In June 2007, a study on working conditions in four Chinese mills was published by FairPlay 2008, an international confederation of trade brotherhoods. The mills has been licensed to bring forth Olympic-branded goods for the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing. The study was critical of a figure of their work patterns, including long on the job hours, forced and unpaid overtime, child labor, rewards below the legal lower limit, and unsafe working conditions. These four mills are, of class, non entirely in runing ‘sweat-shop ‘ on the job conditions are the International Olympic Committee is non the merely well-thought-of organisation to hold inadvertently ( or heedlessly ) authorized goods to be produced in such conditions. In some cases, the mills were interrupting their ain national Torahs but, more significantly, the intervention of their workers raises serious ethical issues.
Working hours do of class vary between states and households may even promote their kids to lend to their meager incomes. Long on the job hours and cheap labour allow developing states to vie more efficaciously in universe markets and to work their otherwise minimum comparative advantages. Indeed, China ‘s economic system as a whole has benefited enormously from the production and export of inexpensive manufactured goods.
Mini Case 1.2 CSR Coverage
Increasingly, companies are get downing to describe their CSR public presentation publically. A major international enterprise supplying a CSR coverage model is the Global Reporting enterprise. The current coverage guidelines at the clip of composing are its 3rd version, the G3 Guidelines, agreed in 2006. These guidelines are now updated on an incremental footing. The G3 Guidelines cover a company ‘s economic, environmental, and societal public presentation and its impact. Social public presentation includes labour patterns, human rights, merchandise duty, a company ‘s part to the community and its conformity with criterions associating to corruptness, anti-competitive behaviour, and other ordinances. This enterprise has the support of a figure of major companies including Microsoft, GM, Ford, Shell, and Deutsche Bank.
Mini Case 2.1 HSBC
HSBC is ranked the fifth largest bank in the universe with gross of $ 146.5 billion in 2008. The company started its life in Hong Kong is 1865 as the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation. Today, HSBC has operations in all the chief parts of the universe, a place it has reached mostly through whole or partial equity investings in other Bankss. The group ‘s corporate central offices were moved to London in January 1993, after the coup d’etat of the UK ‘s Midland Bank the old twelvemonth. Key maps including strategic direction, human resource direction, legal personal businesss, and fiscal planning and control are now centralized in London, but other operations are decentralized. The HSBC Group has besides adopted common engineering throughout its banking operations and a unvarying international trade name and logo. The planetary and local facets of its mission are encapsulated in the strap line: “ The universe ‘s local bank ” .
Mini Case 2.2 EU Quotas on Chinese Textile Imports
On 31 December 2004 the ten-year multi-fibre understanding was terminated. The understanding has allowed its signers to enforce quotas on fabric imports to protect their domestic fabric industries. It was a response to turning competition from inexpensive fabric merchandises from the developing states, particularly in Asia. Almost every bit shortly as the multi-fibre understanding had ended, nevertheless, Chinese and other low-priced fabric merchandises started to deluge into European and American markets. Pressure shortly grew on the EU to reimpose controls and the EU agreed to re-introduce quotas on Chinese fabrics in June 2005. Almost instantly, dressing importers and retail merchants were kicking that their orders were stacking up at the ports. Many of these goods had been ordered before the new quotas were imposed, but the quota bounds for 2005 were shortly reached. The European Commission responded by leting the goods to be imported as an progress on the undermentioned twelvemonth ‘s quotas.
Pressure for the new quotas had come from Europe ‘s fighting fabric manufacturers who feared the loss of their supports as inexpensive Chinese vesture flooded the market. Before long, nevertheless, the big retail ironss were looking for alternate beginnings of inexpensive vesture from states like India, Vietnam, and Cambodia. They argued that their clients demanded low-cost vesture and that local manufacturers were unable to provide their demands. The European Commission claimed in its defence that it was seeking non merely to protect European fabric manufacturers, but besides to safeguard production and occupations in the EU ‘s Mediterranean neighbours, Tunisia and Morocco, which would hold been squeezed out by the Chinese imports. The quotas were withdrawn at the terminal of 2007, with an understanding between the EU and the Chinese authorities that they would go on to supervise the state of affairs.
Mini Case 2.3 US Steel Duties
In March, 2002, the US authorities imposed duties on imported steel to supply impermanent protection for its domestic steel manufacturers. The step was a response to lobbying by US steel manufacturers and trade brotherhoods and the purpose was to maintain the duties in topographic point for three old ages, leting the US steel industry clip to restructure. However, there was besides force per unit area on the US authorities to take the duties. This came from US steel consumers, including the automotive and building industries, and from steel-producing states around the universe, including the EU, India, and China. In certain fortunes, WTO regulations allow a member state to utilize impermanent precaution steps to protect a vulnerable industry from a sudden addition in imports, but in this instance the WTO was loosely critical of the US determination and the complainant states threatened to enforce countenances on US goods if it did n’t take the duties. The difference was eventually resolved when President Bush withdrew the duties in December 2003, but the instance raised inquiries about the function and authorization of the WTO and the dangers both for trade policy and for international dealingss when powerful member states are in difference with each other.
Case survey: please see Chapter 13 ( p.334-335 ) Emerging scenario: Europe coming of age
Case survey: please see Chapter 2 ( p.52-55 ) Globalization of the auto industry
Day 6 ( Morning )
BBC Program 2 Video: The Chinese are coming
Goldman Sachs. 2003. Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050. [ on-line ] . Available at: & lt ; URL: hypertext transfer protocol: //www2.goldmansachs.com/ideas/brics/book/99-dreaming.pdf & gt ;
Day 6 ( Afternoon )
Case survey: The Global Forces and Western European Brewing Industry
( A transcript of the instance will be provided )
Mini Case 7.1 Nestle ‘s Brand Management Strategies
In mid-1988, Nestle SA ( Nestle ) , the universe ‘s largest consumer packaged nutrients company based in Switzerland, acquired Rowntree Mackintosh PLC ( Rowntree ) , in the largest of all time acquisition trade of a British company during that clip. Rowntree was the universe ‘s 4th largest maker of cocoas and confectionery merchandises, with well-known trade names like Kit Kat, After Eight, Smarties and Rolo. The trade attracted considerable attending all over the universe since several commands to get Rowntree were rejected. Rowntree claimed that the commands were excessively low for its valuable, well-recognized trade names. In the terminal, Rowntree was acquired by Nestle for ?2.5 billion, two and a half times the pre-bid monetary value and eight times the net plus value of the company. This acquisition made Nestle the largest cocoa maker in the universe. Analysts felt that Nestle had paid ?2.5 billion because of Rowntree ‘s trade names, non its past fiscal public presentation. Industry perceivers wondered how Nestle would pull off Rowntree ‘s trade names. Rowntree followed a “ one merchandise, one trade name ” policy. The trade names were merely Kit Kat, After Eight, Smarties and Rolo, Rowntree was ne’er mentioned. Furthermore, Rowntree ‘s trade names were non strongly managed European trade names. In fact, harmonizing to an analyst, Kit Kat was one of the worst instances of an over-localized trade name of a company across Europe.
When Nestle acquired Rowntree ‘s trade names in 1988, the major challenge before the company was pull offing them. Rowntree ‘s trade names were non strongly managed European trade names. Before the 1980s, ‘country directors ‘ outside the UK in several European states managed Rowntree ‘s concern. They were free to run their units provided concern aims were met. The orientation at Rowntree was short-run merely to run into one-year concern aims and state directors added nil to the overall organisation. Even though Kit Kat was a prima trade name in UK, it was ignored outside the state. In the early 1980s, Rowntree established Rowntree Continental Europe, which handled concern duties outside the UK in Europe. However, this did non profit Kit Kat, which was launched in Europe by Rowntree Continental Europe as a multi-local trade name.
The Nestle trade name itself had played a cardinal function in the company ‘s globalisation attempts. In 1996, approximately 40 % of the entire grosss were generated from merchandises covered by the Nestle corporate trade name. Nestle ‘s logo was an of import portion of the company ‘s corporate individuality. The ‘nest ‘ was a in writing interlingual rendition of Henri Nestle ‘s name, which meant “ small nest ” .