『RC』Globalization 求确认

烫手小哈

全球化

文章思路：

人们对全球化通常有三个看法。但这往往是人们的误区。然后文章对这三个误区进行以一一的驳斥。比较清晰，呵呵

段落大意：

第一段： 对全球化的通常有三个看法，但这往往是人们的误区，文章就分别对着三种通常的看法进行一一的驳斥
第二段： 驳斥第一个误区：大公司表现好

误区：   通常人们认为globalization中大公司表现更好，更容易成功。 大公司比小公司更容易更适合在全球化环境中生存。

驳斥：    小公司更容易生存。小公司的固定成本低，并且他非常的灵活：有多些弹性改变调整运营并且小公司也不需要考虑过多其他的因素。

第三段：  驳斥第二个误区：商品标准化

误区：    商品标准化。

驳斥：    是在全球化环境中，商品标准化看似必须，其实并不适合。全球化不代表都要生产标准化的东西，统一这些生产准则。举例麦当劳的例子（说麦当劳注重各地方居民的饮食习惯，提供不同的特色品种，结果取得了很好的效果）

第四段：驳斥第三个误区：地域化的不重要性

误区：现在全球化的时代，地域geographic（就是厂子公司什么的建在什么地方）在globalization中已经显得不是那么重要了。

驳斥：在全球化的过程中，打算做全球生意的公司，建立跨国企业是必须的。然而国与国之间的运输成本大小会影响公司决策的，使其最后能不能走向全球化。

第五段： 作者发表观点：对第三段进行补充

地域化的例子是企业群，比如说硅谷，然后说了这种模式的优势。全球化其中一个趋势business cluster开始产生，文章说所谓的business cluster就是将所有的资源与技术集中在同一处，例如硅谷就拥有许多技术劳工跟资金资助，这使得硅谷在短时间内很难被取而代之。



细节

1）    小公司的固定成本比较低；调整运营也很方便

2）    麦当劳根据不同的地方弄出了不同的特色品种；打造了自己的品牌

3）    地域差异化的标准使得越来越多的公司更看重运输成本，通过此来决策。

4）    硅谷是地域化的代表：企业群；把资源和技术都集中在硅谷一处，让他无法替代



题目：

1.       中小企业的叙述能infer出什么来。

我选中小企业的变动成本比较大。有个选项说中小企业比大企业有较多flexibility，我犹豫了很久，后来觉得这应该是文中本来就有的信息，大概不能算infer吧，所以选了前头那个。大家参考就好)

2.       business cluster的相关叙述哪个是对的。

我选每一个business cluster都具有独一无二生产要素组合，此处有两个迷惑选项，一个说cluster的主要竞争优势就是容易取得优秀的劳工与大量资金，另一个是说cluster在未来会越来越赚钱



引申：

Business cluster的介绍：维基百科

This term business cluster, also known as an industry cluster, competitive cluster, or Porterian cluster, was introduced and popularized by Michael Porter in The Competitive Advantage of Nations (1990).The importance of economic geography, or more correctly geographical economics, was also brought to attention by Paul Krugman in Geography and Trade (1991). Cluster development has since become a focus for many government programs. The underlying concept, which economists have referred to as agglomeration economies, dates back to 1890, and the work of Alfred Marshall.

Michael Porter claims that clusters have the potential to affect competition in three ways: by increasing the productivity of the companies in the cluster, by driving innovation in the field, and by stimulating new businesses in the field. According to Porter, in the modern global economy, comparative advantage, how certain locations have special endowments (i.e., harbor, cheap labor) to overcome heavy input costs, is less relevant. Now, competitive advantage, how companies make productive use of inputs, requiring continual innovation, is more important.

Put in another way, a business cluster is a geographical location where enough resources and competences amass reach a critical threshold, giving it a key position in a given economic branch of activity, and with a decisive sustainable competitive advantage over other places, or even a world supremacy in that field (i.e. Silicon Valley and Hollywood).

Silicon Valley case

In the mid- to late 1990s several successful computer technology related companies emerged in Silicon Valley in California. This led anyone who wished to create a startup company to do so in Silicon Valley. The surge in the number of Silicon Valley startups led to a number of venture capital firms relocating to or expanding their Valley offices. This in turn encouraged more entrepreneurs to locate their startups there.

In other words venture capitalists (sellers of finance) and dot-com startups (buyers of finance) "clustered" in and around a geographical area.

The cluster effect in the capital market also led to a cluster effect in the labor market. As an increasing number of companies started up in Silicon Valley, programmers, engineers etc. realized that they would find greater job opportunities by moving to Silicon Valley. This concentration of technically skilled people in the valley meant that startups around the country knew that their chances of finding job candidates with the proper skill-sets were higher in the valley, hence giving them added incentive to move there. This in turn led to more high-tech workers moving there. Similar effects have also been found in the Cambridge IT Cluster (UK)

herocrhatm

顶LZ~~~~

applenn

太棒了

格格1113

黄星月

有確認嗎？

ericaikg

楼主牛啊！！！！！！！！