Our group goals
Our group goal for this class is to broaden our knowledge in management from an international perspective. Since we are exchange students we want to become aware of all the culture differences that might affect the way of managing companies. In our coming work life we will have use of this knowledge since many of us are interested in working abroad. It is always important to have knowledge about other cultures and countries since it gives us a better understanding.
The IM Viking team, starting from the left
Rasmus Åstradsson
Nationality: Swedish
Studies: Strategic Corporate Management at University of Lund
Hobbies: Sports, music and contemporary culture
Lilian Wretenfeldt
Nationality: Swedish/Peruvian
Studies: Business and economics at Gothenburg University
Hobbies: Surfing, traveling, golf
Stina Kärkkäinen
Nationality: Swedish/Finnish
Studies: Business/finance at Stockholm University School of Business
Hobbies: Traveling, cooking, spending time in the nature
Markus Forchhammer
Nationality: Swedish/Danish
Studies: Business and economics at University of Lund
Hobbies: All kinds of board sports, playing some music, creative an social stuff
We find many of the weekly topics interesting. However, there are a few that we look more forward to, for instance; Intercultural Communication and Conflict Resolution, Leading and Motivating Workers in International Cultural Contexts and Business Ethics. We also find communication in businesses interesting.
Globalization myth- The Globalization is inevitable
Is globalization inevitable?
Ever since the industrial age began and the development of modern world took place, the rapid change in the exchange of goods, services, capital, technology and people all over the globe has come to be known as the globalization. The globalization has created an increasing prosperity for many nations all over the world along with new possibilities and markets which has led to increased trading possibilities, global capital markets and the development of great international corporations. Even though the globalization has led to great possibilities and many positive effects in the global over all economy, it has brought adverse effects in local economies. Thus given rise to negative consequences for many nations as widening of economic gaps and increased differences in wealth between countries.
Among the negative aspects of globalization there are a number of prominent arguments that are widely discussed. These arguments concerns complications and problematization in different areas regarding economic policy and environmental issues as well as cultural and social aspects. To sum up the criticism of globalization found in most articles, a number of arguments can be distinguished. First off; nations may loose control over economic decision making because of powerful multinational corporations, which in the long run is harmful for democracy. Second, differences in economic wealth increases. Increased income inequalities creates increased social tension and discontent. Third; increased transportation of goods, services and people in combination with insufficient legislation and regulations is harmful for environment as well as human well-being. Thus, one of the most attentive negative consequences to most people is the increase in international terrorism. Accordingly globalization has raised several ethical, cultural, social, and environmental global issues.
Considering the fact that globalization today is a widely accepted phenomena, and because it is a fundamental part of todays global economic development, it has given rise to several myths. One of these stated myths is weather globalization is inevitable or not. Arguments has been raised regarding weather its possible to halt economic development in order to benefit common people and environment instead of multinational corporations. What efforts can be made individually, nationally as well as on a corporate level?
Individual efforts in globalization
Globalization raises ethical problems in that it creates increased contact and exchange with people in other parts of the world. These interactions creates possibilities for economic growth and prosperity, exchange of knowledge and free movement of individuals, goods, services and capital. This raises questions and problems regarding global justice and equal rights. Today’s economic system is largely based on production of goods in countries with low wages and cost of production. Is it ethically correct to enjoy a lifestyle in excess whilst others live under difficult circumstances, in some cases on the verge of starvation? There has been a rhetoric around the concept of globalization that idealizes this social phenomena. In fact, globalization mainly favours the few, the global elite. In recent decades, it has lead to increased geographic mobility, but it is a development that can only be exploited by few, especially businessmen, people active in culture, media and academics. Capital and freedom is concentrated to the global elite, while freedom decreases for people bound to the local community. Who gains and who loses in this increasingly complex global interplay?
As descrbed in the video above, globalization has not been inclusive, inequalities are on the increase. As an individual, one need to ask oneself how to approach the trends of globalization. Should one seek to utilize ones bargaining power to maximize individual consumption? This is a process which has the effect of putting increased pressure on producers in less fortunate parts of the world, driving down wages and ultimately maintain a the status quo of global injustice and wealth distribution. Should one perhaps use the globalization process to even the play field?
An approach could be to seek minimizing the effect of globalization by promoting and consuming locally produces goods and services. This makes good sense in viewing the costs on the environment from living in the global village. For how long will it be sustainable to ship salmon from the Norwegian coast to China to be deboned and chopped, only to be shipped back for consumption in Sweden? I this an idiotic process or does it make good business sense? Is this a system we want to support?
Should we perhaps seek to reform how we live our life and seek to maximize aspects beyond economic wealth and materialism? Should we perhaps increase our efforts to pursue the higher levels of Maslow´s hierarchy of needs? A more ascetic or self-actualization based lifestyle has the benefits of focusing on spiritual and intrinsic needs, instead of being largely dependent on our outside environment in our pursuit of success. A recent trend, although being based on the pursuit of increased revenue, is the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility. This concept focuses on the need to be a moral citizen in order to sustain ones competitive advantage. Should we seek to increase the weight of of such aspects on our scorecards? Ultimately it is a question of choice, choosing how we want to live our lives and how we want to shape the world. It is a question about democracy and whether one should use ones economic bargaining power to support our moral ethical standing.
According to the myth, globalization on a national level will probably be seen as inevitable. This is because it is likely to assume that all countries strive to reach wealth and compare themselves with other countries. Therefore all countries will become more alike and without taking part of the globalization you would fall behind both economically and technologically, but also in regards to living standards. Many multinational companies have begun reaching monopoly positions on markets in many parts of the world. As an effect of this the small companies have begun to disappear since they do not have the same possibilities. An example of this is McDonald's who have reached high market shares. In a free economy it is hard to stop McDonald’s and other multinationals from succeeding in their country if this is what the customers demand, which in a way makes globalization inevitable.
In today's society almost all the countries trade or interchange goods and services with each other. It has become very important to obtain and maintain good relations between countries to avoid conflicts and wars. Globalization is one way to establish new contacts and make countries more dependent on each other. Countries that for some reason choose to not take part of the globalization might be considered odd or perhaps dangerous.
Nowhere else in the world the border between a non-globalised and globalised country is as clearly seen as between North and South Korea. In the south the economy is on its way up with growing living standards. North Korea is however, economically seen, standing still. The word is that the population are experiencing difficulties coming from less freedom. However, regardless of the situation in North Korea, the country has to some extension made a choice to stand outside the world economy as it is a closed country. Therefore we ask us the question; is it possible to avoid globalization? The answer in this case is apparently yes. However the consequences of avoiding globalization as we have seen in many cases, may lead to poverty. This is the case not only in North Korea and other socialistic states, but also in for example countries in Africa that have not been given the chance to take part of the globalization.
If we take a look back in history there was a development that can be compared to today’s globalization when countries were also trading with each other. There was free trade spreading in Europe and a the gold standard created stable exchange rates and prices. Capital, goods and people could move relatively freely across borders. However this ended while the first and second world war took place. Therefore globalization is always threatened by a third world war that would put a stop to connections between countries. We can therefore not take globalization for granted since history shows that it is not inevitable.
There are also threats as the international terrorism, instability and global rivalry against the globalization. It reminds us that we cannot take today’s modern liberal economic order for granted.
It remains to be seen where the trends of globalization will take us. However it is certain that there exists alternatives to the way we live our lives today; individuals can choose not to participate in the continuous arms race of increased consumption, and nations can choose to step out of the hamster wheel (as North Korea) and choose an alternative path. The question of whether this can be done without endangering a continued rise in global prosperity remains to be answered. It seems that there are efforts to be made on every level. Although these efforts probably requires a change in living standard in the richer part of the world.
Extension section and response to comments:
We
appreciate all the great comments given to this blog and would now further like
to develop our blog after the contribution of these comments.
As 40040169-moomoo
discusses, in fact many of the African nations are taking part of the
globalization and perhaps it is not fair of us to make the easy assumption that
the African nations have not had the possibility to take part of the
globalization and therefore still remain in poverty. We do believe that there
are great investment opportunities in Africa and it is very likely that this is
a region that will be highly affected by the globalization in the near future. Also,
it is a very good point that nations such as Singapore are giving back and
helping other nations. In fact, the globalization is really drawing countries
closer to each other.
What we try
to achieve by discussing Maslow’s hierarchy is to discuss our myth on a deeper
level. That it might be up to the individual himself which parts of his life he
chooses to focus on, it could be spiritual and self-fulfilling parts instead of
being totally wrapped up in the global consumption society.
Bhutan is a
great example of a nation that in many ways is unaffected by the globalization
with slow technological process and so on, yet being one of the happiest
countries in the world. We agree that this is a great example to illustrate
some of the points that we have in our blog.
51438741happy,
it is a very good point you have when you say that when we mention for example
North Korea as being a nation avoiding the globalization and then state that
they have big problems with for example poverty, actually proves that globalization
is not inevitable. We understand what
you mean, if avoiding globalization leads to poverty then in fact it is fair to
state that a nation cannot avoid the globalization. But however, we still
maintain what we said earlier, because our myth only discusses if there is a
possibility to avoid the
globalization, and North Korea proves that in fact there is, with or without
negative consequences.
Sources:
http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/a/hierarchyneeds.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization
http://www.dn.se/ledare/fem-myter-om-globaliseringen
http://www.newoxfordreview.org/reviews.jsp?did=0404-storck
