1a) Why do you think that Roberto Goizueta switched from a strategy that

emphasized localization towards one that emphasized global standardization?

Goizueta was driven for desires of globalization, one of his arguments was the low
level of penetration of coca cola in foreign markets, counting for only a 10-15 percent, it
wanted coca cola to become a global company, among other strategies by offering the same
advertising worldwide.
1b) What were the benefits of such strategy?
In my opinion, apart from the clear benefits of reducing cost, since the same message
is being offered, and taking the other benefits of globalizing your product into account,
there is one major benefit, and it has to do with marketing strategy and creating customer
value.By offering the same message and let’s say creating the same brand experience for
everyone, it could be created much more powerful, huge and amazing advertising could be
created and by delivering the same message to everyone, the brand could be very easily
recognized all over the world, everyone who say and advertising of coca cola, would link
the it with the same values, benefits and bran images that any other in the world, so the
objective of creating a huge global brand was granted.
2) What were the limitations of Goizueta's strategy that persuaded his
successor, Daft, to shift away from it? What was Daft trying to achieve? Daft's
strategy also did not produce the desired results. Why do you think this was the case?
The limitations of Goizueta's strategy was in the very 1990s is when Coke failing to
hit the financial targets for the first time because the one-size-fits-all strategy was running
out of steam, as smaller, more nimble local competitors marketing local beverages began
to halt the Coke business development. So that, Daft shift away the strategy to be more
localization. Daft was trying belief that Coke needed to put more power back in the hands
of local country managers.
 Limitations of centralization are:
 Delay in work
 Remote control
 No local manager loyalty
 No special attention to local market
 Daft decentralize the management to decrease these limitations.
 However, too much emphasis on local management ended up blurring the
bigger picture.
 Decentralization coordination lack of proper guidance led to bad decisions.
 3) How would you characterize the strategy Coke is now pursuing? What is the
enterprise trying to do? How is this different from the strategies of both Goizueta and
Daft? What are the benefits? What are the potential costs and risk?
I believe that Coke is now trying to pursue transnational Strategy as it has been
practiced by many multinational companies like Procter and Gamble, Xerox and etc.
Goizueta’s approach was on Global Strategy and Daft’s approach was more on localization
strategy. The transnational Strategy actually is a combination of both Global and
Localization Strategy. The firm seeks to combine the benefits of global-scale efficiencies
with the benefits of local responsiveness. Interchange still occurs between the home base
and foreign subsidiary and between foreign subsidiaries - a process known as global
learning.
Benefit of Transnational Strategy
 Core competencies exchangeable
 Experience and location economies
 Locally responsive
Potential Cost
 Slightly higher price compared to localization strategy due to minimum adjustment
to suit foreign country requirements.
Potential Risk
 Will be lacking of local responsiveness.
 Will be lacking of location economies.
 Can’t exploit learning effect.

4) What does the evolution of Coke’s strategy tell you about the convergence of
consumer tastes and preference in today’s global economy?
Every location has different taste and preference according to the country, culture,
environment, exposure and etc. Due to that, the producer of the product has to do minor
adjustment on its product to suit with current situation in order to gain higher products sales
and to penetrate bigger market. Based on Neville Isdell strategy, the company took
moderate action between Goizueta’s and Daft’s strategy where the product was produced
based on the local tastes and preference and later leveraging good ideas across nations. The
approach was not the one-size-fits-all ethos like Goizueta’s era but the consumer taste and
preference is considered when setting the strategy and basically the response from the
market is very encouraging.
 Summary
Coca-Cola, the iconic American soda maker, has long been among the most
international of enterprises. The company made its first move outside the United States in
1902, when it entered Cuba. By 1929, Coke was marketed in 76 countries. His prime belief
was that the main difference between the United States and international markets was the
lower level of penetration in the latter, where consumption per capita of colas was only 10-
15% of the U.S. figure.
Goizueta pushed Coca-Cola to become a global company, centralizing a great deal
of management and marketing activities at the corporate headquarters in Atlanta, focusing
on core brands, and taking equity stakes in foreign bottlers so that the company could exert
more strategic control over them. The Japanese experience seemed to signal that products
should be customized to local tastes and preferences, and that Coca-Cola would do well to
decentralize more decision-making authority to local managers.
However, the shift toward localization didn’t produce the growth that had been
expected, and by 2002 the pendulum was swinging back toward more central coordination,
with Atlanta exercising oversight over marketing and product development in different
nations.