Irwin/McGraw-Hill [Modified by EvS]

Mgt 485-3-1

Mgt 485Chapter 3

GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS

3-2

Useful Links

http://globalgateway.t-bird.edu/GlobalGateway/ http://www.camcnty.gov.uk/sub/cominfo/ethnic/ http://international.loc.gov/intldl/intldlhome.html http://www.fita.org http://www.submitshop.com/services/regional-sea

rch-engines.html http://www.usitc.gov/tata/hts/bychapter/

index.htm http://www.geert-hofstede.com/

hofstede_netherlands.shtml

3-3

Summary of Global Competitiveness

Finland as the most competitive economy, holding first position in the Growth Competitiveness Index rankings due to a good all-round performance.

Six European economies are ranked among the top ten with notable good performance from the Scandinavian countries.

The United Kingdom and Canada have dropped to 15th and 16th position respectively – mainly due to a perceived decline in the quality of their public

institutions (particularly significant in Canada). Taiwan and Singapore, ranked 5th and 6th respectively, are

Asia’s best performing countries. – Taiwan’s position is largely due to its excellent performance in

technology – Singapore’s to its sound macroeconomic environment and quality

of public institutions. Chile (28th) is the highest ranking economy in Latin America,

way ahead of Mexico (47th), the second highest ranked economy in the region. – Gradually, through a combination of good macroeconomic

management and a broad range of institutional reforms, Chile is joining the ranks of the most competitive economies in the world, effectively migrating, in a figurative sense, away from the economically troubled region

Adopted from: http://www.psoj.org/pressrelease20031112.html

3-4

TQM Organizations

Recognize the Technology ParadoxCreate A Climate for InnovationCreate High Quality Goals &

Services

3-5

Technology ParadoxThe quality/cost dilemma Wrong:

As quality increases, the cost of production also increases

Right: Quality and costs are inversely related

3-6

Creating a Climate for Innovation

– Create corporate databases to link experts in diverse technologies

– Take advantage of Experts from outside the company

– Encourage Scientists to present innovations to peers

– Create visions by looking to the future – Benchmark competitors– Create a wide array of products that

cannot quickly be copied by the competition

3-7

Quality-Cost (Traditional View)

3-8

Quality-Cost (Evidence)

3-9

“Quality Pays Off”

Auto manufacturing– U.S. automakers have continued to increase their

quality

Asian services– Asian airliners and hotels are top ranking

internationally Aircraft manufacturing

– Major manufacturers are delivering high quality and cost effective products worldwide

3-10

Learning Organizations “Learn how to learn”

– anticipate change and discover new ways of creating products and services

Openness– encourage and anticipate, rather than accept change

Creativity– promote risk taking– encourage personal flexibility

Self-Efficacy– Enhance confidence that employees have the personal

resources needed to accomplish specific tasks within the organization

3-11

Examples of learning organizations

Anticipate change– General Electric– Sony– Kodak

Openness– Whirlpool

Creativity– Sony– Chrysler

Efficacy– IBM

3-12

World Class OrganizationsCustomer Based

Continuous Improvement

Flexible or Virtual Organizations

Creative Human Resource Management

Egalitarian Climate

Technological Support

3-13

World Class Organizations

1) Citigroup2) General Electric3) Exxon-Mobil4) Altria (Formerly Kraft / Phillip Morris)

5) Royal Dutch – Shell Group

6) Bank of America7) Pfizer8) Wal-Mart9) Microsoft10)Toyota

Fortune 500 Magazine v148, n2, p 122

“Global 500” (annual)

The 192 U.S. companies on the list lost $461 billion in revenues

3-14

World Class Organizations

1) Citigroup2) General Electric3) Exxon-Mobil4) Altria (Formerly Kraft / Phillip Morris)

5) Royal Dutch – Shell Group

6) Bank of America7) Pfizer8) Wal-Mart9) Microsoft10)Toyota

Fortune 500 Magazine v148, n2, p 122

“Global 500” (annual)

AOL Time Warner (#80), showed a 2001 - 2002 loss of $98.7 billion

3-15

New Paradigm Organizations

Org

an

izati

on

al D

evelo

pm

en

t

1985 1990 1995 2000+

Time

TotalQuality

(adaptive)

Learning(keeping ahead of change)

World Class(continuous improvement to become

and sustain being the best)

3-16

e-Go

Central Issues to “going international”– Customer Focus?

Market– Economics

– Quality– Technology?

3-17

Exercise #4– http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/reference/

codes/index.html– http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/regulations/

forms/index.html– http://www.unzco.com/basicguide/– http://www.officialexportguide.com/– http://www.oted.wa.gov/trade/importexport/

default.htm

3-18

Export Import Codes Schedule B codes (for exports) Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) codes (for

imports)

The HTS assigns 6-digit codes for general categories. Countries which use the HTS are allowed to define commodities at a more detailed level than 6-digits, but all definitions must be within that 6-digit framework.

The U.S. defines products using 10-digit HTS codes. Exports codes (which the U.S. calls Schedule B) are administered by the U.S. Census Bureau. Import codes are administered by the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC).