Globalization 1 An Argument of Homogenized and Standardized Of the Products Due To Globalization Introduction For the better understanding of the argument of weather, the increment of products that homogenize and standard is as a result of globalization certain factors should be considered. It is important first to understand what is meant by the term globalization and homogenization. Globalization is the process where by a product or anything becomes world wide (Ritzer, 2010). If the commodity is facilitated by Medias of communication, for example via satellite or radio, the information can instantly reach the whole world. Some of the important events in sport, politics, and social have a worldwide audience. Communication is a global aspect that will be appreciated by most people in the world. People will find it easy to welcome globalization for knowledge. However, they will be worried about the things that get globalized. For example, people may be worried about the globalization of economic and cultural sphere. The fear of the globalized economy is capitalism. Capitalism is a system of the economy where few people own and control the resources of the production. Homogenization is where people use the same kind of thing (Martell, 2010). In the world of today, people use the same kind of things. For example, commodities that are mainly found globally are the cars and plans. Evidenced are also products like Coca-Cola and Pepsi, which are found in various countries in the world (Smith, 2006). It is true to say that there has been a rise in the standardization and homogenization of processes and products globally. In line with the theory of convergent, it can be argued that globalization is leading to a more similarity. When similar brands like Starbucks and McDonalds are present in almost all the countries in the world, a person can find it hard to dispute this. However, the idea of globalization must also be considered. While processes and products are increasingly becoming homogenized, different adoption can be evidenced these may be as a result of isomorphism according to the difference in culture. It can be argued that the evidenced increase in homogenization can not be finally attributed to globalization. The general definition of globalization is that, it is the deepening, widening and speeding up of the worldwide interconnectedness (Baylis, Smith & Owens, 2013). Therefore attributing relating homogenization to globalization will be counter- intuitive. This is because an increased of the worldwide interconnectedness would lead to increased diversity, as there is the introduction of different cultures to each other. A person may expect that the outcome of the diversity to be the introduction of different products and processes from different countries into the world market which is not the case. Therefore, it will be right to argue in this paper that the evidenced standardization is mainly as a result of the Americanization or Westernization for dominant states to impose their practices on other countries. This is not to argue that globalization a form of colonialism, but to explain that globalization is an instrument being exploited by the countries that are dominant. It is very important to understand that for a globalized economy, there is a need to be diversity in terms of products available in the world market. However, most of the countries that dominate the global market are majorly the western countries. For example, After Unilever seeing an opportunity among the low-income consumers in India, who wanted top by the company’s personal care product and high-end detergent (Prahalad, 2009). Because of the low earning, they could not afford the company’s products. The company responded by developing a packaging that was of low cost. This is an indication that the change of the Unilever packaging system was dictated by a specific market environment of India but not of any other country. However, it is very possible for the packaging system of the company differs from the world as it is determined by the market of that country. The flexibility of the company opened a new market for the company and allowed the company to also develop brand loyalty. This is to mean that the consumers will remain loyal to the product when there income increased in future. In case a company opts to go in the international market, it becomes concerned with various questions. These questions include; if there is a need for product modification and if so then which of the product is to be modified. Some of the products are easy to standardize while some are not. Products that are nondurable like the food products are always very sensitive to differences in habits and national test (Wyma, 2010). This makes them need changes for various markets. Commodities that are durables such as home electronics, and cameras are less subject to issue to do with regional. When an industry is approaching an international market, there are four very important options. These options include; selling of the product as it is, and designing new products for the global market. Furthermore, incorporating of all, the differences in the market into a product design that is very flexible and selling the product. The four listed option are used by most of the companies simultaneously. These large companies may have might have its production line that it purely local, regional and global. Later the company can introduce a commodity developed in one market into another. For example, the Levi Strauss lines of Dockers casual wear was from Argentina company unit. It was then established by its subsidiary in Japan before being adopted in the United States of America and becoming the Argentina’s brand that is top selling. There are advantages and disadvantages for both the product standardization and adaptation. The advantage of product standardization entails coast saving in marketing and production (In, G. S., 1989). The driving force behind the standardization is integration economic. Economic integration is most in the Europe where most of their market approach are being standardized by the marketers. This happens as the same time when the company is competing in the major world markets which then forces the company to have a marketing approach that is worldwide. Colgate and Coca-Cola companies have marketing strategies and products that are universal (Whitelock, & Pimblett, 1997). However, the argument that the world is becoming more homogenized due to globalization might be true for only a few numbers of products that have a universal brand of recognition. Most of the homologized product majorly comes from the same region which is the westerners region, the products that are today witnessed in the in the world as being universal as from very big companies. It is extremely hard to locate any small industries having their products in other countries. Does this mean that globalization is about the few rich countries in the world supplying their products, technology and belief to other countries? It can be argued that the on going globalization is aimed in bringing uniformity in culture in the entire world and completely eradicating diversity (AgravaAŒ”žla, & Bhatt, 2011). It wants to impose the western culture and way of life in the whole world. The example to support this issue of Westernization is the lecture by Dr. Henry Kissinger. He argued that, the main challenge of what is called globalization is another reference for the dominant place of American (Mac Bride, 2005). During the previous decades, the State of American has accumulated a grate value of wealth. This has enabled it to deepen and broaden the availability of capital. Furthermore, the United States has founded the development, creation and a broad distribution of a variety of new technology at a very wide region. It has also created a market for a continuous display of goods and services. Dr. Henry Kissinger that just as an earlier phase of globalization was dominated by the British (Nayyar, 1997), the present phase had to be under US domination. The world now has no alternative but to accept the American way of life, idea and values. The second example of the American dominance is evidenced in Thomas L. Friedman. He declared that the Americans are an apostle of the first world, the free market prophet, and the high priests of the high technology (Antonio, 2007). He continues to say that the US wants the enlargement of booth its Pizza Huts and values. The United States wants the world to follow its lead and become capitalist and democratic. This is by having a website in every pot, Microsoft Windows in every computer, Pepsi on each lip, and every person everywhere pumping there own gas. In another place, he said that globalization has its dominant culture, and that is why it is seen as homogenizing. Culturally speaking is not entirely but majorly thought to be the spread of Americanization. American coffee house chain Starbucks has started selling its food items and espresso in every country in the world (Daft, 2006). By this means, America has been spreading its food habit to other countries in the world. It is the first time in this universe that every person no matter where he or she is unconsciously or consciously feeling the effect of globalization. The people senses globalization in the food they eat, the goods that they buy, and also the media. Fukuyama rejects the argument that globalization is leading to cultural homogeneity. There may be a homogenization of certain society and economic aspect (Lie & Brym, 2006). However, there will be confirmation of unique cultural identity. If there is a possibility of cultural identity homogenization, then it will be too slow to tell the difference. Most of the people think that because of the presence of advanced communications technology in the world. And are in a position to broadcast various cultures worldwide, they can lead to homogenization on a deeper level of culture. This may not be the case because Fukuyama argues that it has done just the opposite. He further provides an example that in the world of today, there is a possibility of great distrust, less mutual liking, and greater emphasis. These factors are different between the culture of Asians and the United States today than they were 40 years ago. Back in the 1950, and 60s, United States were valued by the Asians as a modernization model. The case is now different as the Asians look at the American decline of the family and their urban decay. What the Asians concludes after analyzing the American family and urban is that America is not a model that is very attractive. The communication technology has provided the chance for both Asians and Americans to see each other clearly. This has turned out that both America and Asia have very different systems of value (Girish Mishra, 2008). Conclusion Even though homogenization is partly as a result of globalization, it is not right to conclude that homogenization is fully as a result of globalization. Though the companies like the Coca-Cola Company have their products in each corner of this world, it is also one of the companies from the westerners. The world market is dominated with the reach countries locking most of the developing countries out. This has also contributed to the dominant countries like American trying to make the world adapt to its way of life, the type of food and technology. However, homogenization of culture seems to very hard in the recent days. Even if the country as great as the United States of America, they find it hard to homogenize culture. These dominant countries have managed to homogenize technology. This can be evidenced by the presence of cars, planes, handsets and other electronics that are globally used by various countries. However, the same technology that has been provided by the Americans has made the world understand their culture. Although some communities value their culture, we also have some communities that do not value the American culture. For this reason, it can be argued that globalization does not lead to homogenization l of everything in the world. Reference AgravaAŒ”žla, P. K., & Bhatt, R. K. (2011). Globalization, India and the world. New Delhi: Concept Pub. Co. Antonio, R. J. (2007). The cultural construction of neoliberal globalization. The Blackwell companion to globalization, 67. Daft, R. L. (2006). Organization theory and design. Mason, OH: Thompson-South Western. Page 55. Girish Mishra. (2008). Globalization and Culture. Web< https://www.stateofnature.org/?p=6292 > accessed, April 8, 2015. In Baylis, J., In Smith, S., & In Owens, P. (2013). The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations. In, G. S. (1989). Global strategy… in a world of nations?. Lie, J., & Brym, R. J. (2006). Sociology: Your compass for a new world. New York, N.Y: Wadsworth. Page 257. Mac Bride, W. (2005). Globalization and inter-culturel dialogue. Sens-Public. Martell, L. (2010). The sociology of globalization. Cambridge: Polity. Page 86. Nayyar, D. (1997). Globalization: the game, the players and the rules. In The political economy of globalization (pp. 13-40). Springer US. Prahalad, C. K. (2009). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid, revised and updated 5th anniversary edition: Eradicating poverty through profits. FT Press. Ritzer, G. (2010). Globalization: A basic text. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Page 5. Smith, A. F. (2006). Encyclopedia of junk food and fast food. Westport, Conn. [u.a.: Greenwood Press. Page 6. Whitelock, J., & Pimblett, C. (1997). The standardisation debate in international marketing Journal of Global Marketing, 10(3), 45-66. Wyma, L. (2010). Consumers’ preferences for private and national brand food products/L. Wyma (Doctoral dissertation, North-West University).
Our editors will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!Get started
Please check your inbox