Monsanto Company Analysis

Monsanto is a St. Louis based company that is one of the most successful agricultural technology companies for over a century now. It is a sustainable agricultural company that is client oriented. Whats more is that it is worldwide and supports farmers from all around the world regardless of the race or country of origin. It provides a forum of motivating small and large scale farmers to maximize their farm profits while at the same time promoting the conservation of the natural resources such as energy and water. Below is a SWOT analysis of Monsanto Company CITATION Lau05 \l 1033 (Mullins, 2005).

If this sample essay on"Monsanto Company Analysis" doesn’t help,
our writers will!

Trust an expert

Strengths

1. Sustainability

Monsanto is a self sustaining company. Ever since its establishment more than a century ago, Monsanto has never run broke nor shut its doors. It has managed to exhibit steady development throughout the years and employing more staff. This can be largely attributed to the capable management heading it.

2. Surety of Revenue

Monsantos sustainability can also be attributed to the availability of revenue. As it stands now, the company has over 10 billion USD in the name of revenue. This is used as the working capital ensuring the company is not in deficit. Therefore, there are enough funds to run the company and purchase the required equipment and pay the employees.

3. Employee Motivation

Monsanto motivates their employees sufficiently. This is through benefits such as:

Providing them with vacations and paid time offs.

Offering them health insurances.

Good salaries and overtime allowances.

Other forms of motivation that may not be so obvious include: flexible work time, performance measurement and rewarding them accordingly.

4. Dedicated Employees

As a result of the motivation Monsanto offers its employees, they win their loyalty and enhance their diligence. Their dedication is facilitated and this only makes them work harder hence, better results and increased profits for both the employees and the company. They make it a win-win situation for both parties as a motivation strategy.

Weaknesses

1. Time Consuming

Monsanto appreciates and pays attention to every new idea brought up by newbie. This becomes tiresome and time consuming since some ideas are irrelevant and out rightly failure bound. Nevertheless, because their policy allows such, it has to be looked into.

2. Ideological Differences

Just like any big organization involving a lot of people, ideological differences are bound to occur. Not everyone will be in agreement with your idea, regardless of how nice or sensible it is. The same way, a bad idea may be popular for other reasons other than beneficial. These differences arise and before they are solved a lot of time and resources are used unnecessarily CITATION Bat11 \l 1033 (Bateman & Snell, 2011).

3. Matrix Structure

Monsanto as a company lacks a hierarchal structure. This is a weakness as no one is directly in charge of others and therefore, everyone is his/her own boss and supervisor. This means no one is tasked with overseeing and monitoring the progress of employees. This is a big fail on the companys management because the few employees who are servants of the eye will be dragging the company down without being known. This matrix system also lacks accountability of resources and employees.

Recommendations

As a part of the management team, I would advocate for a hierarchical structure of organization so as to monitor, assess and evaluate the company at each level. This will also make it easier to distinguish the hard workers from their relatively lazy colleagues. Problem shooting will also be enhanced under this structure.

The company does not offer training funds. I would advocate for this as a means of motivating new employees and those interested in joining our company.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bateman, T. S., & Snell, S. A. (2011). Management. New York: Mc Graw Hill.

Mullins, L. J. (2005). Management and organisational behaviour. New York: Prentice Hall/Financial Times.