How Big Are Global Businesses Compared? Due Week 4 And Worth

How Big Global Businesses Compare Due Week 4 and worth 200 points

Select a global industry such as the automobile or cell phone industry. Research three major international competitors within this industry using credible Internet sources. Analyze how the popular international business press depicts these companies. Write a 4-5 page paper that compares and contrasts the three models of culture relevant to these companies. Choose one of the competitors and identify which cultural model best fits the company, providing a rationale for this choice. Recommend the type of economic system that aligns with each company and predict three potential societal effects of these economic systems, supporting your predictions with reasons. Discuss reasons for economic lag in certain countries and suggest three actions that the competitors could take to promote economic progress in these nations, with some justification. As a leader within one of these companies, select a company you are interested in leading and justify your choice. Outline major steps—such as education, social development, community engagement, skills development—that would prepare you to attain a global leadership role. Additionally, propose two strategic changes in expansion, technology, marketing, products, services, human resources, or customer service that you would implement as CEO, with supporting rationale. Your paper should incorporate at least three scholarly sources, formatted according to APA guidelines, and follow the formatting instructions: double-spaced, Times New Roman font size 12, with one-inch margins. Include a cover page with the assignment title, your name, professor’s name, course name, and date. The cover page and references are not part of the 4-5 page content.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The rapid globalization of industries such as automobiles and mobile telecommunications has intensified the need to understand the varying cultural paradigms and economic systems influencing international businesses. This paper explores three major players in the automobile industry: Toyota, General Motors, and Volkswagen. By analyzing how each company is portrayed in the global business press, contrasting their cultural models, and assessing the economic systems they embody, this study offers insights into their operational frameworks and societal impacts. Additionally, it discusses strategies for economic development, potential leadership pathways, and proposed organizational enhancements to sustain competitive advantage and promote global economic progress.

Comparison of Cultural Models in Major International Competitors

The cultural models underpinning international corporations can profoundly impact their management styles, decision-making processes, and stakeholder relations. Hofstede’s cultural dimensions provide a useful framework to analyze Toyota (Japan), General Motors (USA), and Volkswagen (Germany). Toyota exemplifies a collectivist and high-context culture emphasizing harmony, respect, and consensus (Hofstede, 2011). In contrast, General Motors reflects an individualist and low-context Western culture emphasizing autonomy, competition, and explicit communication. Volkswagen embodies a pragmatic German culture characterized by precision, quality, and efficiency, aligning with Hofstede’s uncertainty avoidance and masculinity dimensions.

While Toyota's culture prioritizes group cohesion and consensus, GM's fosters individual innovation and competition, and Volkswagen emphasizes efficiency and technical mastery. These societal value differences influence organizational behavior and management approaches suitable for each company’s geographical and cultural context (Meyer, 2014).

Model of Culture and Rationale for Selected Company

Selecting Toyota’s cultural model as most appropriate reflects its globally successful adaptation of Japanese cultural values, including collective responsibility and long-term orientation (Hofstede, 2011). The company’s emphasis on continuous improvement (kaizen) and respect for hierarchy aligns with its cultural roots, facilitating effective cross-cultural management. The rationale rests on Toyota’s demonstrated resilience and innovation, underscoring the importance of a cultural orientation grounded in harmony and continuous development.

Economic Systems and Societal Effects

Analyzing the economic systems predominantly associated with these companies shows Toyota operates within a mixed economy emphasizing social market principles; GM has historically thrived within a capitalist framework; Volkswagen is rooted in a social market economy prevalent in Germany. These models influence societal outcomes such as innovation capacity, income distribution, and social stability.

Predicting societal effects involves considering the nature of these economic systems. A social market economy tends to promote social welfare while enabling entrepreneurial ventures (Schmidt & Michelsen, 2017). Capitalist economies like the U.S. foster rapid innovation but may exacerbate income inequality (Piketty, 2014). Conversely, Germany’s model balances economic competitiveness with social protections, influencing societal cohesion positively.

Three societal effects predicted include:

1. Increased innovation and technological advances in capitalist systems through competitive pressures.

2. Enhanced social protections and stability in social market economies, reducing inequality.

3. Potential social stratification arising from high disparities in pure capitalist systems.

These predictions underscore the importance of tailored economic policies aligned with cultural contexts to foster social resilience and economic prosperity.

Reasons for Economic Lag and Actions to Promote Development

Countries lagging in economic development often face challenges such as inadequate infrastructure, political instability, limited access to education, and weak institutional frameworks (Acemoglu & Robinson, 2012). To address these issues, international competitors could adopt actions including:

- Investing in education and workforce skill development.

- Supporting infrastructure enhancements and technological adoption.

- Facilitating local entrepreneurship through strategic partnerships and investment.

These actions can help accelerate economic growth by building human capital, improving productivity, and fostering innovation, aligning with best practices observed in emerging economies.

Leadership Aspiration and Strategic Preparation

Choosing Toyota as the company I aim to lead is justified by its global influence and commitment to innovation. To ascend to a leadership role, I would focus on acquiring advanced knowledge in international management, cross-cultural communication, and sustainable development. Developing skills in negotiation, conflict resolution, and multilingual proficiency would be essential.

Major steps include:

- Engaging in international leadership training programs.

- Participating in cross-cultural exchanges to build global awareness.

- Contributing to community development initiatives to foster social responsibility.

Strategic Changes as CEO

Two significant strategies I would pursue as CEO are:

1. Expanding digital transformation initiatives to enhance operational efficiency and customer engagement.

2. Diversifying product lines to incorporate sustainable and electric vehicles to meet global environmental standards.

These changes aim to boost innovation, meet evolving consumer preferences, and maintain competitive relevance in a rapidly changing global automotive industry. Implementing these strategies would support Toyota’s long-term growth and sustainability.

Conclusion

Understanding the intersection of culture, economic systems, and strategic leadership is vital for navigating the complexities of global business. By analyzing key competitors and their underlying models, organizations can craft strategies that not only foster growth but also contribute positively to societal development. Leadership readiness, coupled with informed strategic decisions, is crucial in shaping successful global enterprises capable of responding to contemporary challenges and opportunities.

References

Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. Crown Business.

Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014

Meyer, E. (2014). The culture map: Breaking through the invisible boundaries of global business. PublicAffairs.

Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Harvard University Press.

Schmidt, V. A., & Michelsen, M. (2017). The Welfare State in a Social Market Economy: Anti-Developmental or Adaptive? In The Future of the Welfare State (pp. 45-68). Springer.

Additional references will include reputable sources from industry reports, academic journals, and credible news outlets to support all claims and analysis discussed in the paper. All references will be correctly formatted according to APA guidelines.