Mastering the
Make-in-India
Challenge
SUMMER 2017
ISSUE
Despite India’s economic growth, many foreign companies
have found it difficult to make money selling there. But a
number of companies have found a winning strategy that
involves weaving together local and global value chains.
Ram Mudambi
Haritha Saranga
Andreas Schotter
Vol. 58, No. 4
Reprint #58410
http://mitsmr.com/2r5BT9q
EMERGING MARKETS
Mastering the
Make-in-India Challenge
Despite India’s economic growth, many foreign companies have
found it difficult to make money selling there. But a number of
companies have found a winning strategy that involves weaving
together local and global value chains.
BY RAM MUDAMBI, HARITHA SARANGA, AND ANDREAS SCHOTTER
THE LEADING
QUESTION
How can
foreign companies sell
successfully
in India?
FINDINGS
DESPITE INDIA’S ECONOMIC GROWTH and potential, developing a successful strategy for
the country remains one of the most complex challenges for foreign multinationals. This challenge is
rooted in the hard realities of global scale and costs. Most foreign executives have found it difficult to
make money in India with their existing product portfolios at the scale of operations dictated by local
demand. In addition, India has not provided foreign direct investment incentives anywhere near those of
neighboring China. However, U.S. management consulting firm A.T. Kearney estimated in 2014 that
India’s share of global trade would be approximately five times greater by 2025 — and at that point would
represent 6% of all global trade.1 Given that growth
projection, waiting for a target income segment to
reach the break-even level or for greater government
incentives to materialize is not the right strategy.
Consider the experience of Apple Inc. India’s
smartphone market has seen rapid growth, but most
of the smartphones being snapped up are priced at
less than $150. This makes even the lowest-priced
iPhones expensive by comparison. Consequently,
Apple’s market share in India is under 5%, in terms of
units shipped. In May 2016, Apple CEO Tim Cook
went to India for high-level talks that included seeking an exception to the localization requirements
imposed on foreign retailers. The company hoped to
introduce Apple’s retail face and service with a string
of its own flagship stores, but India’s government at
the time upheld a local sourcing requirement of 30%
imposed on foreign manufacturers.
This setback for Apple2 reflects the Indian government’s commitment to executing on Prime Minister
Narendra Modi’s “Make in India” campaign.3 At the
center of the campaign stand reforms that improve
the ease of doing business for those foreign companies that are serious about manufacturing in India. It
PLEASE NOTE THAT GRAY AREAS REFLECT ARTWORK THAT HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY REMOVED.
THE SUBSTANTIVE CONTENT OF THE ARTICLE APPEARS AS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED.
Recognize that
the high-income
segment is smaller
than in China.
Collaborate with
large local partners.
Take advantage of
local manufacturing
while simultaneously adapting
global products.
SUMMER 2017 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW 59
EMERGING MARKETS
is all about carrots for compliant, spillover-generating
foreign companies,4 including benefits such as reduced
tax hurdles, improved infrastructure, reformed labor
laws, boosted workforce skills development, easier
land acquisition, and fast-tracked business-license approvals. With China exhibiting slower economic
growth and an increasingly challenging intellectual
property protection environment,5 many foreign multinationals have increased their focus on India. As Bill
Maginas, former vice president, high-growth regions
for Honeywell International Inc., explained:
India is the next big thing for Honeywell.
Amongst our global growth regions, India
provides the kind of market opportunity and
promising local talent that allows us to execute
our high-growth strategy playbook, which is
based on an R&D and supply chain platform as
the foundation to deep market penetration.
Competing in and with China has become increasingly difficult for foreign multinationals. But,
according to former U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew,
India represents an immense untapped economic
opportunity for U.S. multinationals. For example,
India had only 18 cars for every 1,000 citizens in 2014,
compared with 83 per 1,000 in China. India is also the
world’s fastest-growing smartphone market. India’s
consuming population is predicted to grow much
more rapidly than most other large markets.
Besides obvious market opportunities, over the
past decade India has developed into an advanced IT
service and low-cost manufacturing hub with a large,
well-trained, English-speaking workforce,6 strategically located in the Asia-Africa-Middle East triangle.
Because of the pioneering work of some early movers,
India now also boasts a strong local supplier base
across many industries.
British construction equipment maker J.C. Bamford Excavators Ltd., a global leader in its industry,
entered India in 1979. Today, it dominates the Indian
construction equipment market with a 75% market
share. The company recently upgraded its local
manufacturing facilities to export Indian-designed
construction equipment to most of its global markets.
Similarly, Foxconn Technology Co. Ltd. the Taiwanese
technology manufacturing giant, committed to investing $5 billion in an electronics manufacturing
60 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW SUMMER 2017
plant and R&D center in India. Other Taiwanese electronics manufacturers such as HTC, Asus, BenQ, and
Delta Electronics are also planning major investments.
David Hsu, deputy director general of the Bureau of
Foreign Trade in Taiwan, explained, “Investment in
China is too high, but we [Taiwan and China] still treat
each other like an enemy. It is good to explore other
places, and India is a very good option.”7
Volkswagen and Hyundai export vehicles made in
India to more than 35 markets around the world, including Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America.
Ford exports cars made in India to Europe and has
plans to export made-in-India vehicles to the United
States. Harley-Davidson began assembling its iconic
motorcycles in India in 2011 and saw its local sales
increase by more than 500% in five years. The company is also shipping made-in-India bikes to other
Asian nations and Europe. Yamaha already exports
India-made sports bikes to its home country, Japan.
What all these companies have in common is an
understanding that India represents an attractive
strategic option to balance out the natural plateauing of China’s growth and requires more than just a
replication approach to market entry.
Why a Traditional Strategy
Won’t Work
To provide a solution for success of foreign multinationals in India, we took a close look at more than 80
multinationals, as well as hundreds of local Indian
companies. (See “About the Research.”) Many foreign
executives are frustrated that they cannot replicate the
same strategies in India that have led to success in
China. One reason is that the local high-income segment, which constitutes the initial target market for
most foreign companies, is relatively small in India
compared with that of China. This often causes foreign
executives to refrain from investing in more extensive
value-chain activities in India and delay committing to
local manufacturing. The most common approach so
far has been to enter India with imported goods, hoping that the targeted high-income segment grows
sufficiently to eventually justify local manufacturing.
Ravi Venkatesan, former chairman of Microsoft India
and engine manufacturer Cummins India Ltd., argues
that this approach has caught many large multinational companies in a trap.8 According to Venkatesan,
most multinationals have some initial success upon
SLOANREVIEW.MIT.EDU
entering India, but their growth then stalls and sales
fall short of critical volumes. This inability to generate
adequate volume frequently leads to an early exit. The
issue is that everybody competes for the same small
segment at the top, which is not growing in India at
anywhere near the same pace as the comparable highincome segment did in China during its early years
of transformation. Chris Clark, an entrepreneur and
former consultant at Bain & Co. who travels frequently
to India on business, said, “What most executives
do not understand about India is that it is a bottomto-middle income market with relatively small highincome segments. Therefore, you have to localize
quickly and broadly in order to win in India.”
Companies that have mastered the approach Clark
describes have experienced success. These companies
cater to all income segments with global and local designs and use India as a hub for penetrating frontier
markets in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America.
For example, automakers such as Suzuki and Hyundai,
which are market leaders in India, include more than
80% to 85% local content in their most popular vehicles. Another example from the automotive industry is
Renault-Nissan. In its Kwid project, Renault-Nissan
involved local suppliers right from the initial productdevelopment stage to implement a “design-to-cost”
strategy.
Multi-Tiered Income Segments
In China, consumer spending constituted 37% of
GDP in 2015; in India, the figure is 59%. This is a notable advantage in today’s global economy, where
exports and infrastructure investments do not automatically lead to growth.
However, a strong understanding of India’s different income segments is key for a successful India
entry strategy. Unlike China, India’s high-income segments are much smaller as a percentage of the market.9
The good news for multinationals is that Indians across
most segments spend nearly 69% of their income on
non-food consumption. As the workers-to-dependents
ratio is projected to improve to just 2 to 1 by 2030,
this expenditure is set to increase further.
In high-income segments, Indian customers
value global brands and advanced non-Indian
technology. Cutting-edge smartphones, German
luxury cars, and branded medicines for lifestylerelated ailments are very succesful. However,
SLOANREVIEW.MIT.EDU
ABOUT THE RESEARCH
This research began when we were studying the catch-up strategies of emerging market multinational enterprises versus the strategies of multinationals
from developed economies competing in emerging markets. We found that
foreign multinationals, particularly in high-tech sectors such as aerospace, automotive, and electronics, were dominating their respective industries in India.
Initially, we began by talking to industry practitioners and gathering information
on domestic and foreign corporations across various sectors in India. We then
designed and administered two surveys for primary-data collection; the surveys
involved 80 multinational enterprises and 200 local companies, including original equipment manufacturers and tier one and tier two suppliers from a variety
of manufacturing sectors in India. We also conducted in-depth interviews with
more than 25 senior managers.
In order to understand the business models adopted by foreign multinationals
in India and the capabilities of local suppliers, we collected independent secondary data and information on a variety of critical aspects, such as technology
and financial joint ventures between multinationals and local players, R&D
investments, royalty and “know-how” expenses, level of global versus local
sourcing by foreign multinational enterprises, market share, financial performance, and local content in products sold by foreign multinational automakers.
To verify and gain a better understanding of our research findings, we went
back to the industry experts and carried out further interviews with managers
from multinational and domestic customers and suppliers. The strategies and
conceptual framework presented in the current article are outcomes of multiple
research projects spanning more than five years of our work.
since the high-income segment is relatively small
compared with similar segments in countries like
China, most foreign multinationals find it difficult
to achieve the sales to justify local production.
Multinationals successful in the highest-income
segment in India include Louis Vuitton, HarleyDavidson, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, and Samsung.
However, Abheek Singhi, a senior partner in the
Boston Consulting Group’s Mumbai office, has noted
that brands that are globally a notch below the finest
appeal to a wider audience and that their reachable
high-income segments range from 1% to 15% of the
Indian population (roughly 12 million to 180 million
people), depending on the industry.10 Success in this
expanded higher-income segment requires that
companies develop an understanding of its nuanced
differences.11 Consumers here are brand-aware and
willing to experiment. While these consumers are
willing to spend, their interest depends on a brand’s
image, its advanced features, customization options,
and some level of local touch in the products.
In contrast, the lower-income segments of the
Indian population have the scale and appetite for localized products that contain country-specific features.
Approximately 68% of India’s population falls within
these segments. To succeed here, it is important to
SUMMER 2017 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW 61
EMERGING MARKETS
partner with network orchestrators12 such as local conglomerates for deep and geographically far-reaching
market penetration, while building up production and
R&D capabilities for local product development.13
Besides India-based conglomerates like Tata Group,
Reliance Industries, and Bharti Enterprises, several
foreign multinationals have successfully targeted consumers within this segment. Foreign multinationals
winning in this segment include Suzuki, Hyundai, LG,
Unilever, Emerson Electric, and Yamaha.
The middle-income segments in India need to be
tapped from both the lower and upper ends to achieve
critical scale. For foreign multinationals, the middleincome segments are the most difficult ones to
compete in, since they require substantial localization
efforts, but growing local companies are very competitive. However, when considered as a whole, this
segment is much larger than the high-income segment; it consists of nearly 75 million households, or
THE MAKE-IN-INDIA HELIX
Competing effectively in
India requires two strategic
practices that, when interconnected, create global
and local advantages simultaneously. To succeed in
India, foreign multinationals
need to both partner
vertically for supply chain
integration (shown in
brown) and collaborate
horizontally with network
orchestrators (shown in
green). By connecting local
and global advantages from
the start, foreign multinationals can penetrate the
market quickly and deeply
throughout its multitiered
income segments.
Component cost reduction
Supply chain diversity
Global
advantages
Partner vertically
for supply chain
integration
Creating Make-in-India Advantages
What emerged from our research is a framework for a
successful first-time entry into India or for upgrading
an existing operation in India that has not been very
effective. We call this approach the “make-in-India
helix.” (See “The Make-in-India Helix.”) The makein-India helix arises from combining supply chain
integration and strategic partnering with network
orchestrators14 to achieve both an inward-facing
strategy aimed at local success in India and an outward-facing strategy designed to support global
success. This strategy involves simultaneously taking
advantage of local sourcing, manufacturing, and
marketing activities in conjunction with local adaptation of global products to generate mutually
reinforcing advantages. Successful foreign manufacturers use globally focused assets to improve local
sales and locally developed capabilities to deliver
more cost-effective solutions for global markets. This
combination enables companies to reach successfully
across all of India’s income segments, while at the
same time developing a springboard for global
exports. The result is the localization required to
achieve scope and scale advantages in India, which
can be leveraged through export.
Three Key Value Chain Practices
Reductions in manufacturing costs
Improved global manufacturing capacity
Low-cost products for export
Product localization
Speed to market
Local
advantages
Collaborate
horizontally with
network orchestrators
License to operate
Market access for global products
more than 300 million individuals. In the middle-income segments, customers are very value-conscious,
informed, and aspirational. Local manufacturing is
critical, since imported products would not be pricecompetitive. In order to tap into the middle-income
segments, a profoundly local marketing and distribution strategy and a strong service focus are critical.
Foreign multinationals that have excelled here include
Samsung, Bosch, Renault, Ford, and Honda.
62 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW SUMMER 2017
India has a number of country-specific strengths.
Its human capabilities and natural resources include low-cost labor, raw materials, processing
capabilities, engineering skills, and huge market
potential. Most foreign multinationals already possess complementary strengths in technology, new
products, brand equity, and a global footprint.
These two sets of capabilities and resources have
great complementarity. Using insights from our research, we have identified three key value-chain
practices for achieving success in India.
1. Collaborate horizontally with Indian network
orchestrators to achieve localization advantages.
Network orchestrators are those large incumbents that
have deep market access to all customer segments and
operate widely across all geographic regions in India.
Leading network orchestrators include Reliance Industries, Tata Group, Kirloskar Group, TTK Group,
Bharti Enterprises, Arshiya, and Mahindra Group.
Finding the right local joint venture or alliance partners is vital for deep market penetration in India.
SLOANREVIEW.MIT.EDU
Historically, India has been known as the “License
Raj”15 because doing business required a foreign
company to navigate a highly stringent system of government licensing requirements. The 1991 economic
reforms relaxed many such regulatory requirements,
but foreign companies still need to acquire various
national and local licenses. Although no longer mandated by government regulations for most industrial
sectors, a joint venture will help foreign multinationals gain critical local market knowledge to penetrate a
range of income segments nationwide. Most foreignowned subsidiaries are required to achieve a certain
level of local content in their products (usually 30%)
to receive permission to sell directly to Indian
end-consumers. For example, multibrand retailers
like Walmart, Tesco, and Amazon.com could get
direct access only by forming joint ventures with local
partners, while being restricted to 51% ownership
in their local operations.
Horizontal collaboration with the right local partner can also bring significant synergies between the
advanced product technologies of the foreign multinational and the market access and knowledge of the
local player. This in turn allows foreign multinationals
to rapidly achieve low-cost manufacturing advantages
through the existing facilities of the local partner. The
collaboration of the German auto-component manufacturer Robert Bosch GmBH with India’s Motor
Industries Co. Ltd. is an example of how the right local
partner can be used effectively in a joint venture for
both market access and the manufacturing of technologically sophisticated components. Today, Bosch’s
fuel-injection systems dominate the Indian automobile industry, with more than 80% market share.
Another foreign multinational that has mastered
collaboration with an Indian network orchestrator is
Honda Motor Co. Ltd. When the Indian auto market
was partially liberalized in 1984 and Japanese automakers were invited in, Honda formed a joint venture
with New Delhi-based Hero Cycles Ltd., which had
both an extensive distribution network and a deep
understanding of local market dynamics. The joint
venture started with Honda setting up production facilities in India to manufacture two-wheelers, with
both local R&D and an infusion of technical knowhow in the partnership. Hero took care of establishing
a broad national distribution and service network.
Exploiting Honda’s Japanese technology and using
SLOANREVIEW.MIT.EDU
Hero’s Indian marketing network, the Hero-Honda
joint venture went on to introduce a series of locally
developed motorcycles that became highly popular
for their fuel efficiency and low cost.16
In stark contrast was Apple’s 2008 iPhone launch,
which one article called “the biggest failure of a topnotch brand from a well-regarded company in recent
times.”17 First, Apple partnered with telecommunications companies Vodafone Essar and Bharti Airtel,
neither of which had experience in retailing handsets
or the necessary distribution networks to reach the
many layers of complex income segments. Second,
Apple’s pricing and sales strategy was not appropriate
for the Indian market. In the United States, many
service providers give attractive hardware deals to
customers and recover their costs via long-term
contracts. In India, however, cellphones are mainly
sold contract-free to the prepaid market.
2. Partner vertically with local suppliers to achieve
local and global sourcing advantages. It is critical that
foreign multinationals dive deep into the local supply
chain environment and identify reliable suppliers that
specialize in critical subsystem manufacturing. Over
the past decade, local suppliers across several key industries, including automotive components, chemicals,
pharmaceuticals, capital goods, defense, engineering
products, visual effects, and video games have reached a
level of sophistication that have allowed them to become valuable partners for foreign multinationals.18
These companies seek to collaborate with multinationals globally and for the long run and are not driven by
an indigenous innovation policy that sets them up to
eventually become competitors with their foreign partners, as is often the case in China.19 For foreign
multinationals, this critical difference matters.
An additional benefit of sourcing locally is the
ability to quickly and effectively respond to changes
in market demand. The expertise of strategic domestic suppliers can help accelerate cost-effective
product adaptation to local needs. In addition,
local sourcing can reduce global component costs.
To be sure, there are challenges to manufacturing
in India. Complex land and labor laws mean that
transactions like land acquisition can take a long
time; the transportation infrastructure is still subpar;
and frequent power outages require companies to
maintain backup in-house generation capacity.
What’s more, in order to take full advantage of local
SUMMER 2017 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW 63
EMERGING MARKETS
supply chains, foreign executives have to overcome
mental models that hold them back from investing in
India because of the fragmented local demand.
Instead, foreign multinationals need to link their
Indian suppliers to their global supply chains
to generate scale. For instance, Bosch wanted to
localize sourcing of high-speed steel used for manufacturing fuel injectors for vehicle engines. However,
its local order volume was too small for Indian steel
suppliers to invest in the required production technology. Bosch recognized the broader supply chain
opportunity and decided to transform its Indian
business into a global center of excellence,20 providing its local suppliers with some of the technology
investment up front in exchange for a longer-term
discounted price. The Bosch India Group now supplies to numerous Bosch manufacturing operations
around the world.
Another example is Suzuki Motor Corp. Suzuki
entered the Indian passenger vehicle market in 1982
through a joint venture with Maruti Udyog Ltd., an
Indian company with public-sector roots. However,
Suzuki’s existing components suppliers in Japan
were reluctant to follow the company into the thenrelatively small and uncertain Indian market. In
order to solve the problem, Suzuki facilitated a number of technology and equity partnerships between
its Japanese suppliers and Indian components makers.21 Soon the local suppliers were able not only to
supply components and subassemblies to the specifications Suzuki provided but also to help Suzuki
customize products to local customer needs. The
supply chain partnerships led Suzuki to dominate
the Indian passenger vehicle market for more than
three decades, maintaining a share of nearly 50%.
Maruti Suzuki today exports cars manufactured in
India to over 125 countries.
3. Leverage local and global products simultaneously. Foreign multinationals should first introduce
their latest products in India for the upper-income
segment and then quickly localize to accelerate market penetration across multiple income segments.
While Indian customers are very fond of foreign
brands, a combination of foreign-brand reputation
and relevant locally sensitive product features is mandatory for widespread success. Having only one of
the two dimensions right will not suffice in most income segments. For example, when Fiat introduced
64 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW SUMMER 2017
its retro-styled Fiat 500 in the luxury-car segment in
India, sales flattened within a couple of years, mainly
due to a mismatch between product features and customer needs. What Fiat did not see was that India’s
higher-income segment customers aspired to a vehicle that would “intimidate the heck out of everyone
else on the road,” not “little runabouts with a cuddly
design aesthetic,”22 even if luxurious.
LG Electronics Inc.’s experience in India demonstrates the advantages of localizing products and then
launching them in other markets. LG entered the
Indian consumer-durables market in 1997 by importing products designed and developed in South Korea.
However, local customers found these products too
expensive and lacking some important features. LG
changed its strategy and set up local manufacturing
facilities in India while adapting products to local
consumer requirements. For example, it launched a
television that included a cricket video game for the
millions of Indian cricket fans.23 LG also developed a
unique filtration system for its air conditioners to
tackle the high levels of pollution in India’s huge cities.
By the early 2000s, the company had managed to garner significant market share in India by providing
value-conscious customers across the mid- and
lower-income segments with a range of affordable
and feature-relevant localized products, such as refrigerators, washing machines, and television sets.24
This strategy helped LG gain profitability through
high production volumes, even though the whitegoods and consumer-electronics markets in India
offered wafer-thin margins. In 2007, LG took its localization strategy even further by investing in local R&D
to develop products later called “Stars of India.”25
Today, LG exports from India to other countries and is
considering India as an “export hub.”26
Perhaps the most ambitious example of a multinational using India as a base to launch a global
value-chain strategy is Renault-Nissan’s Kwid project.27 The brainchild of Carlos Ghosn, at the time the
chairman and CEO of both Renault and Nissan, the
Kwid has its roots in a world car idea that was generated in 2008-09 and got the green light in 2010, with
its initial launch in India in 2015. The Kwid was developed based on initial drawings done at Renault’s
design studio in Mumbai in 2011, successively refined
by teams in France and Japan. The strategic goal was
to produce a car in the $4,000 range that could
SLOANREVIEW.MIT.EDU
TWELVE PRACTICES FOR A MAKE-IN-INDIA STRATEGY
Some multinational companies have experienced success in India by catering to all income segments with global and local designs
and using India as a hub for penetrating frontier markets in other regions, such as Africa and Southeast Asia.
SEGMENT
1. Partner with network orchestrators to gain access to this market.
HIGHER
INCOME
2. Establish production facilities or partner with contract manufacturers for local production of global products.
3. Start sourcing locally to penetrate into upper end of middle-income segment.
4. Partner with network orchestrators to gain access to this market, too.
MIDDLE
INCOME
5. Establish production facilities for product customization to compete in this segment.
6. Collaborate with local subsystem suppliers to become cost-competitive.
7. Partner horizontally and vertically for significant local sourcing.
LOWER
INCOME
8. Develop distribution and service network to reach rural consumers.
9. Build customized products to gain substantial market share in this segment.
REGIONAL/
GLOBAL
MARKETS
10. Explore India as a sourcing hub for global markets.
11. Use India as an engineering services hub for global markets.
12. Use India as a test bed for innovation, and introduce products developed for India to regional and global markets.
dominate the large middle-income segment and also
be an important product in Renault’s global frontier
markets, specifically the rest of Asia, Africa, and Latin
America. Ghosn noted, “This car will be a game
changer for Renault in India. It will be a big contributor to our India growth story first, secondly in other
emerging markets, and then globally.”28
Only a few months after launch, the Kwid managed
to grab 10% of the market share in the entry hatchback
segment in India, generating a 144% volume growth
for Renault India.29 By fall 2016, Kwid was accounting
for nearly 80% of Renault’s sales in India.
Once foreign multinationals succeed in developing products for the middle- and lower-income
segments in India, they then have the foundation to
rapidly enter other emerging markets in Asia, Latin
America, Africa, and the Middle East. Given the complexity of the Indian market and its demanding
customers, success in India is likely to lead to success
elsewhere. Today, a range of products originally developed for India are being exported not just to other
emerging markets but also to markets in mature
economies. General Electric Co. and Koninklijke
Philips NV, which have a history of developing products in India at low cost, have successfully marketed
products designed and made in India to Europe and
the U.S. GE, for example, developed an electrocardiography machine for rural clinics in India at a price
point of $1,000, which is now being sold worldwide,
including in the U.S.30 Consequently, GE has set up
SLOANREVIEW.MIT.EDU
three manufacturing facilities in Bangalore to manufacture a variety of diagnostic devices for markets in
Europe, Latin America, Africa, and Asia.31
In conjunction with India’s education system, faster
deregulation, and other reforms, the Indian government’s “Make in India” policies could translate into
greater productivity and faster economic growth for
the country. While not understating the challenges of
manufacturing in India, it is important to underline the
fact that fundamental resource elements are in place in
its business environment. Whereas Dominic Barton,
the global managing partner of McKinsey & Co., was at
one point not advising companies to invest in India, by
2014 he had reversed that position, prompted by
changes in the business environment. “If you look at
the trends that are going on in the world, India is right
in the center,” he said.32 We have developed a list of
12 practices, sorted by market segments, for helping executives to put a successful India strategy into action.
(See “Twelve Practices for a Make-in-India Strategy.”)
What is necessary is a strategic vision to see the possibilities, along with a comprehensive implementation
plan to weave all value-chain elements together.
Ram Mudambi is the Frank M. Speakman Professor
of Strategy at the Fox School of Business at Temple
University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Haritha
Saranga is the Airbus Group Endowed Chair Professor of Sourcing and Supply Management at the Indian
Institute of Management Bangalore in India. Andreas
Schotter is an assistant professor of international business at the Ivey Business School at Western University
SUMMER 2017 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW 65
EMERGING MARKETS
in London, Ontario, Canada. Comment on this article
at http://sloanreview.mit.edu/x/58410, or contact the
authors at smrfeedback@mit.edu.
17. P. Mehra and S. Ghosh, “Lost Opportunity:
How Apple Got Its Strategy Wrong,” Nov. 12, 2008,
www.livemint.com.
REFERENCES
18. M. Lorenzen and R. Mudambi, “Clusters, Connectivity,
and Catch-Up: Bollywood and Bangalore in the Global
Economy,” Journal of Economic Geography 13, no. 3
(May 2013): 501-534.
1. A.T. Kearney and the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals, India, “Supply Chain 2025: Trends and
Implications for India,” April 2014, www.atkearney.com.
2. Apple began manufacturing a limited number of
iPhones in India in 2017. See T. Haselton, “Apple Begins
Manufacturing iPhone SE in India,” May 17, 2017,
www.cnbc.com.
3. “About Us,” n.d., www.makeinindia.com.
4. M. Blomström and F. Sjöholm, “Technology Transfer
and Spillovers: Does Local Participation With Multinationals Matter?” European Economic Review 43, no. 4-6
(April 1999): 915-923.
5. A. Schotter and M. Teagarden, “Protecting Intellectual
Property in China,” MIT Sloan Management Review 55,
no. 4 (summer 2014): 41-48.
6. A.Y. Lewin, S. Massini, and C. Peeters, “Why Are Companies Offshoring Innovation? The Emerging Global Race
for Talent,” Journal of International Business Studies 40,
no. 6 (2009): 901-925.
7. M. Goyal, “Foxconn Boost for ‘Make in India’: Why Taiwan Inc.’s Growing Interests in India Deserve Attention,”
Economic Times, Aug. 24, 2015.
8. R. Venkatesan, “Conquering the Chaos: Win in India, Win
Everywhere” (Boston: Harvard Business Publishing, 2013).
9. J. Bhattacharya and S. Unnikrishnan, “The Great Indian
Middle Class: The Promise and the Reality,” March 14,
2016, www.livemint.com.
10. S. Agarwal, “India Is Not Yet on the Priority List of
the Luxury Companies: Abheek Singhi,” Nov. 1, 2014,
www.livemint.com.
11. KPMG and ASSOCHAM India, “India Luxury Summit
2014,” New Delhi, India, Feb. 7, 2014.
12. V.K. Fung, W.K. Fung, and Y.R. Wind, “Competing
in a Flat World: Building Enterprises for a Borderless
World” (Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Wharton
School Publishing, 2008).
13. S.L. Hart and C.M. Christensen, “The Great Leap:
Driving Innovation From the Base of the Pyramid,” MIT
Sloan Management Review 44, no. 1 (fall 2002): 51-56.
14. J. Hagel III and J.S. Brown, “The Only Sustainable
Edge: Why Business Strategy Depends on Productive
Friction and Dynamic Specialization” (Boston: Harvard
Business School Publishing, 2005).
15. A. Kazmin, “Modi Tackles India’s ‘Licence Raj’ With a
Thousand Cuts,” Financial Times, Sept. 21, 2014.
16. R.T. Krishnan, “Innovation in the Indian Automotive Industry: Role of Academic and Public Research Institutions”
in “A Comparative Study on the Role of University and
PRI as External Resources for Firms’ Innovation,” eds.
A. Sunami and P. Intarakumnerd, Economic Research
Institute for ASEAN and East Asia report 2010-10 (Jakarta,
Indonesia: ERIA, 2011), 57-109.
66 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW SUMMER 2017
19. J. McGregor, “China’s Drive for ‘Indigenous Innovation’: A Web of Industrial Policies,” July 10, 2010,
www.uschamber.com.
20. T. Sahoo, D.K. Banwet, and K. Momaya, “Strategic
Technology Management in the Auto Component Industry in India,” Journal of Advances in Management
Research 8, no.1 (2011): 9-29.
21. A. Kumaraswamy, R. Mudambi, H. Saranga, and
A. Tripathy, “Catch-Up Strategies in the Indian Auto Components Industry: Domestic Firms’ Responses to Market
Liberalization,” Journal of International Business Studies
43, no. 4 (May 2012): 368-395.
22. K. Thakkar, “Iconic Cars Like Volkswagen Beetle
and Fiat 500 Unable to Connect Beyond Their Die-Hard
Fans, Forcing Makers to Pull Them Out,” Economic
Times, Oct. 1, 2013.
23. K. Ramaswamy, “LG Electronics: Global Strategy
in Emerging Markets,” Thunderbird School of Global
Management case no. A09-070008 (Glendale, Arizona:
Thunderbird School of Global Management, 2007).
24. P.R. Sinha, “Premium Marketing to the Masses: An
Interview With LG Electronics India’s Managing Director,”
2005, www.mckinsey.com.
25. “LG India Presents the ‘Stars of India,’” news release,
Business Standard, April 28, 2009.
26. PTI, “LG Plans to Make India Export Hub,” Economic
Times, April 18, 2017, economictimes.indiatimes.com.
27. C. Midler, B. Jullien, and Y. Lung, “Innover à l’envers:
Repenser la stratégie et la conception dans un monde frugal” (Malakoff, France: Dunod, 2017), available in English
as “Rethinking Innovation and Design for Emerging Markets: Inside the Renault Kwid Project” (Boca Raton,
Florida: Auerbach Publications, 2017).
28. “Renault Kwid Compact Hatchback Unveiled; To Take on
Alto & Eon in Rs 3-4 Lakh Price Range,” Economic Times,
May 20, 2015, economictimes.indiatimes.com.
29. “Renault India Registers 144% Growth in November,”
Dec. 1, 2015, auto.ndtv.com.
30. J.R. Immelt, V. Govindarajan, and C. Trimble, “How
GE Is Disrupting Itself,” Harvard Business Review 87,
no. 10 (October 2009): 56-65.
31. N. Abraham, “GE Healthcare to Make India Hub for
Low-Cost Devices; Products Will Be Up to 40%
Cheaper,” Economic Times, Nov. 6, 2013.
32. V. Mahanta and S. Dave, “Narendra Modi Has Turned
India Into a Magnet: McKinsey CEO Dominic Barton,”
Economic Times, Nov. 26, 2014.
Reprint 58410.
Copyright © Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2017.
All rights reserved.
SLOANREVIEW.MIT.EDU
MIT SL
SLO
OAN MANA
MANAGEMEN
GEMENT
T REVIEW
OPERA
OPERATIONS
TIONS
PDFs
Reprints
Permission to Copy
Back Issues
Articles published in MIT Sloan Management Review are copyrighted by the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology unless otherwise specified at the end of an
article.
MIT Sloan Management Review articles, permissions, and back issues can be
purchased on our Web site: sloanreview.mit.edu or you may order through our
Business Service Center (9 a.m.-5 p.m. ET) at the phone numbers listed below.
Paper reprints are available in quantities of 250 or more.
To reproduce or transmit one or more MIT Sloan Management Review articles by
electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying or archiving in any
information storage or retrieval system) requires written permission.
To request permission, use our Web site: sloanreview.mit.edu
or
E-mail: smr-help@mit.edu
Call (US and International):617-253-7170 Fax: 617-258-9739
Posting of full-text SMR articles on publicly accessible Internet sites is
prohibited. To obtain permission to post articles on secure and/or passwordprotected intranet sites, e-mail your request to smr-help@mit.edu.
Copyright © Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2017. All rights reserved.
Reprint #58410
http://mitsmr.com/2r5BT9q