Anna, Hr director, unilever, had just returned from the meeting with top corporate management. The meeting was dedicated to the recent transaction – acquisition of the large state-wide leading ice-cream manufacturer.This transaction had been prepared, estimated and planned for a long time before and finally colleagues were celebrating the successful close-out. anna was also quite happy with the changes. even though she was not a key decision-maker on inmarko acquisition she earnestly believed that this expansion would grant unilever new business opportunities in Russia. would now become a member of unilever family. in fact the merger of two companies was a demanding challenge for anna. Differences in corporate cultures, excessive inmarko headcount, deeply rooted diverging organizational concepts – all that could result in certain integration issues. anna was not expecting swift and easy wins. Moreover, she actually preferred complex tasks over simple ones. she was well poised for careful planning and productive scrutiny.
Anna already had a positive experience of integrating a new plant into the company some time ago. i n case with i nmarko u nilever management granted a nna almost unlimited powers related to integration of two companies cultures on one condition: as a result the planned synergy effect from merger should be attained. The following operating indicators should be reached with account for merger of both companies’ resources: improved cost efficiency should result in 3 million EUR saved per year and overall i nmarko and u nilever
FT
e productivity 2 should increase 2.5 times in a