A PROJECT REPORT ON

COOPERATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES OF
MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA CO. LTD.

BACHELOR OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES

SEMESTER V
(ACADEMIC YEAR – 2010-11)

SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY 0F MUMBAI IN PARTIAL

REQUIREMENT LEADING TO A DEGREE IN BACHELOR OF
MANAGEMENTMENT STUDIES

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

PROF. Mrs. S. S. R. SIVAJYOTHI

SUBMITTED BY
SAGAR AKARAM SATHE
SEAT NO. 1234
TYBMS SEM – V

BHAVNA TRUST‘S DEGREE COLLEGE OF BMS

DEONAR MUMBAI – 400088
2010-2011
 OF SCIENCE AND COMMERCE
Deonar, Mumbai 400 088.
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES

Certificate
I hereby certify that ---------------------
Of Bhavna trust’s Degree College of Science & Commerce of TYBMS(Sem-V) has
successfully completed project on
------------------------------------------------------------------ in the academic year 2010-
2011. The information submitted is true and original to the best of my knowledge.

Signature of Principal Signature of project

Co-ordinator

Name & sign. of BMS Course

 Co-ordinator Name & sign.of External Examiner

DECLERATION CERTIFICATE

I, SAGAR. A. SATHE student of TYBMS 2009-2010 studying at

BHAVNA TRUST’S DEGREE COLLEGE OF TYBMS (Sem-V) hereby declare that
the project work entitled “COOPERATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES OF MAHINDRA
& MAHINDRA CO. LTD” was carried by me in the partial fulfillment of BMS
program under the University of Mumbai for the academic year 2010-2011.

This project was undertaken as a part of academic curriculum

according to the university rules and norms and it has not commercial interest and
motive. It is my true and original work.

Date: -

Place:-Mumbai
 Signature of the Student
SAGAR. A. SATHE
T. Y. B. M. S.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It gives me immense pleasure to present this project report on

Cooperative Responsibilities carried out at MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA CO. Ltd. in
partial fulfillment of graduate course B.M.S.

I would like to thank MRS. S. S. R. SHIVJYOTHI In charge of

TYBMS for their valuable advice and guidance during my project Completion) for
timely help concerning various aspects of project.
 SAGAR. A. SATHE
T. Y. B. M. S.
CONTENTS

SR NO. TOPICS
 CHAPTER - I
COOPERATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES
1. Introduction
2. Definition
3. Historical definition
4. Features of CSR
5. Need of CSR
6. Determinants of CSR
7. Why CSR is so
important?
8. Challenges of CSR
9. Introduction of Mahindra
co.
10. Mahindra co. and it’s
responsibilities
11. Objective of Study
Methodology of Data
Collection
12. Limitations of Study

CHAPTER-1
 INTRODUCTION
OF
CSR

INTRODUCTION OF CSR :->

CSR is stands for Cooperative Social Responsibity, which means

kinds of responsibility of the organization towards the society. It is an
evolving concept which is yet to command a standard definition or a
fully recognized set of criterion. With the given understanding that
businesses have a key role of job and wealth creation in society.
 CSR generally understood to be the way an organization achieve a
balance between economic, environment and social imperative while
they address the exception if shareholders and stakeholders. It is
generally accepted that business firms have so vial responsibilities that
extend well beyond what in the past was commonly referred to simply as
the business economic function.

Corporate social responsibility ("CSR" for short, and also called

corporate conscience, citizenship, social performance, or sustainable
responsible business) is a form of corporate self-regulation integrated
into a business model. CSR policy functions as a built-in, self-regulating
mechanism whereby business monitors and ensures its active
compliance with the spirit of the law, ethical standards, and
international norms. The goal of CSR is to embrace responsibility for
the company's actions and encourage a positive impact through its
activities on the environment, consumers, employees, communities,
stakeholders and all other members of the public sphere. Furthermore,
CSR-focused businesses would proactively promote the public interest
by encouraging community growth and development, and voluntarily
eliminating practices that harm the public sphere, regardless of legality.
CSR is the deliberate inclusion of public interest into corporate
decision-making, and the honouring of a triple bottom line: people,
planet, profit.

The term "corporate social responsibility" came in to common use

in the early 1970s, after many multinational corporations formed. The
term stakeholder, meaning those on whom an organization's activities
have an impact, was used to describe corporate owners beyond
shareholders as a result of an influential book by R. Edward Freeman,
Strategic management: a stakeholder approach in 1984. Proponents argue
that corporations make more long term profits by operating with a
perspective, while critics argue that CSR distracts from the economic
role of businesses. Others argue CSR is merely window-dressing, or an
attempt to pre-empt the role of governments as a watchdog over
powerful multinational corporations.
 Corporate social responsibility (CSR) of companies has become a
subject of much debate. Despite this, I had been unable to understand
what exactly companies are supposed to do as their CSR. Is it
philanthropy and charity? Is it social and humanitarian work or
protecting the environment? Is it undertaking public service tasks which
normally government should be doing? Or is it all of these? I believe
that the CSR of a company should be undertaking all actions as would
maximize the probability of its long-term survival and sustained growth.

CSR is titled to aid an organization's mission as well as a guide to

what the company stands for and will uphold to its consumers.
Development business ethics is one of the forms of applied ethics that
examines ethical principles and moral or ethical problems that can arise
in a business environment. ISO 26000 is the recognized international
standard for CSR (currently a Draft International Standard). Public
sector organizations (the United Nations for example) adhere to the
triple bottom line (TBL). It is widely accepted that CSR adheres to
similar principles but with no formal act of legislation. The UN has
developed the Principles for Responsible Investment as guidelines for
investing entities.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has variously been described

as a ‘motherhood issue’, ‘the hot business issue of the naughtiest’ and
‘the talk of the town in corporate circles these days’. There seems to be
an infinite number of definitions of CSR, ranging from the simplistic to
the complex, and a range of associated terms and ideas (some used
interchangeably), including ‘corporate sustainability, corporate
citizenship, corporate social investment, the triple bottom line, socially
responsible investment, business sustainability and corporate
governance’ (Prime Minister's Community Business Partnership). It has
been suggested that ‘some…researchers…distort the definition of
corporate social responsibility or performance so much that the concept
becomes morally vacuous, conceptually meaningless, and utterly
unrecognizable’; or CSR may be regarded as ‘the panacea which will
solve the global poverty gap, social exclusion and environmental
degradation’.

An approach for CSR that is becoming more widely accepted is

community-based development approach. In this approach,
corporations work with local communities to better themselves. For
example, the Shell Foundation's involvement in the Flower Valley,
South Africa. In Flower Valley they set up an Early Learning Centre to
help educate the community's children as well as develop new skills for
the adults. Marks and Spencer is also active in this community through
the building of a trade network with the community - guaranteeing
regular fair trade purchases. Often activities companies participate in
are establishing education facilities for adults and HIV/AIDS education
programmes. The majority of these CSR projects are established in
Africa. JIDF For You, is an attempt to promote these activities in India.

A more common approach of CSR is philanthropy. This includes

monetary donations and aid given to local organizations and
impoverished communities in developing countries. Some organizations
do not like this approach as it does not help build on the skills of the
local people, whereas community-based development generally leads to
more sustainable development.

Another approach to abcd CSR is to incorporate the CSR strategy

directly into the business strategy of an organization. For instance,
procurement of Fair Trade tea and coffee has been adopted by various
businesses including KPMG. Its CSR manager commented, "Fairtrade
fits very strongly into our commitment to our communities."
 Another approach is garnering increasing corporate responsibility
interest. This is called Creating Shared Value, or CSV. The shared value
model is based on the idea that corporate success and social welfare are
interdependent. A business needs a healthy, educated workforce,
sustainable resources and adept government to compete effectively.

In earlier times the managers in most cases had only to concern

themselves with the economic results of their decisions. Todays
managers must also consider & weigh the lehgal, ethical, moral &
repercussion of each of their decisions. All companies have to ensure
that their activities do not adversely affect the environment. Depletion of
natural resources, like forests or ground water is a case in point.
Recovery of heat or minerals from flue gases or effluents reduces
pollution and the consumption of scarce resources, while saving money.
Atmospheric pollution affects the health of people and so must be
minimized. Laws relating to the environment should be observed both in
letter and in spirit.

After a comprehensive study of competitor strategy and an

internal policy review performed, a comparison can be drawn and a
strategy developed for competition with CSR initiatives.
 The CSR is the most important concept for leading business in
competitive world and to follow that many definition has been introduce
in market followed it. Many authorized peoples have defined CSR in their
way are as follow –

• Corporate social responsibility is operating a business in manner

which meets or excels the ethical, legal, commercial & public expectation
that society has from business.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• In the year 1953 the Bowen has said that “to pursue those policies
and to make those decisions or to follow those lines of actions which are
desirable in terms of objectives & values of society.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• According to Lord Holme & Richard Watts defines CSR as,

“Corporative Social Responsibility is the continuity commitment by
businesses to behave ethical and contribute to economic development
while improving community and society at large”.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• According to Wood, “the basic idea of corporate social

responsibility is that businesses and society are interwoven rather than
distinct entities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• The World Business Council for Sustainable Development in its

publication "Making Good Business Sense" by Lord Holme and Richard
Watts, used the following definition. "Corporate Social Responsibility is the
continuing commitment by business to behave ethically and contribute to
economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce
and their families as well as of the local community and society at large".

• Business for Social Responsibility America’s largest organisation

devoted to CSR, Business decision making linked to ethical values,
compliance with legal requirements, and respect for people,
communities, and the environment around the world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• Prince of Wales Business Leaders Forum

Open and transparent business practices that are based on ethical
values and respect for employees, communities, and the environment.
It is designed to deliver sustainable value to society at large, as well as
to shareholders.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• European Commission
A concept whereby CSR companies decide voluntarily to contribute to a
better society and a cleaner environment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Anonymous respondent to an Accountancy Ireland survey
CSR is ‘doing the right thing even when no-one is looking’.

Usually CSR concentrates on the activity that typically address the

aspects of a firms behavior (including its policies & practices) with
respect to such key elements as health & safety, environmental
protection, human rights, human resources management practices,
corporate governance community development, consumer protection,
labour protection, suppliers relations, business ethics & stakeholders
rights.
CSR IN SOCIETY
CHAPTER-1
HISTORICAL
DEFINITION
OF
CSR
HISTORICAL DEFINITON :->

While the term CSR may appear to be relatively new to the

corporate world, the literature reveals that the evolution of the concept
itself has taken place over several decades. The fact that the terminology
itself has changed over this time also suggests that the meaning ascribed
to concepts such as CSR will continue to evolve in tune with business,
political and social developments. The impact of globalisation
and mass communication also means that while definitions will reflect
local 3 situations, they will also be strongly influenced by global trends
and changes in international law.

1920s – 1950s
It has been suggested by Windsor that ‘business leaders have since the

1920s
Widely adhered to some conception of responsibility and responsiveness
practices’. Others have argued that the genesis of CSR was in the

1930s with the debate between AA Berle and E Merrick Dodd over the
role of managers. Merrick Dodd contended ‘that the powers of
corporate management are held in trust for the entire community’.

In 1953, Bowen conceptualised CSR as social obligation – the

obligation ‘to pursue those policies, to make those decisions, or to follow
those lines of action which are desirable in terms of the objectives and
values of our society’. Carroll has described Bowen as the
modern ‘Father of Corporate Social Responsibility’ and believes that his
work marks the beginning of the modern period of literature on CSR.
Bowen took a broad approach to business responsibilities, including
responsiveness, stewardship, social audit, corporate citizenship and
rudimentary stakeholder theory.
Peter Drucker was one of the first to explicitly address CSR, including
public responsibility as one of the eight key areas for business objectives
developed in his 1954 book, The Practice of Management. While Drucker
believed that management’s first responsibility to society involved
making a profit, ‘he felt it was also most important that management
consider the impact of every business policy
and action upon society’.

1960s
The literature of the 1960s is not heavily represented in CSR discourse.
However, Carroll believed that this decade ‘marked a significant growth
in attempts to formalize, or more accurately, state what CSR means’. He
suggested that some of the most prominent writers during that time
were Keith Davis, Joseph W McGuire, William C Frederick and
Clarence C Walton. Davis’s assertion that ‘some socially responsible
business decisions can be justified by… having a good chance of
bringing long-run economic gain to the firm, thus paying it back for its
socially responsible outlook’ is an interesting precursor 4 to
contemporary debates about the financial implications of CSR. Davis’s
later assertion that ‘The substance of social responsibility arises from
concern for the ethical consequence of one’s acts as they might affect the
interests of others’ introduces the notion of business ethics to CSR.

In 1960, Frederick wrote that ‘Social responsibility in the final analysis

implies a public posture toward society’s economic and human
resources and a willingness to see that those resources are used for
broad social ends and not simply for the narrowly circumscribed
interests of private persons and firms’. Clarence C Walton emphasized
that ‘the essential ingredient of the corporation’s social responsibilities
include a degree of voluntarism, as opposed to coercion’, an argument
that business continues to put forth today. Walton also counselled ‘the
acceptance that costs are involved for which it may not be possible to
gauge any direct measurable economic returns’.
1970s
The literature on CSR includes many references to Milton Friedman’s
‘minimalist’ view of corporate responsibility and his famous comment in
1970 . It is useful to include the quotation here because it is such a
business-centric view and is one end of a continuum that is still being
debated today in terms of CSR:
There is one and only one social responsibility of business – to use its
resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so
long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engage in
open and free competition, without deception or fraud.
Friedman’s view has continued to be debated over the decades, for
example
McAleer, who concluded that Friedman’s arguments were
unsound and his views unclear, and Oketch, who suggested that ‘Today,
many would not be comfortable with such a profit-oriented statement’.
The US Committee for Economic Development’s (CED)1971 model of
CSR reveals that despite Friedman’s pronouncement, there were other
evolving views about the role of business in CSR. The Committee
described CSR as being ‘related to products, jobs and economic growth;
related to societal expectations; and related to activities aimed at
improving the social environment of the firm’. Carroll describes the
CED’s model 5 as ‘a landmark contribution to the concept of CSR’
which illustrated the changing relationship between business and
society.
Business is being asked to assume broader responsibilities to society
than ever before and to serve a wider range of human values. Business
enterprises, in effect, are being asked to contribute more to the quality
of American life than just supplying quantities of goods and services.
Inasmuch as business exists to serve society, its future will depend on
the quality of management’s response to the changing expectations of
the public’. The relationship between business and society was being
questioned at a time when the United States was embroiled in the social
and political protests of the civil rights and peace movements, when
issues such as ‘human values’ and morality were being publicly debated.
This would also have impacted on corporate America.
Wallich expanded the debate about voluntarism versus coercion by
equating CSR with the freedom to be a free agent: I take responsibility to
mean a condition in which the corporation is at least in some measure a
free agent. To the extent that any of the foregoing social objectives are
imposed on the corporation by law, the corporation exercises no
responsibility when it implements them. Business therefore abrogates its
responsibility to government and the wider society.

In 1974, Eells and Walton’s discussion of CSR could perhaps be seen as

moving toward the issue of social licence that was to emerge more fully
nearly thirty years later.
In its broadest sense, corporate social responsibility represents a
concern with the needs and goals of society which goes beyond the
merely economic. Insofar as the business system as it exists today can
only survive in an effectively functioning free society, the corporate
social responsibility movement represents a broad concern with
business’s role in supporting and improving the social order.

In Sethi’s 1975 three-level model, the concept of corporate social

performance is discussed, and distinctions made between various
corporate behaviours. Sethi’s three tiers were ‘social obligation (a
response to legal and market constraints); social responsibility
(congruent with societal norms); and social responsiveness (adaptive,
anticipatory and preventive)’.
Early research studies on CSR conducted in the 1970s included
Bowman and Haire’s measurement of corporate involvement in CSR.
Their research used a variant of content analysis to measure the number
of lines covering social responsibility in company annual reports. The
headings they used included ‘corporate responsibility, social
responsibility, social action, public service, corporate citizenship, public
responsibility, and social responsiveness’.

1980s
The 1980s have been described as having ‘a more responsible approach
to corporate strategy’ (Freeman in Lucas, Wollin & Lafferty 2001, p.
150). Prominent was the work of R Edward Freeman on the emerging
Stakeholder Theory. Freeman saw ‘meeting shareholders’ needs as only
one element in a value-adding process’ and identified a range of
stakeholders (including shareholders) who were relevant to the firm’s
operations.

Freeman’s 1984 paper continues to be identified as a ‘seminal paper on

stakeholder theory’, and stakeholder theory as the ‘dominant paradigm’
in CSR.
Carroll believes that in the 1980s, ‘the focus on developing new or
refined definitions of CSR gave way to research on CSR and a
splintering of writings into alternative concepts and themes such as
corporate social responsiveness, CSP, public policy,
business ethics, and stakeholder theory/management’.
Carroll outlined the work of a number of researchers, including
Jones, who ‘posited that CSR ought to be seen not as a set of outcomes
but as a process’, and Tuzzolino and Armandi who ‘sought to develop a
better mechanism for assessing CSR by proposing a need-hierarchy
framework patterned after Maslow’s’.
The authors developed the organisational hierarchy as a
conceptual tool that could be used to assess socially responsible
organizational performance.
A prominent development in terms of CSR was the global debate
on sustainable development that emerged in this decade. The World
Conservation Strategy that was published in 1980 stressed the
interdependence of conservation and development and was the first to
conceptualise ‘sustainable development’ .

In 1987 the World Commission on Environment and

Development (WCED) published the Brundtland Report, ‘Our
Common Future’. The 7 report states that ‘Sustainable development
seeks to meet the needs and aspirations of the present without
compromising the ability to meet those of the future’ (World
Commission on Environment and Development 1987). This early
definition of sustainable development is often quoted, but it is
interesting from the viewpoint of the CSR debate that most authors to
not seem to quote the next sentence from the report:
Far from requiring the cessation of economic growth, it recognizes that
the problems of poverty and underdevelopment cannot be solved
unless we have a new era of growth in which developing countries play
a large role and reap large benefits. (World Commission on
Environment and Development 1987)
The report clearly links sustainable development with economic
growth and sets the direction for future debate on this issue. Although
we have seen examples of earlier work that touched on the issue of CSR
and financial profit, Carroll identified the 1980s as the period when
‘scholars were becoming interested in the question of whether socially
responsible firms were also profitable firms. If it could be demonstrated
that they were, this would be an added argument in support of the
CSR movement. Aupperle, Carroll, and Hatfield’s 1985 study of the
relationship between CSR and profitability ordered the priorities of
four components of CSR previously identified by Carroll, as ‘economic,
legal, ethical, and discretionary’.

1990s
The literature of the 1990s has not so much expanded the
definition of CSR, but used the CSR concept ‘as the base point, building
block, or point-of-departure for other related concepts and themes,
many of which embraced CSR-thinking and were quite compatible with
it. CSP, stakeholder-theory, business ethics theory, and corporate
citizenship were the major themes that took center stage in the 1990s’.

An important contribution to the literature was made by Wood in

1991 when she revisited the CSP model and ‘placed CSR into a broader
context than just a standalone definition. An important emphasis in her
model was on outcomes or performance’. The CSP framework
developed by Wood and the pyramid of responsibilities developed by
Carroll, with economic responsibilities at the base and philanthropy at
the apex, are discussed in depth in the literature,
including Carroll (1999) and Windsor (2001).

Swanson (1995) suggested that there were three main types of

motivation for CSR:
i. The utilitarian perspective (an instrument to help achieve
performance objectives);
ii. The negative duty approach (compulsion to adopt socially responsible
initiatives to appease stakeholders); and
iii. The positive duty view (businesses self-motivated regardless of social
pressures) (Swanson in Maignan & Ralston 2002).
Wood also identified three main types of processes used by businesses to
implement their CSR motivational principles: environmental
management, issues management and stakeholder management.
‘Once implemented throughout the organization, these processes
help the firm to keep abreast of, and to address successfully, stakeholder
demands’. However, this may be a somewhat simplistic view of CSR and
relationships with stakeholders. It is also a view that was overtaken in
the 90s by a broadening discussion of the concept of stakeholder, and
whether ‘the first priority of a corporation is to its shareholders’ or
whether policymakers should develop ‘a flexible multistakeholder
approach to promoting CSR’, as Aaronson suggests has occurred in
Britain in response to concern about global corporate responsibility.
Even within the group that O’Rourke has described as the ‘primary’
stakeholders – the shareholders – ‘the boundary zone of CSR is
currently being negotiated’ with companies.
O’Rourke writes that: A trend also noteworthy in the late 1990s was
that of shareholder activists linking their environmental or social issue to
financial performance and/or risks faced by the company. By claiming
that
environmental and social issues have a direct effect on shareholder
value, shareholder activists are moving the rhetoric of their activism out
of the realm of “ethics” or good versus bad behaviour, and into that of
traditional issues of profitability, risk and shareholder value.

An example of shareholder activism is the group BHP

Shareholders for Social Responsibility, which was formed in 1994 as a
result of shareholder concerns about environmental damage done by the
company in Papua New Guinea. The group has concerns about
environmental, social and economic issues and has actively
engaged BHP Billiton management about its concerns (BHP
Shareholders for Social Responsibility). Similar advocacy groups have
been formed in Australia for shareholders of Boral Green, Gunns, and
PaperlinX.

Global influences on CSR continued in the 1990s as the roles of business

and government continued to blur. In 1997, Solomon wrote that ‘now
that businesses are often the most powerful institutions in the world, the
expanse of social responsibility has enlarged to include areas formerly
considered the domain of governments…The more powerful business
becomes in the world, the more responsibility for the wellbeing
of the world it will be expected to bear’ .

Writing in 1999, as the new millennium approached, Carroll suggested

that, ‘the CSR concept will remain as an essential part of the business
language and practice, because it is a vital underpinning to many of the
other theories and is continually consistent with what the public expects
of the business community today’.

Corporate Social Responsibility in the 21st Century

If the issue of CSR came to public prominence as a result of highly-
publicised events such as the collapse of Enron and the James Hardie
asbestos scandal in Australia, how have these concerns been addressed
in the literature of the new century? The debate about the place of CSR
in the global economy continues, with writers such as Scherer and Smid
echoing Solomon’s opinion that multinational corporations ‘should
take responsibility for the improvement of world-wide social and
environmental conditions’.
Windsor takes this point further by investigating examples of
Western oil production projects currently operating in a number of
war-torn, impoverished African states that are noted for corruption and
human rights abuse. James Buckee, the CEO of one of these companies,
is quoted as saying that ‘it is socially responsible for a corporation to
invest in certain places that some elements of popular opinion find
objectionable’. Clearly this illustrates Windsor’s conclusion that ‘There
are fundamental differences of opinions and values in the global
economy’. Oketch’s simplistic contention that ‘there is need to ensure
that the global market operates according to a certain set of rules and
institutions that a majority of people see as being legitimate’ raises more
questions than it answers.
As well as the development of global business, recent literature
appears to be moving away from a US-dominated discourse to a more
international one. Academics such as Maignan and Ralston – CSR in
France, the Netherlands and the UK; Aaronson – UK; Perrini et al –
Italy; and Lucas et al – Australia have extended the debate to other
countries, as well as comparing national perceptions of CSR and the
role of business in society. Significant international developments that
have influenced this move include the appointment of a UK Minster for
Corporate Social Responsibility in March 2000; the release of the
European Commission’s Green Paper, Promoting a European
Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility; and the United Nations
Global Compact regarding human rights, labour and the environment.
Such developments are also reflected in the literature, where the linkage
between government and CSR has been explored.
Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Implications
The issue of CSR and its effects on financial performance continued to
be addressed in the literature. Windsor quotes the 1998 findings of
Verschoor, that ‘among the 500 largest US public corporations, the
26.8% committing in annual reports to ethical behaviour toward
stakeholders or compliance with corporate code of conduct have
higher financial performance measures than other firms that do not’.
However, this is a very narrow measurement of CSR and does not allow
for the fact that companies such as Enron can engage in philanthropy
while being guilty of moral misconduct. Windsor suggests that ‘The
Enron collapse is a reminder that such deviation [between responsibility
and wealth] is never far away in the increasingly competitive landscape
of global business operations’.
He believes that there has been ‘A marked tendency in the
relevant literature…to examine alternatives – such as citizenship or
stakeholder management – precisely because of the difficulties inherent
in the responsibility construct’.
Orlitzky argues that his research shows a positive correlation
between corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate financial
performance, that CSP actually reduces financial risk and that
organisations of all size may benefit financially from socially responsible
activities. In a discussion about the business case for CSR, Hopkins
suggests that while it is difficult to prove a causal link between CSR
actions and financial indicators, an in-depth benefit-cost analysis of
CSR by the Cooperative Bank of the UK ‘declared that between 15 and
18% of its pre-tax profits could be directly attributed to its ethical
stance’.
Hopkins undertook a study of the top UK companies, examining
the correlation between social responsibility and their stock market
performance. He concluded that ‘the public’s purchasing of shares was
still not greatly affected by the companies’ level of social responsibility
[but]…that CSR standing does not necessarily badly affect a company’s
share price’. Of course, share market price is only one measure of
profitability and the narrowness of Hopkins’ research supports his
contention that, ‘Definition, measurement and data problems exist for
assessing both social responsibility and financial performance’.
In terms of corporate financial investment in CSR, McWilliams
and Siegel postulated that ‘there is some level of CSR that will maximize
profits while satisfying the demand for CSR from multiple stakeholders.
The ideal level of CSR can be determined by cost-benefit analysis’.
Another aspect of investment in CSR that has financial implications is
what Brammer and Pavelin have termed ‘insurance-motivated social
investment’, a risk-management strategy aimed at reducing reputational
and financial losses caused by adverse stakeholder reaction to negative
events.
The authors suggested that ‘Social investment, by establishing a
positive reputation in the eyes of stakeholder groups, helps to mitigate
the impact of those negative events by reducing the likelihood that
stakeholders attribute blame to the company concerned’.
 Corporate Citizenship and Moral/Ethical Responsibility One of the
complexities of CSR is that in defining what it means to be a ‘good’
corporate citizen, some lobbyists talk in terms of absolutes, while others
speak in terms of degrees. In this age of multi-facetted international
corporations, practices within and across corporate boundaries may
vary. In a recent analysis of Business Ethics magazine’s ‘100 Best
Corporate Citizens for 2006’, Mattera points out that high-tech firms,
such as Hewlett-Packard, make up seven of the ‘top’ eleven companies.
However, he disputes this view of the high-tech industry as a top
environmental performer, citing concerns about its creation of toxic
waste sites, the wastage generated by obsolete hardware, and workplace
exposure to toxic chemicals. Mattera categorises the divergency between
Wal-Mart’s environmental reforms and its retrograde labour policies as
symbolising was he sees as ‘the selective business ethics that prevail
today’. The difficulty in discussing moral/ethical responsibility, of
course, is whose morality/ethics? Ryan asks ‘who should be the judge of
a company’s reputation’, and how should it be measured? Nevertheless,
an increasing number of writers are raising the issue of moral/ethical
responsibility as an identifiable aspect of CSR.
In a discussion of Shareholder Theory versus Stakeholder Theory,
Post contends that ‘Implementing management principles derived from
Stakeholder Theory will broader and enhance the moral quality of
decisions. In the modern era, having management serve only the
interests of the shareholder or itself is morally untenable’. The linkage
between CSR and corporate morality has also been explored by
Richards and Maignan and Ralston.
In their study of business ethics and CSR, Joyner and Payne
identified a time lag between socially responsible behaviour by a
company and financial gain. They have called for larger longitudinal
studies of this linkage over a five-ten year period, and comment that
although ‘in a perfect world such studies would not be necessary, …in
this less-than-perfect-world…, where success for business is measured
almost exclusively by financial performance, the ability to show that
ethical and socially responsible behaviour can boost financial results
might provide the impetus for real change in many organizations’.
Social Licence A recent addition to the vocabulary of CSR is the concept
of ‘social licence’.
Gunningham et al offered the following description:
… social licence…is based not on compliance with legal requirements
(although breach of these requirements may jeopardise the social
licence), but rather upon the degree to which a corporation and its
activities are accepted by local communities, the wider society, and
various constituent groups.
Sweeney compares society’s treatment of corporations with its
treatment of persons, with the attendant rights and responsibilities.
Thus corporations are allowed the right to operate provided they fulfil
their duties by providing benefits to society. ‘In this sense, corporations
have a social licence to operate’.
The concept of ‘social licence’ is an abstract one, the interpretation of
which varies. This is understandable in a corporate world grappling
with varying degrees of success with a range of concepts such as CSR,
triple bottom line, and socially responsible investment. However, it is
critical that corporations understand and embrace this relationship with
the broader society in which they operate. The websites of the
Association of Market & Social Research Organisations and the Mineral
Policy Institute suggest that these organisations interpret ‘social licence’
as the Government allowing them to operate, or a way of operating that
will allow companies to avoid regulation (Evans 2001 ; Sergeant 2005)
Social licence is not a licence to avoid government regulation, in fact it
has been described as a way of operating ‘beyond compliance’.
Matilda Minerals has stated that, ‘The “social licence to operate” is a
compliment [sic] to the regulatory licence issued by government’. The
Minerals Council of Australia has expanded on this statement:
The Australian minerals industry is committed to developing its
social licence to operate as a complement to the regulatory licence issued
by government. To the minerals industry ‘social licence to operate’ is
about operating in a manner that is attuned to community expectations
and which acknowledges that businesses have a shared responsibility
with government, and more broadly society, to help facilitate the
development of strong and sustainable communities. Simply defined
the ‘social licence to operate’ is an unwritten social contract…
Similarly, the Ministerial Council on Mineral and Petroleum Resources
defines social licence as: …the recognition and acceptance of a
company’s contribution to the community in which it operates, moving
beyond meeting basic legal requirements, towards developing and
maintaining the constructive relationships with stakeholders necessary for
business to be
sustainable. Overall it comes from striving for relationships based on
honesty and mutual respect.
While the above are examples of corporate commitment to social
licence, the literature also provides examples of the ‘corporate
misreading’ of the terms of their social licence’, which ‘caused a broader
corporate rethink’. These examples include Monsanto’s failure to
appreciate the European consumer backlash against genetically
modified food and the perception of Nike as an exploiter of labour in
impoverished countries. Both situations led to damage to brand image
and necessitated corporate restructuring. Wheeler et al provide further
comment on these examples in their discussion of CSR and a
stakeholder approach to the creation of value.

FEATURES OF CSR :->

• Increasing inconsistencies between corporate actions.

• Creating the good relationship between customers & firm.

• Improvement of responsibilities towards the employees.

• Improving the company status in the market.

• Helping to solve the social problem.

CHAPTER-1
NEED
OF
CSR
NEED OF CSR :->

 While the interests of shareholders and the actions of managers of

any business enterprise have to be governed by the laws of economics,
requiring an adequate financial return on investments made, in reality
the operations of an enterprise need to be driven by a much larger set of
objectives that are today being defined under the term CSR.

 The CSR is important for broad rationale for a new set of ethics for
corporate decisions making, which clearly constructs and upholds a
organization’s social responsibility, arises form the fact that a business
enterprise derives several benefits from society, which must, therefore,
require the enterprise to provide returns to society as well.

 The CSR is beneficial for clearly establishes the stake of a business

organization in the good health and well being of a society of which it is a
part.

 Most importantly in this age of widespread communication and

growing emphasis on transparency, customers of any product or services
are unlikely to feel satisfied in buying from an organization that is seen to
violate the expectations of what is deemed to be ethically and socially
responsible behavior.
 The CSR now a days becoming increasingly evident that
organizations that pay genuine attention to the principles of socially
responsible behavior are also finding favor with the public and are the
preferred choice for their goods and services.
 CHAPTER-1
DETERMINANT
OF
CSR
 CHAPTER-1
WHY CSR IS SO
IMPORTANT
 IMPORTANCE OF CSR :->

 The CSR is important to improve the financial performance of

firm :->
The management literature has acknowledged social
responsibility as an important corporate duty. Given the
significance of corporate social responsibility in corporate
decision making the relationship between a firm’s social
and ethical policies or actions and its financial
performance is an important topic.

 Heightened public creditability :->

In this regard the number of companies is maintaining
their public relationship for inventing their business
status good in the people’s eyes. The CSR is very
important to provide the good services to their customers
and other surrounding peoples.

 It helping to reduce cost :->

The CSR is helping to the customers to reduce the cost of
good and services in many ways. By maintaining good
relation with the people leads to increase the business
activity with the demand.

 To increase attractiveness of investors :->

The CSR helps to the company to earn huge profit by
maintaining CSR among their members and surrounding
people.
 Improve relationship with stakeholders :->
Good public relation among the members helps the
business to maintain their goodwill in the market.

 Early identification of potential liability :->

The CSR is important to identify the public demand
towards the companies activities. It helps to identify the
potentiality of the liability.

 Market place advantage :->

The CSR helps at the market place for set-up the good
business.

 Improve overall management :->

The CSR improving the whole department wise
management of the organization.

 Improve organization effectiveness.

 Decrease risk of adverse publicity.

 CHAPTER-1
CHALLENGES
OF
CSR
CHALLENGES OF CSR :->

 Lack of awareness of general public in CSR activities

There is a lack of interest of the
general public in participating and contributing to CSR activities of
companies. This is because of the fact that there exists little or no
knowledge about CSR. The situation is further aggravated by a lack of
communication between the companies involved in CSR and the general
public at the grassroots.

 Need to build local capacities

There is a need for capacity building of the local non
governmental organizations as there is serious dearth of trained and
efficient organizations that can effectively contribute to the ongoing CSR
activities initiated by companies. This seriously compromises scaling up
of CSR initiatives and subsequently limits the scope of such activities.

 Issues of transparency
Lack of transparency is one of the key challenge for the
corporate as there exists lack of transparency on the part of the small
companies as they do not make adequate efforts to disclose information
on their programmed, audit issues, impact assessment and utilization of
funds. This negatively impacts the process of trust building among the
companies which is key to the success of any CSR initiative.

 Non-availability of well organized non-governmental organizations

There is non-availability of well organized non
governmental organizations in remote and rural areas that can assess and
identify real needs of the community and work along with companies to
ensure successful implementation of CSR activities.
 Visibility factor
The role of media in highlighting good cases of successful
CSR initiatives is welcomed as it spread good stories and sensitizes the
population about various ongoing CSR initiatives of companies. This
apparent influence of gaining visibility and branding exercise often leads
many non-governmental organizations to involve themselves in event-
based programmers in the process; they often miss out on meaningful
grassroots interventions.

 Narrow perception towards CSR initiatives

Non-governmental organizations and Government
agencies usually possess a narrow outlook towards the CSR initiatives of
companies, often defining CSR initiatives more as donor-driven. As a
result, corporate find it hard to decide whether they should participate in
such activities at all in medium and long run.

 Non availability of clear CSR guidelines

There are no clear cut statutory guidelines or policy
directives to give definitive directions to CSR initiatives of companies.
The scale of CSR initiatives of companies should depend upon their
business size and profile. In other words, the bigger the company, the
larger its CSR programmed.

 Lack of consensus on implementing CSR issues

There is a lack of consensus amongst implementing
agencies regarding CSR projects. This lack of consensus often results in
duplication of activities by corporate houses in areas of their intervention.
This results in a competitive spirit between implementing agencies rather
than building collaborative approaches on issues. This factor limits
company’s abilities to undertake impact assessment of their initiatives
from time to time.
 CHAPTER-2
INTRODUCTION
OF
MAHINDRA CO.
PROFILE OF THE COMPANY

Mahindra is one of the leading business group of India, it is one of

the largest corporate group of India. Mahindra Groups has global
presence & it is ranked amongst Forbes Top 200 list of the world’s most
Reputable companies & in the Top 10 of Most Reputable Indian
Companies.

The origins of Mahindra & Mahindra company can be traced back

to Oct 2, 1945 when Mahindra brothers, J.C. Mahindra & K.C.Mahindra
joined hands with Ghulam Mohammad & Mohammad was set up as a
franchise for assembling Jeep from Willys (U.S.A). When this company
name was Mahindra & Mohammad but after India independence in
1947, Mahindra & Mohammad returned back to Pakistan & became the
first Finance Minister of Pakistan.

At the beginning time this company was introduced first Indigenous

Jeep in the year 1949 in market and then this company proceeds with
new brands vehicles. Some of the famous automobiles brands of
Mahindra are- Scorpio & Bolero. The Mahindra company is also the
largest producer of tractors in India & now it is fourth largest tractor
company in the world. Mahindra & Mahindra is one of the leading
tractor brands in the world. It is also the largest manufacture of tractor
in India with substain market leadership of over 25 year. It designs,
developes, manufacturers and market tractors as well as farm
implements. Mahindra Tractors (CHINA) CO. Ltd. Manufacturer
tractors for the growing Chinese market and is a hub for tractor exoports
to the USA and other nation. Mahindra & Mahindra has a 100%
subsidiary, Mahindra USA, which assembles products for the American
markets.

HISTORICAL SCENARIO :->

1945
- The Company was Incorporated and converted into Public Limited in
1955 at Mumbai. The Company Manufacture Jeep type vehicles, petrol
industrial engines, industrial process control instruments and flow
meters. Trading in steel and manufacture of professional grade
electronic components. Jeeps are manufactured under a license and
an agreement with Willys Motors Inc., Toledo, Ohio, U.S.A., for whom
the Company also acts as exclusive distributors for the whole of India
for their entire range of vehicles including utility vans,
cargo/personnel carriers and pick-up trucks.

1958
- The Company entered into an agreement with Birfield Ltd., to form
Mahindra Sintered Products Private Limited for the manufacture of a
wide range of self lubricating bearings.

1968
- The Instrumentation & Electronics Division came into existence as
a result of merger of the wholly-owned subsidiary of Mahindra
Engineering Co. Ltd., with the Company with effect from 1st April
1968. The activities of the merged company were being carried on in
this division.

- The Company acquired the whole paid-up capital of Mahindra

Electro-Chemicals Products Ltd. Company.

- With effect from 1st April, the wholly owned subsidiary Mahindra
Engineering Co. Ltd., was merged with the Company. International
Tractor Company of India Ltd., was merged with the Company
effective from 1st November 1977.
1970
- The name was changed from Mahindra Van Wijk & Visser Ltd. to
Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. This was merged with the Indian National
Diesel Engine Co., Ltd., during 1977-78.

1977 - 74,
- 700-9.3% Pref. and 12,98,202 No. of Equity share allotted without
payment in cash to shareholders of International Tractor Co. Ltd.,
on its merger in prop 1:1 Pref. and 2:3 Equity. 12,500-7.8% Pref.
shares redeemed on 1.2.1979.

1978
- The Company started negotiation with Balania K. Zacharopoulos
Ltd., Athens for jointly promoting a new company in Greece for the
manufacture of Jeep vehicles and trucks. Initially, it was proposed
to assemble these vehicles mainly from CKD packs to be shipped from
India.

1979
- 57,22,764 Bonus equity share issued in prop. 1:1.

1983
- 76,30,352 Bonus equity shares issued in prop. 2:3 in October 1984.

1984
- Mahindra Spicer Ltd. (MSL), was amalgamated with Mahindra &
Mahindra Ltd. (MML) with effect from 3rd April. Pursuant to the
scheme of amalgamation of MSL with MML, the shareholders of MSL
were allotted 1,88,166 equity shares of MML in the ratio of 1 equity
share of MML for every 6 shares held in MSL.

- The Company entered into a collaboration agreement with Foramer

S. A., an associate of Forasol S.A., for purchase of Ile d' Amsterdam
an offshore drilling rig at a price U.S. .75 million. The Company
arranged for a foreign currency loan through Bank of Baroda. In

view of this purchase, the Company obtained a firm order from ONGC
for drilling services for 2 years.

1985
- A letter of intent was obtained for the manufacture of 50,000
lines of EPABX/PAXs in collaboration with OKL Electric Co. of Japan.

- The Company also signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the

British Telecom p.l.c. of London under which the two companies were
to jointly explore and develop opportunities in telecommunication and
technical fields in India.

- MBT was made a subsidiary of the Company with 60% holding and
the remaining 40% was subscribed by the foreign partners, the British
Telecommunications p.l.c., U.K. (BT) for provision of software
engineers of MBT to work on various projects of BT in the U.K. MBT
also decided to issue equity capital to the extent of Rs 4 crores
out of which shares worth Rs 2.40 crores were to be offered to
Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., for subscription and the balance shares
worth Rs 1.60 crores were to be offered to BT.

1987
- (17 months), approval from Government was received for the
manufacture of Peugeot 504 pick-up vehicles in collaboration with
Automobiles Peugeot of France.

- A new model M-595 tractor in the 50 H.P. range was introduced.

1988
- The Company acquired a off-shore drilling rig Ile d' Amsterdam
from Foramer S. A., France as on 1st March. A firm letter of intent
was received for one land rig for drilling operations at Jwalamukhi,
Himachal Pradesh against a tender from ONGC. The Company already
entered into an agreement with Forasol S.A., for purchase of a land
rig and related equipment.

1989
- During the year improved versions of CJ 500 range of jeeps and FJ
range of LCVs were introduced. Also a sporty model of jeep was
introduce which was well received by the target audience.

- During September, the Company acquired the automotive pressing

unit at Kanhe from Guest Keen Williams, Ltd. for a gross consideration
of Rs28.75 crores. The unit has an installed capacity of 10,000 tonnes
per annum.

1990
- The Automotive division faced adverse market conditions resulting
in a drastic reduction in production and sales of vehicles. The
Automotive division introduced a direct injection diesel engine, the
MDI 2500 A engine on the CJ 500 vehicles. A new fuel efficient 10
seater vehicle having a direct injection diesel engine was
introduced.

- A letter of intent was obtained from ONGC for extension of the

contract for a further period of one year. However, on account of
certain procedural delays ONGC dehired the rig and it remained
non-operational for about 160 days. However, the Company received a
contract from ONGC for a much higher day rate and the rig was
rendering service to ONGC with effect from 9th November.

- The Company issued 48,16,012-12.5% fully convertible debentures of

Rs 110 each with a provision to apply, instead, for 58,86,236 fully
convertible zero interest bonds of Rs 90 each. An option was given
to apply for a combination of debentures and bonds subject to an

aggregatevalue of Rs 52,97,61,320. These debentures/bonds were

offered on rights basis to the then existing equity shareholders in the
ratio of one debenture for every four equity shares held. The issue was
fully subscribed. Additional bonds/debentures were issued to retain the
over-subscription to the extent of 15% of the issue which is equivalent
to 7,22,401 debentures of Rs 110 each.

- Through another letter of offer, two blocks consisting of 8,64,049

debentures each were offered to Mahindra Companies and
International Finance Corporation, Washington, respectively with an
option to apply for bonds subject to the aggregate value of Rs
9,50,45,390 for each block. The issue was fully subscribed. Additional
bonds/debentures were issued to retain the over-subscription to the
extent of 15% of the issue which is equivalent to 1,29,607 debentures of
Rs 110 each for each block.

- The employees (including Indian working directors)/workers of the

Company were also offered on an equitable basis 2,40,801 debentures
of Rs 110 each with a provision to apply for bonds within the aggregate
limit of the issue. The issue was under subscribed. Only 16,750
debentures and 68,250 bonds were allotted. The balance
debentures/bonds were allowed to lapse.

- As on 1st April, 49,90,354 debentures and 26,20,371 bonds were

allotted.

- As on 1st May, the Company allotted on private placement basis 14%

redeemable non-convertible debentures for a total value of Rs 20
crores to UTI, LIC, ICICI, Army Group Insurance Fund and GIC and
its subsidiaries. These debentures are redeemable in full at a premium
of 5% on 1st May 1997.
1991

- New replacement kits for the series of diesel engines, the XDP
4.90 were successfully launched in order to replace petrol engines in
passenger cars and create new demands for the series of diesel
engines manufactured by the Company.

- During the second half of the year, the Company introduced the new
range of `Commander' vehicles which were well received in the
market.A new model on the anvil was a five door ten seater vehicle
Armada with a factory built body for which dies were imported from
Japan.

- To meet the changing needs of the market, the Company introduced a

new model 225 DI (25HP) tractor.

- Another 8,64,049 zero interest fully convertible bonds of Rs 90

each for a total value of 9,50,45,390 were allotted to Peugeot India
Holding, France, a subsidiary of Automobiles Peugeot, France as on
18th January.

- As per the terms of the issue, a portion of Rs 55 of each

debenture was converted into one equity share of Rs 10 at a premium of
Rs 45 per share and a portion of Rs 45 each bond was converted into
one equity share of Rs 10 at a premium of Rs 35 per share an on 1st
April.

- Accordingly, the Company allotted 49,90,354 equity shares on

conversion of debentures and 34,84,420 equity shares on conversion
of bonds. The balance amount of each bond and debenture was to be
converted as per the same terms given above at the end of 18 months
from the date of allotment.
- In order to meet the long term working capital requirements, the
Company issued in January 1991, 14% redeemable non-convertible
debentures aggregating Rs 25 crores to Infrastructure Leasing and
Financial Services, Ltd. on a private placement basis. The debenture
are redeemable in full at premium of 5% on 8th January, 1998.

1992
- It was proposed to launch a new LCV with a much larger platform,
imported driving comfort and better styling.

- The Company issued 72,42,719 - 14.5% secured Non-convertible

redeemable debentures of Rs 100 each with a detachable warrant
attached
to each debenture entitling the holder thereof to apply for 1 equity
share of Rs 10 each at a premium of Rs 20 per share in the ratio 1
debenture: 5 equity shares held, on the expiry of six months and 36
months from the date of allotment of debentures.

- Another 3,62,136 non-convertible debentures with detachable

warrants
were also offered to employees on an equitable basis. Only 2,20,300
debentures taken up.

- 76,04,855 oridinary shares of Rs 10 each at a premium of Rs 20 per

share were to be issued to those exercising the rights attached to
the
warrants between 6 months and 36 months from the date of allotment
of
debentures. The debentures were to be redeemed not earlier than the
end of 7th year but not later than the end of the 10th year from the
date of allotment of debentures.

1993
- The Automotive division undertook to introduce a wide range of
products such as mini bus, MM Deluxe, Armada deluxe, Cabking
pick-up,
CL-Classic & a single/double Cab pick-up etc.

- Mahindra Nissan Allwyn Ltd. (MNL) was amalgamated with

Mahindra &
Mahindra Ltd. (MML) with effect from 1st November. Pursuant to the
scheme of amalgamation, the shareholders of MNAL were allotted
9,73,200
equity shares of MML in the ratio of 1 equity share of MML for every
25
shares held in MNAL. With the merger modern automotive plant
owned
MNAL became a Unit of the Company's automotive division.

- The Company issued 100,47,043 Global depository receipts valued at

US
$ 74.75 million. Each GDR was issued at a market price of US .44
and
was supported by equal number of underlying shares. Accordingly
1,00,47,043 shares were allotted at a premium of Rs 22.50 per share.

1994

- During the year a new Company Mahindra USA Inc. had been
established
in Texas, U.S.A. with the objective of increasing tractor sales in
U.S.

- 9,73,200 shares allotted to the erstwhile sharehodlers of MNAL

11,14,682 shares allotted against the detachable warrants.
35,85,874
shares allotted to Ford Motor Company USA, at a premium of Rs 370
per
shares. 28,00,000 shares allotted to the promoter group.

1995

- A New LCV model-cabking DI 3150 - with a payload of 2.5 tonnes, a

5-speed transmission and high quality components was launched. Also,
a
sporty 4-wheel drive vehicle Mahindra Classic with modern fitments
such
as Vacuum assisted brakes, disc brakes in front, wire wheels & bull
bar
was launched for the domestic market. In addition, a new commander
5-Door Hard Top vehicle, primarily targeted for semi-urban and rural
transportation was introduced.

- Two new models - 365 DI and 585 - DI were also launched in 30-35
HP
and 45-50 HP segments respectively.

- The Company entered into a joint venture agreement with Ford

Motor
Company USA (Ford) for promotion of a new Company for the
manufacture
and marketing of Ford range of passenger and other vehicles. The
Company has an equity participation of Rs 160 crores each by Ford
and
the Company.

- 22,71,322 No. of Equity shares allotted in conversion of warrants.

407,17,489 bonus equity shares issued in proportion 2:3.

- The tractor division received the ISO 9001 certification from TUV
of
Germany.

1996
- The Company proposed to introduce the `Armada Grand' with XD3
diesel
engine, 5 speed BA 10 transmission with air-conditioning and power
steering as standard features. New models like, soft top and FRP
versions of CL/MM 550 models, comfortable 8 seater Armada with Disc
Brakes and an optional factory fitted air conditioner, Commander 650
DI
on a longer wheel base and MM 540/550 XDB models with the powerful
2.5
lines XD3 engine and the all-synchromesh 5 speed BA 10 transmission
were launched during the year.

- During July, the Company offered US 0,00,000-5% convertible

note
during July 9, 2001 came into GDRs each representing one share at a
cover sum price of US .955 per GDR. Till date 15,73,830 shares
issued.

1997

- The Zaheerabad plant and R&D division were awarded Iso 9002 and
ISO
9001 certification respectively. With the technology received from
Fuji Technica, Japan the company undertook to manufacture dies for
vehicle bodies in the new Die Shop. During the year, 7 new models
to
cater to different nice markets were introduced.

- New products viz. 275 DI TU upgrades B-275 model with increased

power
and 585-C, 585 DI model with constant mesh transmission for ease
operation were introduced.

- M&M is setting up an engineering and product development centre at

Thane to strengthen its technology and designing capacities.
- M&M is setting up a joint venture with Mondragon Corporation of
Spain
in the area of iron foundry. The joint venture agreement was signed
in
Spain by M-M at an Indo-Spain joint business council meeting
organised
by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry and
the
Association of Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India.

- M&M is entering into a 50:50 joint venture with the billion

Case
of the US for manufacturing high horse power tractors.

- The M&M-Sealand joint venture is considering introducing a Ro-Ro

(Roll-on, Roll-off) railway service in India.

- The Mahindra group has tied up with Sega Enterprises Ltd and
Mitsubishi Corporation of Japan to form a joint venture (JV) in
India
to develop and launch Sega branded family entertainment centres.

- M&M has signed an agreement with Chemoleums Ltd under which

M&M
will
use a special quality of Chemoleums lubricating oil, Mahindra
Singlestar, for its tractors.

- M&M has signed a wage agreement with its union at its automotive
plant at Kandivali, evolving a Mahindra Production System (MPS)
which
is an amalgamation of latest work measurement techniques and Toyota
Production Systems.

1998
- A joint venture company is being promoted by Mahindra and
Mahindra
Limited, Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services and Tamil
Nadu
Industrial Development Corporation to set up an industrial park near
Chennai to attract auto ancillary units and all categories of
non-polluting industries.

- Utility vehicle manufacturer, Mahindra and Mahindra (M&M) on

May
27
signed a productivity and capacity linked wage agreement with its
union
(Bharatiya Kamghar Sena) at its tractor plant at Kandivali.

- M&M has signed new productivity agreements with its workers at the
Kandivli (Mumbai), Nashik and Zaheerabad (Andhra Pradesh) plants.

- Mahindra Ford is likely to sign a MoU with the government to

import
auto kits.

- Mercedes-Benz India Ltd and Mahindra Ford India Ltd have signed a
MoU
with the Directorate-General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), under the new
MoU
policy for car manufacturing in the country.

- Danish company Maersk, Mahindra & Mahindra and the Tamil Nadu
Industrial Development Corporation (Tidco) propose to establish a
joint
venture to develop Colachel on western coast of south Tamil Nadu into
a
hub port.
- Mahindra & Mahindra (M&M) is all set to float a 50:50 joint
venture
company with the Punjab state government for setting up a hi-tech
agro-commodity exchange in the state.

1999

- M&M has set up a new company - Mahindra Auto Specialities Ltd -

for
bullet-proofing passenger vehicles and providing specialised
services.
M&M has signed an MoU with Plasan Sasa of Israel for design and
development of armoured (bullet proof) solutions on M&M utility
vehicles for use by Indian security forces.

- The Mahindra & Mahindra group and the TVS group have floated a
joint
venture to provide software solutions to the automobile sector.

- Mahindra and Mahindra (M&M) is working towards introducing a

slew
of
models in India from the Mitsubishi stables, including its famed
Pajero
brand of multi-utility vehicles (MUVs) and jeeps.

- Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd (M&M) has created a tier-IT structure

under
Mahindra Holdings & Financial Ltd whereby individual subsidiaries
will
tap the capital market depending upon their need for cash.

- Utility vehicle major, Mahindra and Mahindra (M&M), is entering

the
Rs 1,000-crore three-wheeler market for the first time. The company
will launch its first three-wheeler a diesel-driven eight seater
within
8-10 months from now.

2000

- The Company will be launching its first CNG-powered utility

vehicle
in Delhi.

- The Company consequent to disciplinary action taken by the

Management
against certain workmen and Union representative, the workmen of
Kandivli Plant of Tractor Division of the company initially stopped
work and thereafter resorted to illegal strike on 11th January.

- The Company proposes to make a call for redeeming Bonds of value

US
.378 million out of current outstanding of US .866 million.

- The Company tie-up with Citibank for a channel financing agreement

for their dealers.

- Mahindra & Mahindra launched its eight seater Marshal DI Deluxe

2000
in Western Maharashtra.

- Mahindra Auto Specialisites Ltd, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the

company delivery of the first Neticle (net-vehicle) - brand named
Quadro - in India.

- The Company has launched its new generation tractors Arjun 605 DI
at
the Kandivali plant.

- The Company and French car maker Renault have signed an

agreement
to
explore the possibility of using Renault petrol engines for M&M's
planned Scorpio utility vehicle.

- The Company has launched a fresh voluntary scheme for employees

in
its tractor division. The Scheme will open on June 8 and will
continue
till July 31.

- The Company is set to launch its 2.5-litre multi-utility vehicle,

Bolero.

- The Company launched the 39 HP and 40 HP models of its `Bhoomi

Putra'
range of tractors.

- The Company has entered into a technical alliance with Austrian

engine manufacturer AVL list GmbH for production of light
commercial
vehicles of 3.5 tonne capacity.

- M&M will launch the LCV under the `Loadking' name in January
next
year.

- M&M has launched its first 60 HP class tractor Arjun 605 DI here,
will from now roll out a new mode very six months.

- The Company the utility vehicle market leader, launch of its

latest
UV, the Bolero GLX.

- The Company will launch Scorpio, its urban utility vehicle, by the
end of the year.
- The Company has launched the first of its new series of Horizin
Tractors, the Mahindra Arjun 605 DI in Andhra Pradesh.

- The Company launched diesel version of Bolero in a short time.

- Mahindra & Mahindra is to go for a expansion, keeping pace with

its
plans for the introduction of new models, including the Scorpio.

- Mahindra & Mahindra is likely to introduce agricultural related

implement and equipment in the near fugure.

- Mahindra and Mahindra Limited (M&M) launched yet another range

of
new
generation tractors to grab a large share of an emerging mature
market.

- The Company has launched its fourth portal business with an

investment of million.

- Mahindra Intertrade, subsidiary of Mahindra & Mahindra, has

launched
a steel trading portal, steelmartindia.com.

- Fitch Ratings India has assigned `Ind AAA' rating to the proposed
five-year Rs 100-crore non-convertible debenture programme of the
company.

- The Board has approved an ESOS and decided to allot 55,24,219 No.
of
equity shares to the Mahindra & Mahindra Employee Stock Option
Trust.

2001
- The Company has set up a farm extension services division called
Mahindra Shubh Labh, which will pioneer the building of a chain of
one-stop shops offering a comprehensive range of farm-gate services.

- Mahindra Intertrade, the largest non-automotive company of the

Mahindra & Mahindra group, has entered into a distribution alliance
with Lego.

- Mr. Anand G. Mahindra has been appointed as Vice-Chairman and

Managing Director.

- Mahindra & Mahindra is set to launch three new variants of its

utility vehicle Bolero to boost its presence in the urban segment.

- The strike at the company's Nashik automotive plant which began on

March 4, has been called off with effect from 8th March.

- Credit Rating and Information Services of India Ltd. has revised

the
rating assigned to the company's long-term debentures to `AA+' to
`AAA'.

- Mahindra & Mahindra has tied up with French auto giant Renault for
sourcing petrol engines for its premium utility vehicle Scorpio
which
would be launched later this year.

-The price of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd (M&M) shares hit a 92-
month
low
on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) on june 14 fuelled by market
apprehensions of a steep fall in the company’s sales in May 2001

- Mahindra & Mahindra launched the premium version of its 7 seater

multi-utility vehicle, Bolero GLX.
2002

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd has informed BSE that ICICI Bank Ltd
has
withdrawn the nomination of Mr Inder Chand Jain as their Nominee
Director from the Board of M& M with immediate effect.Consequently
Mr
Inder Chand Jain ceases to be a Director of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd
with immediate effect.

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd has informed BSE that Mr. David
Friedman
(currently the Alternate Director to Mr.Lewis W. K. Booth) has been
appointed as a Director of the Company w.e.f. October 30, 2002 in the
vacancy caused by the cessation of Directorship of Mr. Lewis W.K.
Booth. Mr. V.K. Chanana has been appointed as a Nominee Director of
UTI w.e.f. October 30, 2002 in place of Mr. Sanjiv Kapoor whose
nomination has since been withdrawn by UTI.

2003

-Unleashes MaXX Pik Up utility vehicle

- Signed an agreement with Canara Bank . Where in, Canara Bank will
provide loan to those farmers who are willing to buy Mahindra's
tractors and other farm implements.

- Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd on December 24th showcased its new

products, Bolero XL and Bolero XLS, for prospective customers in
Karnataka.

2004

-Mahindra & Mahindra delisting of shares from DSE

-M&M launches two variants of Bolero utility vehicle in TN

-The former managing director of Rallis India, Mr Rajeev Dubey, is
joining Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd (M&M) as Executive Vice-
President
(Human Resources & Corporate Services). Mr Dubey has previously
held
senior positions at Tata Steel and was the managing director of Tata
Metaliks.

-Auto giant Mahindra and Mahindra has launched its latest variants of
Bolero XL range here on January 19, 2004, thus heralding its launch
across the State.

-M&M enters into agreement for acquiring majority stake in US based

Bristlecone Inc

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd has informed that the equity shares of the
Company have been delisted from Pune Stock Exchange Ltd w.e.f.
January 16, 2004.

-M&M unveils innovation matrix to enhance performance

-Mahindra Special becomes M&M's new IT unit

-Equity shares delisted from Madras Stock Exchange

- tied up with an Iran-based company Barchinkar for localising M&M

tractors in the Iran market

- Mahindra Tractors in accord with Castrol

-M&M rolls out India's first turbo tractor

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd has informed that HSBC Global

Investment
Fund has acquired 3,99,825 equity shares of the company through
market on May 17
-- Andhra Bank has announced that it has joined hands with Mahindra
Tractors for financing the distribution of tractors through the bank
branches across the country

-Mahindra & Mahindra (M&M) has forayed into the Latin American
markets through the opening of an assembly line in Uruguay

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd (M&M) on announced its foray into the
South
African automobile market

-Hemant Luthra to head M&M's new MSAT Sector

-Dena Bank inks MoU with M&M for tractor loans

2005

- Mahindra & Mahindra tractors' top dealer in the US has become the
largest tractor dealer in the US, muscling past dealers of John Deer,
New Holland and Kubota.

-M&M forays into Australian tractor market on February 14, 2005.

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd (M&M) launches its Common Rail Diesel
Engine (CRDEe) fitted-Scorpio, which conforms to BS III emission
norms on February 22, 2005,

-Mahindra & Mahindra executes JV Agreement with Renault

-Scorpio unveiled in Malaysia on May 4, 2005

-M&M, Renault ink MoU to set up Rs 550 crore car manufacturing

plant
in Nasik
-M&M introduces new pick-up vehicle on July 6, 2005

-Mahindra unveils 3-wheeler cargo carrier Champion Alfa model

-Mahindra & Mahindra inks a JV with International Truck & Engine

Corporation, USA

-Mahindra & Mahindra enters into agreement with Plexion

Technologies,
Mauritius

-M&M has signed a memorandum of understanding with the Saigal

family
of Pakistan for exporting tractors to that country..

2006

-M&M unleashes Scorpio Pik-Up in South Africa

-M&M unveils three-wheeler car

-M&M Hingna unit enters into new new wage agreement

- Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd on Oct 11,2006 signed a agreement with

ITMCo (Iran Tractor Manufacturing Co) to sell tractors in Iran. The
agreement was signed in Tehran.

-Mahindra & Mahindra (M&M) and French automaker Renault have

joined
hands yet again to establish a greenfield passenger car manufacturing
plant in India within five years.

- Mahindra & Mahindra inks deal with Global Vehicles USA Inc

2007
- Mahindra & Mahindra acquires a leading German Forging Company
Schoneweiss & Co. GmbH.

- Mahindra unveils new Bolero in Gujarat.

-Mahindra and Mahindra (M&M) has launched the line of sports

utility
vehicles (SUV) and pick up trucks that it plans to begin selling in
the United States starting from 2009.

- M&M unveils Mahindra Pik-Up in Australia.

-The latest product from Mahindra Defence Systems, the Axe FAV is
an
extreme offroading multi terrain defence purpose vehicle.

2008

-Mahindra & Mahindra acquires renowned Italian design house, GRD

Italy.

2009

- Mahindra & Mahindra unveiled its fourth generation Scorpio at an

unbeatable price.

- Mahindra & Mahindra (M&M) signed a memorandum of

understanding with
the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (SBBJ) for vehicle finance.

2010

- Mahindra & Mahindra has hiked prices of its products by up to Rs

18,000 due to the in excise duty announced in the Budget.
- Anand Mahindra, vice-chairman and managing director, M&M, is
keen
on attaining companies that boost M&M’s global aspirations. This can
be done by giving a combination of facilities, technology and dealer
network. Meanwhile, M&M came out as the ideal bidder for getting
hold
of a majority stake in Ssangyong Motor Company (SMC).