it. It gives me immense pleas ure to express my heartfelt gratitude to my respected guide Mr. Rahul Gupta for providing me guidance. I am than ful to Mr. Rahul Gupta (project guide) who provided me articulate guid ance and ceaseless encouragement throughout my project. Despite his numerous pre occupations, he has always spared his valuable time to guide me at all stages of

the wor . I would li e to offer my sincere than s to MR. NITIN SINGH for helping me in se lecting the topic for the project and providing me the necessary guidance throug hout the project. This project has helped me in increasing my nowledge as well as given me an opportunity to put my theoretical nowledge to practical use. The last but not least, I express my sense of gratitude to my family and friends for their cooperation.

Gourav Singh Chib

DECLARATION I hereby declare that the project report "FINDING MARKET SHARES AND STUDY OF COM PETITORS FOR JAI BEVERAGES PVT. LTD. (Jammu & Kashmir)" carried out by me for th e partial fulfillment of the course requirements of Masters of The Business Admi nistration from GIMT (GLOBLE INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY) sec-62 Noid a. It is the original wor done by me and the information provided in the study is authenticated to the best of my nowledge. The report has not been submitted to any other university or institution for the award of any other degree.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This project ta es a loo in various inds of merchandising activities, mar et s hare of Pepsi and Coca Cola and various sales promotion schemes, which are follo wed in the soft drin industry. The two major global players i.e. Pepsi and Coca Cola dominate the soft drin industry in India. India is one of few battlegroun ds in the world where there is nec -to-nec competition between the two. Both th e companies claim to be in number one sport coating the data produced by two dif ferent mar eting research companies. Where co e follows ORG data and says it has 57% share, Pepsi follows IMRB data and says it has 49% mar et shares in India. In 2004 the cola war has begun afresh. Coca cola India today claimed that it has increased its mar et share form 57 percent in the carbonated soft drin (CSD) C ategory in 2002 to 61 percent at the end of December 2003, as per ORG - Marg fig ures. Pepsi, however, contested the figures by saying that it mar et share stood at 47.6 pe4rcent during the same period and Coca Cola India had a combined mar et share of only 52.4 percent, as per IMRB figures. In this cutthroat competition, both of the cola majors have to do something spec ial to the service. This something special is done in various forms of advertisi ng and sales promotion schemes provided by the two companies. Coca cola's 200ml strategy has paid off. New consumers are coming in droves from the hinterland. This apart, the company undertoo a series of cost-cutting meas ures to ensure efficient distribution. According to Mr. Sunil Gupta, president C oca Cola India, apart from the 200 ml strategy, ultra light glass bottles saved transport costs, centralized procurement of raw material cut down wastage and th e hub-and-spo e distribution system ensured deeper penetration and faster turnar ound of returnable glass bottles. TABLE OF CONTENTS

Compiled by:-

S.NO. 1. 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 2. 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Page No. INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW OF THE INDUSTRY PROFILE OF THE COMPANY PROBLEMS OF THE COMPANY COMPETITION INFORMATION SWOT ANLYSIS RESEARCH METHODOLOGY OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY HYPOTHESIS RESEARCH DESIGN SAMPLE DESIGN SCOPE OF THE STUDY LIMITATIONS CONCEPTUAL DISCUSSION DATA ANALYSIS FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS BIBLIOGRAPHY ANNEXURE CASE STUDY

TITLE

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION 1.1 OVERVIEW VIEW OF SOFTDRINK INDUSTRY Soft drin industry scenario the world is almost the same with two major players i.e. Pepsi Co. and Coca-Cola having the major than in the pie. The other Major player in the industry is Cadbury-Schweppes and some local players in individua l countries. The major components of the industry consist of the concentrate manufactures, bo ttlers and the sales and distribution networ of the companies the rule and resp onsibilities of each of the are different. The major activity ta en up by the co ncentrate 2 India fountain sales form a very insignificant part of the sales rev enue. During the initial stages both soft drin s. Majors used a networ of indep endent bottlers to bottle and mar et their products. Independent bottling arose primarily because it was not possible to create an effective organization for op erating a vertically integrated company with hundreds of geographically separate d manufacturing unit and local delivery operation given the limited transporta tion and communication system of the time and the lac of sophisticated financia l and management controls. Although Coca-Cola and Pepsi Cola are premier mar eting companies the fundamenta l competitive advantage that allowed that to compete so effectively lies in thei r ability to operate through a very cumbersome distribution system. In India after the exist of Co e in 1977 the Indian Soft Drin mar et was contro lled by Parle and Pure Drin s. By the end of 1970 Campa Cola was practically alo ne in cola mar et Parles introduced Thumsup in the beginning of 1980s. By the an d of 80s Parle with Limca, Gold Spot and Thums up emerged as clear winner with ar ound 60% mar et share. In the year 1985 Pepsi tried to enter into India when it teamed up with RPG grou p. This proposal was rejected on the grounds that the import of concentrate coul

d not be agreed and the use of foreign brand name was not allowed. In year 1988 Pepsi again floated a project this time in collaboration with Punjab Agro Indust rial Corporation (PIAC) and Voltas India Limited and succeeded. Finally in June 1990 Pepsi was launched in India under the brand name of Lehar Pepsi. Ta ing full advantage of the liberalization policies of the government Pepsi set up a new c ompany in India called PepsiCo India Holding Pvt. A wholly around subsidiary Coc a Cola company which is a leader in Soft drin industry returned to India after a gap of 16 years in 1995. The most strategic step ta en by Coca Cola was the pu rchase of Parle brands. With this co e instantly had the ownership of countries tap soft drin s brands as well as got access to Parles extensive 54 plant bottli ng as well as a pre set distribution networ . The Texas soft-drin industry dates from 1839, when Dr. Thomas Mitchell, an Engl ish physician living in Houston, operated an apothecary with a soda fountain fro m March until his death on October 1. Carbonated water had bubbled from springs in Europe since Roman times. During the eighteenth century, scientists experimen ted with "fixed air" and produced "aerated waters." Some of them used bicarbonat e of soda in their experiments, and the term "soda water" became ensconced in th e English language. By 1810 New Yor City had "soda fountains," where proprietor s dispensed artificial "mineral waters" for therapeutic purposes. Flavored soda water, which developed with the rise of the ice industry, was available in apoth ecary shops, but bottled soda water was an expensive product. Sailing ships too ice from northeastern states to New Orleans in 1820 and later to Houston, and i n 1838 a Houston newspaper noted that ice sold for 50 cents per pound. In 1850 T exas had none of the sixty-four bottling plants in the nation. The first notice of a soda-water manufacturer in Texas was issued in 1866, when the Houston City Directory listed J. J. C. Smith's establishment as a "mineral water manufactory. " In the 1870 census, Galveston and Brownsville reported "manufacturers of miner al and soda water." Victoria and Austin had two ice-ma ing machines. Texas had o ne of the four ice plants in the nation. In 1880 Texas had eleven bottling plant s: four in San Antonio, two each in Galveston and Austin, and one each in Housto n, Dallas, and Mexia. In 1890 Texas had forty-two soda-water plants, plus five u nspecified bottlers and seven breweries. The 1890s saw major changes in the state's soft-drin industry. New plants appea red with the introduction of the Hutchinson bottle stopper, patented in 1879 and manufactured in Chicago. (In a Hutchinson stopper, a wire loop protruded from t he bottle nec and was fastened to a rubber seal; when seated the seal bloc ed t he escape of gas from the water in the drin .) Most plants served one or two cou nties, and occasionally they shipped by rail to neighboring communities. The bot tler's largest investment was in bottles and cases. No deposit was charged and b ottle stealing among bottlers was common, even when glass blowers embossed the n ame of the town on the bottles. In 1891 the Elliott Bottling Wor s of Paris call ed a convention to address the problem. Twenty-nine bottlers and suppliers, prin cipally from East Texas, met in October in Dallas and formed the Texas State Bot tlers Protective Association. They drafted a constitution and by-laws aimed at p reventing "the unlawful use of registered bottles, boxes, siphons, etc." But pol icing was impossible. By the 1890s two beverages had changed the character of the soft-drin industry. In 1885 Charles Alderton, a Waco pharmacist, originated Dr Pepper Phos-Ferrates (see DR PEPPER COMPANY), and in 1886 John Pemberton concocted Coca-Cola in Atla nta, Georgia. In 1885 Wade B. Morrison, who owned the Old Corner Drug Store in W aco, arranged with Robert Sherman Lazenby, owner of a small bottling plant, to m ix and ship Dr Pepper Phos-Ferrates syrup to area drugstores. In 1891 a feed-sto re operator in Dublin, Texas, began bottling soda waters, including Dr Pepper. O ther plants in Central Texas followed suit. However, during the 1890s no Texas b ottling plant advertised a franchised soft drin and no company listed such a pr oduct in its company or corporate name. In 1898, during the Spanish-American War , Lazenby had an exclusive War Department contract to bottle and ship his Circle A Ginger Ale to servicemen in foreign lands. He supplied both army and navy ins tallations until World War I. In 1900 Texas had 139 soda-water bottling plants. Lemon, ginger, ale, vanilla, orange, sarsaparilla, and raspberry were the princi

pal flavors. The state also had seventy-seven ice plants, more than any other. O nly one bottling plant used power-a four-horsepower central motor which delivere d power by belts to carbonators and bottle-washing machines. In 1899 two lawyers from Tennessee, B. F. Thomas and Joseph Whitehead, secured " bottling rights" from the Coca-Cola Company of Atlanta, Georgia. They issued con tracts to produce and sell Coca-Cola within control areas. Although Texas and pa rts of New England were excluded, the system provided the capital and the entrep reneurship needed to develop the soft-drin industry nationally. Thomas and Whit ehead offered contracts in specific geographic regions, Thomas ta ing the northe rn and eastern states and Pacific coast and Whitehead ta ing the South and South west. Thomas built a bottling plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee, and Whitehead bui lt one in Atlanta. Whitehead sold a half interest to J. T. Lupton, a lawyer from a Virginia tobacco family. Lupton helped finance the Coca-Cola bottling plant i n Atlanta, and in 1902 his relatives opened plants in Dallas and Houston. Within three years Coca-Cola was selling its syrup to twenty-nine Texas plants. Soft d rin s were among the first consumer products controlled by the franchise system. In 1914 twenty Texas bottlers listed Coca-Cola as part of their trade name, and eight did not. Other Texas companies did not issue franchises until the 1920s. Delaware Punch, a noncarbonated drin formulated in 1913 in San Antonio, was amo ng the first to join Coca-Cola in issuing franchises in Texas. Between 1899 and 1914 the number of Texas plants doubled and the value of production tripled. In 1914 Texas had 262 plants (4.8 percent of the nation's total), but only the Coca -Cola bottlers included the franchise in their trade name. Between 1914 and 1924 a number of flavor manufacturers or distributors began off ering franchises patterned after the Coca-Cola model. In 1922 Texas had 179 bott ling wor s, but only 33 included a copyrighted soft drin in their trade name-30 with Coca-Cola and 3 with Whistle. By 1923 Texas had 205 plants (of 4,514 natio nally). In 1924 nine bottlers were producing "cola" drin s besides Coca-Cola, in cluding Chero-Cola, Tex-A-Cola, Lime Cola, Keen Kola, and Cola Hiball. Cola-Cola filed a lawsuit against all "imitators," won a raft of court decisions, and sto pped the traffic for a decade. The Chero-Cola Company of Columbus, Georgia, chan ged its corporate name to Nehi Company and promoted fruit flavors. Other franchi ses in Texas included Whistle (six plants), Orange Crush (three), NuGrape (one), Grapico (two), and Cherry Blossoms (one). Bottling plants also manufactured oth er merchandise: ice (five plants), ice cream (ten), candy (eleven), creamery pro ducts (three), and beer (one). Out of 276 bottling firms, 114 produced no franch ised soft drin s. In 1924 Texas bottlers mar eted eleven trademar ed products. B y 1929 the state had thirty-four Nehi plants, ten Dr Pepper plants with name ide ntification by trademar , three Orange Squeeze plants, and six other plants inco rporating a beverage name. Coca-Cola gave bottlers "exclusive rights" to use its trademar in 6-ounce returnable bottles in a specific territory. In 1929 Texas h ad 325 bottling plants, 16.3 percent of the national total. The number declined to 260 in 1931 and 210 in 1933. During the Great Depression, Seven-Up and Pepsi-Cola sought mar ets in Texas, ma inly under the promotion of Jodie W. McCarley of San Antonio. While shagging bas eballs for the Cleveland Indians in St. Louis, McCarley met Pearl Whitcraft and Ed Taylor, who owned soda-water plants in the city. In 1929 Taylor offered McCar ley a chance to get in the bottling business by assuming a debt owed a St. Louis flavor manufacturer. McCarley set up a small bottling plant in his home in San Antonio with second-hand machinery, and peddled his drin s each morning. In addi tion to generic flavors, he sold Knight Club Ginger Ale, mostly to bootleggers. Ed Taylor also put McCarley in touch with C. L. Griggs, owner of the Howdy Compa ny, which offered franchises on Howdy Orange. In 1928 Griggs had copyrighted Sev en-Up, a lithiated lemon drin promoted as a mixer. In January 1930 McCarley, th e second bottler in the nation to receive a Seven-Up franchise (Taylor was the f irst), was given an opportunity to sell Seven-Up in seventy-eight Texas counties . Business was slow: he signed up only one bottler, Ed Knebel, who had moved his small plant from Pflugerville to Austin in 1930. In 1932 McCarley obtained a fr anchise to sell Hires Root Beer. Then Whitcraft notified McCarley that Pepsi-Col a was interested in Texas, and on April 1, 1934, McCarley and a partner secured

a Pepsi-Cola franchise for sixty-four counties. McCarley was the first Texan to bottle Pepsi-Cola. In his first year he sold 13,300 cases of Pepsi in twelve-oun ce beer bottles of brown, green, and "flint" (colorless). As his business expand ed, he began operating five route truc s, and in 1937 he moved to a larger plant in San Antonio. By the 1930s, Pepsi and Nehi's Royal Crown Cola had established mar ets in Texas. Nehi had a statewide system nown as Chero-Cola bottlers. Dep ression prices enabled bottlers to offer twelve-ounce drin s for five cents reta il, and twelve-ounce bottles became popular. Between 1934 and 1939 Pepsi signed up bottlers in eighteen Texas towns, though many of these did not survive. Texas bottlers were highly competitive. With Cola-Cola leading the way, they mai ntained an eighty-cent wholesale price for a case of twenty-four bottles. The Co ca-Cola franchise system had developed, however, when each plant served an area that a horse-drawn truc could cover in a day. The motor truc expanded dealer t erritories. Although each community had a wealthy Coca-Cola bottler, Walter Mac , Pepsi president in 1938-39, saw opportunities. Coca-Cola maintained 1,150 fran chise areas in the nation, but Mac was able to franchise 550 areas for Pepsi. P epsi also ran ads at independent radio stations and later on the networ s. By ea rly 1938 many Texas Coca-Cola bottlers, under company pressure, had dropped all flavors except Coca-Cola. Dr Pepper started franchising in 1925 and offered the drin to Coca-Cola bottlers, who declined to accept. In 1938 the Texas soft-drin industry comprised 297 plants. Most held multiple franchises. At the outbrea of World War II, the soft-drin industry faced rationing of suga r, crown caps, cor , gasoline, tires, truc s, and coolers. Though prices were fr ozen and labor became scarce, bottlers profited from the military bases establis hed in Texas, since quota-exempt sugar was available to the military, which deem ed soft drin s essential to morale. Coca-Cola promptly moved its vending machine s, introduced in the late 1930s in service stations, grocery stores, and at-wor outlets, to military bases. Few bottlers had vending machines, especially multi ple choice vending. These bottlers found mar ets at the Post Exchanges. After the war, soft drin demand soared. On October 23, 1946, wartime controls w ere lifted, but sugar rationing continued until July 28, 1947. Bottlers were rel uctant to brea the "nic el price." Coca-Cola advanced its price from 80 cents t o 90 cents to $1 a case, but still did not raise the retail price of 5 cents. So me coin-vending machines had a six-cent mechanism, but they were aw ward to use. While Coca-Cola ept sales prices down, other companies, especially Pepsi and R C Cola, were stuc with a twelve-ounce bottle and its higher ingredient costs. I n1955 Coca-Cola introduced the " ing-size" (ten or twelve ounce) and the "family -size" bottles (twenty-six ounces). The family-size returnable became popular in Texas, particularly in urban areas. Dr Pepper and Seven-Up followed. Nehi had a uthorized the "Par-T-Pa " in quart or family size in the 1930s, but sales had be en slow. Bottlers soon saw the economy of returnable bottles. As prices and bott le sizes increased, a conflict loomed between "big-bottle bottlers" and "littlebottle bottlers." Clifton C. Carter, a vice president of the Texas State Bottler s Association, sought to resolve the problem. In 1952 the Texas State Bottlers A ssociation enrolled 226 bottling plants as dues-paying members; 145 plants were non-members. Carter, membership chairman, sought new members and saw a major inc rease in membership to 71 percent of total Texas bottlers. In February 1954 Cart er became president, W. L. "Brownie" Dorris became vice president, and J. Conrad Dunagan became second vice president. Association officers made swings through Texas to enlist members. Carter visited eleven cities, Dorris nine, and Dunagan five. Their efforts bore fruit. By enlisting members, the association began to d efuse the bottling controversy and other problems. In 1957 the American Bottlers of Carbonated Beverages, of which the Texas State Bottlers had been an affiliat e since 1919, cited the Texas group as the "outstanding state bottlers' associat ion in the nation." Dunagan was elected to the ABCB Executive Board in 1961 to t he presidency for 1957-58. Texas, with more ABCB members than any other state, b rought the national convention to Dallas in 1961. Vice President Lyndon B. Johns on gave the eynote address. As the Texas bottlers wor ed out their differences, innovations changed the indu stry in pac aging, manufacturing, and distribution. Cans with linings that could

withstand the acidity of soft drin s were introduced, along with materials to w ithstand high degrees of carbonation. Calcium Cyclamate and sodium cyclamate wer e combined with the synthetic sweetener saccharin to produce an acceptable diet drin . Nehi had tried to mar et Diet Rite in 1952 in Texas, but acceptance was s potty. However, diet drin s gained steadily and reached an annual rate of 15 per cent of the soft-drin mar et by 1969. Major soft-drin companies, as well as ma jor brewers, had developed canned drin s during World War II, but a "metallic" t aste persisted because the cans lac ed special acid-resistant linings. Coco-Cola introduced canned drin s in 1960, when it authorized the Kimble Food Products C ompany of Fort Worth to offer canned Coca-Cola to franchised bottlers. Although supermar ets quic ly accepted canned drin s, they sold only 450 million cans in 1954, a fraction of the 30.3 billion bottles sold. Canned-drin sales fell to 31 7 million by 1956, when Royal Crown, Nehi, and Par-T-Pa entered the mar et. Can ned RC Cola, Diet Rite, and Nehi flavors arrived in Texas by rail from Columbus, Georgia. The glass-container industry, aware that Texas supermar ets objected t o handling returnable bottles, introduced light-weight glass bottles. The larger sizes, twenty-six to thirty-two ounces, easily competed with aluminum and steel cans. Mar eting strategies also changed. In the 1920s, soft drin s were sold fo r home consumption. Grocery stores offered a twenty-four-bottle wooden case, and plants also sold cases from the floor or loading doc s. In 1922 Coca-Cola sough t additional mar ets by producing a cardboard six-bottle carton, but the boxes w ere too expensive for one-trip use. Strengthened paperboard solved the problem. In 1933 Coca-Cola distributed 2 cent postcards to bottlers for stores to use as coupons with which a customer could received a free six-pac by paying the twelv e-cent bottle deposit. This encouraged housewives both to return the empties and buy more. In the 1970s the federal government threatened the franchise system in the softdrin industry. In 1971 the Federal Trade Commission declared the existing franc hises to be illegal restrictions on interstate commerce and sued the major compa nies. After lengthy hearings, the FTC examiner ruled for the soft-drin companie s. While the threat of franchise cancellation hung over their heads, some bottle rs turned to cooperatives to build canning plants. Pepsi-Cola built a plant at C onroe, and in July 1970 turned it over to a corporation composed of Texas PepsiCola bottlers. By 1972 West Texas bottlers planned a cooperative to produce Coca -Cola and other franchised products. Amarillo, Lubboc , and Monahans bottlers so ught ties with New Mexico and O lahoma bottlers. They established the Southwest Canners, with J. Conrad Dunagan as president, Pat W. McNamara as vice president, and R. E. Nic les as secretary-treasurer. But Coca-Cola warned that the bottler s who used their franchise territory to host a cooperative could incur substanti al liabilities. The organizers also discovered that Texas lac ed legislation to permit issuing tax-exempt bonds for industrial development, so Southwest Canners located its plant in Portales, New Mexico, in the Clovis Coca-Cola franchise. N ew Mexico permitted industrial bonds to acquire land, buildings, and equipment, and an Albuquerque investment ban underwrote $2 million in municipal bonds. The Portales plant opened in the spring of 1975. By then, however, the FTC decision favoring franchises had been overruled-a shoc ing set-bac . The bottlers now so ught federal legislation to rescue their franchises. As most congressional distr icts in Texas had bottling plants, the bottlers found wide support. But Texas re presentative George H. Mahon, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, would no t release the bill. Finally, Sam Hall, of Marshall, introduced a measure to call the bill from committee by a House vote. Both House and Senate approved the mea sure, and the soft-drin franchise system was saved. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, bottling franchises began to consolidate. Coc a-Cola, which had relied heavily upon independents until the 1980s, began to pur chase large independent bottling groups in 1986 and consolidate them into Coca-C ola Enterprises. In July 1986 Coca-Cola Enterprises acquired Rainwater Coca-Cola Bottling Companies in Texas, and in September they acquired control of the McAl len and Brownsville Coca-Cola Bottling Companies. By the mid-1990s many of the m ajor urban mar ets for Co e were serviced by Coca-Cola Enterprises, supplemented by other company franchises and independents. In 1996 Pepsi-Cola had company-ow

ned bottling facilities at Conroe, Houston, Mesquite, and San Antonio, and wor e d through independent bottlers at Abilene, Hallettsville, and Corpus Christi. Dr Pepper merged with the Seven-Up Company in 1986 and soon thereafter moved its m anufacturing operations to facilities in St. Louis, although the company's corpo rate headquarters remained in Dallas. 1.2 COMPANY PROFILE ABOUT PEPSICO COMPANY PepsiCo is a world leader in convenient foods and beverages, with 2004 revenues of more than $29 billion and 153,000 employees. The company consists of Frito-La y North America, PepsiCo Beverages North America, North America, PepsiCo Interna tional and Qua er Foods North America. PepsiCo brands are available in nearly 20 0 countries and territories and generate sales at the retail level of about $78 Billion. Many of PepsiCos brand names are more than 100 years old, but the corporation is relatively young. PepsiCo was founded in 1965 through the merger of Pepsi-Cola a nd Frito-Lay. Tropicana was acquired in1998 and PepsiCo merged with Qua er Oats Company including Gatorade in 2001. PepsiCos Mission To be the worlds premier consumer Products Company focused on convenient foods an d beverages. We see to produce healthy financial rewards to investors as we pro vide opportunities for growth and growth and enrichment to our employees, busine ss partners and the communities in which we operate. And n everything we do, we strive for honesty, fairness and integrity. PepsiCos World Headquarter PepsiCos world Headquarter is located in Purchase, New Yor , approximately 45 min utes from New Yor City. The seven building headquarters complex was designed by Edward Durrell Stone, one of America foremost architects. The building occupies 10 acres of a 144 acre complex that includes the Donald M. Kendall Sculpture Gar dens, a world acclaimed sculpture collection in a garden setting. PEPSI THE INDIAN SCENARIO Since the entry of Pepsi Cola to India in 1989, the soft drin industry has unde r gone a radical change. When Pepsi-Cola entered Indian mar et, Parle was the le ader with the Thumps-Up being its flagship brand. Other products offering by Parle included Limca & GoldSpot, another upcoming pla yer in the mar et was, the erstwhile bottler of Coca-Cola, Pure Drin s. Its offeri ng includes Campa-Cola, Campa-Lemon & Campa-Orange. With the re-entry of Coca-Cola in the Indian mar et, Pepsi-Cola had to go in for more aggressive mar eting to sustain share. The chronology of the initial phase of the Cola Wars in India are 1977 Milestone Parle launched Thumps-Up and pure drin s launched Coca-Co la. 1990 Milestone In March, Pepsi-Cola and 7-Up launched mar ets India. in north

In May, the Government cleared the Pepsi-Cola project ag

ain but with a change in brand name to Lehar Pepsi, simultaneously it rejects the Coca-Cola application Citra from the Parle, stable hited the mar et. 1991 Milestone Pepsi-Cola extended its soft drin s business and reached at national scale. Pepsi-cola launched its product in Delhi and Bombay. 1992 Milestone In January, Brito Foods application is cleared by the FI PB. Pepsi-Cola and Parle start initial negotiation for a strategic alliance but too brea off after a while. 1993 Milestone

1994 Milestone Pepsi bought Du es & Sones. 1995 Milestone Pepsi-Cola lunched Cans, having capacity of 330ml in var ious flavours. 1996 Milestone Pepsi-Cola domestic and International operations combine d into a Pepsi-Cola Company. International and Domestic operations combined into one business unit called Frito-lay Company. 1997 Milestone Pepsi-Cola brought Mirinda Orange Opposite to Fanta. 1998 Milestone Pepsi-Cola launched Mirinda Lemon opposite to Limca. In September, final approval for the Pepsi Foods Ltd. Proje ct granted by the Cabinet Committee on economic affairs of the Rajeev Gandhi Govt. 1999 Milestone Pepsi-Cola launched Diet Pepsi can and 1.5 Lit. ttle for health conscious people. 2001 Milestone 2003 Milestone Pepsi-Cola launched Pepsi Blue to get the favour of world cup season. 2005-Milestone Pepsi-Cola launched Mirinda in Straw Berry flavour to get the favour of movie Batman. 2005-Milestone Pepsi-Cola launched 7-up as 7-up ice. Pepsi-Cola launched Mountain Dew to be more competitive with Coca-cola. CELEBRITIES FOR PEPSI Following are some celebrities for Pepsi : Pepsi-Cola launched Slice in Tetra Pac . PET bo

the soft drin

Pepsi-Cola launched Slice & Teem captured about 25-30% of mar et in about 2 years.

Amitabh Bachchan Shahru h Khan Saif Ali Khan Fardeen Khan Kareena Kapoor Preity Zinta Sachin Tendul ar Saurav Ganguly Yuvraj Singh Harbhajan Singh Rahul Dravid Zaheer Khan Mohammad Kaif Priyan a Chopra FAMOUS CATCH LINES Some famous lines of Pepsi are : Yehi Hai Right Choice BabyAaha !! Nothing Official About It Choice of Next Generation More Cric et More Pepsi Yeh Aazadi Hai Dil Ki Yeh Dil mange More Zor Ka Jhat a Dheere Se Lage Pepsi Ke Liye Hum Besharam Hain Yeh Pyaas Hai Badi Do The Dew Oye Bubbly !! R .K .Jaipuria Group It can be said with absolute certainty that the RKJ Group has carved o ut a special niche for itself. Our services touch different aspects of commercia l and civilian domains li e those of Bottling, food chain and education. Headed by Mr. R. K. Jaipuria, the group as today can lay claim to expertise and leaders hip in the fields of education, food beverages. The business of the company was started in 1991 with tie- up with Pepsi Foods Li mited to manufacture and mar et Pepsi brand of beverages in geographically pre-d efined territories in which brand and technical support was provided by the Prin ciples viz., Pepsi foods Limited. The manufacturing facilities were restricted a t Jammu Plant, only Jaipuria Beverages Ltd. is the flagship company of the group . It has exclusive franchise rights for the Northern & Eastern India. It has total 27 pizza Hut Restaurants under its company. It diversified into education by opening the first school in Gurgaon under Manag ement of Delhi Public School Society. The schools of the group are run under a r egistered Trust namely Champa Devi Jaipuria Charitable Trust. Companies are medium sized, professionally managed, unlisted and closely held be tween Indian Promoters and Foreign collaborators. The group added another feather to its cap when the prestigious PepsiCo Internati onal Bottler of the year award was presented to Mr. R. K. Jaipuria for the year 1 998 at a glittering award ceremony at PepsiCos centennial year celebrations at Hawai, USA. The award was presented by M r. Donald M. Roger A. Enrico, Chairman of the Board & C.E.O., PepsiCo Inc. and M

r. Craig Weatherup, President of Pepsi Cola Company. Vision:Being the best in everything we touch and handle. Mission:Continuously excel to achieve and maintain leadership position in the chosen bus iness and delight all sta eholders by ma ing economic value additions in all cor porate functions. Success :Production of innovative, high quality retail branded beverages combined with wo rld class pac aging. Driven by management team with a relentless focus on achieving superior customer service, driving earnings improvement and shareholder value. People :RKJ creates an environment where employee enjoy a greater degree of empowerment both individually and in their wor teams. The employees are equipped with the necessary tools, training and well managemen t bac up for strong performance and accountability, as well as with an environme nt of open communication and involvement. THE RKJ GROUP INVESTMENT COMPANIES CHART

JAI BEVERAGES LTD. JAMMU JAI BEVERAGES LTD (PEPSI), R.Pura, JAMMU is a Bottling Plant of Pepsi Cola Brand s. Today, JBL is the top position holding company among the soft drin bottling companies in India. Its registered office is located in New Delhi and corporat e office at Jammu. It is a Franchise company of PepsiCo India holding. Its a R.K . JAIPURIA GROUP COMPANY. The group is a largely diversified rising group having interest in Soft Drin Bottling, Restaurant chains under the Brand name of Pizza Hut and Tricon & Creambell Ice Cream manufacturing, power project, Export and m any other projects. It is having Pepsi Bottling Plants in various places of Ind ia as well as out of India. It is on the rising path under and the wisdom guida nce of its chairman Mr. R.K.JAIPURIA. The VBL plant was established in the year 1999 in Jammu. It was the first plant to start its operation in the Jammu. Jammu Industrial Development Authority has awarded and given early production incentive for being starting and competing t he project very first in Jammu. The companys mainly operate the Bottling and mar eting of Pepsi Cola Brand. Its product brand are Pepsi, Mirinda-orange, Mirinda-Lemon, Mirinda-Apple, Slice , 7-Up, Evervess Soda. Its mar eting Networ is spread in Jammu , Shrinagar, Haryana, Delhi(TRANS YAMUNA) and Uttaranchal. JBL has always secured top position in its best quality and mar eting. Mr.R.K.JA IPURIA who is the chairman of the group, received various award for the best qua lity and mar eting. He has also been awarded for good quality and mar eting in South Asia with EXCELLANCY AWARD by Mr. GEORGE BUSH, former president of U.S.A. i n 1998.

AIM The main aim of JBL Jammu plant is to provide soft drin to the people of India in its assigned territory, which is helpful in eeping cool their mind. The aim of this company is also to provide full satisfaction to the customers. And most importantly, through a range of customer relevant product manufactured with care and quality in a fully hygiene environment. QUALITY POLICY Deliver the best product in the mar et place The highest Quality The best Tasting

Different Brands of Pepsi Co.(India) Pepsi Co is today having the soft drin s mar et in India with lots of its brands . They have also diversified into different sectors. Their popularly exiting bra nds in the Indian Mar et are as follows: Soft Drin s 1) Pepsi 2) Pepsi Blue 3) Diet Pepsi 4) Mountain Dew 5) Slice 6) 7Up Purified Drin ing Water Aquafina Fruit Juice Tropicana Chips Frito-Lays Ruffles

Composition of Pepsi Pepsi Contains: Carbonated water, high fructose corn syrup and/or sugar, caramel color , phosphoric acid, caffeine, citric acid and natural flavors Calories 100 Total Fats (g) 0 Sodium (mg) 25 Potassium (mg) 10 Total Carbohydrates (g) 27 Sugars (g) 27 Protein (g) 0 Caffeine (mg) 25 Pepsi Blue Contains: Carbonated water, high fructose corn syrup and/or sugar, citric acid, natural and artificial flavors, phosphoric acid, potassium citrate, potassium be nzoate and potassium sorbate (to preserve freshness), caffeine, gum arabic, asco rbic acid and calcium disodium EDTA (to protect flavor), blue 1, red 40 Calories 100 Total Fats (g) 0 Sodium (mg) 25 Total Carbohydrates (g) 27 Sugars (g) 26 Protein (g) 0 Caffeine (mg) 25 Diet Pepsi Contains: Carbonated water, caramel color, aspartame, phosphoric acid, potassium

benzoate (preserves freshness), caffeine, citric acid and natural flavors Calories 0 Total Fats (g) 0 Sodium (mg) 25 Potassium (mg) 20 Total Carbohydrates (g) 0 Sugars (g) 0 Protein (g) 0 Caffeine (mg) 24 PRODUCTION SET UP Jammu plant is a dedicated plant for 7 major products. These are as follows : PRODUCT BOTTLING FILLING PEPSI 300ML, 200ML MIRINDA ORANGE 300ML, 200ML MIRINDA LEMON 300ML, 200ML SLICE 250ML 7- UP 300ML, 200ML EVERVESS SODA 300ML MOUNTAIN DEW 200ML & 300ML Plant is producing 10 million cases every year. Plant has employed about 200 emp loyees on permanent and casual basis. There are 40 mangers/officers/ supervisor s and rest of wor men. Plant is dispatching near about125-150 truc s in pea sea sons per day to various location. This Plant is spread in pea seasons per day t o various location. This plant is spread over 7.5 acre. 1.3 1.4 PROBLEMS OF THE ORGANIZATION Service delivery / Logistics perception is wea Negative Environment Top management ta es large amount of time to approve high value loan borrowers. COMPETITION INFORMATION COCA-COLA INDIA PVT LTD DABUR INDIA LTD MOUNT EVEREST MINERAL WATERS LTD NARANGS HOSPITALITY SERVICES PVT LTD PARLE AGRO PVT LTD PARLE BISLERI LTD PIOMA INDUSTRIES LTD

1.5 SWOT ANALYSIS STRENGTHS 1. Company belongs to the FMCG sector so the demand will never die. 2. A large and strong distribution networ . (In comparison to the other com petitive brand Pepsi is having better reach to the mar et.) 3. Professional and dedicated manpower. (Starting from the higher-level man agement to the sales-man Pepsis employees is having great degree of dedication an d professional attitude towards selling the products. On the other hand companie s operational staff always try their maximum strength to meet the demand and util ize the recourses to maximum.) 4. More emphasis on mar et penetration. (Companies efforts of providing the Pepsi and other products to the customers doorstep are wor ing vis--vis wherever the transportation is not possible dealers are appointed.) 5. In comparison to Coca-Colas red color, which is brighter and have more vi sibility Pepsis blue color provide sense of relax ness in the bright sunny day. 6. In the rural areas and outs irts of the city where there is maximum popu lation is illiterate, Pepsi is having an edge. (As compared to Coca-Cola, pronou

ncing Pepsi is lot more easy reason for more demand of the Pepsi and its brands. ) 7. More popularity among the ids and female youth. (Because of the sweeten ed taste Pepsi and its other brands attracts the ids and female more. Mirinda i s found more popular among ids.). 8. Retain ability of the T.V. advertisements of Pepsi is far more in compar ison to Coca - Cola. (Pepsis T.V. advertisement in which Sachin Tendul ar whistle s at the end has maximum retain ability. Other than this world cup 2003 advertis ement campaign that comprises of Sachin Tendul ar, Shane Warne and Carl Hooper, advertisement campaign which comprises of Amitabh Bachan, Karma Kapoor and Adnan Sami and latest advertisements of Pepsi and Mountain Dew (Do the Dew) are very famous. On the other hand Coca-Colas advertisement campaign of thanda matlab CocaCola and Amir Khans five rupees add have the maximum retainability. WEAKNESS 1. Coca-Colas red color has more visibility than Pepsis blue color. (Because of the bright color of Coca-Cola it is more visible even from the distance as co mpared to Pepsi) 2. Pepsis sinages are far more scattered as compared to Coca-Cola. (Because of this at some places it loo s that the mar et is captured by Coca-Cola.). 3. Low plant capacity because of which company is not able to meet its dema nd during the pea season. (Devyani Beverages India Ltd., Pepsis Greater Noida pl ant has one continuous assembly line for preparing tetra and four continuous ass embly lines which are filling around 15,000 bottle/day, which is insufficient to complete the demand during the pea seasons.). 4. Lesser plant utilization during the off-pea seasons. (During the winter season as the demand is very low, plant and resource utilization goes down.) 5. Lac of automaton in the administrative department in the plant, which r esults in wastage of time and sometimes in resources also. OPPORTUNITIES 1. Demand is more than the production. (Because of the heat the demand of t he soft drin raised drastically which is the good opportunity for the company a the rival brands are also finding it difficult to complete the demand. Therefor e PepsiCo. has to increase the production.) 2. In the rural areas PepsiCos distribution networ is far stronger vis.-I-v is to any of the competitor. Therefore it is viable to ma e it more stronger, as this can restrict the entry of the other brands in the rural mar et. 3. Kids demand for the Mirinda more as compared to any other orange flavor soft drin brand. 4. With the launch of slice tetra PepsiCo has entered in to one more segmen t of soft drin beverages, which was more or less captured by the Frooti till now. THREATS 1. Not able to meet the mar et demand during the pea season. (As the plant capacity is very low the company is not able to meet the existing demand during the pea seasons). 2. Pepsi is not pic ing up the empty bottles of Coca-Cola on the other hand Coca-Cola is exchanging the Pepsis empty bottles with the filled bottles of Coca -Cola. (This is hitting the Pepsi in two ways, firstly our bottles are getting t uc ed with the Coca-Cola and creating shortage of empty bottles of Pepsi in the mar et, and secondly when our salesman goes to distribute the re-filled bottles in the mar et, he tends to meet with the lac of sales at the end of the day des pite of the increasing demand because wherever he goes he found the empty bottle s of Coca-Cola everywhere which he is as ed not to pic ed up. 3. There is lot of complaints are coming up about the impurities or lea age of gas or lea age of carbonated water. (Within the last 30 days I met around 50 such complaints because of which retailers were very angry with the company). 4. Some of the filling equipments in the plant are quite old which one of t he reasons for low production is. 5. There is no proper policy of distributing the merchandising assets of th e company to the retailers. (Many of the retailers have so many things though th eir sales are low but few of them dont have anything inspite of large sales.).

Chapter 2 OBJECTIVE AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 2.1 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY: To study the various types of Performance Appraisal methods. To study the Performance Appraisal method being used at Jai Beverages Ltd. To establish a direct relationship between wor performance and Performance Appr aisal system. 2.2 HYPOTHESIS: - The research questions that have been devised for this dissertation pertain to the following: 1. See to identify and comprehend the relationship between culture and mar eting for consumer and apply it to the Chinese beverage mar et. 2. Analyze the performance of the Pepsi Co Incorporated and its operations based on the growth of the Chinese beverage industry and the success of the comp anys mar eting strategy in the region. Analyze the Chinese beverage mar et and the behavior of the carbonated drin s co nsumers/ target mar et from a cultural perspective.

The following are the hypothesis for the research underta en in the dissertation : H1: The Main factor which provo es consumers to buy Pepsi include good performa nce of public relations and promotions of the products H2: The products of Pepsi in China have significant local cultural elements in t hem. H3: Customers very li e to support Pepsis culture activities 2.3 RESEARCH DESIGN: - The method is used for my research design was the des criptive way of designing which is as under: Descriptive Research Descriptive research has been conducted as the primary data was studied and analyzed according to the need of the study. 2.4 SAMPLE DESIGN: Target Population: The target population under this survey are the schools, canteens, colleges, restaurants, banquet halls and other beverage stalls etc. w hich eep Pepsi products and are in contract with Pepsi Food Pvt Ltd. Type of Universe: Retailers or mar eters who sell Pepsi products in the finite type of universe. Consumers of Pepsi products are the infinite type of universe. Type of Sampling: The sample is drawn on non-probability sampling basis i.e. No n-random sampling technique has been used. The list of target population is defi nite and already decided in advance. As we now that the sample design is carried out in two main parts:1. Sample unit: - Each respondent was considered as a single unit in the survey. 2. Sample size: - The sample size ta en into consideration includes simple of ar ound 90 related people in various different location. The sample size has been d ecided in accordance with the instructions been given by the Pepsi Food Pvt. L td. The sample was done ta ing 100 units. 2.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY: To find out the loopholes (if any) in the Performance Appraisal System at Jai Be verages Ltd. To have an overloo over the changes and improvements made in the Company 2.1 METHODOLOGY Research Methodology is a way to systematically solve the research problem invol ving a study of various steps that are adopted by the researcher in studying his

/her research problem. Data Collection There are two methods for collecting the data. They are: 1) Primary Data 2) Secondary Data 1. Primary data: There are several methods of collecting Primary data. These a re given below. A- Observation method: The observation method is the most commonly used method especially in studies relating to behavioral sciences. Under the observation met hod the information is sought by way of investigators own direct observation with out as ing from the respondent. B:- Interview method: The interview method of collecting data involves presenta tion of oral verbal and stimuli reply in terms of oral verbal responses. This m ethod can be used through personal interviews and if possible through telephonic interviews. C: - Questionnaires; - This method of data collection is quite popular particula rly in case of enquiries. It is being adopted by private individuals, research purposes, private and public organizations and even by governments. In this meth od questionnaires are sent to the persons of concern with the request to answer the questions and return the questionnaires. The respondents have to answer the questions on their own. In this project I have used questionnaires as one of the primary sources of coll ecting data. 3. Secondary Data When an investigator uses the data that has been already collected by others is called Secondary Data. The secondary adapt could be collected from Journals, Rep orts and various publications, web sites. The advantages of the secondary data c an be- it is economical, both in terms of money and time spent. 2.6 LIMITATIONS Every Study suffers from certain limitations and so does this project. So, the applicability of the findings and recommendations is subjected to the fo llowing mentioned constraints/limitations Respondents were reluctant to give their views on data or open to other Shortage of time duration for the research wor Hiding of some true facts by the respondents due to the fear of the management Though care has been ta en, judgement errors may have occurred Employees being very busy did not get enough time to give responses whole-hearte dly Some of the responses given by the respondents were not legible and clear.

Chapter 4 DATA ANALYSIS DATA ANALYSIS Analysis has been made on the data collected by means of Questionnaires. For thi s purpose, I prepared two questionnaires First for the permanent Wor ers and Sta ff members and Second for the Managers of jai puria Beverages Ltd.

The Questionnaires have been prepared eeping in mind the level and magnitude of activities carried out by the Wor ers, Staff & Managers. The basic aim of quest ionnaire is to find out the mental perspective of the respondent towards the Per formance Appraisal exercise followed at jai puria Beverages Lt. The Questionnaire also aims at finding the level of motivation of the respondent with reference to the performance appraisal exercise i.e. whether the responden t feels motivated after his appraisal and wor s hard for the same. The questionnaire also highlights some suggestions given by the respondents as a lternatives which the organization can practice for better wor ing and for impro ving satisfaction level of the employees.

ANALYSIS BASED ON QUESTIONNAIRE ( WORKERS & STAFFS) Inference From the sample size of 40 respondents, only 24 are aware about the performance appraisal system while other 16 are unaware about this.

Q2) Are you satisfied with the existing P.A. Method followed in the Company? Highly RESPONSE HIGHLY 11 MODERATE NOT AT ALL TOTAL 40 Moderate NO. OF RESPONDENT 28% 19 47% 10 25% 100% PERCENTAGE Not at all

Inference It is thus cleared from the above analysis that about are 28 % strongly satisfie d, 47% are moderately satisfies and 25% are unsatisfied by the performance appra isal system at VBL. This shows a very much unsatisfaction among employees regarding Performance Sys tem at VBL Q3) Are there Biases in the existing P.A. Method? Yes RESPONSE Yes 28 No 12 No NO. OF RESPONDENT 70% 30% PERCENTAGE

It is thus cleared from the above analysis that about 40 % doesnt mance appraisal system at VBL

now the perfor

Total

40

100%

Inference About 70% of the employees feel that there are biases in the Performance Apprai sal system at VBL. This part constitutes a large amount of the total respondents.

Q4) Are you satisfied with the increment in your Salary? Yes RESPONSE Yes 07 No 33 Total 40 No NO. OF RESPONDENT 18% 82% 100% PERCENTAGE

Inference From 40 respondent, 33 unsatisfied from their increment in salary and only 7 are satisfied. This shows a improper increment in salary or low satisfaction level among employ ee regarding their salary increment.

Q5) Did Varun Beverages Ltd. provide any training at beginning of your joining? Yes RESPONSE Yes 29 No 11 Total 40 No NO. OF RESPONDENT 72% 28% 100% PERCENTAGE

Inference Among 40 respondents, 29 said that they got training after joining the organizat ion while rest 11 respond to NO. This shows that Training Program is also not underta en with much care or there may be some malfunctioning.

Q6) Is proper action ta en after the fulfillment of the PA Forms?

Yes RESPONSE Yes 12 No 28 Total 40

No NO. OF RESPONDENT 30% 70% 100% PERCENTAGE

As per the respondents, the proper actions are not being carried after the filli ng of Appraisal Forms. About 70% of the respondents, responds to NO, which shows a much amount and also some mal-functionings in Performance Appraisal System

Q7) Is the PA exercise strictly followed or is just a formality? Strictly followed RESPONSE NO. OF Strictly Followed Moderate 20 Formality 12 TOTAL 40 100% Moderate PERCENTAGE Formality

RESPONDENT 08 12% 50% 30%

Inference The above data shows that very few employee feels that the Performance Appraisal System really wor s in a proper way and most of were in the view of it as a For mality one and is made on the papers.

Completely RESPONSE Completely Moderate Not at all TOTAL 40 NO. OF 10 15 15 100% RESPONDENT 25% 37% 38%

Inference From the above analysis one can find that there not proper discussion is being c arried among seniors and the junior employees

Q8) Are you satisfied from the Feedbac

you get from your Supervisors? Moderate PERCENTAGE Not at all

Q9) If the existing PA Method be changed? Would you readily accept the change? Yes RESPONSE Yes 29 No 11 Total 40 No NO. OF RESPONDENT 72% 28% 100% PERCENTAGE

Inference Among 40 respondents, 29 said to change in existing Performance Appraisal Method and also they will accept the newer method while rest 11 were satisfied to the existing method and are not willing for new method

Q10) After filling PA Forms, are the results discussed between the Seniors & Subordinates ? Yes RESPONSE Yes 28 No 12 Total 40 No NO. OF RESPONDENT 70% 30% 100% PERCENTAGE

Inference About 70% of the employees feel that there are biases in the Performance

ANALYSIS BASED ON QUESTIONNAIRE (MANAGERS) Q1) Are you aware of the Performance Appraisal (PA) Method followed in Varun B everages Ltd.? Yes No

RESPONSE NO. OF RESPONDANT PECENTAGE Yes 35 87% No 05 13% TOTAL 40 100%

Inference From the sample size of 40 respondents, 35 are aware about the performance appra isal system while other 05 are unaware about this.

RESPONSE Self Peers 02 Subordinates 04 Supervisors Unit Manager Chair Person Total 40

NO. OF RESPONDANT 02 5% 5% 10% 02 12 18 100% 5% 30% 45%

PECENTAGE

Inference This shows that the Managers are Appraised mostly by the Unit Managers & the Cha ir Person Q3) Is PA at Managerial level seriously underta en? Yes No RESPONSE Yes 07 No 33 Total 40 NO. OF RESPONDENT 18% 82% 100% PERCENTAGE

Inference The above analysis shows that the Performance Appraisal is ta en under seriously as about 82% respondents have agreed regarding the respective question.

It is thus cleared from the above analysis that about 13 % doesnt mance appraisal system at VBL Q)2 Who Appraises the Leaders/Heads/Managers? Self Supervisors Peers Unit Manager Sub-ordinates Chair Person

now the perfor

Q4) Are you satisfied with the existing P.A. Method followed in the Company? Highly RESPONSE HIGHLY 11 MODERATE NOT AT ALL TOTAL 40 Moderate NO. OF RESPONDENT 28% 19 47% 10 25% 100% PERCENTAGE Not at all

Inference It is thus cleared from the above analysis that about are 28 % strongly satisfie d, 47% are moderately satisfies and 25% are unsatisfied by the performance appra isal system at VBL. This shows a very much unsatisfaction among employees regarding Performance Sys tem at VBL Q5) Are you satisfied with the increment in your Salary? Yes RESPONSE Yes 33 No 07 Total 40 No NO. OF RESPONDENT 82% 18% 100% PERCENTAGE

Inference From 40 respondent, 33 unsatisfied from their increment in salary and only 7 are satisfied. This shows a improper increment in salary or low satisfaction level among employ ee regarding their salary increment.

Q6) Does the Appraisal System of the company motivates you? Always To a great extent To some extent Not at all RESPONSE NO. OF Always 18 44 To a great Extent To some extent 07 Not at all 05 Total 40 100% RESPONDENT 10 18 13 25 PERCENTAGE

Inference The analysis shows that the Managers are motivated to different levels. However , most of the Managers are motivated Always form the Performance Appraisal method at the organization. Q7) Are there Biases in the existing P.A. Method? Yes RESPONSE Yes 28 No 12 Total 40 No NO. OF RESPONDENT 70% 30% 100% PERCENTAGE

Inference About 70% of the employees feel that there are biases in the Performance Apprai sal system at VBL. This part constitutes a large amount of the total respondents.

Q8) In your opinion, do Managers requires Management Development Programmes (MDP)? Yes RESPONSE Yes 33 No 07 Total 40 No NO. OF RESPONDENT 82% 18% 100% PERCENTAGE

Inference From 40 responding Managers, around 33 agreed in the view that the MDP should be given to them, while rest 07 disagreed and doesnt need the programme

Q9) Has Varun Beverages Ltd. organized any Training Programmes for its Managers or Department Heads etcs?. Yes RESPONSE Yes 29 No 11 Total 40 No NO. OF RESPONDENT 72% 28% 100% PERCENTAGE

Inference Among 40 respondents, 29 said that they got training after joining the organizat ion while rest 11 respond to NO. This shows that Training Program is also not underta en with much care or there may be some malfunctioning.

Q10) Do you thin the Training MDP will affect the performance levels of the Leaders? Highly RESPONSE HIGHLY 11 MODERATE NOT AT ALL TOTAL 40

Moderate NO. OF RESPONDENT 28% 19 47% 10 25% 100% PERCENTAGE

Inference Regarding affect of MDP over Mangers, many of the respondents were in Moderate v iew. However, respondent in view of Highly & Not at all are almost the same.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDATIONS Certain recommendations can be made after interviewing various employees at diff erent levels with the help of my data sheet. Some recommendations are as follows : Good performer should not only be rewarded by promotion etc.,but also by appreci ation of their performance in public Wor ers opinion regarding their job should be given more priority. The wor relat ed benefits li e overtime, production incentives expenses should be provided to the employees There should be proper utilization of existing manpower

Not at all

 Employees should be given recognition at proper intervals. Suggestions from the employees should be welcomed with open arms and if found su itable should be implemented More opportunities should be given to the employees regarding, T&D, MDPs, partic ipation in decision ma ings etcs.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS REFFERED: Ramaswami.v.s, Mar eting management, MacMillan publications , 2009(4th edition) pg 695-671 Kotler Philip, Mar eting Management New Delhi, Prentice Hall of India, 2009(13th e dition) pg 476-478 Britannica Encyclopedia Kothari.c.r. Research Methodology, pearson publication, 2007(14th edition)pg 156 -170 INTERNET: www.google.com http://www.mar etingteacher.com/swot/pepsi-swot.html access on 05/07/11 at 3.30 pm http://www.pepsico.com/Company/Our-History.html access on 06/07/11 at 4.00 pm www.pepsicoindia.co.in/ home access on 07/07/11 at 11:00 am http://www.pepsico.com/Company/Our-Mission-and-Vision.html access on 02/07/11 at 3:30 pm www.wi ipedia.org http://en.wi ipedia.org/wi i/PepsiCo access on 03/07/11 at 4:00pm http://www.nos.org/Secbuscour/24.pdf access on 04/07/11 at 7.24 pm NEWS PAPER The Hindu Daini jagaran

Chapter 6

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Magazine: Mar eting magazine http://www.mar etingmagazine.co.u /bulletin/dailynews/article/1075878/?DCMP=E MC-Brea ingnewsfromMar eting

ANNEXURE QUESTIONNAIRE ( For Wor ers & Staff Members ) Name :- .. Age:- (Tic mar Under 20 Under 30 Under 40 to which you belong) years Under 50 years years Under 60 years years Under 70 years Accounts Security PMX HR Maintenance Mar eting

Deptt :Production Quality Control TPT Designation:-.. Grade:W1 W2 W3

S1 S2 S3

Current Salary (in Rs):-. Experiences(in Years) :-................. First Promotion :-.

Salary (Before 1st Promotion):-.. 1) Are you aware of the Performance Appraisal (PA) Method followed in Varun Beverages Ltd.? Yes No Are you satisfied with the existing P.A. Method followed in the Company? Highly Moderate Not at all Are there Biases in the existing P.A. Method?

2) 3)

Yes 4) 5) ng? 6) 7) 8) 9)

No

Are you satisfied with the increment in your Salary? Yes No Did Varun Beverages Ltd. provide any training at beginning of your joini Yes No

Is proper Training given/recommended in PA Forms? Yes No Is proper action ta en after the fulfillment of the PA Forms? Yes No Is the PA exercise strictly followed or is just a formality? Strictly followed Moderate Formality Are you satisfied from the Feedbac you get from your Supervisors? Completely Moderate Not at all

10) After filling PA Forms, are the results discussed between the Seniors & Subordinates ? Yes QUESTIONNAIRE (For Managers) Name :- .. Age:- (Tic mar Under 20 Under 30 Under 40 Deptt :Production Accounts Quality Control TPT Designation:-.. Grade:M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 Current Salary (in Rs):-. Experiences(in Years) :-............. First Promotion :-. M6 M7 M8 M9 M10 PMX HR Maintenance Security Mar eting to which you belong) years Under 50 years years Under 60 years years Under 70 years No

Salary (Before 1st Promotion):-..

1) Are you aware of the Performance Appraisal (PA) method followed in Varu n Beverages Ltd.? Yes No 2) How frequently is PA done ? Monthly Quarterly Semi-Annually Annually Who Appraises the Leaders/Heads/Managers? Self Supervisors Peers Sub-ordinates Is PA at Managerial level seriously underta en? Yes No Are you satisfied with the existing P.A. Method followed in the Company? Highly Moderate Not at all Are you satisfied with the increment in your Salary? Yes No Does the Appraisal System of the company motivates you? Always To a great extent To some extent Not at all Are there Biases in the existing P.A. Method? Yes No Which PA Method would you alternatively suggest for the existing one?

3)

5) 6) 7)

8) 9)

Suggestions (if any):- 10) ..................................... . ..

CHAPTER 8: CASE STUDY

4)

CASE STUDY I. CURRENT SITUATION A. Corporate Overview and Financial Performance: PepsiCo, Inc. is one of the most successful consumer products companies in the w orld, with 2000 revenues of over $20 billion and 125,000 employees. The company consists of: Frito-Lay Company, the largest manufacturer and distributor of snac chips; Pepsi-Cola Company, the second largest soft drin business and Tropican a Products, the largest mar eter and producer of branded juice. PepsiCo brands a re among the best nown and most respected in the world and are available in abo ut 190 countries and territories. In 2000, PepsiCo has a reported net sale of $20,348 and a comparable net sale of $20,144 in comparison to its 1999s net sales of $20,367 and $18,666 respectively . PepsiCo has increased its comparable net sale of 8% in 2000 while it had an in crease of 15% in 1999. This reflects the increasing rate is going slower. On the other hand, PepsiCos interest expense declines 39% showing that the company is s ignificantly lower the average debt level. Bac to 1999, the report shows that t he companys interest expense dropped 8%, which indicates that the company is perf orming well in managing its financial strategies. More details about the financi al performance of the company will be discussed in the later part of this paper. B. Strategic Posture: 1. Mission: PepsiCo's overall mission is to increase the value of shareholder's investment. They do this through sales growth, cost controls and wise investment of resource s. They believe their commercial success depends upon offering quality and value to their consumers and customers; providing products that are safe, wholesome, economically efficient and environmentally sound; and providing a fair return to their investors while adhering to the highest standards of integrity. 2. Objectives: PepsiCos overriding objective is to increase the value of our shareholders' inves tment through integrated operating, investing and financing

REFERENCES REFERENCES HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Human Resource Management & Personnel Management byal Human Resource Management

- T.N.

ohli

- Mr. Ra esh sam

RESEARH METHODOLOGY Research Methodology MARKETING RESEARH Mar eting Research WEBSITES www.pepsi.com www.pepsiworld.com www.pepsico.com www.pbg.com www.r jgroup.com www.google.com

- C.R. Kothari - Rajendra gupta