Xavier Institute of Management, Bhubaneswar

MBA 2020-22 :TERM VI (END TERM)

Corporate Image Building
Question Paper- Open book examination

Ms. Sumitra Balakrishnan

DURATION:2 hours
FULL MARK:40
ANY SPECIFIC INSTRUCTION TO THE STUDENTS:

i. You are allowed to carry your textbook and any form of text resources, but
NO digital or online resources or reference whatsoever.
ii. A total of 2 questions have to be attempted. Ensure that all parts of any question are
attempted.
iii. You are required to submit an answer sheet in either typed or hand-written format.
a. All answer sheets need to have student details with Name and Roll. Number in them.
b. For typed answer sheets, create a header and insert the student details in them. Use 11
sized font at the minimum
c. For hand- written sheets, ensure that you leave a 1-inch margin on both sides of the
sheet, and leave a recognizable gap between answers.
d. Ensure that the answer sheets are uploaded in proper sequence of page, and as a PDF.
iv. Use diagrams and models where appropriate. Stick to word -limits IF mentioned in any
question
v. Any major similarities ad exact copies of answers will result in direct deduction of marks
of all those whose answers are same or largely similar.

QUESTIONS
1. Answer both the parts
a) How does the PESO model explain media types that any organization can utilize in a
communication plan? How does the model factor in and explain contributions to
reputation building? (12)
b) Why is corporate storytelling more relevant now than it was earlier? What does the
Story Brand framework of Donald Miller give as steps and points to build a brand
story? (8)

2. Answer both the part questions after reading the given article relating to a recent
business event that had been in the news. You are advised to use your insights from the
how, what, who and why of this event as you know it.
a. Explain the communicated identity and the conceived identity of Future Retail
during the event timeline. (8 marks)
 b. As a result of this event, what do you perceive as changes in (a) the image of
Reliance Industries (b) the image of the leadership and management team of Big
Bazaar (Future Group and Future Retail specifically) and (c)the reputation of
Amazon (12 marks)

Source : Financial Times

Mukesh Ambani corners Jeff Bezos

in battle for retail stores in India
Reliance Industries has taken control over 800 Future Retail stores
in blow to Amazon

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, left, and Reliance Industries chair Mukesh Ambani, right. Their
companies have been fighting for control of India’s second-largest retail chain © FT
Montage/Bloomberg
Chloe Cornish in Mumbai and Dave Lee in San Francisco : MARCH 17 2022
Reliance Industries chair Mukesh Ambani has outmanoeuvred Amazon founder Jeff Bezos in India
after taking over more than 800 stores of Future Retail in defiance of a two-year legal battle for
control of the country’s second-largest retail chain.

The long-running saga has pitted two of the world’s richest people against each other for the future
of Indian retail. It highlights the difficulties for overseas ecommerce companies seeking to expand in
a country that has 1.4bn consumers, but where regulations give local players an advantage.

Amazon is not giving up. On Tuesday, lawyers for Future and Amazon told India’s Supreme Court that
out-of-court talks between the two parties had broken down yet again. Amazon had filed a new case
at the High Court of Delhi to counter the store takeover. “Only 300 shops are left,” said Amazon’s
lawyer.

Amazon took out advertisements in national newspapers claiming the store takeover had been done
clandestinely by “playing a fraud on” Indian courts and authorities. Future has argued the deal with
Ambani should be cleared but on Wednesday the company said Reliance had “forcefully taken over
control of hundreds” of stores, insisting it was “a surprise”.
“Mr Bezos is also not used to giving up that easily,” said Arvind Singhal, founder of retail consultancy
Technopak. “He’s a street fighter, so is Mr Ambani.”

Reliance had announced in 2020 that it was acquiring Future in a $3.4bn deal to give it a national
network of grocery and fashion stores including Big Bazaar and Foodhall. Amazon argued that an
indirect minority stake it bought in Future a year earlier gave it the right to stop competitors from
buying the retailer and took Reliance to court.

“Going against Reliance was never a good idea,” said Prachir Singh, an analyst at consultancy
Counterpoint Research. “Reliance wanted this deal because they wanted to be the offline retail kings
of India.”

He added: “On a strategic side, I think [Amazon] have lost. They will cut their losses and get whatever
they can from this deal.”

Lawyers for Amazon declined to comment. Future and Reliance did not respond to requests for
comment.

Two people familiar with the store takeover said Reliance has offered fresh contracts to Future’s staff,
planned to continue working with the same vendors under new deals, and was rebranding the stores
under its own marques.

Analysts suggested that Amazon, one of India’s largest online retailers, could seek joint ventures with
other companies that have physical stores. Amazon also has an investment in a physical store
network, More, through an investment vehicle.

Future had been hit by pandemic-related shutdowns and weighed down by high debt. New Delhi’s
harsh lockdown at the start of the pandemic in early 2020 accelerated its collapse, threatening to put
Future’s 30,000 workers out of work. Reliance’s acquisition of Future was intended to deepen its
retail network as a counterpart to JioMart, its online store.

That hit Amazon’s ambitions in India. The company, alongside other foreign ecommerce players such
as Walmart-owned Flipkart, is barred from operating physical stores under Indian rules. Its minority
stake in Future was intended to be a launch pad for an offline expansion if regulations changed.

Nigam Nuggehalli, a law professor, described Amazon’s scheme as pushing “the outer margins of
foreign investment regulation”.

The fight has played out in multiple venues, including an arbitration tribunal in Singapore — which in
2020 issued an order blocking the deal from closing — India’s Supreme Court, and India’s
competition commission.

Promod Nair, a senior advocate who regularly appears before the Supreme Court, said Amazon
would be “disappointed” that the order it won from the emergency arbitrator to block the tie-up was
not being honoured.

“A lot of effort has gone into erasing the image of India as an arbitration-unfriendly destination,” said
Nair. “But the pendulum has now quite unfortunately swung back in the wrong direction,” he said
about the Amazon case.

He added: “I think the damage it will do to India’s ambitions to become a reliable and credible
arbitration destination will not easily be reversible.”

People familiar with Amazon’s strategy have stressed that it will continue to defend its rights in court.
But its efforts to develop a meaningful bricks-and-mortar presence in India have been severely
undermined.
“It’s a missed opportunity for Amazon,” said Neil Shah, vice-president of research at Counterpoint.
“The power of local competition is another thing which Amazon will learn . . . to make a move to
acquire something, they have to do it quickly and smoothly before some other competitor that has
more buying power and political clout.”

3. Answer both the parts

a) Do you think that the Mitchell, Agle & Wood’s stakeholder salience model (mapping process)
has any distinct advantages over Freeman’s stakeholder theory (Socio-economic model) as he
called it? Explain (6 marks)
b) Read the caselet and answer the questions in it: What is the main focus of RSA’s
communications and how does it equate with both Van Riel’s and Balmer and Grey’s
typologies of communication? (14 marks)