“The Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention argues that no two countries that are both part of the same global supply chain will ever fight a war as long as they are each part of that supply chain.” (Friedman 170) The supply chain, being the complex system in which we transfer parts and other things throughout the world in order to build a finished product. Thomas Friedman gives an example of the supply chain with his experience of getting a computer built by Dell in Emerging: Contemporary Reading for Writers. This sets the groundwork for Friedman’s theory and also the McDonald’s Theory of Conflict Prevention. The McDonald’s Theory and the Dell Theory are of the same skeleton, both have the same premise and try to both play on your emotions. The …show more content…
Another thing that is stated in the book is, “For a country with no natural resources, being a part of a global supply chain is like striking oil—oil that never runs out. And therefore, getting dropped from such a chain because you start a war is like having your oil wells go dry or having someone pour cement down them.” (Friedman 171) This quote really rings true despite the rest of the Dell Theory seeming to fall flat; a result of contradictions that are currently in existence. Going forth once a country is elevated in status, going backwards into a warlike state will only hinder said country, hence why the book said it is literally like pouring cement in your wells, it only ends with ruin. History repeats itself, so for example, World War II Nazi controlled Germany goes to war and ends with a destroyed economy, war torn countries generally do not come out with good standings, this has been proven to be true, time and time again, looking toward the Middle East, the area is not a part of the global supply chain henceforth it allows war to run rampant because a man with nothing …show more content…
I had a CIO from one of our big American clients send me an e-mail saying, I am now spending a lot of time looking for alternative sources to India. I don 't think you want me doing that, and I don 't want to be doing it. I immediately forwarded his message to the Indian ambassador in Washington and told him to get it to the right person.” (Friedman 174) United Technologies was the company that basically called out an entire country to cease and desist their near-nuclear warlike state otherwise they would take their business elsewhere. This concept of big business controlling affairs like that on a grand scale seems almost unreal but in reality it is a big portion of politics these days where companies and rich people fund politician 's campaigns in order to push their agenda out into the public. It seems like an underlying theme throughout the analysis of the theories and their effects on the world basically all lead back to some form of controlling someone or something, whether it be controlling the customer to believe what they are buying is a deal or controlling a nation to avoid going to war to keep the income going into their pocket or to avoid instability in a region which is always bad for business. Overall war is a rather crushing defeat in the business world, if countries go to war rather than improving their status and gaining premiums and having market expansion to war
Some americans say that nations hinge on each other, while others say they also compete with one another. This gives rise to rivalry, which sometimes leads to war. Some wars emerge from differentiation in race, religion and culture. Due to the evolution of technology in an accelerated pace, highly sophisticated weapons are now available for use in wars. Wars also bring about widespread destruction, disrupt communication and hamper commerce. Thus, they cause heavy financial loss and great suffering to people. The effects of wars often affect countries that are not involved in the conflict. The threat of war can pressure a nation to waste immense amounts of money on defense instead of spending on developmental works like creating roads, hospitals, schools, and much more. War can halt a countries development. Some countries try to achieve political desires by using terrorism as a weapon against other countries. Terrorism spreads fear in civilians through acts of violence like killings and hostages. This intimidation has transformed into worldwide threat.
The society in 1984 revolves around 3 'superstates' which are Eurasia, Eastasia, and Oceania. All of these states are in a constant state of war with one another, yet all are self contained, and require no trade with one another, and therefor do not require war as a means of economical necessity. However, it is their feeling that as long as a constant state of war is prevailing, the people will be too preoccupied with the war effort to worry about whether or not the present political system is working. The government constantly reminds the people that when they win the war, Oceania will rule the world, and life will be better.
Pilisuk, Marc. “[CN]Chapter 5: [CN] Networks of Power.” Who Benefits from Global Violence and War: Uncovering a Destructive System. With Jennifer Achord Rountree. Westport: Praeger Security International, an imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc., 2008. Print.
How and why did the personal computer industry come to have such a low profitability?
With the shock of two destructive world wars and then the creation of the United Nations, whose aim is to preserve peace, it is unconceivable for these two nations to fight directly in order to promote their own ideology. But the US and the USSR end up to be in competition in numerous ways, particularly in technological and industrial fields. In the same time they start to spread their influence over their former allies. This phenomenon have led to the creation of a bipolar world, divided in two powerful blocs surrounded by buffer zones, and to the beginning of what we call the Cold War because of the absence of direct conflicts between the two nations.
The “shifting landscape” that Welch speaks of refers to a global political shift where power has moved from the central institutions to smaller, intrastate actors. Interstate wars have declined sharply in number since the end of World War II. The rise of nongovernmental and international organizations, the establishment of cooperation agreements and confidence-building measures, and the increasing presence of the news media, are all elements that have relegated traditional wars to a thing of the past.
In 1984, Michael Dell invested $1,000 in start-up capital to register his business as Dell Computer Corporation, which was known as PC's Limited. The company becomes the first in the industry to sell directly to end-users by passing the dominant system of using computers resellers to sell mass-produced computers. Dell Computer also pioneers the industry first thirty-day money back guarantee. It became the cornerstone of Dell's commitment to expand its service offerings, superior customer satisfaction, and the industries first on site service program. It also established its first international subsidiary in the United Kingdom, and raised $30 million in its initial public offering.
Speaking about the business model of Dell, it has ability to remain on the higher end of the scale for a particular time period. Dell has business model, which primarily focuses on direct selling line of attack. It in a straight line supplies the PCs to the regulars. It does not believe in intermediary, retailers for the business practices. Undeniably, this gives them an edge to serve customer well. Nevertheless, it understood the importance of retailers and start offering products on the premises of retailers, such as Wal-Mart, Sam’s Club and so on. Next, Dell administration is certain of the exclusive business of PCs. As time goes on, however, observing the
Dell Computers Strategy Global companies play an important role in the business environment, because they connect their businesses together around the world. A good example of a global company is Dell Inc., an American computer-hardware company, headquartered in Austin Texas, which develops, manufactures, sells and supports a wide range of personal computers, servers, data storage devices, network switches, personal digital assistants (PDAs), software, computer peripherals, and more. They design, build and customize products and services to satisfy a range of customer requirements: from the server, storage and Premier Services needs of the largest global corporations, to those of consumers at home. According to the Fortune 500 2006 list, Dell ranks as the 25th-largest company in the United States by revenue.
Dell Computer have recently announced changes to their business strategy and supporting supply chain. They will no longer focus on a made to order direct sales model for their personal computers. Nor will they continue to refine their renowned supply chain model that supported their sales model. Instead, they will be looking to produce personal computers with fixed configurations at lower prices. This essay looks at why Dell have changed their strategy, and then considers the customer value proposition of the new strategy, as well as lessons that other organisations can learn from the Dell experience.
Pillars of Peace, an annual report published by the Institute for Economics and Peace, consistently indicates that nations with high levels of development, democracy and economic prosperity are unlikely to engage in interstate conflicts. This provides the framework for yet another crucial argument in favor of free trade and globalization. In his article, The Capitalist Peace, Eric Gartzke (2007) does a rigorous statistical analysis into how free trade effects a variety of sociological metrics such as development, democracy, prosperity and peace. Gartzke found a high correlation between each of these factors. Most notably, he found a mutually causal relationship between free trade and each sociological metric. That is, free trade causes development, democracy and peace and vice versa. Acemoğlu and Robinson (2011) give insight into the mechanisms of this mutually causal relationship. They claim that elements of the global economy and by extension, affluence, will make their way into any country that recognizes property rights and has some form of democracy. Thus, one can say that the policy of governments have an effect on their likeliness to engage in international conflicts. This point is illustrated by Thomas Freedman(1999 ) who came up with the “Golden Arches Theory of Peace.” Freedman discovered that no two countries in which
Realist perspective explains globalization in terms of the relative distribution of power (Nau 2007, 278). In their opinion, trade and economic activities thrives “only under favorable security conditions,” and those conditions rely on the relative distribution of power (Nau 2007, 279). They believe that alliances and hegemony are the two most affirmative security conditions. “’Free trade is more likely within than across political-military alliances; and …alliances have had a much stronger effect on trade in a bipolar than in to a multipolar world.’” (Nau 2007, 279) In other words, the fewer dominating states with power there are in the system, the stronger is the alliance and its effect on trade. In a multipolar world, countries cannot trust each other in trade because alliances are rarely permanent and therefore, countries might use the gains from trade to increase its military power and threaten to cause damage to the other country. Thus, realists argue that,
Competitive strategy is the approach that an organisation takes in order to gain advantage over its competitors. According to Porter, there are two major sources of competitive advantages: costs and differentiation. Cost-based competitive advantage involves reducing production costs so that an organisation can earn higher profit margin or offer products at lower price compared to competitors. Differentiation-based competitive advantage involves offering unique properties that are not offered by competitors’ products. Differentiation allows an organisation to charge a premium for their products because they offer additional benefits to buyers.
Economic globalization raises debate about whether integration will reduce the probability of conflict and war. Globalization in this context refers to an international trading market, where state economies become dependent on global trade. States prosper by being economically advanced, promoting trade would increase state capital. For economic globalization to be successful in reducing conflict it would follow neoliberalism’s free hand of the market, limiting government’s role in trade. The economic liberalization of trade globalization can reduce resource wars and civil wars influenced by natural resources. Integration would generate state interdependence preventing the risk of conflict between trading states. Independent states in the past have shown to be unstable and have been the political and economic causes of war on a global scale. Economic globalization and economic integration produces a neoliberal market, interdependent states, and stable governments reducing the probability of conflict and war.
Dell has managed to become remarkably successful in a short span of time by following a direct "business to customer" model. By selling computers directly to customers, they have been able to best understand their needs and provide effective solutions to meet those needs. Dell built PCs to order, so customers received only what they wanted. Dell's just-in-time inventory system allowed them to order only parts that customers demanded, thus keeping the minimal inventories and enjoying the cost-reductions which in turn were passed to customers. Dell's extensive use of e-commerce contributed to further cost minimization, reduced the order and delivery time for customers, and customization. There are three golden rules at Dell: disdain inventory, always listen to the customer, and never sell indirectly.