Globalization Of The Roman Empire And The British Empire

1085 Words 4 Pages
One may argue that the Roman Empire or the British Empire and many other empires of the past represent globalization of businesses that were managed by a small group of people located in a single country, to promote and protect their own interest1. The military might be considered as a form of transaction, at times utilized for acquisition and procurement. The success of such empires did not only depend on revenues they provided to their owners but also on how well their outposts were managed. The management was centralized in that all important decisions were made by the headquarters but local managers had to ensure local books were balanced, workers were satisfied and were delivering efficient work. At times the central management would pressure …show more content…
Kings and emperors are now replaced by shareholders and instead of a national flag it is the brand that must be upheld. This means they must maintain the same look and feel across all the nations they are present to leverage their brand, regardless of differences in languages, customs and peoples. The interests of the shareholders of the parent company have to be protected and their presence outside their own borders has to bring benefits to the parent company. These are the two greatest challenges a multinational company must …show more content…
Fair trade is an issue that is causing headache to some of the fashion and sporting goods manufacturers2, 3. The standards of fair trade is based on values of industrialized nations, to grant the less privileged the same rights and conditions to protect them. Sweat shops are obviously illegal in the United States, but it may be a normal way of life in some of the third world countries. The headquarters of these companies need to make a decision on whether to uphold the ethics that are valid at home and to the markets they are selling their products and services to or consider the source separate from the headquarters or customer market and cut costs because they can. If they were really true to their brand and the ethics it is supposed to represent, they should not succumb to the lure of cheap labor. If they get that far in thinking about ethics, they then have another issue to deal with, which is why would they go to a cheaper labor market in the first place if they could not take advantage of the local

Related Documents