How Far Is the World Still Not Homogeneous - Coursework Example

Globalization and Homogeneity The idea of a world that is largely homogenous is a concept that is identifiable and needs to be understood in consonance with the concept o globalization. The basic functional idea behind this assumption is that with an evolution of communication and related technologies, an increased level of intra nation interaction and dependence there is would come a tome when the world would be homogenous, there would be no difference or separating factor that would distinguish one part of the world from another part making it what is known in academic circles a ‘global village’. There are those that argue that is in fact the process of globalization that has made the world a homogenous place. Wendell Wilke wrote in One World, in 1940 that the ‘world has become small and completely interdependent’, (Greider. 1997). The focus of this essay however is not to look at the impact that globalization has actually had on the world but debate the truth of the assumption that the world is homogenous free of the individuality that defines its constituents. Ti this end, the essay will try and analyse the difference that the world has experienced and is experiencing by virtue of the impact that globalization has left. The basic underlying debate is with respect to the levels of homogeneity achieved by the world and its people; this obviously includes areas such as politics, culture, language and economics. The second par of the essay will try and look at the ways in which Multi National Corporations-MNCs- around the world came to grips with the changing realities and how there is still a need to tailor product according to local demands. There is a lot that has been written and discussed about globalization and its impact over the past two decades. The word itself was first used in 1962 but has been used in such a manner that it was described by the Economist as being ‘the most abused in history’, (Adams and Carfagna, 2006). It has come to mean all kinds of things for many people and has been used to glorify and to demonize. The IMF defines it as, ‘the growing economic interdependence of countries worldwide through the increasing volume and variety of cross borer transactions in goods and services and of international capital flows, and also through the more rapid and widespread diffusion of technology’. Another manner in which globalization can be described which would probably be more pertinent to our discussion here is, ‘the Copernican revolution of our day. It is making the world truly round because it is simply bringing humanity into a single ecosystem of embedded, overlapping networks. Borders, boundaries, delineations and walls of any kind are slowly giving way to the compelling forces on integration and interdependence’, (Garrison, 2004). What one can conclude unarguable from the above discussion is that globalization is a fact of life, it relates to all of those processes that are producing an increasingly interwoven world society and that its effects are easily discernible, it has in fact spawned equally passionate friends and foes. The following section in this context will attempt to look at how homogenous the world is and whether or not this homogeneity is aided by cultural imperialism that is associated with globalization. It will also analyse the barriers to globalization. This does not however mean a world without boundaries is a world which is homogenous. There are various aspects to the debate that need to be understood in order to qualify and understand the statement in its depth. Globalization is in essence an economic process by which the flow of goods and services across borders is facilitated by the removal of tariffs and duties on trade (Schaeffer, 2003). The process began in the decade of the 1970s when poor nations the world over borrowed heavily from the western nations tapping financial pools in Eurocurrency to get out of their financial crisis. This was followed by rising interest rates, fall in commodity prices, forced these nations into bankruptcy and ultimately forced them into submission where in they joined global regulating bodies like the GATT and then the WTO. The origin of the process of globalization is traced back usually to the 1990s, and this then facilitated the process which led to much debate in the later years. With the growth of increasing interactive world trade came an increasingly interactive media community. Countries around the world were exposed to the features and culture of the other. With the export of commodities and communication came the export of culture and democracy. The homogenization of society it’s politic and its culture arises from this basic premise. The idea is that globalization processes have facilitated the growth of an increasingly homogenized global culture that is underwritten by an Anglo –American value system. Culture is no longer tied to the bonds of local identification but acquires new meanings that are reflective of dominant themes that are emerging in the global markets. Global homogenization is associated usually with US cultural imperialism or a process that is better known as Americanization. The idea is that local cultures face extinction with an invasion of US culture and value systems that are largely being adopted at the cost of indigenous cultural traditions (Tomlinson, 2002). Interestingly, this alleged movement is almost always from the first world to the third world and not the other way around. The scenario that is thus outlined is one in which the deterritorialization of culture is conceived as promoting a convergence of cultural styles wherein western culture is being embraced in localities around the globe leading to an increasing elimination of cultural difference in the world and hence to the crescent production of a world of sameness (Inda and Rosaldo, 2008). The view however is a little bit skewed as it represents one side of the picture and completely disregards the fact that there is an exchange of cultural values that actually takes place, that the process of cultural outflow that happens from third world countries into the first world as well, and the fact that the nation state and sovereignty have in fact put up a stiff fight to the onslaught of globalizing process. Had the world been truly homogenous Iraq would have easily accepted US invasion, there would be no protests and no riots in the third world. It can in fact be said that wit the advent of the globalized world nationalization and localization has received further impetus. The argument of political or economic homogeneity is not acceptable either. First not all countries in the world are democracies, second, not all democracies run on the path of some predetermined model, there are variations and individualizations in each one, that are tailored to suit the needs of local populations. Homogeneity is a factor unknown even in intra country politics let alone inter-country homogeneity. On the economic front the recession and the global crisis has denoted the fact that though globalization has ensured a globalized manner of doing business, the level of dependence and the cultures intrinsic to each country has not changed. So while the American banks were lending and getting deeper entrenched in the sub prime crisis the central banks in many countries around the world were tightening the noose on lending practices saving the global baking system from collapse. National identity bonds have been strengthened with an identification of what the other nationalities are like. It has made each individual more aware and more conscious of one’s own culture and more protective against imperialism from alien cultures (Robertson, 1992). The theory of media imperialism can be negated by virtue of the fact that even today vernacular channels would any day gather more ratings than a channel showing American shows. Just by virtue of the fact that Pepsi and Cola have become beverages in the transnational order, does not mean that people have given up on local beverages. There might be a McDonald in every metropolitan in the world, but the local eateries would still do better and brisk business. There is a pluralization of the world as localities produce a variety of unique cultural responses to global forces. The result is a complex interaction of the global and local cultures characterized by cultural borrowing. This can also be referred to as hybridization (Pinkowski and Farazmad 2006). There is barely any evidence to prove that all cultures are heading in the same direction. There is no homogeneity and yet there do not exist any more isolated, pure and traditional cultures. The history of the world far from moving towards homogeneity is moving towards cultural complexity. The barriers to globalization in the greatest sense are the in built sense of culture and tradition that most societies have a fear against imperialism and neo colonialism and a fierce sense of protecting the independence of one’s country and its culture against foreign invasion. If foreign products are being accepted it is on merit and comfort. One can chose to drink Cola and eat at McDonald’s without becoming American in any sense of the term. It is individual choice that is fragmenting the imposed uniformity of nationalized or globalized cultures. Hybrid cultures are emerging and regional ones re-emerging, there is no homogenization of living and there can thus be no homogenization of strategy that an MNC needs to employ in order to survive in the transnational business world. It is in this context that the following section will assess the strategies that are taken by MNCs in order to successfully compete in the globalized world which is, contrary to perceptions, not homogenous. There are a number of areas that demand strategy alterations and differentiation in order for MNCs to meet the demands of local culture as opposed to global culture. A multinational corporation (MNC) does not operate in isolation. The MNC interacts with various societies to acquire resources, process the resources, and sell goods and services produced. Unless MNCs recognize cultural differences and train expatriate managers and the corporate staff to deal with individuals from other countries and cultures, the competitiveness of the firm will suffer. Many costs and benefits are intangible, but they must not be overlooked.  Most MNCs now employ a diverse work force and outsource big parts of their production processes. This helps not just in production and logistics cost but also helps them get a feel of the market that is being targeted. Human Resources play an important role in the process of balancing local and global forces. It helps foster an organizational culture that in turn helps in organizational learning and innovation. Multinational organizations place significant emphasis on understanding the local culture of the markets they operate in, to customize their products or services to the unique needs of their customers. Most companies invest in cross-cultural training, exposure through short term projects to prepare their staff for these challenges. There are international managers assigned periodically to the head offices to assimilate corporate culture and strategic goals (Selmer, 1995) An MNC holds business capabilities but lacks knowledge about on the specifications of new countries and its markets. The best way of dealing with these challenges is to make cross border acquisitions and get into partnerships which give an MNC access to the already existing local markets without the added burden of market segmentation and ad spends (Tallman, 2007). There are product alterations that are made so that these are acceptable to local tastes and requirements. McDonalds for example came up with the idea of the hugely popular ‘McAloo’ in India to suit the local vegetarian taste of the market. Finally, the marketing mix that is employed by the MNC needs to vary with each country and each culture. There can be no universal marketing strategy to sell the same product world wide. What is acceptable advertising in the US would create uproar in South East Asia. The marketing mix and getting it right in fact is a big part of the success or failure that an MNC witnesses in any given part of the world. The campaigns that are run by the two cola giants- Pepsi and Coke is proof enough of the fact that in order to see success in new markets it is imperative that the marketing mix be correct. Therefore, this essay has stated that there is a lot more to the globalization and homogenization debate that meets the eye. Contrasting opinions on the same are proof enough of the fact that there cannot be one right or any one wrong as far as this debate is concerned, but as far as organizations that function in the trans-nation scenario working under the assumption that there is a global world with global needs and perceptions would be a strategy that could very well be suicidal. Reference: Adams M J and Carfagna, 2006, Coming of age in a globalized world: the next generation, Published by Kumarian Press, Inc., pp22-28 Garrison J, 2004, America as empire: global leader or rogue power?, Published by Berrett-Koehler Publishers, p38 Inda J X and Rosaldo R, 2008, The anthropology of globalization: a reader, Published by Wiley-Blackwell, pp15-18 Pinkowski J and Farazmad A, 2006, Handbook of globalization, governance, and public administration, Published by CRC Press, pp30-34 Robertson R, 1992, Globalization: Social theory and Global Culture, published by Sage Publications, pp126-130 Schaeffer R K, 2003, Understanding globalization: the social consequences of political, economic, and environmental change, Published by Rowman & Littlefield pp95-119 Selmer J, 1995, Expatriate management: new ideas for international business, Published by Greenwood Publishing Group, p237 Tallman S, 2007, A New Generation in International Strategic Management, Published by Edward Elgar Publishing, pp175-77 Tomlinson J, American Council of Learned Societies, 2002, Cultural imperialism: a critical introduction, Published by Continuum International Publishing Group, pp34-56 Read More