Strategi Pengasuhan PT. Pupuk Indonesia (Persero)

Budi Asikin, Muhammad Arief Rusdi, Ningky Sasanti Munir


As a large business entity that already has many subsidiaries, PT Pupuk Indonesia (Persero) is required to carry out a professional corporate governance system based on strong commercial principles, in the sense that it is able to provide added value, benefits and maximum profit levels to shareholders and existing stakeholders. Therefore, PT Pupuk Indonesia (Persero) needs to carry out an in-depth analysis of the implementation of the management strategy of its subsidiaries to determine the level of compatibility between the characteristics of the parent and its subsidiaries. Thus the company can develop a parenting strategy that is appropriate, effective and will further increase the value and competitiveness of the company as a whole. This research is an applied research with a qualitative descriptive approach using the Corporate Parenting Framework from Campbell et al. (1995). Data obtained through interviews, observation, and study of relevant documents. The study shows that the subsidiaries engaged in the main business of the fertilizer and chemical industry are in the Heartland Business category. Subsidiaries engaged in supporting businesses in the industry, trade and energy services sector, shipping and sea transportation and agricultural industry and trade are in the Edge of Heartland category. For subsidiaries engaged in EPC services and trading and general services the position is is in the area of the Alien Territory. So the parenting style of a parent company that is suitable for parenting for a subsidiary that falls into the Heartland Business category is a combination of corporate development and linkage influence; for a subsidiary that is part of the Edge of Heartland area, is stand alone influence. Meanwhile, for subsidiaries that are included in the Alien Territory area, the parenting style is linkage influence.


Parenting strategy; Parenting style; Parenting fit; Fertilizer industry


Afza, T., C. Slahudin, dan M. S. Nazir. (2008). Diversification and corporate performance: an evaluation of Pakistani firms. South Asian Journal of Management 15(3):7-18.

Basu, N. (2010). Trends in corporate diversification. Financial Markets and Portfolio Management 24(1): 87-102.

Bowman, E. H. & Helfart, C. E. (2001). Does Corporate Strategy Matter ?. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 1 - 23

Campbell, A., M. Goold, dan M. Alexander. (1995). Corporate strategy: The quest for parenting advantage. Harvard Business Review (March-April): 120-132.

(2014). Strategy for the corporate level: Where to invest, Where to cut back, How to growth organization wite multiple divestation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ciabuschi, F., M. Forsgren, dan O. Martin. (2016). Value creation at the subsidiary level: testing the MNC headquarters parenting advantage logic. Long Range Planning 50(1), 48-62.

Collis, D., D. Young, dan M. Goold. (2012). The size and composition of corporate headquarters in multinational companies: empirical evidence. Journal of International Management 18(3): 260275.

Fernndez, F.A., and Montoya, L.M.R. (2018). Multi-business companies: The Leonisa case. Cuadernos De Administracin, 34(60), 81 95.

Goold, M., Campbell, A., & Alexander, M. (1998). Corporate strategy and parenting theory. Long Range Planning, 31(2), 308-314

Kim, K. (2018). Matchmaking: Establishment of state owned holding companies in Indonesia. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, 5(2), 313-330

Kishita, T., & Hayashi, N. (2019). Parental control on subsidiaries in corporate groups with a pure holding company. Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research, 8(3), 43

Kruehler, M., Pidun, U., & Rubner, H. (2012). How to assess the corporate parenting strategy? A conceptual answer. The Journal of Business Strategy, 33(4), 4-17.

Munir, N. S. (2017). Kesesuaian Pengasuhan Perusahaan Multi Bisnis: Studi Kasus Kelompok Media Group. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis 20(2): 1979 6471.

Nell, P.C., and Ambos, B. (2013) Parenting advantage in the MNC: An embeddedness perspective on the value added by headquarters. Strategic Management Journal, 34 (9), 1086-1103.

Pidun, U., Richter, A., Schommer, M., & Karna, A. (2019). A new playbook for diversified companies. MIT Sloan Management Review, 60(2), 1.

Porter, M. (1998). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press

Pranoto, T. (2017) Holding company BUMN: Konsep, implementasi dan benchmarking. Jakarta: Lembaga Management Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis Universitas Indonesia.

Rawley, E., Godart, F. and Shipilov, A. (2018). How and when do conglomerates influence the creativity of their subsidiaries?. Strategic Management Journal 39(9):2417-2438

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research Methods For Business: A Skill Building Approach 7th Edition. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.

Wheelen, T.R.,Hunger, D. J., Hoffman, A. N., and Bamford, C. (2014), Concepts in strategic management and business policy 14th Edition. Engleword Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,.


JMBR Editorial Office: PPM School of Management, Jl. Menteng Raya 9-19 Jakarta 10340 Phone: 021-2300313 ext 2354

View My Stats


JMBR is using CC BY License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.