SWOT analysis of sail


The Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) - SWOT Analysis company profile is the essential source for top-level company data and information. Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) - SWOT Analysis examines the company’s key business structure and operations, history and products, and provides summary analysis of its key revenue lines and strategy. Steel Authority of India (SAIL) is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing steel and its allied products. It is a fully integrated iron and steel maker, producing both basic and special steel products for construction, engineering, power, railway, automotive, and defense industries. The company primarily operates in India. SAIL is headquartered in New Delhi, India and employs about 121,300 people. The company recorded net sales (sales net of excise duty) of INR431,767.6 million (approximately $9,421.2 million) in the financial year ended March 2009 (FY2009), an increase of 9.1% over FY2008. The operating profit of the company was INR75,600.2 million (approximately $1,649.6 million) in FY2009, a decrease of 22.8% compared with FY2008. The net profit was INR62,529.1 million (approximately $1,364.4 million) in FY2009, a decrease of 17.7% compared with FY2008. Scope of the Report - Provides all the crucial information on Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) required for business and competitor intelligence needs - Contains a study of the major internal and external factors affecting Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) in the form of a SWOT analysis as well as a breakdown and examination of leading product revenue streams of Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) -Data is supplemented with details on Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) history, key executives, business description, locations and subsidiaries as well as a list of products and services and the latest available statement from Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) Reasons to Purchase Support sales activities by understanding your customers’ businesses better Qualify prospective partners and suppliers Keep fully up to date on your competitors’ business structure, strategy and prospects Obtain the most up to date company information available

Introduction MNCs are under increasing pressure for socially responsible behavior in their global operations. However, global corporate social responsibility and the management of CSR behaviors in global operations remains less understood (Wood and Pasquero, 1997; Wartick and Wood, 1998; Freeman, 1997). The national business environments are increasingly promoting CSR (for example, see Bondy, Matten, Moon, 2004; Moon, 2004). Furthermore, there are several emerging global guidelines and voluntary initiatives seeking to improve CSR in global operations (Waddock, Bodwell, Graves, 2002). These trends in MNCs' environmental context need to be further supported by investigation of management of CSR in the global operations of MNCs and

in this paper. viz. Hedlund & Rolander. is an empirical in-depth investigation using an embedded sample of eight case studies across two MNCs of UK origin. 1984. norms. 1989. as well as the management of local CSR practices suited to the local context of the subsidiary units. 2001. CSR is behavior that is "congruent with prevailing social norms. Sethi. Business responsibilities have been thus discussed in reference to the stakeholders of business (see Freeman. customers. 1999) often are considered extensions of the primary stakeholders of the firm. In addition to its economic role in society. Clarkson. business also has several other roles and responsibilities towards society (see Preston and Post. refers to a business organization's responsibility for integrating stakeholder concerns in routine business activities for primary stakeholders (employees. 1989. and institutional and sociological requirements also change over time. as well as environment (see Starik. CSR is behavior that is "congruent with prevailing social norms. 2001). CSR. Global CSR management also involves cross-border transfer and management of CSR practices. values and expectations of performance" Furthermore. values and expectations of performance" (Sethi. 62). and values. 1991. Carroll.the environmental drive that influence global CSR management in MNCs. The present paper meets this gap by providing empirical study of management of global CSR in two MNCs of British origin. critical social issues. Furthermore. 1995) and communities (see Burke. and business's contributions that would benefit the society at large (Margolis and Walsh. revealing several influences of the local. The management of CSR in the global operations of MNCs. stakeholder expectations. suppliers). It provides a multilevel analysis of management of CSR in these firms. and values. discussed in this paper. and institutional and sociological requirements also change over time. the social and environmental responsibilities of the business towards its stakeholders. 1990). critical social issues. from one part of the MNC to another. as well as several CSR practices not transnationally managed across multiple units and levels of the MNC and also several local CSR practices. This has several implications for MNCs' management of stakeholder relations across the multiple levels and diverse contexts of its operations. 1975 p. Davis and Blomstrom. national and global environments on CSR management in these MNCs. Hedlund 1986. 1975. responsible conduct of business activities while pursuing economic gains. . MNCs are complex differentiated networks marked with internal heterogeneity and with the complexity of managing across globally dispersed. 1975). norms. Margolis and Walsh. SOCIAL FACTORS: Business is an inseparable and embedded part of the society. Ghoshal and Nohria. MNCs are faced with diverse stakeholder environments across their international operations. 1971. stakeholder expectations. diverse units (Bartlett and Ghoshal. 1979. and across four stakeholder dimensions within these MNCs. The analysis of self-reported CSR practices in these MNCs revealed the globally-managed CSR practices and their transnational management processes. 1995) and the wider society The term.

1997. At the same time. the social issues. and the related corrective and preventive business actions already institutionalized. both in space and in time. while in the developed countries. 2002. Thus. social acceptance and societal expectations are differentiated across the world.. 2001). For example. . MNCs need to simultaneously manage across these diversities. 1992. Mohan. In operating across the spatially and temporally differentiated definitions and expectations of the 'role of business in society' across the globe. or only emerging in developing countries (see Reed. these issues might be still unknown. Khanna and Palepu. Amba-Rao. 2001) are also context specific. 2000. some social issue might have been already addressed.The temporal patterns of social issues (Lawrence et al.