Hey everyone, we are the group
Globetrotter!
Globetrotter means someone who
travels widely around the world. We want to use the name to show our interests
and enthusiasm to explore the world. The logo has the same meaning with our
group name. At the background of globalization, our footprints could reach any
place on the world map. Particularly, in the business world, we hope we could
use the professional knowledge learnt in this class in the future career and
contribute to the world’s economy.
Globetrotter comprises of five
members, one Hong Kong girl and four mainland China girls. Following is a more
detailed introduction of each individual:
- Ko Wing Ka (Ka): My name is Ko Wing Ka. You can call me Ka. I am a year 3 student from BBAIBJ. One of my individual identities is that I am a loner. I love and enjoy to be alone. It does not mean that I do not like to cooperate or communicate with others, it just means that I need my space to think alone sometimes. Another identity is that I am friendly. My appearance may make me a cool girl that others cannot make friend with; but, actually, I am friendly to those I know.
- Liao Yu (Samantha): My name is Samantha Liao and I am from management department. As I describe in my blog name, I am an outgoing person that I like making friends with people from all around the world. My hobby is reading different kinds of books especially consequence books. Besides, I’d like to study different cultures. I think knowing and comparing different cultures are fun and interesting.
- Chen Xi (Adeline): My name is Adeline. I am year 3 student majoring in International Business (Japan studies). I am positive, and I like interesting things and jokes. My identity is another thing that I am a "dog lover". I like pets and I have kept a dog in my home. I treat her as one of my family member. Every time when I returned home and brought presents to my parents, I also brought one for her. I hope one day, I can get a house with a garden so that my pets can have a large enough place to play.
- Hu Mengsha (Kelly): My name is Kelly, a girl from mainland China. I have been Hong Kong for 3 years and I am a marketing student in CityU. I am a person who is flexible and positive. I like making friends from different cultures. Gardening and farming are two of my special hobbies and I have been a volunteer in an organic farm for two months last summer.
- Liang Yuanyuan (Doris): My name is Doris Liang, and I’m from marketing department. I’m an outgoing person though sometimes I may be a little bit shy to strangers. This is my last semester in CityU, I’m so honoured and glad to meet new friends in this class. I’m keen on travelling, and recently I’m playing rock climbing which is cool and interesting. I hope that we can be not only classmates but also friends.
The goals...
Through this course, we want to
equip ourselves with the ability to identify the key concepts in international
management and strategic cultural aspects of international business
organizations. We shall practise team working and team presentation.
Since we may deal with clients
and colleagues from different cultual backgrouds in our furture career, we want
to understand the key bareers that may influence effective communication and
management, and find out the way to resolve it.
Furthermore, as the world is
getting flatter, even in our daily life, we may have dealing with various
people, to better express ourselves, we’d better know more about other culture
as well as the effectve communication way.
Our interested topics...
After having a brief
understanding of the course outline, there are two topics that interest our
group most, which are “Business ethics” and “Inter-cultural communication and
conflict resolution”. These two topics are practical and provide more insights
in our learning, working areas and daily life.
As we all know, corruption in
China is becoming a more and more serious problem that arouses our alert.
Corruption in China has also brought a lot of other social problems, such as
poison food and poor quality building construction. Through this course, we'd
like to know more about the cause and cost of corruption in China and what can
Chinese government do to resolve the problem. In addition, since we are all
final year students and probably we will work with people from diversified
cultural backgrounds, we should equip ourselves with skills that communicate
ourselves effectively and help to resolve intercultural conflicts.
Additional topics...
Besides, we want to know more
about the cultural influences that brought by globalization. Since globalization
has already changed the way we live, but it is controversial whether it is good
or not. Through this course, we want to have a deep understanding of the pros
and cons of globalization from the cultural aspect.
The myth...
Which brand would you choose if
you want to buy a Smartphone? Probably
would be Samsung or Apple.
Which bank would you choose if
you want to save money? Probably would be HSBC.
Which fast food shop would you go
if you want to have a quick lunch? Probably would be McDonald’s.
All of the brands have one common
characteristic – they are all multinational company (MNC). MNCs are surrounding
all of us; thus, a myth said:
"MNCs are getting bigger and
companies become fewer."
Is that true?
Definitely not!
1) MNCs actually create more
inches for markets to develop new businesses.
Take one of the MNCs, McDonald’s,
as an example. In India, McDonald's use all local materials to do business; for
example, cheese are sourced from Dynamix Dairies, Baramati, Maharashtra; fresh
Buns from Mrs. Bector Foods, Phillaur, Punjab & Khopoli, Maharashtra; sauce
from Mrs. Bector Foods, Phillaur, Punjab, Chicken Patties, Vegetable Patties,
and Veg. McDonald’s even taught the local farmer to plant potatoes. These
create larger inches for Indian market, developing more different and new
food-related business in India.
2) Concentration in certain big industries is
decreasing.
In some year there was an issue
in Harvard Business Review, two professors report on their detailed study of
mergers and concentration. Although in a global marketplace, big companies have
to merge with other big companies, as globalization is becoming a big trend,
the facts become that:
- The oil industry is actually far less concentrated today than it was 60 years ago, with many more equal-sized competitors in the field now.
- GM, Ford and Toyota control less of the world’s car market today.
- The shares of worldwide sales in computer hardware and software in top high-tech companies are dramatically declining in these few decades.
3) Globalization and freer trade
make market access easier for everyone -- not only large MNCs, but also small
businesses
Globalization brings new
technologies, creative ideas and access to foreign market to the smaller
businesses.
For example, because of
globalization, Internet has been introduced to China and online shopping become
increasingly popular. This trend brings great opportunities for people to start
their own small businesses, without large expenses on physical rentals,
storage, and etc. “Taobao” is the largest B2C online shopping platform in
China, and now it has about 2 million online shops and over 10 million
registered members. These small businesses catch the trend of globalization,
fully take advantage of the new technology introduced in and therefore gain
their own success.
Depending on the period and the market we are focusing on, the globalization has different effects.
回复删除I agree with you that the concentration in the oil industry, in the car market and in the high technology companies is getting lower, but, for example, what about the global media market ? and the agrifood system?
In the first case, the market has come to be dominated by only seven multinational corporations (Disney, AOL Time Warner, Sony, News Corporation, Viacom, Vivendi, and Bertelsmann).
They own the major U.S. film studios, control 80-85 percent of the global music market and a significant percentage of book publishing and commercial magazine publishing. In addition they control most of the commercial cable TV channels in the U.S. and worldwide and the European terrestrial television.
For the agrifood system, talking about the U.S. , from the mid-1970s, it has been possible to see a rapid process of concentration of few companies, developing an oligopoly in that market ( this was due to the saturation of the per capita food consumption of basic staples in the developed world, and overall growth suffered from the effects of the end of the baby boom).
Unfortunately, it is possible to say that the oligopoly structure has become the norm in many market and industries (airlines, energy, pharmaceuticals, supermarkets, department store chains, hospitals, banks, accounting firms). Because of the problem in setting price and output decisions caused by this concentration, cartels have been formed and antitrust and competition laws have been set to regulate the behaviour of firms and to regulate the level of concentration allowed.
What you write about multinationals creating new opportunities for smaller companies is probably true, however it could depend on the type of industry. Anyways, these smaller companies might not be that visible to the most people. With this I mean that yes, when McDonald’s establishes in a country it might create opportunities for smaller companies that can deliver products to McDonald’s but there is also a risk that other smaller, local restaurants go out of business because of the competition from the multinational. The companies visible to the people are not the subcontractors but in this case the restaurants, therefore you could on some level argue that there are fewer companies because of the globalization, at least the way people experience it since they don’t have as many choices when multinationals take over. Then there might be an increase in companies “behind the scenes”, but this is nothing ordinary people would notice in their everyday life. What you wrote is probably true, this is just another way of looking at it and this is how I experience it in my everyday life.
回复删除Also, you argue that the concentration in some big industries is decreasing and give some examples. But however, if the concentration is decreasing in some industries, but increasing in let us say, twice as many industries, can we really argue that the big picture is that multinationals are not taking over? A very interesting myth and interesting reading, thanks!
Hi Globetrotters!
回复删除After the reading of your article, I chose to challenge the veracity of evidence you have supplied in formulating your arguments. Indeed, after the reading of the article, I still believe that MNCs become more powerful everyday and that reduce possibilities for new organizations of growing and going global. In fact, I believe that local markets are more and more aimed and attacked by powerful MNCs. The main consequence is that a small new organization is then limited by assets and resources constraints and has to fight against a “powerful giant”; (SMEs in Global Market: Challenges, Opportunities and Threats).
I think that your arguments can only apply in specific markets and regions. In fact, most of multinationals have become increasingly global by developing varied products, business strategies and adapted cultural approach to diffuse and practice in order to conform to the aimed market characteristics and to continue to generate profits.
The main examples I can give is Coke, the famous company who, in order to protect its secret recipe, refuses to outsource the production of its drinks to local businesses and is seen constantly to buy plants in the countries concerned.
In other words, I find you subject very interesting and that have a great potential for debate and discussion.
Hi Globetrotters!
回复删除After the reading of your article, I chose to challenge the assumptions you have taken in formulating your arguments. Indeed, after the reading of the article, I still believe that MNCs become more powerful everyday and that reduce possibilities for new organizations of growing and going global. In fact, I believe that local markets are more and more aimed and attacked by powerful MNCs. The main consequence is that a small new organization is then limited by assets and resources constraints and has to fight against a “powerful giant”; (SMEs in Global Market: Challenges, Opportunities and Threats).
I think that your arguments can only apply in specific markets and regions. In fact, most of multinationals have become increasingly global by developing varied products, business strategies and adapted cultural approach to diffuse and practice in order to conform to the aimed market characteristics and to continue to generate profits.
The main examples I can give is Coke, the famous company who, in order to protect its secret recipe, refuses to outsource the production of its drinks to local businesses and is seen constantly to buy plants in the countries concerned.
Hi Globetrotters!
回复删除After the reading of your article, I chose to challenge the assumptions you have taken in formulating your arguments. Indeed, after the reading of the article, I still believe that MNCs become more powerful everyday and that reduce possibilities for new organizations of growing and going global. In fact, I believe that local markets are more and more aimed and attacked by powerful MNCs. The main consequence is that a small new organization is then limited by assets and resources constraints and has to fight against a “powerful giant”; (SMEs in Global Market: Challenges, Opportunities and Threats).
I think that your arguments can only apply in specific markets and regions. In fact, most of multinationals have become increasingly global by developing varied products, business strategies and adapted cultural approach to diffuse and practice in order to conform to the aimed market characteristics and to continue to generate profits.
The main examples I can give is Coke, the famous company who, in order to protect its secret recipe, refuses to outsource the production of its drinks to local businesses and is seen constantly to buy plants in the countries concerned.
Hi Globetrotters!
回复删除After the reading of your article, I chose to challenge the assumptions you have taken in formulating your arguments. Indeed, after the reading of the article, I still believe that MNCs become more powerful everyday and that reduce possibilities for new organizations of growing and going global. In fact, I believe that local markets are more and more aimed and attacked by powerful MNCs. The main consequence is that a small new organization is then limited by assets and resources constraints and has to fight against a “powerful giant”; (SMEs in Global Market: Challenges, Opportunities and Threats).
I think that your arguments can only apply in specific markets and regions. In fact, most of multinationals have become increasingly global by developing varied products, business strategies and adapted cultural approach to diffuse and practice in order to conform to the aimed market characteristics and to continue to generate profits.
The main examples I can give is Coke, the famous company who, in order to protect its secret recipe, refuses to outsource the production of its drinks to local businesses and is seen constantly to buy plants in the countries concerned.
you have pointed out what is happening with the MNCs arround the world and it is an issue we should be aware of. However, in my point of view, the MNCs can create capacity for other small businesses, but also can get rid of other companies that interrupt the development of global market. Take the Mc'donalds as an example, they are welcomed to people arround the world, they have put millions of advertising cost to promote their products, so people believe that they are almost "the best" fast food restaurants in the world and then just buy their food. At the same time, this situation will decrease the demand to other fast food in the small restaurants and then they may be closed as soon as possible. Taking a big control over the market may make the company have less motivation to improve or insist their prodution quality. Finally, we (customers) will lose a lot of choices to opt in the market.
回复删除Anyway, your idea is a good way for me to think more about the MNCs problems. Thank you!
Thank you for this fascinating myth, Globetrotters! The stance you have taken with this myth is quite interesting – at first glance, one would inevitably argue that MNCs are gaining more control in markets by driving out smaller businesses and creating a monopoly in the industry. Your arguments have shown that this is not the case in every circumstance. I think that globalization brings about negative as well as positive effects. I agree with always_curious – that it may depend on the type of company and the industry. As you have mentioned in the fast food and car industry, globalization has created more opportunities for smaller players to gain market share. But looking at other industries might paint a different picture.
回复删除For example, Wal-Mart, the multinational retailer has been criticized for putting pressure on its suppliers for ‘every day low prices’ as well as shutting down mom-and-pop shops due to their inability to compete with Wal-Mart’s prices.
However, the whole picture must also be looked at – some argue that while Wal-Mart has caused many closures, it has also created new businesses and economical benefits which offset the negative aspects (for example: created less congestion in high traffic areas, reallocation of productive resources and contracting local builders to build the store itself)
I found a very interesting report on this matter which can be found here: http://be.wvu.edu/Div/econ/work/pdf_files/06-05.pdf
Yuki – thank you for your comment! I do not agree your argument about McDonald’s great advertising expenditures which create limited choices for the wider public. I believe having choices is the number one concern for consumers, especially concerning food! In my experience, we will always want to try different cuisines, which is why I don’t think McDonald’s or any big fast food chain could drive out smaller restaurants (if you think about the widespread usage of openrice.com – it illustrates consumers’ desire for variety and willingness to try smaller less well-known restaurants)
Thank you – great work :)
Hi Globetrotters!
回复删除After the reading of your article, I chose to challenge the assumptions you have taken in formulating your arguments. Indeed, after the reading of the article, I still believe that MNCs become more powerful everyday and that reduce possibilities for new organizations of growing and going global. In fact, I believe that local markets are more and more aimed and attacked by powerful MNCs. The main consequence is that a small new organization is then limited by assets and resources constraints and has to fight against a “powerful giant”; (SMEs in Global Market: Challenges, Opportunities and Threats).
I think that your arguments can only apply in specific markets and regions. In fact, most of multinationals have become increasingly global by developing varied products, business strategies and adapted cultural approach to diffuse and practice in order to conform to the aimed market characteristics and to continue to generate profits.
The main examples I can give is Coke, the famous company who, in order to protect its secret recipe, refuses to outsource the production of its drinks to local businesses and is seen constantly to buy plants in the countries concerned.
此评论已被作者删除。
回复删除After reading the blog, some ideas pop out in my mind. Firstly, whether MNCs have created new business opportunities is different from industry to industry, like the McDonald case. I agree that when McDonald entered the Indian market, it indeed create new business. But there are some exceptions as well. Like the Wendy‘s which is the world’s third largest quick-service hamburger company, has entered Hong Kong market in 1991 and set up some branches in different parts of HK like Wan Chai. It was one of the renowned fast food chain stores and a strong rival to McDonald at that time. But because of the heavy advertisement of McDonald, in 2001, on direct media advertising, that’s radio, television and print, McDonald’s spent 1.4 Billion dollars worldwide (NELSON, 2001, McDonald’s Spent 23 Cents on Advertising for Every Human on Planet Earth in 2001 #marketing). Wendy was beaten up by McDonald and the brand was eventually expelled from Hong Kong in 2001! This case illustrates that under globalization, MNCs does not always create new business.
回复删除Also, I agree with the point that Globalization and freer trade make market access easier for everyone because not only the mainlander use Taobao, the Hong Kongers also crazy about Taobao.
With the reference of the online survey conducted in 2011, Taobao has tion website of Hong kongers, which beats up Yahoo! auction and eBay. People not only search clothing and accessories in Taobao but also the travelling bundles like the air ticket with accommodation. Some economists pointed out that the trend of using Taobao will be even more popular in the future and more enterprises will make use of these online platforms to reach the potential customers.
Anyway, your blog is nicely designed. I love it!
I appreciate that your team has tried to tell a an interesting myth, but I think your second argument (concentration in certain big industries is decreasing) cannot support your point of view entirely. Your team thinks that the statement that “MNCs are getting bigger and companies become fewer” is not true. In the other words, your team opines that when MNCs are getting bigger, companies become more. However, the second argument is actually talking about MNCs in some industries do not continue to grow bigger so concentration is less and thus more companies survive. It is not relevant to your point of view because MNCs are not getting bigger in this argument. Of course, if MNCs do not continue to grow, other small companies will have room to survive. However, once globalization encourages MNCs to grow, many MNCs started to occupy the market and eliminate others’ small and medium sized companies. For example, in recent year, IT industry in India is facing a problem that many small local companies are mostly forced to shrink in size and eventually leave the industry because most large deals are taken by the MNCs like IBM, Accenture and HP. It shows that MNCs which are growing bigger will definitely hurt many small companies and eventually only big MNCs can survive.
回复删除Hi Globetrotters!
回复删除After the reading of your article, I chose to challenge the assumptions you have taken in formulating your arguments. Indeed, after the reading of the article, I still believe that MNCs become more powerful everyday and that reduce possibilities for new organizations of growing and going global. In fact, I believe that local markets are more and more aimed and attacked by powerful MNCs. The main consequence is that a small new organization is then limited by assets and resources constraints and has to fight against a “powerful giant”; (SMEs in Global Market: Challenges, Opportunities and Threats).
I think that your arguments can only apply in specific markets and regions. In fact, most of multinationals have become increasingly global by developing varied products, business strategies and adapted cultural approach to diffuse and practice in order to conform to the aimed market characteristics and to continue to generate profits.
The main examples I can give is Coke, the famous company who, in order to protect its secret recipe, refuses to outsource the production of its drinks to local businesses and is seen constantly to buy plants in the countries concerned.
Hi Globetrotters!
回复删除After the reading of your article, I chose to challenge the assumptions you have taken in formulating your arguments. Indeed, after the reading of the article, I still believe that MNCs become more powerful everyday and that reduce possibilities for new organizations of growing and going global. In fact, I believe that local markets are more and more aimed and attacked by powerful MNCs. The main consequence is that a small new organization is then limited by assets and resources constraints and has to fight against a “powerful giant”; (SMEs in Global Market: Challenges, Opportunities and Threats).
I think that your arguments can only apply in specific markets and regions. In fact, most of multinationals have become increasingly global by developing varied products, business strategies and adapted cultural approach to diffuse and practice in order to conform to the aimed market characteristics and to continue to generate profits.
The main examples I can give is Coke, the famous company who, in order to protect its secret recipe, refuses to outsource the production of its drinks to local businesses and is seen constantly to buy plants in the countries concerned.
Hi Globetrotters!
回复删除After the reading of your article, I chose to challenge the assumptions you have taken in formulating your arguments. Indeed, after the reading of the article, I still believe that MNCs become more powerful everyday and that reduce possibilities for new organizations of growing and going global. In fact, I believe that local markets are more and more aimed and attacked by powerful MNCs. The main consequence is that a small new organization is then limited by assets and resources constraints and has to fight against a “powerful giant”; (SMEs in Global Market: Challenges, Opportunities and Threats).
I think that your arguments can only apply in specific markets and regions. In fact, most of multinationals have become increasingly global by developing varied products, business strategies and adapted cultural approach to diffuse and practice in order to conform to the aimed market characteristics and to continue to generate profits.
The main examples I can give is Coke, the famous company who, in order to protect its secret recipe, refuses to outsource the production of its drinks to local businesses and is seen constantly to buy plants in the countries concerned.
I think your group did a very good argumentative writing:)
回复删除However, I think whether the myth u guys pointed out is true or not depends not only on many factors.
Take Hong Kong as an example, MNCs are elsewhere in every districts.As for small businesses, it is nowadays so hard for them to survive in the market and they could merely make a very little profits. From the recent news, the UA cinema in Causeway Bay was forced to close down due to the increasing rent and their shop would be replaced by MNC Louis Vuitton since they are able to afford the high rent. Even such a famous business (ie: UA) can not stand in the market, let alone the many smaller businesses in Hong Kong.
However, the other side is also sometimes true.
Take the fashion industry as an example, MNCs have new ideas every season and would advocate different fashion trends. This fashion panic is flushed globally very soon and this actually provide insights for local small fashion garment producer to produce similar clothes for catching up the trend.
Iphone is another example for some smaller telecom company in China to design their products for consumers without large budgets for getting products from MNCs.
To conclude, I think both side could be true.
Whether globalization brings out more benefits or crisis is still a controversy issue.
I appreciate that you team has found an interesting myth,but I think your second argument (concentration in certain big industries is decreasing) cannot support your point of view entirely. Your team thinks that the statement that “MNCs are getting bigger and companies become fewer” is not true. In the other words, your team opines that when MNCs are getting bigger, companies become more. However, the second argument is actually talking about MNCs in some industries do not continue to grow bigger so concentration is less and thus more companies survive. It is not relevant to your point of view because MNCs are not getting bigger in this argument. Of course, if MNCs do not continue to grow, other small companies will have room to survive. However, once globalization encourages MNCs to grow, many MNCs started to occupy the market and eliminate others’ small and medium sized companies. For example, in recent year, IT industry in India is facing a problem that many small local companies are mostly forced to shrink in size and eventually leave the industry because most large deals are taken by the MNCs like IBM, Accenture and HP. It shows that MNCs which are growing bigger will definitely hurt many small companies and eventually only big MNCs can survive.
回复删除Reference: Domination of MNCs in mega IT deals to continue (http://www.dnaindia.com/money/report_domination-of-mncs-in-mega-it-deals-to-continue_1462866)
Hello Globetrotter,
回复删除I think that this myth is half true if I analyse this myth in two separate parts. I agree on the fact that small companies are not fewer but I think that MNCs are really getting bigger!
McDonald’s EPS average growth rate is 11% for the last 11 years, and according to Zacks Investment Research, McDonald’s now operates in over 118 countries throughout the world. Thus, globalization and its features: reduction of barriers to trade by increasing number of free-trade agreement, easier communication thanks to the social media platform, etc. had clearly facilitated MNCs to expand and conquer the world.
I agree that there are still many smaller companies but I’m still not very convinced with the first explanation that MNCs are creating more business for SMEs. Perhaps in some cases when two companies complements each other only. For companies from the same industry, regardless of their size, there is for sure competition on the global market. However, at the end of the day, I think that the integration of social, economic and political by globalization has benefit both MNCs and SMEs.
I really enjoy reading your blog because the structure is simple and clear. I think that it is very efficient of you to go straight to the point and support each argument with examples.
Hello Globetrotters,
回复删除very interesting and valid myth, with some very good examples to support your argument. I find myself agreeing with much of what is said in both the blog itself and also with the comments.
However, there are a few points I'd like to elaborate on. To begin with, in the first part of your post, you demonstrate that multinationals aid the development of local companies. In the example used by you, you outline the companies collaborating with Mac Donalds in India, and use this as an example of how multinationals promote and aid smaller local companies. My question is, don't you think, that instead of creating new opportunities and therefore enlarging the number of businesses, Mac Donalds is simply helping a few, chosen business to grow larger? Maybe some research on the effects the introduction of Mac Donalds in India has had on local fast food chains would be more appropriate.
Another aspect which should be taken into consideration is that mergers and acquisitions, are not the only means of growth and most importantly of advantageous competition of multinational companies. Big multinationals seem to be expanding in many diverse fields of business and markets. They are in advantaged not only by capital, but also by existing brand image and customers loyalty. Let me give you an example, if Apple launched any new product in any given market, they would be hugely advantaged in comparison to unknown, newly established brands because of the factors mentioned above.
I agree that freer trade means smaller companies can operate internationally and expand faster than ever before, but what should also be mentioned is that large multinationals can benefit from the same advantages, leaving the "score" even.
Sorry, in relation to my previous comment...student id 40037988
回复删除40041781 Highly Adaptable
回复删除Honestly I like your blog because it is very controversial, just as globalization is itself. I think for the extremely large MNC’s like McDonalds for example, create no room for smaller MNC’s or even local competitors to even begin to compete, let alone be born or survive. They are on every corner of every street and have the financial ability to purchase the very best and second best locations for doing business and attracting their customers. They even have enough buying power to control their suppliers because they cannot afford to lose a contract as large as McDonalds, so they even bow down to these giants and give the cheapest prices possible. But at the same time due to globalization, other companies that can be suppliers to McDonalds in other countries do, because it is cheaper than having to pay the shipping cost to ship fresh meat halfway across the planet. So because of this, some local or near local companies get to contract with them as well, creating new jobs in that country where there were none before. As well as employing locals to run their many business locations in their country. So the arguments are polar opposites of each other. What I gathered from your blog is that in order to understand globalization, one must be willing to accept the good with the bad, because both are present at the same time, which most business opportunities are. But the key result is to make sure the good outweighs the bad. From what I noticed from your article which opened my eyes, is that globalization shuts down many opportunities for large corporate competitors to emerge and or survive amongst the giants, and are forced to shut down. While the giants open up so many jobs for the poor, uneducated, and less fortunate in other countries, and sometimes even in their home countries. So I can see and understand how and why the new emergence of the middle class is extremely present, how the rich separate themselves further and further away by becoming richer and richer. I just want to thank you for the insight and illuminating my though process and allowing me to be able to see something in terms of globalization that I haven’t been able to see before. Thank you!
Hello Globetrotter,
回复删除This is a very interesting and controversial topic that you have chosen. I agree with always curious that it would probably depend on the industry but I think it would also depend on the environment and surroundings of the MNC coming into. For example, I have noticed that where I'm from in the states, people are really into buying local. People really seem to support the local businesses.
Such as you pointed out in your example about Mcdonalds. Many MNCs make it a point to hire smaller local companies. I believe a reason why they do that is to support the local companies. They probably also know that if they come in and take over parsay, there would be much commotion. So it's really a win-win situation. I know for example that the television show, Hawaii 5-0 hires local companies to help with production and what-not.
Hi Globetrotter! I really enjoyed reading your globalization arguments, as well as the following comments on opposing views. I have to agree with both views, the arguments are valid but just not as "black and white" because for every good there is a bad. Before I state my disposition, I'd like to say that I can agree globalization has made changes in our world to which we've all globally benefited yet at the same time experienced degradation on a national level due to outsourcing.
回复删除The reason why I most enjoy reading this article, it preserves an optimistic view that seems to be ceasing with the pitfalls of individual countries whose small businesses can not compete with the big dogs. I do agree MNC's by helping contract with SME's that it helps their local businesses survive and pay rent/lease, however my personal opinion it's only on a small scale and fades to comparison the harm that it does on an overall national level. Back home in the U.S., it's far and few in between that you'll see small businesses stick around unless they have government regulated rent/lease on their block. If it weren't for this, we'd have large chains, MNC's run over the small businesses and "mam & pap" shops and be saturated on every corner of the city.
It helps preserve the culture and the nation's pride that we once had a belief in the american dream to own land/property, and start a business, which helps the local people with employment. When a small company succeeds, it affects everyone around them. It allows a perpetual growth to encourage more small companies to contract with current growing companies. This creates a sense of autonomy for the people, to have the power to grow and be self-sufficient.
Hey Globetrotter!! Your article is the fourth article I've read about globalization, and what I found yours different from many is that you don't only focus on the business point of view of what globalization has done. Many of the other articles focus on how MNC's have it made it very difficult for smaller companies to compete and making many suffer from the market. But What I totally agree with what was mentioned in your article and some of the comments above is that MNC's do benefit the local citizens as well. MNC's moving into the local market, like McDonald's, they will create job opportunities for the local citizens. As well as local suppliers, some local suppliers will definitely benefit from the movement of such a big MNC moving into their area.
回复删除It should be always kept in mind that every aspect of a problem, such as those mentioned above, of larger companies entering the market, that the strengths of the implementation should outweigh the weaknesses of the decision. SWOT analysis provides this comparison, if the strengths and benefits outweigh the weaknesses and threats of MNC's like McDonald's to move in, we should be thankful for the results globalization has provided us. I definitely enjoyed reading your blog, and will definitely keep in mind when your next blog is updated!