You are on page 1of 10

Says, Smita Jatia, Managing Director, Hard Castle Restaurants Pvt.

Ltd (HRPL), "We are an equal opportunity employer, providing not only [local] employment but long-term careers as well. The world-class training that we impart enables us to provide our customers the ultimate McDonald's experience. "When a new employee joins the organisation, he is taken through a systematic induction programme. This is done through one-on-one interactions as well as exposure to the customer through operations training in the restaurants for a specified period of time. Crewmembers are trained extensively on all food safety and food handling processes. The crew trainees work shoulder-to-shoulder with their trainers while they learn the operational skills necessary for running the restaurant - from the front counter to the kitchen areas.

One of the issues that a business needs to address is where decision-making power resides in the organisational structure. Decision-making is about authority. A key question is whether authority should rest with senior management at the centre of a business (centralised), or whether it should be delegated further down the hierarchy, away from the centre (decentralised) The choice between centralised or decentralised is not an either/or choice. Most large businesses necessarily involve a degree of decentralisation when it starts to operate from several locations or it adds new business units and markets.

Centralised structures Businesses that have a centralised structure keep decision-making firmly at the top of the hierarchy (amongst the most senior management). Fast-food businesses like Burger King, Pizza Hut and McDonalds use a predominantly centralised structure to ensure that control is maintained over their many thousands of outlets. The need to ensure consistency of customer experience and quality at every location is the main reason.

The main advantages and disadvantages of centralisation are:

Advantages Easier to implement common policies and practices for the business as a whole Prevents other parts of the business from becoming too independent Easier to co-ordinate and control from the centre e.g. with budgets Economies of scale and overhead savings easier to achieve Greater use of specialisation Quicker decision-making (usually) easier to show strong leadership

Disadvantages More bureaucratic often extra layers in the hierarchy Local or junior managers are likely to much closer to customer needs Lack of authority down the hierarchy may reduce manager motivation Customer service does not benefit from flexibility and speed in local decision-making

In a decentralised structure, decision-making is spread out to include more junior managers in the hierarchy, as well as individual business units or trading locations. Good examples of businesses which use a decentralised structure include the major supermarket chains like WM Morrison and Tesco. Each supermarket has a store manager who can make certain decisions concerning areas like staffing, sales promotions. The store manager is responsible to a regional or area manager. Hotel chains are particularly keen on using decentralised structures so that local hotel managers are empowered to make on-the-spot decisions to handle customer problems or complaints. The main advantages and disadvantages of this approach are:

Advantages Decisions are made closer to the customer Better able to respond to local circumstances

Disadvantages Decision-making is not necessarily strategic More difficult to ensure consistent practices and policies (customers might prefer consistency from location to location) May be some diseconomies of scale e.g. duplication of roles Who provides strong leadership when needed (e.g. in a crisis)? Harder to achieve tight financial control risk of cost-overruns

Improved level of customer service Consistent with aiming for a flatter hierarchy Good way of training and developing junior management Should improve staff motivation

McDonald's Corp., Consolidated Statement of Financial Position, Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity USD $ in thousands

Dec 31, 2011 Notes payable Accounts payable Income taxes Other taxes Accrued interest Accrued payroll and other liabilities Current maturities of long-term debt Current liabilities Long-term debt Other long-term liabilities Deferred income taxes Noncurrent liabilities Total liabilities Preferred stock, no par value; issued none Common stock, $.01 par value Additional paid-in capital 961,300 262,200 338,100 218,200 1,362,800 366,600 3,509,200 12,133,800 1,612,600 1,344,100 15,090,500 18,599,700 16,600 5,487,300

Dec 31, 2010 943,900 111,300 275,600 200,700 1,384,900 8,300 2,924,700 11,497,000 1,586,900 1,332,400 14,416,300 17,341,000 16,600 5,196,400

Dec 31, 2009 636,000 202,400 277,400 195,800 1,659,000 18,100 2,988,700 10,560,300 1,363,100 1,278,900 13,202,300 16,191,000 16,600 4,853,900

Retained earnings Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) Common stock in treasury, at cost Shareholders equity Total liabilities and shareholders equity
Source: McDonald's Corp., Annual Reports

36,707,500 449,700 (28,270,900) 14,390,200 32,989,900

33,811,700 752,900 (25,143,400) 14,634,200 31,975,200

31,270,800 747,400 (22,854,800) 14,033,900 30,224,900

Item Accounts payable

Description Carrying value as of the balance sheet date of liabilities incurred (and for which invoices have typically been received) and payable to vendors for goods and services received that are used in an entity's business. Used to reflect the current portion of the liabilities (due within one year or within the normal operating cycle if longer). Total obligations incurred as part of normal operations that are expected to be paid during the following twelve months or within one business cycle, if longer.

The company McDonald's Corp.'s accounts payable increased from 2009 to 2010 and from 2010 to 2011.

Current liabilities

McDonald's Corp.'s current liabilities declined from 2009 to 2010 but then increased from 2010 to 2011 exceeding 2009 level. McDonald's Corp.'s noncurrent liabilities increased from 2009 to 2010 and from 2010 to 2011. McDonald's Corp.'s total liabilities increased from 2009 to 2010 and from 2010 to 2011.

Noncurrent liabilities

Total obligations incurred as part of normal operations that is expected to be repaid beyond the following twelve months or one business cycle.

Total liabilities

Sum of the carrying amounts as of the balance sheet date of all liabilities that are recognized. Liabilities are probable future sacrifices of economic benefits arising from present obligations of an entity to transfer assets or provide services to other entities in the future. Total of all Stockholders' Equity (deficit) items, net of receivables


McDonald's Corp.'s


from officers, directors owners, and affiliates of the entity which are attributable to the parent. The amount of the economic entity's stockholders' equity attributable to the parent excludes the amount of stockholders' equity which is allocable to that ownership interest in subsidiary equity which is not attributable to the parent (noncontrolling interest, minority interest).

shareholders equity increased from 2009 to 2010 but then slightly declined from 2010 to 2011.

Additionally our employee value proposition focuses on Fun, flexibility & Future hence Flexi working hours for crew, ensuring activities that interest our women members, Equal employment opportunities, annual award ceremonies, regular crew outings, recognition & incentive programs & Voice of McDonalds a global initiative are some of the areas that we have been actively working towards. With regards to diversity we have introduced a womans champ program that specifically works with female employees to make us a preferred employer amongst women.

chandeverypersontohisorhergreatestefficiency.bonuss ystemsforencouragingtheemployeestohavethebetterperf ormanceandtomeetitsstandardsandobjectives.Thiswill supporttothestatementofTaylorthatthenonincentivesystemofwagescanonlyencouragethelowprodu ctioniftheemployeeisreceivingthesimilarpaymentregard lesstheproducedamountthattheymade

McDonaldsismotivatingemployeesforbetterperforman ce.Asidefromthebasepayment,thecompanyhadestablis hedthepromotionalprogramsandthecompetitivewages,m otivation,hardwork,dedication,andresultsthatrewardeda ndrecognizedbyMcDonalds.alsoestablishedtheincenti vepaysystemthatcanprovidetheiremployeesfortheearnin gtheopportunitiesinthecompetitivetotalcompensationwh enmeetingorevenexceedingtheperformancegoals

Inthismanner,theobjectiveisnotonlyfortheestablish mentofthebonussystembutalsofortheefficientandeff ectiveperformanceofthecompanywhichinstitutingth edifferentkindsofsystemsinincreasingthemonetaryin centives

authoritytolowestlevels.Thepurposeofthescalarchaininadministrativetheoryi stomaintaintheideaofunityofcommandandauthoritybutatthesametimeprovidee


nofcommandfromtoptobottom.Therearestoreowners,storemana gers,assistantmanagers,andtheemployees.Thereareorganization algoalsthatmustbemet,anditistheresponsibilityofthemanagerstom akesurethatitsemployeesareperformingthosetasksandfollowingt herulethatareappliedtoall.

vidualtobuildupexperience,andtocontinuouslyimproveh isskills.Therebyhecanbemoreproductive.Theuseofdivi sionoflabourorspecializationhasprovedextremelyusefuli nboostingproductivity.FayolsPrincipleofDivisiono


ThisprincipleisbeingusedatMcDonaldandhasgreatlyhelpedi nimprovingtheservices.Forexample:ThemethodinwhichMcDonaldsforexamplecreatetheirham burgerisaformofdeskillinganddivisionoflabour.Theyhaves implifiedthejobbyfirstlygrillingtheburger,puttinginlettucean dtomatoes,addingsauceetc,puttingontorollsandthenwrappin gitup.Wecanseethatthisisabreakdownofthejobandbyhavin gindividualsdoeachtaskitnotonlyimprovesefficiencybutalso createsspecialisedpersonnel.PrincipleofDivisionofwor


Director Code of Conduct

The members of the Board of Directors of McDonalds Corporation acknowledge and accept the scope and extent of our duties as Directors. We have a responsibility to carry out our oversight responsibility in the interests of all McDonald's shareholders, within the scope of our authority and consistent with our fiduciary duties and our governance documents. The Board of Directors has adopted the following Code of Conduct and our Directors are expected to adhere to the standards of loyalty, good faith, and the avoidance of conflict of interest that follow. Board Members will: Act in the best interests of, and fulfill their fiduciary obligations to, all McDonalds shareholders;

Act honestly, fairly, ethically and with integrity;

Conduct themselves in a professional, courteous and respectful manner;

Comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations;

Act in good faith, responsibly, with due care, competence and diligence, without allowing their independent judgment to be subordinated;

Act in a manner to enhance and maintain the reputation of McDonalds;

Disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including those that they may have regarding any matters that may come before the Board, and abstain from discussion and voting on any matter in which they have or may have a conflict of interest;

Make available to and share with fellow Directors information as may be appropriate to ensure proper conduct and sound operation of McDonalds and its Board of Directors;

Respect the confidentiality of information relating to the affairs of the Company acquired in the course of their service as Directors, except when authorized or legally required to disclose such information; and

Not use confidential information acquired in the course of their service as Directors for their personal advantage. A Director who has concerns regarding compliance with this Code should raise those concerns with the Chairman of the Board and the Chair of the Governance Committee, who will determine what action shall be taken to deal with the concern. In the extremely unlikely event that a waiver of this Code for a Director would be in the best interest of the Company, it must be approved by the Governance Committee. Directors will annually sign a confirmation that they have read and will comply with this Code. Originally Adopted by the Board of Directors

As of May 22, 2003 Revised by the Board of Directors As of July 19, 2010