International Marketing

With dramatic growth of once domestic companies into the global market, comes an increasingly higher amount of disputes between countries concerning matters of trade. To solve these matters, agreeing countries have turned to the process of International Dispute Resolution (Chapter 5, Slide 9). A prime example of this would be the current conflict between Japan and China. The dispute comes after a long standing argument over who has sovereignty of the Senkaku islands, also known as the Diaoyu islands, which are located in the East China Sea. Japan’s recent purchase of three of the islands has outraged the population of China and caused protest across the country.

The first step of international dispute resolution, informal resolution, cannot be completed due to the magnitude of the dispute and attitudes of both countries. With no informal resolution, both countries may now enter into an agreement through either mediation (a 3^rd-party led, nonbinding agreement between both countries to resolve the dispute), or arbitration (a decision rendered by a 3^rd-party in which both countries must agree to). As the dispute continues on with no informal agreement in sight, Japan and China seem to be facing arbitration in the International Court of Justice.

Kevin Clements and Ria Shibata, (2012, October).” Finding a solution to conflict over islands”.Deccan Herald. Accessed: October 8, 2012. http://www.deccanherald.com/ content/ 283970/ finding- solution-conflict-over-islands.html

Ethics and Global Marketing

Ethics

Ethics are a set of self-rules that help you to do what is right. Ethics are the moral codes that your conscience chooses to either follow or stray away from. Ethics can be difficult to follow; however, if you do make the choice to follow your ethics and make positive decisions then you tend to steer clear of scandals and ethical dilemmas. 

 Making ethical choices may not positively benefit the business in anyway seen by the naked eye, however, being an ethical business does come with major benefits. Of course making the ethical decision might not always be the easiest and might seem to make the company lose money, nevertheless, in the long run it is much more beneficial. Not only do customers notice and appreciate an ethical business, but it also keeps the business in a positive light in the eye of the press, government, and society.

In today’s society, ethics are very uncommon in business. However, they are slowly starting to make a comeback. This is because more and more employees are standing up for what is right and making others realize that ethics are something that should be involved with everyday life, including large business firms. Companies are even starting to include ethics into their training, because they are realizing that customers need and appreciate ethics.

http://www.business-marketing.com/article-businessethics.php

1. Some companies are incorporating ethics into their training? Yes!
2. Above all, a high level of ethics in your business should not be in place at least for the customers? No!

Global Marketing 

Global Marketing has many challenges. Of course, the obvious challenges of different languages, different cultures, different incomes, and so much more, have always been issues for global marketers. The article I choose is called “Five Challenges for Tomorrow’s Global Marketing Leaders: Study.” This article discusses the challenges that new global businesses must face in terms of marketing.

First, the article states disruptive technologies. This is a challenge for global marketers because they must make themselves knowledgeable in all of the new technologies in order to know how to market on them. This is a problem because according to my article, “just 20% consider themselves very knowledgeable about technology, yet by 2017 these CMOS will purchase more technology than their CIO’s.” The next problem my article talks about is globally connected customers. 

This is a problem because the article illustrates how interconnected customers have broken the wall between global and local marketing. Problem three is localization revisited. This is a problem because every culture is diverse and many also consist of strong regional subcultures. Problem four is multi-channel misses, which means that marketing activities are not fully integrated across channels. Problem five is organizational structures, meaning that there is a problem with the structures of the business not being on the same page.

1.  CMOs are struggling to adapt to a world that has fundamentally changed over the course of their careers.
2. A new class of consumers, adept with and empowered by affordable ubiquitous technology, has changed the marketing rules.

Business Articles on Market Forces

'When Public Health Meets Market Forces'

 and 

'John Rapanos and the Kitchen Sink'

The main goals of the articles “When Public Health Meets Market Forces “and “John Rapanos and the Kitchen Sink” are both simply to enforce what is right. However, the idea of what is considered right and wrong have two major components in which these two articles focus on. The legal justification of right is the main focus of the Public Health article while the ethical justification of right is strongly voiced in the Kitchen Sink article.

The fundamental idea reflected by the Public Health article is to stress the importance of the fundamental commerce clause’s ability to protect “all interstate and intrastate waters and bodies of land.” If this case is lost, the foundation of laws such as the Clean Water Act will began to weaken—thus, the security of public welfare may become unstable. The voice of this article seems to imply that if this single instant of weakness is shown in regards to the commerce clause will definitely reverse the progress made towards the stability of the environment.

In respect to the Tragedy of the Commons, the argument of the Public Health article is best described by the Pollution section. According to this section, society is “locked into a system of fouling our own nest”. This view reflect the actions that caused such laws to be established—if left to only the population’s control, eventually our environment would be primarily composed of filth. However, this article does seem to shy away from the “How to Legislate Temperance” section of the Tragedy of Commons—its focus is solely directed to the benefit of the environment, regardless of any ethical side effects of the population.

The fundamental idea reflected by the Kitchen Sink article is the extent of the commerce clause seems to exceed ethical values. Therefore, the authority of the commerce clause is unconstitutional. The article exposes the power of the commerce clause by describing it as “a limitless authority to regulate virtually anything anywhere at any time: everything up to and including, literally, the kitchen sink.” At first, this accusation seems farfetched but within the commerce clause, federal bureaucrats extend authority by “writing laws in the vaguest terms, and interpreting them as broadly as possible”.

In respect to the Tragedy of the Commons, the argument of the Kitchen Sink article is captured by the “How to Legislate Temperance” section. The location of his accused pollution to the environment is approximately 20mi from navigable waters and therefore “does not harm the general public under frontier conditions, because there is no public”. However, this article seems to ignore the invisible hand concept under the Tragedy of the Commons—if this case were to be in favor of Rapanos, it is highly probable that others would begin to use this method to supply their own personal gains.

Personally, I side with the simple property rights interpretation of legal wetlands regulation for two reasons. First, the article does not include vague details or overly complex themes that deviate from the central topic of the article. Secondly, I believe that the power of the commerce clause in this situation has too much authority. I say this because the definition of the law is far too broad; however, I confess that the commerce law is indeed needed, but there is a vast amount of room for improvement.

In regards to acceptable legal scope of the regulation of water bodies/wetlands, Justice Kennedy sits as the mediator. In an attempt to help alleviate the situation, “Justice Kennedy was willing to give the agency a chance to show the importance of its intervention”. Therefore, it was the responsibility of the agency to prove if the environmental impact caused by John Rapanos was indeed detrimental to the stability of the environment. In regards to the Tragedy of the Commons, Justice Kennedy serves as a prime example of “[w]ho shall watch the watchers themselves”—his actions “nonetheless places a high burden of proof on the regulators”.