Assignment One: Global Business Management - Strayer Univers

Assignment One: Global Business Management Strayer University

Compare and contrast the three models of culture. Next, select one of the researched international competitors, and ascertain the model of culture that is most appropriate for the selected international competitor. Provide a rationale for your response. Recommend the type of economic system that best relates to each of the researched international competitors. Predict three potential effects of such an economic system on the societies in which the system is involved. Provide a rationale for your response. Speculate on the major reasons why certain countries have lagged behind other countries in economic development. Recommend three actions that the three researched major competitors could take to encourage economic progress within these countries. Provide a rationale for your response. Finally, imagine leading one of the researched international competitors, select a company, and outline the steps needed to propel you from your current position to a global leadership role. Also, suggest two global changes you would implement as CEO and provide reasoning behind these choices.

Paper For Above instruction

Global business management requires an understanding of cultural models, economic systems, and developmental strategies to effectively compete and lead in international markets. This paper compares three prominent models of national culture, evaluates the appropriate cultural model for a chosen international competitor, discusses economic systems suitable for these competitors, analyses reasons behind economic lag in some countries, and proposes strategic actions to foster growth. Additionally, it reflects on leadership development within a global context and considers transformative initiatives as a CEO of an international firm.

Comparing the Three Models of Culture

The study of national cultures is fundamental in international business. Hofstede’s model, the GLOBE study, and the 7D model each offer unique portrayals of cultural dimensions. Hofstede’s model emphasizes six dimensions: power distance, individualism vs. collectivism, masculinity vs. femininity, uncertainty avoidance, long-term vs. short-term orientation, and indulgence versus restraint (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010). It facilitates understanding of how cultural values influence workplace behavior and societal norms. The GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) model extends Hofstede's work, emphasizing nine cultural dimensions such as uncertainty avoidance, institutional collectivism, gender egalitarianism, and performance orientation, and highlights leadership attributes (House et al., 2004). The 7D model, developed by Robert House and his colleagues, integrates dimensions like power distance and uncertainty avoidance but introduces additional emphasis on humane orientation and future orientation, offering a comprehensive framework (House et al., 2004). Each model serves as a tool to interpret how cultural values shape business practices but differ in dimensions and emphasis, influencing how multinational corporations adapt strategies across countries.

Selecting a Cultural Model for an International Competitor

For illustration, consider Toyota, a leading automotive manufacturer from Japan. Based on Hofstede’s dimensions, Japan scores high on uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation, indicating a culture that values planning, perseverance, and consensus. The GLOBE model also underscores strong institutional collectivism and performance orientation, aligning well with Toyota’s corporate ethos. The 7D model's emphasis on humane orientation and future orientation further supports Toyota’s focus on quality, innovation, and responsibility. Given this alignment, the most appropriate cultural model for Toyota is Hofstede’s, as it provides clear insights into national values guiding corporate behavior. The rationale is that Hofstede’s dimensions directly influence Toyota’s management style, production processes, and customer engagement, making it essential for strategic alignment and operational success in international markets.

Recommending Economic Systems for International Competitors

Similarly, considering Toyota’s global competitors like General Motors (USA), Volkswagen (Germany), and Hyundai (South Korea), respective economic systems can be analyzed. The United States operates primarily under a capitalist or market economy, characterized by private ownership and free-market principles (Lipsey, 2010). Germany's economy is a social market economy, combining free enterprise with social protections (Brest, 2010). South Korea exemplifies a mixed economy, blending government intervention with private enterprise (Amsden, 1989). These systems influence societal development, productivity, and economic stability. In capitalist economies like the U.S., increased innovation and entrepreneurship are encouraged, but income inequality may rise. Social market economies foster social welfare and economic stability but may risk reduced competitiveness. Mixed economies aim to balance growth and social equity, yet can face challenges related to policy consistency. Understanding these dynamics helps multinational corporations tailor strategies and anticipate societal impacts.

Reasons for Lagging Economic Development & Strategies for Growth

Many countries lag behind due to inadequate institutions, insufficient infrastructure, political instability, or lack of access to education and technology (Acemoglu & Robinson, 2012). For instance, resource-rich but politically unstable nations often suffer from weak governance and corruption, constraining economic growth. To address this, the three international competitors—say, Ford (USA), BMW (Germany), and Hyundai (South Korea)—could implement targeted actions. First, investing in local education and workforce development enhances human capital. Second, supporting infrastructure projects facilitates commerce and industry growth. Third, engaging in corporate social responsibility initiatives strengthens community trust and social stability. These actions aim at creating an enabling environment conducive to sustainable development, fostering economic independence, and reducing disparities.

Leadership and Strategic Development in International Contexts

Assuming the opportunity to lead one of these companies, the choice might be a global corporation such as Toyota, given its extensive international footprint. To ascend to a leadership position, I would prioritize broadening my cross-cultural competence, developing linguistic skills, and acquiring expertise in international trade and management. Education in global business strategies and leadership, coupled with social development initiatives like community engagement and team-building skills, are essential. Kotter’s model of leading change emphasizes establishing a sense of urgency, creating guiding coalitions, and embedding new approaches within organizational culture (Kotter, 1996). Applying this, I would initiate strategic transformation through stakeholder engagement, innovation, and fostering a global mindset. The envisioned future state involves a diversified, resilient organization expanding into emerging markets while maintaining operational excellence and social responsibility.

Global Strategic Changes as a CEO

As CEO, two transformative initiatives I would pursue include expanding technological innovation and enhancing customer-centric practices. The first involves investing in digital transformation—such as adopting artificial intelligence and big data analytics—to optimize manufacturing, supply chain management, and customer engagement. The second entails developing culturally tailored marketing strategies and innovative product lines responsive to regional preferences, enhancing global brand relevance. These changes aim at strengthening competitive advantage, increasing operational efficiency, and fostering sustainable growth. Strategic considerations include leveraging technology to capitalize on industry trends, aligning marketing with cultural nuances, and ensuring resource allocation supports innovation and talent development (Porter, 1985). Economically, these initiatives promote profitability and market share, while customer focus ensures loyalty and satisfaction (Kotler & Keller, 2016).

References

• Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Business.
• Amsden, A. H. (1989). Asia's next giants: South Korea and late industrialization. Oxford University Press.
• Brest, P. (2010). The German social market economy: Origins and evolution. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(3), 49–72.
• Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. McGraw-Hill.
• House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., et al. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Sage Publications.
• Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.
• Langlois, R., & Cosgel, M. (2010). The evolution of economic systems. Journal of Institutional Economics, 6(3), 281–308.
• Lipsey, R. G. (2010). Economics. McGraw-Hill.
• Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. Free Press.
• House, R. J., Hanges, P., Javidan, M., et al. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Sage Publications.