Many global retailers are targeting China, India, and other emerging marketing. what would be the most likely entry strategies for these countries and why? Provide evidence and relevant examples supporting your argument.

Thoroughly explain the various types of pricing strategies and objectives available to global marketers with examples.

Company A is selling packing material to the consumer products company B. Company B needs 1.021 km of a certain carton per year. The costs structure is as follows.

Orders below 10,000 m are not allowed.

The company uses a holding cost rate of 30% per year. An economist has determined the fixed ordering costs at company B and he has arrived at a value of 8 euro per order. Assuming the lowest price (222,4 euro / 1000 m), calculate the optimal order quantity using the EOQ model. Is the assumed price valid under this quantity? Next, determine the optimal order quantity while taking the discount price structure into account.

7.Regarding the Theories of Public Policy, which one do you think best describes policy making in today's political environment? Explain your answer.

Give an example of a public policy issue that you have been involved with, whether at the federal, state or local area. How did you participate from agenda setting onto policy implementation?

Choose three (3) external environments from the PESTEL analysis and identify, assess and provide a solution to one risk per environment that is affecting to Thai lingerie company.

Book: Conscious Capitalism, With a New Preface by the Authors: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business John Mackey and Raj Sisodia Harvard Business Review Press ISBN: 9781625271754

Question:

Write a clear and brief assessment/critique of the book Conscious Capitalism. Make sure that the majority of your writing focuses on what you particularly learned from the book and the pros and cons of conscious capitalism.

Exercise 12.1: Empowerment Profile

Step 1

Complete the following questionnaire. For each of the following items, select the alternative with which you feel more comfortable. While for some items you may feel that both (a) and (b) describe you or neither is ever applicable, you should select the alternative that better describes you most of the time.

When I have to give a talk or write a paper, I . . .

________

Base the content of my talk or paper on my own ideas.

________

Do a lot of research, and present the findings of others in my paper or talk.

When I read something I disagree with, I . . .

________

Assume my position is correct.

________

Assume what’s presented in the written word is correct.

When someone makes me extremely angry, I . . .

________

Ask the other person to stop the behavior that is offensive to me.

________

Say little, not quite knowing how to state my position.

When I do a good job, it is important to me that . . .

________

The job represents the best I can do.

________

Others take notice of the job I’ve done.

When I buy new clothes, I . . .

________

Buy what looks best on me.

________

Try to dress in accordance with the latest fashion.

When something goes wrong, I . . .

________

Try to solve the problem.

________

Try to find out who’s at fault.

As I anticipate my future, I . . .

________

Am confident I will be able to lead the kind of life I want to lead.

________

Worry about being able to live up to my obligations.

When examining my own resources and capacities, I . . .

________

Like what I find.

________

Find all kinds of things I wish were different.

When someone treats me unfairly, I . . .

________

Put my energies into getting what I want.

________

Tell others about the injustice.

When someone criticizes my efforts, I . . .

________

Ask questions to under-stand the basis for the criticism.

________

Defend my actions or decisions, trying to make my critic understand why I did what I did.

When I engage in an activity, it is very important to me that . . .

________

I live up to my own expectations.

________

I live up to the expectations of others.

When I let someone else down or disappoint them, I . . .

________

Resolve to do things differently next time.

________

Feel guilty, and wish I had done things differently.

I try to surround myself with people . . .

________

Whom I respect.

________

Who respect me.

I try to develop friendships with people who . . .

________

Are challenging and exciting.

________

Can make me feel a little safer and a little more secure.

I make my best efforts when . . .

________

I do something I want to do when I want to do it.

________

Someone else gives me an assignment, a deadline, and a reward for performing.

When I love a person, I . . .

________

Encourage him or her to be free and choose for himself or herself.

________

Encourage him or her to do the same thing I do and to make choices similar to mine.

When I play a competitive game, it is important to me that I . . .

________

Do the best I can.

________

Win.

I really like being around people who . . .

________

Can broaden my horizons and teach me something.

________

Can and want to learn from me.

My best days are those that . . .

________

Present unexpected opportunities.

________

Go according to plan.

When I get behind in my work, I . . .

________

Do the best I can and don’t worry.

________

Worry or push myself harder than I should.

Step 2

Score your responses as follows:

Total your (a) responses: ___________

Total your (b) responses: ___________

Reflect on the overall pattern of your a) and b) responses.

Case Study: Engineering Ethics in a Technology Startup

Introduction

A business’s reputation and brand name depend upon the behavior and values of that
business. Businesses should be socially responsive, fair and just, with a positive
reputation for business conduct. Engineering entrepreneurs must confront ethical
challenges such as engineering design reliability and salespeople’s ethical standards.
Ethical decisions in sales include: intentionally misrepresenting a faulty product,
economic tradeoffs, short-term v. long-term gain. In general, a company’s beliefs and
values matter, along with business conduct and the representation of facts to customers
and investors.
This case study attempts to identify the specific ethical issues and obligations of an
entrepreneur and his employees in making decisions for his startup company.
The Case
Tina is a new hire at a startup company that produces very expensive security cameras
primarily for large organizations. Tina is hired to engineer and troubleshoot
malfunctioning cameras.
One day, one of its Fortune 500 customers reported to Tina that a number of the cameras
out of its last big shipment were not functioning properly. The customer also informed
Tina that the serial and revision numbers on these units were different from the rest of the
units.
Tina’s technicians inspected the cameras. Based on the results of their inspection, Tina
realized that her company sold units that were from a bad batch. Tina wanted to tell the
customer why the units failed but recognized that if she disclosed this information, the
customer would be eligible to receive replacement units at no additional cost. On the
other hand, if she blamed the failing units on something else, such as improper care, her
company would be able to charge the customer for replacement units.

As a recent hire, Tina decided to discuss the case with David, the owner of the startup.
David told her that she should minimize his company’s losses. Tina is concerned with her
job security. But she also wanted to be honest with this major customer.

Questions:
1. What are the ethical issues in this case?
2. Who are the actors and what is their obligation in this case?
3. Would the issue in the case have occurred if the actors followed the IEEE code of
ethics (https://www.ieee.org/about/corporate/governance/p7-8.html)?
4. What sections of the IEEE code of ethics would have been relevant in this case?
5. Should Tina’s personal beliefs play a role in this case? What about the personal beliefs
of David?
6. What should Tina do? Does she have a moral obligation to obey or disobey the owner?
Why?

Describe team building and the activities that surround it. What are the intended purposes, and how are those accomplished?

1. How has the Great Recession directly affected the magnitude of stress that people experience?
2. How have the responses of businesses to the Great Recession affected employees' stress levels?
3. How can the Yerkes-Dobson law help in understanding the impact of the Great Recession on people's stress levels?
4. Drawing on your answer to the preceding question, explain what individuals could do to deal effectively with their stress levels.
5. Drawing on your answer to the third question, explain what employers could do to help employees deal effectively with their stress levels.

(make something up question) Give a comparison between theory (things you would learn in the classroom) and practice (things you would do at a branding and marketing company)

why do we often overlook the role of the board of directors in ethical scandals or conversely in ethical organizational successes?

can you think of other factors that might encourage boards to act irresponsibly?

which of the reforms is most important to board performance? why?

Designing a global organization structure to operate effi ciently across many countries is a critical issue for multinational companies, as Ford has discovered over time. Ford realized early in its history that a major opportunity to increase its profi tability was to take its American car-manufacturing skills and apply them in countries abroad. Over time, it established car-manufacturing divisions in different countries in Europe, Asia, and Australia. Ford decentralized decision-making authority to each global division, which controlled its own activities and developed cars suited to the local market. The result was that each division came to operate independently from its United States parent company. Ford of Europe, for example, became the largest and most profi table carmaker in Europe. Ford remained a highly profi table company until Japanese carmakers began to fl ood the world with their small, reliable, low-priced cars in the 1980s. As car buyers began to buy the Japanese imports in large numbers, Ford tried to draw on the skills of its European unit to help build smaller, more fueleffi cient cars for the United States market. But it had never before tried to get its United States and European design and manufacturing units to cooperate; this proved diffi cult to achieve because its decentralized global organizational structure did not encourage them to cooperate. In the 1990s, Ford embarked on a massive project to create a new global-matrix structure that would solve the decentralized task and authority problems that were preventing it from utilizing its resources effectively. In the 2000 plan, Ford laid out a timetable of how all its global carmaking units would learn to cooperate using one set of global support functions, such as design, purchasing, and so on. Country managers continued to resist the changes, however, to preserve their country empires and forced Ford to redesign its proposed global structure again and again. By the mid-2000s, Ford’s United States, European, and Asia/Pacifi c divisions were still operating as a collection of different autonomous “empires.” Ford had failed to lower its cost structure or design and make a profi table “world car” that could be sold to customers around the globe.

Once again, Ford decided to restructure itself. It moved to a “world structure,” in which one set of managers was given authority over the whole of a specifi c global operation such as manufacturing or car design. Then Ford began to design cars for the global market. Its new structure never worked to speed car design and production, even as it constantly changed global lines of authority and the locations in which it operated to increase profi tability. Ford went through multiple reorganizations to try to meet the Japanese challenge, but nothing worked. Losing billions of dollars, Ford announced in 2006 a revamped “Way Forward” plan to turn around its United States and global operations, a plan that called for cutting 44,000 jobs; closing 16 plants; and freshening 70% of the company’s Ford, Mercury, and Lincoln car lineup. In October 2006, Ford also appointed a new president and CEO, Alan Mulally, an expert in organizational design, to help turn around its operations. Mulally, a former Boeing executive, had led that company’s global reorganization effort. He began to work out how to change Ford’s global structure to reduce costs and speed product development. In the structure Mulally inherited, Ford’s American unit reported to the CEO, but its other global and functional operations reported to the next two most senior executives, Mark Fields, president of Ford’s Americas operation, and Mark Schulz, president of international operations. Mulally decided that Ford’s downsizing should be accompanied by a major reorganization of its hierarchy, and he decided to fl atten Ford’s structure and recentralize control. At the same time, however, he put the focus on teamwork and adopted a cross-functional approach to handling the enormous value chain challenges that still confronted the organization. The position of president of international operations was eliminated, and Mark Fields continues to report to Mulally but so also do the heads of the other two world regions: Lewis Booth, head of Ford of Europe, and John Parker, head of Ford of Asia Pacifi c and Africa and Mazda. Two levels in the hierarchy are gone, and Mulally’s new organizational design clearly defi nes each global executive’s role

in the company’s hierarchy. Ford can begin acting like one company instead of separate global units, each with their own interests.33 In addition, the heads of its global value chain functions also now report directly to Mulally, not to Fields. These heads include Tony Brown, global head of purchasing; Nick Smither, head of IT; Richard Parry-Jones, chief technical offi cer; and Bennie Fowler, head of quality and advanced manufacturing engineering. Mulally’s goal is to provide a centralized focus on using the company’s global functional assets to better support its carmaking business units. At the same time, Mulally also took a major restructuring step, announcing the creation of a new position, global product development chief, who is responsible for overseeing the development of Ford’s entire global lines of vehicles. He appointed Derrick Kuzak, head of product development in the
Americas, to head Ford’s new global engineering design effort, and he also reports directly to Mulally. Kuzak oversees efforts to streamline product development and engineering systems around the world. As Mulally commented, “An integrated, global product development team supporting our automotive business units will enable us to make the best use of our global assets and capabilities and accelerate development of the new vehicles our customers prefer, and do so more effi ciently.”34 Mulally’s goal was to force a cross-functional app roach on all his top managers—one that he will

personally oversee—to standardize its global carmaking and allow functional units to continuously improve quality, productivity, and the speed at which new products can be introduced. But beyond streamlining and standardizing its approach, its new- product development group must also ensure that its new vehicles are customized to better meet the needs of regional customers. All Ford’s executives now understand the company’s very survival was at stake; they had to work together to accelerate efforts to reduce costs and catch up to more effi cient competitors such as Toyota. Despite the fact that in 2009 Ford was still losing billions of dollars as the 2008 recession continued, its new global organizational structure did seem to be working. Ford was in the best competitive position of any United States carmaker, and it had not needed to borrow billions of dollars from the United States government so that it could continue to operate. Only time will tell, but Mulally remains confi dent.35

1. What kind of global strategy did Ford pursue at the beginning? What kind of global strategy does it pursue now?

2. In what main ways has Ford changed its global structure to allow it to coordinate the production and sale of its products more effectively around the world? In particular, what different forms of organizational structure has it adopted?

David is the CEO of FactsNow, Inc. (not a real company), a consumer research and crisis management organization located in Greenville, SC. FactsNow has contracts with several Fortune 500 organizations and has a reputation for uncovering future trends and handling any number of major crises with great success. Recently, David was approached by his friend Jason, who is the vice president of manufacturing for child clothing manufacturer Baby Gaits (also not a real company). Jason told David he needed to speak to him immediately regarding a matter of a "serious nature," and the two agreed to meet for dinner the following evening. Knowing that Jason had recently received a huge bonus and stock options for meeting production cost ceilings, David felt sure that Jason was going to finally give in and buy that lake house that he had always wanted.

During their dinner, Jason revealed that the FDA is about to release a report revealing that Baby Gaits knowingly participates in the practice of manufacturing clothes with legal products that contain levels of cancer causing agents described as "toxic and extremely dangerous." The FDA report is expected to confirm that the practice is not illegal, but that it results in a product that could be extremely dangerous to children. Jason wants to hire FactsNow to assess what steps should be taken to reduce the impact this will have on Baby Gaits' stock price and market share. David needs more information and asks Jason when he first became aware the products used in manufacturing are dangerous. When Jason says he's known for more than three years, David explodes and asks why Jason didn't immediately discontinue the use of these products. Jason explained that he was directed to continue using the products by Baby Gaits' chief operations officer, Linda Watts, even after he had recommended using alternative solutions. Further, Jason stated that he was told by Linda to, "keep this information to himself." David warned Jason that the report will bring with it severe fallout for Baby Gaits stock as well as all of its senior management personnel, and told him he would begin drafting a proposed public relations response. Out of curiosity, David asked Jason if he still continued to allow his children to wear Baby Gaits products, to which Jason replied incredulously, "What do you think?"

David went home and discussed this shocking information with his wife, Annabelle. David told Annabelle he was heading back to his office to begin developing a crisis management approach when Annabelle reminded him that a significant portion of their personal investment portfolio was invested in Baby Gaits' stock. David cringed when reminded, called his broker immediately and ordered him to dump the stock first thing in the morning. David felt bad about this decision since he owned more than 15 percent of Baby Gaits' stock, but knew he had to put his family first.

Three days later, the FDA released the report, which did contain the information Jason and David expected it to contain. Chaos ensued at Baby Gaits and FactsNow as both companies worked to deal with the fallout. During this time, David was pleased with his decision to sell his Baby Gaits holdings as the stock price plummeted to one-tenth of its previous value. Within one week of the FDA's report, lawsuits began trickling in and the Securities and Exchange Commission called and wanted to speak to David about a "serious matter." David cringed thinking back to the last time he had heard that term and wondered what could be next as he picked up the phone to call you, his lawyer.

A. The SEC speaks with you and indicates they believe David may have conducted a transaction in violation of applicable insider trading regulations. Describe insider trading and make a determination as to whether or not David's actions constituted insider trading.

B. David was recently told by Jason that shareholders are suing Linda for violating the actual authority rule. Jason comes to you and asks you what this is. Based on the information provided, did Linda violate this rule? Why or why not?

C. Angry that the SEC is now banging down his door, David is beginning to resent Jason for failing to honor his responsibility to ensure manufacturing is done properly. David comes to you and asks if he can sue Jason for violating the business judgment rule. What is this rule? Did Jason violate this rule? Why or why not?