The Coca-Cola Company Versus PepsiCo Inc essay

In actuality, the Coca-Cola Company and Pepsi Co Inc. are two behemoths of the beverage industry. Both companies operate worldwide and are among the largest employers in the US and the world. In such a way, the companies pay a lot of attention to the development of their business. On the other hand, both companies are vulnerable to criticism for their human resource management because the way both companies treat their employees and manage their human resources is questionable in terms of the protection of employees’ rights and interests. At this point, it is possible to refer to compensation and pension plans developed by both companies. In fact, the Coca-Cola Company and Pepsi Co Inc. offer different pension plans but either plan has its advantages as well as drawbacks but the overall assessment of their pension plans reveals the fact that the Coca-Cola Company offers its employees a better compensation plan.

In fact, pension plans of the Coca-Cola Company and Pepsi Co Inc. are quite different. The Coca-Cola Company offers its employees compensation and pension plans to its employees aiming at the retention of employees in the company. In this regard, the company offers relatively high pensions after the retirement of employees. Remarkably the gap between the top pension and the lowest pension within the Coca-Cola Company is relatively narrow compared to that of Pepsi Co Inc. In addition, Pepsi Co Inc. offers its employees higher pensions on the condition of longer work time. This means that the longer employees work in Pepsi Co Inc. the more employees can receive after their retirement. In this regard, the Coca-Cola Co. is more liberal in relation to new employees and offers them larger opportunities to receive good pensions after their retirement depending on their performance but not the time they work in the company.

The relevant pension rates of the Coca-Cola Company and Pepsi Co Inc. are close and comprise about 105-15%. Nevertheless, the redistribution of pension plans and expected compensations are quite different. In this regard, employees working in the Coca-Cola Company are in a better position because they can count on higher pension compared to employees working on the Pepsi Co Inc. On the other hand, Pepsi Co Inc. pays more attention to the employees’ loyalty. This means that the employees’ loyalty does matter, when employees retire.

The Coca-Cola Company and Pepsi Co are the largest beverage companies operating worldwide. In fact, these two brands are among the most recognizable and popular in many countries of the world. At the same time, such a position of companies makes the rivalry particularly serious and affects practically all spheres of the functioning of both companies. Nevertheless, neither the Coca-Cola Company nor Pepsi Co can avoid the criticism, especially in the field of their social policy. In this regard, compensation and pension plans offered by the Coca-Cola Co. and Pepsi Co Inc. are very important, especially for employees. On comparing the pension plan offered by the Coca-Cola Co. and Pepsi Co Inc., I would choose the Coca-Cola Co. because I could receive relatively high pension on the condition of my effective performance in the course of my work in the company. However, to make the final decision, I would compare the social responsibility of both companies.

On comparing both companies, it should be said that the social responsibility of both companies is quite arguable. To put it more precisely, it would be more precise to speak about social irresponsibility than responsibility of the Coca-Cola Company and Pepsi Co. in this respect, it should be said that, in spite of the existing criticism, Pepsi Co is in a better position in regard to its social responsibility compared to the Coca-Cola Company. At the same time, it should be said that one of the major concern of the public is the potential danger of products of both companies, which prove to contain pesticides. At any rate, the researchers (Stanford, 2007) revealed the presence of pesticides in products of both companies in India.

However, this is not the only problem the Coca-Cola Company faces. In addition, the company is criticized for its social policy in regard to its employees and their rights, especially in developing countries. For instance, the company is suspected in hiring assassinators of the leader of trade union in Colombia. Also, the company often uses its monopolistic position to maximize their profits regardless interests of customers.

On the other hand, the Coca Cola Company attempts to improve its public image and focuses on sponsorship of sports events, such as the English Football League in 2004-2005, NASCAR, the NBA, the FIFA World Cup and others. The same may be said about Pepsi Co. In such a way, both companies contribute to the development of sports and, therefore, promote the healthy lifestyle.

On the other hand, they pursuit mercantile goals while supporting sports, which may be viewed as a negative social effect of their sponsorship activities. They promote sport drinks that are not as healthy as sport and linking them to sports events force the supporters and fans to buy their products. In addition, the current focus of both companies on bottled water threaten the monopolization of this segment of the market by Pepsi and Coca-Cola and limits the access of people to valuable sources of water.

Therefore, the Coca-Cola Co. is the better choice for investment because the company holds one of the leading positions in the market and keeps growing. In addition, the company attempts to conduct aggressive policy of mergers and acquisitions to expand its market faster compared to its major rival Pepsi Co Inc. In fact, the Coca-Cola Company still has a considerable potential for growth and has its renowned products, which are popular worldwide. Even though Pepsi Co Inc. has its own unique and popular products but the Coca-Cola Company manages to promote its products successfully and effectively gaining a larger share of the market.

In addition, the Coca-Cola Company attempts to improve its public image and conduct environment friendly policies. At any rate, the company attempts to create a positive public image and to attract customers to its products. On the other hand, the company should keep developing its diet products to enhance its position in the market and to expand its market share attracting new customers. Moreover, the development of diet products will help the Coca-Cola Company to create drinks that are safe for customers’ health.

In such a situation, the major threat to both companies is the safety of their products to the health of customers. Obviously, nowadays health is the primary concern of customers and the problems with pesticides and negative effect of Coca-Cola and Pepsi products on human health can undermine their position, especially in markets of developed countries. At this point, it is worth mentioning the fact that the analysis of both companies and their policies it is possible to define the better choice for employment. At the same time, in spite of existing drawbacks of both companies, I would choose the Coca-Cola Co. as the place of my employment because I see better career opportunities and better pension plan offered by the company.

Thus, taking into account all above mentioned, it is important to place emphasis on the fact that the Coca-Cola Company and Pepsi Co Inc. are leaders of the beverage industry in global terms. Nevertheless, the Coca-Cola Company seems to be more prospective in terms of investments and employment compared to Pepsi Co Inc. This means that I would rather invest and work in the Coca-Cola Company than in Pepsi Co Inc. The Coca-Cola Company offers a better pension plan and conducts more effective marketing strategy and policy compared to Pepsi Co Inc.