The document discusses a case study about Best Food Products Company and its chairman, Mr. Srinivasa Raghavan. Mr. Raghavan was facing problems with the working of the vice presidents. He decided to introduce product-wise departmentation, splitting the vice presidents' roles and setting up six product managers reporting to a product marketing manager. Each product manager would be responsible for one product. While this would provide clearer roles, Mr. Raghavan was concerned about potential confusion in reporting relationships under this new structure. He sought advice from a university faculty friend on how to avoid such confusion.

1. Case study

2. Departmentation
Best Food Products Company

3. Summary
Mr.Srinivasa Raghavan, the chairman of the best Food
Product Industry.
Problem faced by Mr. Raghvan Regadring working of vice
presidents.

4. Summary
Example of sales vice president
Mr.Raghavan splitting vice president and want to introduce product
wise departmentation.

5. Summary
Many of the branded food products were produced and used same
factory equipment and same raw materials.
Consequently, Mr.Raghavan came to conclusion that the best thing to
do was to set up six product managers reporting to a product
marketing manager.

6. Summary
Each product manager responsible for each product.
Mr.Raghavan realised that he could not give these product managers
actual line authority over the various operating departments of the
company.

7. Summary
He was concerned about this problem but one of his friends on
university faculty for suggestion.
Mr.Raghavan resolves to put the product structure in his organisation
as outlined but he wondered how he could avoid the problem of
confusion in reporting relationships.

8. Question Answer for
discussion

9. 1. Do you agree with
Mr.Raghavan programme?
Would you have done it
differently?

10. 1. you agree with Mr.Raghavan programme?
Would you have done it differently?
Yes, we do agree with Mr.Raghavan programme.
We would have done it differently by doing departmentation by
territory :
Large companies that distribute products on a massive scale,
nationally. Decisions regarding product design, pricing and
marketing may left to the discretion of zonal managers who are
close to customers and know their zone very well and know their
customers’ needs.

11. 1. you agree with Mr.Raghavan programme?
Would you have done it differently?
Territorial departmentation reduces transport costs.
Territorial departmentation helps local managers to assess the
needs of local customers closely and serve them well.
Economics of localized operations are also available.

12. 1. you agree with Mr.Raghavan programme?
Would you have done it differently?
Business expansion across various regions is possible.
Each region head can focus attention on a region in an exclusive
manner and gain comfortable experience in handling the peculiar
problems of a local unit independently.

13. 2.Exactly what would you do to
avoid any confusion in this
organisation?

14. 2.Exactly what would you do to avoid any
confusion in this organisation?
For avoiding any confusion in this organisation we would
advise to do things we have mentioned below:
Performance appraisal :
The performance of people working in department can be
appraise easily against the assigned goals and targets.
So in this case a chairman Mr.Raghavan can do performance
appraisal of his vice presidents.

15. 2.Exactly what would you do to avoid any
confusion in this organisation?
Communication and control :
Departmentation facilitates communication, coordination and
control and contributes to the organisational success.
In this case Mr.Raghavan can have a communication control
over his vice presidents

16. 2.Exactly what would you do to avoid any
confusion in this organisation?
Responsibility :
In responsibility people know what to do and what not to do and
they also know what they are supposed to do in order to meet
targets and deadlines.
When they fail to live up to expectations and go off the track it
is easy to find out where things have gone wrong.

17. Conclusion

18. Thank you