Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Name: Ansano, Rey M. BSENTREP 3-B

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 5

Name : Ansano, Rey M.

BSENTREP 3-B

Assessment 2

Directions: Write T if the state is True and F is the statement is False. (20 Points)

I.

_T____1. Globalization is a term used to describe the changes in societies and the world economy that
are the result of dramatically increased trade and cultural exchange.

_T____2. Globalization refers almost exclusively to the effects of trade, particularly trade liberalization
or "free trade".

_T____3. It is a common belief that globalization plays a role just at international levels of trade and
commerce, but the fact is that it has played an important role in making our lives much more
comfortable too.

_T____4. One of the signs of globalization is increase in international trade at a faster rate than the
growth in the world economy.

_T____5. Philippines has taken part in the process of globalization ever since the country signed
agreements with the World Trade Organization in 1995.

_T____6. Globalization is very effective in the Philippines because it has allowed major changes in the
nation like more labor, and more Filipino and foreign companies have emerged in the nation in order to

help the country’s developing economy.

_T____7. Globalization can make the Philippines into a better nation if the Philippine leaders make their
economy more advanced through global trading and allow more foreign investors to help boost the

economy.

_T____8. Globalization has brought in fierce competition in the markets.

_T____9. Gross Domestic Product, commonly known as GDP, is the money value of the final goods and
services produced within the domestic territory of the country during an accounting year.

_T____10. Globalization has promoted tourism to great heights.

II. Research. 30 points

Journal/References: Any journals/publications on Globalization

Required:

1. Summarize your selected journal/references/books etc. (at least 3 paragraphs)


2. Cite at least 3 debatable issues in the journal and explain your side to each issue/s

SUMMARY

Many companies have become disillusioned with sales in the international


marketplace as old markets become saturated and new ones must be found. How can
they customize products for the demands of new markets? Which items will consumers
want? With wily international competitors breathing down their necks, many
organizations think that the game just isn’t worth the effort. In business, this trend has
pushed markets toward global commonality. Corporations sell standardized products in
the same way everywhere—autos, steel, chemicals, petroleum, cement, agricultural
commodities and equipment, industrial and commercial construction, banking and
insurance services, computers, semiconductors, transport, electronic instruments,
pharmaceuticals, and telecommunications, to mention some of the obvious.

Nor is the sweeping gale of globalization confined to these raw material or high-
tech products, where the universal language of customers and users facilitates
standardization. The transforming winds whipped up by the proletarianization of
communication and travel enter every crevice of life. Commercially, nothing confirms
this as much as the success of McDonald’s from the Champs Elysées to the Ginza, of
Coca-Cola in Bahrain and Pepsi-Cola in Moscow, and of rock music, Greek salad,
Hollywood movies, Revlon cosmetics, Sony televisions, and Levi jeans everywhere.
“High-touch” products are as ubiquitous as high-tech.
Starting from opposing sides, the high-tech and the high touch ends of the
commercial spectrum gradually consume the undistributed middle in their cosmopolitan
orbit. No one is exempt and nothing can stop the process. Everywhere everything gets
more and more like everything else as the world’s preference structure is relentlessly
homogenized. Consider the cases of Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola, which are globally
standardized products sold everywhere and welcomed by everyone. Both successfully
cross multitudes of national, regional, and ethnic taste buds trained to a variety of
deeply ingrained local preferences of taste, flavor, consistency, effervescence, and
aftertaste. Everywhere both sell well. Cigarettes, too, especially American-made, make
year-to-year global inroads on territories previously held in the firm grip of other, mostly
local, blends.
Issues

1. Many companies have tried to standardize world practice by exporting domestic


products and processes without accommodation or change and have failed
miserably

Their deficiencies have been seized on as evidence of bovine stupidity in the


face of abject impossibility. Advocates of global standardization see them as
examples of failures in execution.
In fact, poor execution is often an important cause. More important, however, is
failure of nerve failure of imagination.

2. Trouble increasingly stalks companies that lack clarified global focus and remain
inattentive to the economics of simplicity and standardization.

The most endangered companies in the rapidly evolving world tend to be those
that dominate rather small domestic markets with high value-added products for
which there are smaller markets elsewhere. With transportation costs
proportionately low, distant competitors will enter the now-sheltered markets of
those companies with goods produced more cheaply under scale-efficient
conditions. Global competition spells the end of domestic territoriality, no matter
how diminutive the territory may be.

3. Negative Consequences and How to Mitigate Them

Globalization has its side effects on advanced nations, too. These are several
variables that include work instability, market volatility, extremism, currency
fluctuations, capital flows, and so on.
References :

1. In a landmark article, Robert D. Buzzel pointed out the rapidity with which barriers to
standardization were falling. In all cases they succumbed to more advanced and
cheaper ways of doing things. See “Can You Standardize Multinational Marketing?”
Harvard Business Review (November–December 1968).

2. There is powerful new evidence for this, even though the opposite has been urged by
analysts of PIMS data for years. See “Product Quality: Cost Production and Business
Performance—A Test of Some Key Hypotheses” by Lynn W. Phillips, Dae Chang, and
Robert D. Buzzell, Harvard Business School Working Paper No. 83-13.

3. For a discussion of multinational reorganization, see Christopher A. Bartlett, “MNCs:


Get Off the Reorganization Merry-Go-Round,” Harvard Business Review (March–April
1983).

A version of this article appeared in the May 1983 issue of Harvard Business Review.
Theodore Levitt, a longtime professor of marketing at Harvard Business School in
Boston, is now professor emeritus. His most recent books are Thinking About
Management (1990) and The Marketing Imagination (1983), both from Free Press.

You might also like