This presentation discusses Unilever's sustainability efforts in sourcing tea. It addresses why Unilever committed to sourcing 100% of its tea sustainably, whether Rainforest Alliance certification has been successful, and what Unilever should do with its tea business in India. The presenter argues that while Rainforest Alliance certification had high costs and limited success, marketing sustainable tea to consumers in India could improve quality, costs, and farmers' livelihoods. Committing to source all agricultural inputs sustainably makes strategic and economic sense for Unilever through cost savings, ensuring raw material supply, social responsibility, and setting industry standards.
1. Dear Audience
Welcome to my todays presentation class
Presenting by: Yousuf Ali
ID NO:1525044
Department of Marketing.
Islamic university, Bangladesh.
5. .
Question No 1: Why did Unilever commit to sustainability source 100% of its Tea?
Question No 2: Has Rainforest alliance certification been a success for Unilever? Why or
Why not ?
Question No 3: What should Unilever do with its Tea business in India? Should it
pursue Rainforest alliance certification? Should it market sustainable tea to consumers?
Question No4: Why has Unilever committed to sources 100% of its agricultural inputs
sustainability? Does this commitment make strategic and economic sense?
6. Question No 1: Why did Unilever commit to sustainability source 100% of its Tea?
Unilever did commit to sustainability source 100% of its Tea for the increasing and develop of
the following requirements:
Quality
Quantity
Customer satisfaction
Reducing operating costs.
Brand equity
Market share.
Meet to abnormal rainfall climate change.
living standard of farmers.
Average income 10% to 15%.
7. Question No 2: Has Rainforest alliance certification been a success for
Unilever? Why or Why not ?
Rainforest alliance certification had not been success for Unilever.
Why not? This question answer are in the following:
Actions had to take:
Certification cost $4000 to $ 10000.
Participation fee $0.0125 for per kilogram of tea.
Had to pay 2,00,000 Euro for the farmer training.
Invested $ 1.72 million to update facilities.
8. Consequences
Challenges in developing large volumes.
Had not experience with tea nor with Africa.
Market share growth in just some markets.
Some sales increase in UK, Australia, Italy.
France and US sales was remain constant.
Decision making: Analyzing this two steps we are finding that consequences of
rainforest alliance certification is very narrow. So it had not been success for Unilever.
9. Unilever should consider the following things, when they are going to
do its tea business in India:
Consumed domestically.
Tea is grown by smallholders
Sold it to local factories.
Has govt. regulations.
Use child labor and pesticide use.
Competitors.
Question No 3: What should Unilever do with its Tea business in India?
Should it pursue Rainforest alliance certification? Should it market sustainable
tea to consumers?
10. What will be pursued by Unilever tea in India Rainforest alliance certification or sustainable
tea to consumers?
Restriction of Rainforest alliance:
Did not permit certified firms to employ anyone under the age of 15.
Did not permit to use pesticide.
Benefits of Market sustainable tea to consumers:
Quality and quantity of the tea for satisfying consumers.
Reducing operating costs.
Brand equity and market share.
Farmers to meet the abnormal rainfall climate change.
To improve the lives of farmers.
To increase average income 10% to 15%.
11. Yes the commitment make strategic and economic sense.
Cost savings ( operating cost)
Preservation of raw materials ( 50% come from farms and forests)
Corporate social responsibility and stewardship ( workers,
communities)
Establish industry standards.
Question No4: Why has Unilever committed to sources 100% of its agricultural
inputs sustainability? Does this commitment make strategic and economic
sense?
