The British company's involvement with its Indian expansion was not entirely seamless. BAT had to demonstrate a cultural sensitivity to the needs of its Indian counterparts by slowly, systematically removing the majority of its employees from the Indian branches of its business. Eventually this move would pay off, as BAT was able to greatly increase its profits by diversifying the company into its subsidiary, ITC. Actually, the relationship between BAT and ITC was somewhat symbiotic in the sense that it allowed for greater business diversification and entry into more markets for BAT, and enabled India to modernize and to industrialize in a way that would not have been possible without some form of outside assistance.
It is quite clear that the primary boon of BAT's involvement in India was the legacy of companies it engendered, some of the most lucrative of which it is a mere partner in. Yet one particular aspect o the history of BAT that the author of this article alluded to, yet did not specifically address has to do with the issue of ownership of the conglomeration that BAT spawned through its activity on India's soil. Nayak's article takes great pains to emphasize BAT's dominance over its subsidiaries, which lasted until the middle of the 20th century. Yet the author offers relatively no explanation for the transition of ownership from BAT to ITC that was solidified in 1975. He simply states that this occurrence happened, leaving the reader curious as to what was responsible for such a significant transition.
In fact, the significant reduction in equity that BAT possesses in what essentially was its scion, ITC, serves to underscore this confusion on the part of th reader. The article would have been better served by explaining what factors were responsible for such a change. Still, the overall strength of this particular article is its comprehensive nature. It manages to chronicle the rise and expansion of a company for more than 100 years. In attempting to do so, the author may not have provided as many details as readers may have wanted. Still, in relating the history of that long of a time period, is not always space to cover every aspect of a company's history as thoroughly as one may have if one were simply writing about a particular aspect of a company's history. Additionally, the article does well to depict the cultural differences that BAT had to take account for in order to eventually continue to grow as a company in India.