We are delighted to present to you six excellent research articles in this Special Issue, “Globalization of Markets and Work force.”
The article by Ford and Whaley addresses two important elements in work force, particularly in private sector and academe: collegiality and perception of justice. The analyses and recommendations are based on data from US. However, there is an evident level of generalizabiliy. Complementing this work, Srivastava examines specific challenges of job-related anxiety and stress among professionals in Mumbai. While the work by Ford and Whaley is broader about the global work force, the work by Srivastava is very focused and specific. The findings reported in both the articles are applicable and appropriate.
The articles by Paul and Pellissery, and by Bamber, Phadke and Jyothishi nicely juxtapose two interesting and fundamental markets in Indian economy. Paul and Pellisary present theory and data on network effect on very small businesses, namely, street vendors who constitute a significant component of the rural and urban society not only in terms of economic metrics but also social identity. Bamber et. al. ask a fundamental question: how does the country of origin (in this instance, India) affect consumer perceptions and purchase intentions. Of course, this study is more relevant to branded and middle- and upper-scale Indian markets and export markets.
The articles by Ghosh, Arize and Ghosh and Patel are respectively technical and empirical analyses of trade and financial markets. The data employed by Ghosh et. al. is from United States, but it is focused on the export markets and trade. Patel’s empirical analysis on Indian equity market offers a different perspective.
So, in this issue we present six important research articles that address various challenges related to global markets and work force. These issues assume special importance and interest as we face a global economy that is fragile and uncertain.
The European and Japanese economies are very weak. In light of the recent challenges in banks and currencies, the robust recovery in Europe will be long and arduous – at least four to five years in the making if decision makers make the right policy decisions and lady luck is kind. Apart from the monumental crisis in Greece (Ireland and Portugal), the situation, though less severe, is nevertheless very difficult in Spain, Italy and several other countries. Only Germany has shown some resilience, and UK has managed to survive. Japan continues to be weak in stimulating demand and growth – this has been the pattern for the last 15 years and there is little to inspire that this will change. Japan has never quite cleared the economy of toxic assets and debt from the days of its real-estate and housing collapse in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
The US economy is tepid, and the performance is lackluster. The economy has been growing in the range of 1 to 2 percent in the last couple of years. But this growth is too limited to create jobs, and that’s why the US unemployment rate has been stubborn over 8 percent.
Unfortunately, the economies of China and India are also sluggish. India’s growth (about 6 percent) is being eroded by high inflation rate (8 percent plus), so the substantial growth is small. China has slowed down too. However, for the simple reason that forty percent of China’s growth comes from exports China is more dependent on the global economy than being able to lead the global economic growth. Accordingly, India is more likely than China to be an engine for global growth, though United States will be the global economic leader for the next decade.
Apart from the uncertain economic situation, there are important fundamental questions about the concept and definition of globalization. Are we more globalized today or less? In some metrics, we are certainly more globalized. We are more globalized in terms of exchange and flow of currency, data and information, and goods and services, all of which are more instantaneous, complete and transparent – thanks to technology. But we are also more fragmented today because there are currently193 member countries in United Nations. Each country, sovereign as it is, formulates its own rules, regulations and statutes, and this creates greater friction in movement of goods and services and skilled labor. Compare this with 1900 when the rules were set by a relatively few players and the borders were fewer. The British, Dutch and French Empires governed most of Asia, Middle-East and Africa, and they were the major players in Europe. The United States through Monroe Doctrine had substantially influence on Latin American countries.
Over time, consumer preferences have also become at once homogeneous and more heterogeneous. For example, the consumer preference for a Nike shoe or MTV programming is reasonably homogenous, but the preference for a Nestle chocolate is very heterogeneous (for example, the European chocolate brand is more bitter than the US chocolate brand.)
So, what can be said with certainty is that the global markets and work force are dynamic and evolving, and the preferences can be sometimes homogeneous and at other times very heterogeneous.
Accordingly, the challenges are many, and this issue of the Journal begins conversation on this central dimension of globalization.
The article by Ford and Whaley addresses two important elements in work force, particularly in private sector and academe: collegiality and perception of justice. The analyses and recommendations are based on data from US. However, there is an evident level of generalizabiliy. Complementing this work, Srivastava examines specific challenges of job-related anxiety and stress among professionals in Mumbai. While the work by Ford and Whaley is broader about the global work force, the work by Srivastava is very focused and specific. The findings reported in both the articles are applicable and appropriate.
The articles by Paul and Pellissery, and by Bamber, Phadke and Jyothishi nicely juxtapose two interesting and fundamental markets in Indian economy. Paul and Pellisary present theory and data on network effect on very small businesses, namely, street vendors who constitute a significant component of the rural and urban society not only in terms of economic metrics but also social identity. Bamber et. al. ask a fundamental question: how does the country of origin (in this instance, India) affect consumer perceptions and purchase intentions. Of course, this study is more relevant to branded and middle- and upper-scale Indian markets and export markets.
The articles by Ghosh, Arize and Ghosh and Patel are respectively technical and empirical analyses of trade and financial markets. The data employed by Ghosh et. al. is from United States, but it is focused on the export markets and trade. Patel’s empirical analysis on Indian equity market offers a different perspective.
So, in this issue we present six important research articles that address various challenges related to global markets and work force. These issues assume special importance and interest as we face a global economy that is fragile and uncertain.
The European and Japanese economies are very weak. In light of the recent challenges in banks and currencies, the robust recovery in Europe will be long and arduous – at least four to five years in the making if decision makers make the right policy decisions and lady luck is kind. Apart from the monumental crisis in Greece (Ireland and Portugal), the situation, though less severe, is nevertheless very difficult in Spain, Italy and several other countries. Only Germany has shown some resilience, and UK has managed to survive. Japan continues to be weak in stimulating demand and growth – this has been the pattern for the last 15 years and there is little to inspire that this will change. Japan has never quite cleared the economy of toxic assets and debt from the days of its real-estate and housing collapse in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
The US economy is tepid, and the performance is lackluster. The economy has been growing in the range of 1 to 2 percent in the last couple of years. But this growth is too limited to create jobs, and that’s why the US unemployment rate has been stubborn over 8 percent.
Unfortunately, the economies of China and India are also sluggish. India’s growth (about 6 percent) is being eroded by high inflation rate (8 percent plus), so the substantial growth is small. China has slowed down too. However, for the simple reason that forty percent of China’s growth comes from exports China is more dependent on the global economy than being able to lead the global economic growth. Accordingly, India is more likely than China to be an engine for global growth, though United States will be the global economic leader for the next decade.
Apart from the uncertain economic situation, there are important fundamental questions about the concept and definition of globalization. Are we more globalized today or less? In some metrics, we are certainly more globalized. We are more globalized in terms of exchange and flow of currency, data and information, and goods and services, all of which are more instantaneous, complete and transparent – thanks to technology. But we are also more fragmented today because there are currently193 member countries in United Nations. Each country, sovereign as it is, formulates its own rules, regulations and statutes, and this creates greater friction in movement of goods and services and skilled labor. Compare this with 1900 when the rules were set by a relatively few players and the borders were fewer. The British, Dutch and French Empires governed most of Asia, Middle-East and Africa, and they were the major players in Europe. The United States through Monroe Doctrine had substantially influence on Latin American countries.
Over time, consumer preferences have also become at once homogeneous and more heterogeneous. For example, the consumer preference for a Nike shoe or MTV programming is reasonably homogenous, but the preference for a Nestle chocolate is very heterogeneous (for example, the European chocolate brand is more bitter than the US chocolate brand.)
So, what can be said with certainty is that the global markets and work force are dynamic and evolving, and the preferences can be sometimes homogeneous and at other times very heterogeneous.
Accordingly, the challenges are many, and this issue of the Journal begins conversation on this central dimension of globalization.
No comments:
Post a Comment