This 4 page paper examines a Harvard Business Review case study entitled "Ben & Jerry's Homemade Ice Cream, Inc.: Keeping the Mission Alive." Several questions, posed by a student, are answered. No additional sources cited.
Name of Research Paper File: RT13_SA536Ben.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
genetic coding, using the case study at hand, it seems that there are a variety of issues. First and foremost, Ben and Jerrys stands for something. It has a unique
worldview and may be deemed a political company. The primary point made by the firm is that people at the lower echelons will only be slightly removed from those at
the top. Unlike firms that employ people at minimum wage, but have CEOs making billions, Ben and Jerrys five to one ratio structure means that someone at the lowest level
of the firm may make $20,000 per year, but no one-even the CEO-makes more than $100,000. It is good in theory. At least, people will feel they are working for
a company that is fair. However, according to the case study, many complain that this strategy lets potential new hires out of the marketplace. Effectively, the policy creates more barriers
than benefits. And while the pay scale is close, that does not mean that a hierarchal structure is not in place. Certainly, part of the problem with the firm is
that it does not also incorporate a flat structure. In any event, the genetic encoding also includes a company culture reliant on social activism. Some see this as hypocritical as
the firm has taken advantage of the marketplace. Yet, when all is said and done, its core competencies include good market timing and sensitivity, and the ability to manufacture a
good product. Many issues for this company, related to the genetic coding, has to do with the fact that many employees are not happy with the status quo. This is
problematic. Also, critics have a point in that there is a competitive human resource marketplace. By limiting salary ranges, the firm is also limiting its growth.