Introduction
Just Eat is a UK-based online food ordering and delivery service founded in 2001 and headquartered in London, United Kingdom. The company operates in fourteen countries, with six hundred and thirty-four thousand local partners. Customers can order food from restaurants via the website or app and have it delivered to their homes or office. Organizational culture can be defined as the shared set of values, beliefs, and norms that guide the behaviour of employees in an organization. Just Eat has a hierarchical organizational structure that includes management and supervisory board members and impacts organizational culture differently.
Similarly, external factors affect the company’s operation, which can be analyzed by the political, economic, social, technological, legal, and environmental factors (PESTEL) model to find solutions. External factors in business operations are the events and conditions that exist outside of a company’s control and can impact its ability to achieve its goals. It is also crucial for the company to include ethical elements in the organizational culture to attract and retain their clients and employees and ensure corporate social responsibility (CSR). Just East company is the world’s top online food ordering platform that can apply different models and strategies to formulate better organizational culture to enable it to attain its goals.
Just Eat Organizational Structure and Culture
Just Eat Takeaway has a management and supervisory board responsible for running the company. Under the management board is the chief executive officer (CEO), Jitse Groen, and the chief financial officer (CFO), Brent Wissink (Takeaway, n.d.). On the other hand, there is a supervisory board composed of the vice chair (Corinne Vigreux) belonging to the remuneration and nomination committee. Ron Teerlink is a member of the supervisory board and auditing committee, as well as David Fisher, while Jambu Palaniappan is only part of the supervisory board. Based on the outlay, the company appears to be more of a hierarchical structure.
A hierarchical company structure harms the organizational culture by promoting a top-down management style. This management style stifles creativity, innovation, employee engagement, and motivation (Just Eat, n.d.). In addition, a hierarchical company structure leads to communication barriers among employees and contributes to feelings of hierarchy and entitlement among managers. Ultimately, this leads to a dysfunctional organizational culture. For example, the CEO can negatively impact an organization’s culture in several ways, but some of the most common ways are through their words and actions.
For instance, if a CEO constantly belittles employees publicly, it can create a hostile and negative work environment. This can lead to lower morale, decreased productivity, and employee turnover. Additionally, a CEO can negatively impact an organization’s culture by making decisions that go against the company’s values or behaving unethically (Lin et al., 2018). For example, if the CEO engages in unethical behaviour, it can damage the company’s reputation and make it difficult to attract and retain top talent.
Similarly, when a CFO prioritizes profit and financial stability over all else in an organization, it can create a damaging culture of short-termism and greed. Employees may view their work purely in terms of how it affects the bottom line rather than what value they create for customers or society more broadly (Roszkowska and Melé, 2021). This can lead to unethical decisions, layoffs, and other cost-cutting measures that sacrifice long-term sustainability for short-term gain. In extreme cases, a CFO who puts profit first can destroy an organization entirely.
Additionally, a poorly functioning supervisory board negatively impacts organizational culture. This can happen in many ways, including failing to provide adequate oversight, being excessively intrusive, or allowing personal relationships to interfere with decision-making (Alam and Miah, 2021). If the supervisory board is ineffective in carrying out its role, it can deteriorate the organization’s culture. Staff may no longer feel confident that they are working in a safe and secure environment and may start to doubt the integrity of management. This can create an atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust which will be corrosive to team spirit and productivity.
On the other hand, a hierarchical company structure positively impacts the organizational culture by providing a clear chain of command and defined roles. This can aid in creating clarity and efficiency within the organization, as employees know who to report to and what is expected of them (Zhou et al., 2021). A hierarchical structure also helps promote a strong work ethic and sense of responsibility amongst employees, as they are aware that their actions may impact the organization’s overall success. This encourages employees to take pride in their work and be more committed to achieving collective goals.
Just Eat’s management board is critical in shaping the organizational culture. The management board can create a positive or negative climate for creativity, risk-taking, and innovation (De Villiers and Dimes, 2021). They also promote or discourage open communication and collaboration. The management board ensures that the organization’s values are aligned with those of the management team and that these values are cascaded throughout the organization (Just Eat, n.d.). Doing this creates a cohesive organizational culture that supports achieving business goals.
Moreover, the supervisory board is a critical governance body that can positively impact the organizational culture differently. The board ensures a robust and independent system of oversight and maintaining independence from management (Just Eat, n.d.). Furthermore, the supervisory board ensures that the organization’s culture is transparent, consistent with its values, and supportive of long-term business success. Ultimately, the supervisory board’s effectiveness depends on its members’ quality and ability to work together cooperatively.
Just Eat Company External Factors PESTEL Analysis
PESTLE factors are important to consider when assessing a company’s external environment and the opportunities and threats that exist within it. For example, a company might be affected by a change in political regulations or by an economic downturn that impacts consumer spending (Nandonde, 2019). Moreover, there are many external factors in business operations, but some of the most important include economic conditions, competition, government regulation, and technological innovation that can affect Just Eat.
There are a few political factors affecting the work culture of Just Eat. The first is the national minimum wage, which has been gradually increasing since 2007 (Gertner et al., 2019). This increase has put pressure on companies to raise wages to remain competitive. However, not all businesses can do this, and as a result, some have turned to automation instead. Another political factor influencing work culture is the rising cost of living (Gertner et al., 2019). This has led to an increase in the number of people working two or more jobs in order to meet their basic needs. Finally, there is the issue of Brexit and its potential impact on immigration rates. Brexit led to a decrease in immigration, thus resulting in a shortage of workers in companies, including Just Eat. Brexit is an event in which the United Kingdom (UK) voted to leave the European Union (EU) (Guma and Dafydd Jones, 2019). The vote has created a lot of uncertainty around the work culture of Just Eat, as it is unclear how the vote will influence trade and hiring policies between the UK and EU.
Equally, the are several economic factors that influence Just Eat company’s operations. Economic forces such as inflation and recession can impact consumer spending and the restaurant industry. For example, in times of recession, people are less likely to eat out at restaurants, while during periods of high inflation, restaurant prices may increase more quickly than general prices (Gertner et al., 2019). The growth or decline of major chains or franchises also affects the restaurant industry. For example, the recent success of the Just Eat company has impacted the number of independent restaurants in the UK. Similarly, the rise of “meal kit” delivery services, like Blue Apron and Hello Fresh, have made it easier for people to cook at home, reducing customers purchasing volumes from Just Eat (Dablanc et al., 2017). Likewise, the growth of online ordering and delivery services, such as Grubhub, Uber Eats, and DoorDash has made Just Eat lose some of its clients.
Apart from political and economic factors, social factors have also been affecting Just Eat company in three social changes, networks, and norms. Social norms: Just Eat benefits because people are increasingly comfortable dining out and ordering in. The company has also made it easy for customers to order food through its app and website, which has helped it grow quickly (Dablanc et al., 2017). Concerning social networks, Just Eat has been successful in leveraging social media to market its services and attract new customers. For example, the company has run successful ad campaigns on Facebook and Twitter (Al, 2022). Regarding societal changes, the growth of Just Eat is partly due to changing trends, such as the increasing popularity of healthy eating and the rise of leisure time activities that involve eating out in restaurants.
The technological factors influencing the Just Eat company are the growth of internet-based technologies and the development of mobile technologies. The growth of internet-based technologies has allowed faster and more widespread adoption of online food ordering. The emergence of smartphones and mobile devices is another key factor that has helped Just Eat grow its business is the increasing use of smartphones and other mobile devices (Al, 2022). With over half of their orders coming through mobile devices, they have effectively reached out to customers through a medium that is increasingly popular.
The company’s most significant legal factor is its copyright infringement dispute with competitors Hungry House and Just Eat. In 2017, the High Court found that Just Eat had copied parts of the websites of Hungry House. As a result, Just Eat was ordered to pay damages to the company (Jephcott and Allen, 2020). The environmental factors that influence the Just Eat company include globalization, technological advancement, and the development of e-commerce. Globalization allows food to be transported around the world more easily, making it possible for Just Eat to provide food delivery from various restaurants. Technology advancements allowed online orders and payments to be processed quickly and easily (Al, 2022). In addition, the development of e-commerce made it easy for people to order food online without leaving their homes.
Ethical Organizational Culture Elements and Suggestions
The company emphasizes values such as respect, integrity, accountability, transparency, and rewarding employees for their positive behaviours in its organizational culture. Just Eat is a company that prides itself on its ethical organizational culture (Takeaway, n.d.). Respect, integrity, and accountability are cornerstones of their corporate values, and they place high importance on these principles. Employees at Just Eat are held to the highest respect for their customers, partners, and fellow employees (Just Eat, n.d.). Integrity is essential in every business transaction, and employees are expected to act with honesty and candour in all dealings (Barlo et al., 2021). Accountability is paramount in a company that prides itself on its ethical culture; employees are responsible for their actions as well as the actions of their team.
The Just Eat company has great transparency in its ethical organizational culture. Employees and clients can view the company’s policies and procedures online and are encouraged to ask questions and provide feedback (Just Eat, n.d.). Just Eat can use the Cultural Web model to embrace transparency in its organizational culture. The model consists of five elements: symbols, rituals, values, stories, and heroes (Hänninen and Sools, 2022). Each of these elements influences how employees think and behave. For example, if the company wants to emphasize the importance of customer service, it could create a ritual in which employees applaud customers who have had a good experience. This would convey that they value customer service (Hänninen and Sools, 2022). Equally, if the company wants to emphasize teamwork, it could tell employees stories about successful collaborations, which would show that they value working together towards a common goal.
Additionally, in order to recognize employees for their commendable actions at Just Eat Company, some essential components of ethical company culture are required. First and foremost, employees understand they are working in an honest and ethical environment where their actions and decisions are valued (Just Eat, n.d.). They also feel comfortable communicating with their managers about any potential issues or concerns that they may have. Additionally, managers should be transparent in their decision-making and ensure that employees understand the company’s values and how their work contributes to its overall success. Finally, a recognition system is in place to formally commend employees for their positive contributions.
A few important components of an ethical organizational culture are considered when rewarding employees for their positive behaviours. The most important element is that the reward system should transparent and consistently applied across all levels of the organization (Di Stefano et al., 2019). Additionally, rewards are given in a way that does not create competition or envy among employees and is consistent with the company’s values and mission. Just Eat is a company that strongly emphasizes its ethical values and culture. Its reward system reflects this by rewarding employees for their positive behaviours in a transparent, competitive-free way and aligned with the company’s values (Just Eat, n.d.). This helps to create a positive work environment where employees are encouraged to act ethically and work hard to be the best and be rewarded.
There are a few operations that Just Eat could initiate to create a better ethical culture environment. One would be to establish clear ethical guidelines and expectations for their employees. This would help employees understand what is and is not acceptable behaviour and would provide a framework for making ethical decisions. Just Eat could also promote the adoption of Porter’s Five Forces model within the company. Through this model, the company may maximize on power of suppliers by having more vendors to locate the most competent supplier. Vendor competency will ensure that Just Eat company provides standard services (delivering food without delay or lie). In addition, many suppliers will help the company spot the most affordable food distributors; this will ensure that the company does not overcharge its clients since overcharging customers is unethical (Elshaer et al., 2022). It is considered unethical because it takes advantage of customers who may not know the price trends.
Similarly, Just Eat can provide training on ethics and decision-making. This training would aid employees in understanding the company’s ethical values and how to apply them in real-world situations. Finally, the company can adopt and maximize CSR to ensure a great ethical culture environment. CSR will assist Just Eat company in creating a better ethical culture environment by promoting responsible business practices and creating positive relationships with the community. CSR aids businesses in being more mindful of the ethical implications of their decisions and operations (Wang et al., 2019). By establishing a code of ethics and promoting responsible business practices, CSR help businesses to avoid negative publicity and foster a more positive image, thus creating a positive environment that improves employees’ productivity.
Just Eat Company Functionality and Recommendations
Some of the barriers to the effective functioning of Just Eat culture are poor coordination, bureaucracy, and rigid processes and systems. Bureaucracy and red tape entail too many levels of management, and decision-making can slow things down and lead to contradictory instructions or policies (Kaufmann et al., 2019). Employees’ autonomy is the most recommended way to eliminate red tape and bureaucracy in Just Eat. Autonomy will enhance workplace culture in the future by increasing employee satisfaction, engagement, and productivity (George et al., 2021). Giving employees greater autonomy allows them to take ownership of their work and makes them feel like they are an important part of the organization. This will lead to a positive work culture that benefits the employees and the organization.
Lack of communication or coordination amongst different company parts can lead to missed opportunities or late food deliveries to clients. The best way to solve this is by encouraging communication and collaboration. Encouraging communication and collaboration will enhance Just Eat’s workplace culture and positively impact organizational efficiency. Communication is key to a cohesive workplace culture, and collaborative activities allow employees to get information on time regarding the placed orders, thus working on them on time (Mutonyi et al., 2020). When there is cooperation among the employees, then accusations and complaints about late deliveries by clients will greatly reduce, and the firm will gain more customers, thus more profit. Encouraging communication and collaboration will help Just Eat to build a strong team-oriented workplace culture that will improve organizational efficiency and productivity.
Inflexible systems and processes hinder creativity and innovation, as well as impede the ability to adapt quickly to changes in the marketplace. Breaking down silos and innovation promotion are some of the recommendations that will help the Just Eat company solve the inflexibility issue (Freeman et al., 2021). Breaking down silos and promoting innovation within an organization can positively impact efficiency and performance. Breaking down silos is a strategy that many organizations use in an attempt to improve workplace culture and organizational efficiency. By eliminating the barriers between different departments and teams, employees can communicate and collaborate more effectively (Morrison-Smith and Ruiz, 2020). This can lead to a more cohesive workplace culture and improved organizational efficiency as employees can better share resources and work together towards common goals.
Just Eat is a company that could potentially benefit from breaking down silos. By doing so, they could create a more collaborative environment in which employees feel comfortable sharing ideas and working together toward common goals (Cichosz et al., 2020). This would likely lead to increased productivity and innovation within the company. Additionally, innovation promotion will help to enhance workplace culture by encouraging employees to be creative and think critically. This can lead to increased organizational efficiency as employees develop new and innovative ways to do things that will improve productivity. Additionally, a positive workplace culture can help to retain top talent, which is essential for any organization (Pandita and Ray, 2018). By implementing innovation promotion initiatives, Just Eat can create a friendly work environment.
Conclusion
To sum up, Just Eat is the world’s largest online food delivery company in many countries. The company has had a successful track record and reached a notable milestone this year by completing its one billionth order. The company has faced some recent challenges, such as competition from UberEats, Grubhub, and DoorDash, but continues to dominate the food delivery market. The company can still scale to higher success levels if it solves the external factors and uses the cultural web to promote ethical virtues. In attaining a better workplace culture in Just Eat company, I would recommend the adoption of employees’ autonomy, communication and collaboration, and innovation promotion as well as silos breakdown. Similarly, Porter’s Five Forces will help the organization find and maintain reliable suppliers, while the PESTEL model will aid the firm in identifying external factors affecting its operations. Conversely, the cultural web can be used to motivate Just Eat employees by narrating the stories of successful companies and the values they embraced.
Reference List
Al, M. (2022) ‘The repercussions of the covid-19crisis on the development of e-service-case study of food delivery services in the USA’, Journal of Contemporary Economic Studies Volume, 7(01), pp.665-682.
Alam, M.K. and Miah, M.S. (2021) ‘Independence and effectiveness of Shariah supervisory board of Islamic banks: Evidence from an emerging economy’, Asian Review of Accounting, 29(2), pp. 173–191.
Barlo, S., Boyd, W.B.E., Hughes, M., Wilson, S. and Pelizzon, A. (2021) ‘Yarning as protected space: Relational accountability in research’, AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 17(1), pp.40-48.
Bruijl, D. and Gerard, H.T. (2018) ‘The relevance of Porter’s five forces in today’s innovative and changing business environment’, SSRN 319220, pp.5-17.
Cichosz, M., Wallenburg, C.M. and Knemeyer, A.M. (2020) ‘Digital transformation at logistics service providers: Barriers, success factors and leading practices’, The International Journal of Logistics Management, 31(2), pp.209-238.
Dablanc, L., Morganti, E., Arvidsson, N., Woxenius, J., Browne, M. and Saidi, N. (2017) ‘The rise of on-demand ‘instant deliveries’ in European cities’, Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal, 18(4), pp. 203–217.
De Villiers, C. and Dimes, R. (2021) ‘Determinants, mechanisms and consequences of corporate governance reporting: A research framework’, Journal of Management and Governance, 25(1), pp.7-26.
Di Stefano, G., Scrima, F. and Parry, E. (2019) ‘The effect of organizational culture on deviant behaviors in the workplace’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(17), pp.2482-2503.
Elshaer, I.A., Azazz, A.M. and Saad, S.K. (2022) ‘Unethical organization behavior: Antecedents and consequences in the tourism industry’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(9), p.4972.
Freeman, O., Hand, R. and Kennedy, A. (2021) ‘Breaking down silos through authentic assessment: A live case analysis’, Journal of Higher Education Theory & Practice, 21(4), pp.236-240.
George, B., Pandey, S.K., Steijn, B., Decramer, A. and Audenaert, M. (2021) ‘Red Tape, organizational performance, and employee outcomes: Meta‐analysis, meta‐regression, and research agenda’, Public Administration Review, 81(4), pp.638-651.
Gertner, A.K., Rotter, J.S. and Shafer, P.R. (2019)’ Association between state minimum wages and suicide rates in the US’, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 56(5), pp.648-654.
Guma, T. and Dafydd Jones, R. (2019) ‘“Where are we going to go now?” European Union migrants’ experiences of hostility, anxiety, and (non‐) belonging during Brexit’, Population, Space and Place, 25(1), p. e2198.
Hänninen, V. and Sools, A. (2022) ‘Cultural story models in making sense of a desired post-corona world’, Futures, 141, p.102989.
Jephcott, M. and Allen, R. (2020) ‘The CMA steps up enforcement of procedural merger control rules: Key lessons from recent cases’, Competition Law Journal, 19(1), pp.10-23.
Just Eat (n.d.). Web.
Kaufmann, W., Borry, E.L. and DeHart‐Davis, L. (2019) ‘More than pathological formalization: Understanding organizational structure and red tape’, Public Administration Review, 79(2), pp.236-245.
Lin, X., Clay, P.F., Hajli, N. and Dadgar, M. (2018) ‘Investigating the impacts of organizational factors on employees’ unethical behavior within organization in the context of Chinese firms’, Journal of Business Ethics, 150(3), pp.779-791.
Morrison-Smith, S. and Ruiz, J. (2020) ‘Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: A literature review’, SN Applied Sciences, 2(6), pp.1-33.
Mutonyi, B.R., Slåtten, T. and Lien, G. (2020) Empowering leadership, work group cohesiveness, individual learning orientation and individual innovative behaviour in the public sector: Empirical evidence from Norway’, International Journal of Public Leadership, 16(2), pp.175-197.
Nandonde, F.A. (2019) ‘A PESTLE analysis of international retailing in the East African Community’, Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 38(4), pp.54-61.
Pandita, D. and Ray, S. (2018) ‘Talent management and employee engagement–a meta-analysis of their impact on talent retention’, Industrial and Commercial Training, 50(4), pp.185-199.
Roszkowska, P. and Melé, D. (2021) ‘Organizational factors in the individual ethical behaviour. The notion of the “organizational moral structure”‘, Humanistic Management Journal, 6(2), pp.187-209.
Takeaway (n.d.). Web.
Wang, W., Zhao, X.Z., Chen, F.W., Wu, C.H., Tsai, S. and Wang, J. (2019) ‘The effect of corporate social responsibility and public attention on innovation performance: Evidence from high-polluting industries’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(20), p.3939.
Zhou, Y., Liu, G., Chang, X. and Hong, Y. (2021) ‘Top-down, bottom-up or outside-in? An examination of triadic mechanisms on firm innovation in Chinese firms’, Asian Business & Management, 20(1), pp.131-162.