Coca-Cola North America.
In a University of Cincinnati MBA project, I examined why Coke's North American bottling network earned lower margins as water, tea, and juice grew.
I recommended integrating production and IT, coordinating distribution for water, tea, and juice, then returning regional bottlers to a franchise model after the system stabilized.
I led the decision framing, Five Forces, SWOT implications, and final recommendation.
How could Coke serve a changing category without giving up the partner model that made it profitable?
13.6%
North America operating margin
The share of revenue left after operating costs in the case.
18%+
Target after the redesign
The team’s forecast, not a realized result.
45%+
Expected category growth from water, tea, and juice
Forecast through 2020 in the case materials.
$350M
Estimated savings from integration
A classroom-model estimate for shared production and IT.
The margin gap pointed to the operating system, not to demand for the brand.
Operating margin is the share of revenue left after running the business. Choose a bar to see why each comparison mattered to the recommendation.
Operating margin by market or proposed model
This is the starting point. Separate bottlers, systems, and retailer teams added cost and made it harder to launch new drink formats.
Water, tea, and juice exposed where the North America network broke down.
Switch between the two network designs to see what changed and why the recommendation was phased.
Different companies handled connected work with different tools and incentives.
That structure worked for high-volume soda. It created extra handoffs when Coke needed to package, route, and sell water, tea, and juice alongside it.
Coke HQ
Owns the brand and makes concentrate
Independent bottlers
Package, route, and sell with separate systems
Retailers
Receive overlapping sales coverage
Split pallets
Separate IT
Repeated retailer calls
The recommendation was a sequence, not a list of separate ideas.
Choose a move to see the action, the reason for its timing, and the business measure it was designed to change.
First 18 months
Stabilize production and technology
Integrate production and consolidate IT across CCR and Coke HQ.
Shared facilities and systems reduce split-pallet, routing, and coordination friction.
$350M estimated savings in the classroom model
A real rollout would need to prove the financial case before it scales.
The case recommendation established a direction. These are the three questions I would use to decide whether to continue, adjust, or stop the plan.
Prove the financial case
North America operating margin and cost per delivery
The $350M estimate was a combined classroom-model total. A live program would need to show how much each change contributes before it scales.
Prove the retailer model
One account plan for each major retailer
Costco and Walmart could determine whether a coordinated coverage model creates value or simply shifts cost into trade spending.
Prove the franchise transition
Service continuity, bottler incentives, and transition cost
Refranchising only works if Coke can preserve the shared operating model while handing regional execution back to partners.
I made the structural case and authored the final recommendation.
I led the Focus question, Porter's Five Forces, SWOT implications, and final synthesis for this small-group MBA strategic-management project. The Latin America benchmark narrowed the question from brand performance to operating-model design.
Would repeat: start with the margin benchmark.
Would test next: retailer response and refranchising-transition risk.
This was an MBA case analysis, not a client engagement. Historical operating data and category forecasts came from the submitted case materials; the 18%+ margin target and $350M estimate were recommendations, not realized results.