Irony has got a a definitive way of popping at the least-expected mode. The World is not yet flat. Well, these are no my views. Apparently Pankaj Ghemawat, a professor of Harvard Business School expresses the same in his article "Global Strategy: What's Different". He spurns of the idea of a flat world and dimishing borders as "apocalyptic" and justifies it.
He gives us two contradicting examples. One is that of a Wal-Mart and its cross-border expansion problems and other is that of Yum! Brands with its high-intensity proliferation in the Chinese markets.
I am not sure what is the point he want's to stress on. The article goes on to stress that Wal-mart didnt match the pace of revnue growth because it couldn match the cultures of the retail giant with the same on the local market in a Non-US lke territories. The reason did sufice them to exit from Germany and a stunted growth in the other areas. Then he talks about Yum! Brands (Parents of Pizza Hut & KFC) and how as it matched the culture in China grew with about 1800 units in 2005.
I agree with his point FDI flows are accounting to 10% of the capital formation. But there are many forms of indirect investements which are adding to the company revnues. Moreover, Tom doesnt say in "The World is Flat" that the flattening has been completed. It is happening, but at a pace that is going to astonish everybody. The flat world encircles the mere fact that how the world is becoming a single market. How easy it is to cross-port data and convert the same in to information. Its not abou borderless world, but wireless world.
As far as the article goes, I disagree with the same. It's implicit that if there is a cultural disparity, your organisation will cease to exist on the market. But that entails the fact that companies do come up with innovative strategies to match the same.
Ironically, Tom emphasises on the Wal-Mart's global supply chain as one factor contributing to the flattening world.
He gives us two contradicting examples. One is that of a Wal-Mart and its cross-border expansion problems and other is that of Yum! Brands with its high-intensity proliferation in the Chinese markets.
I am not sure what is the point he want's to stress on. The article goes on to stress that Wal-mart didnt match the pace of revnue growth because it couldn match the cultures of the retail giant with the same on the local market in a Non-US lke territories. The reason did sufice them to exit from Germany and a stunted growth in the other areas. Then he talks about Yum! Brands (Parents of Pizza Hut & KFC) and how as it matched the culture in China grew with about 1800 units in 2005.
I agree with his point FDI flows are accounting to 10% of the capital formation. But there are many forms of indirect investements which are adding to the company revnues. Moreover, Tom doesnt say in "The World is Flat" that the flattening has been completed. It is happening, but at a pace that is going to astonish everybody. The flat world encircles the mere fact that how the world is becoming a single market. How easy it is to cross-port data and convert the same in to information. Its not abou borderless world, but wireless world.
As far as the article goes, I disagree with the same. It's implicit that if there is a cultural disparity, your organisation will cease to exist on the market. But that entails the fact that companies do come up with innovative strategies to match the same.
Ironically, Tom emphasises on the Wal-Mart's global supply chain as one factor contributing to the flattening world.
Comments