Introduction
Licensing is the granting of rights to another or individual, for a fee, whereby the firm that has been granted to sell and produce the products or services by the licensing company. Licensing provides a way of expanding the products but with minimal costs on the innovating company, and minimized research and development costs for the firm buying the license. Licensing is beneficial and especially when applied globally as the market of the product is extended to the world.
Supports in Innovation
Licensing, joint ventures, and mergers and acquisitions do help in innovations in that not all companies can afford the costly investments that are required for the Research and Development of new products. Thus the joint ventures and mergers and acquisitions assist by providing the economies of scale required to cover these costs. When two firms join forces in a merger or by acquisition, their strength in terms of capital and resources is increased, and hence the power to invest is also increased (Christensen, 2010). These two companies that have merged either by acquisition, a joint venture also combine other resources, including the market and human resources factor. Where these firms are in different countries, they again gain the advantage of a ready market and easy accessibility to consumers, considering also the cultural barriers having been removed.
Types of Licensing
Licensing can be incremental, radical, and even disruptive innovation. Incremental innovation is based on the already existing knowledge and resources and where any technological changes in innovation are modest (Moore, 2005). The existing products remain competitive in the market. A firm will grant a license to another firm to license it to use its products or services. This license can be to sell a product that compliments the services provided by the licensed firm, which improves on the already existing products. An example is Nokia providing license rights to mobiles phone service providers to sell their products to a set of consumers of mobile phone consumers. Licensing becomes radically innovative where the licensed firm has been granted the rights and introduces completely new knowledge and new resources in providing the services and whereby the technological changes are new and completely different from what was previously in the market (Chesbrough, 2003). The existing products are non-competitive with this new product. The licensing company will provide a license in such cases where they want to provide a new product in a foreign market but without investing in this foreign market. The firm will thus grant a license to this firm at a fee. An example is where the new technology of iPad which is an innovation and Apple granting a license to a certain firm in each country to be the sole seller of iPad in that country.
Disruptive Innovations
Disruptive innovations are an improvement of the already existing products and services but with the purpose of targeting a different set of consumers. The innovation is based on the existing applications which are at the bottom of the market of a product or service, starting with a small market, and gradually moving upmarket, and eventually displacing the existing competitors. The innovation can be either by lowering the prices of the product or service or coming up with different designs to fit this new targeted market (Porte, 2005). A firm can engage in disruptive innovation by buying an exclusive license to sell or produce a new innovation since these new innovations may be too expensive for a single company. An example is the licenses that are granted to produce copywrited music and movies to small firms and individuals.
Conclusion
Licensing is meant to improve and increase the marketability of the movies and movies to a wider market, at a reduced cost. This is the method that I would choose because the continuous changes in technology and new products being introduced in the market, allows for easy adaptability. It becomes cheaper to buy licenses for the new products than it is to invest in the Research and Development of a new product.
References
- Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open Innovation: The New Imperative For Creating And Profiting From Technology.
- Christensen, C. (2010). Key Concepts: Disruptive Innovation.
- Moore, G. (2005). Dealing with Darwin: How great companies innovate at every phase of their business. New York: Penguin.
- Porte, A. (2005). International Workshop on Accelerated Radical Innovation: What is Accelerated Radical Innovation?
Balance Of Power And Huntington’s Clash Of Civilizations Theory
Introduction
The principal rationale of this essay is to delve into, discuss and analyze the regional squabbles among the Middle Eastern States. It seeks to critically evaluate how the “Balance of Power theory” and “Huntington’s Clash of Civilization theory” pertain to the economic and political disputes in the Middle East. This essay also gives a synopsis of the two International relations theories and consequently applies their philosophical presumptions in analyzing regional disputes.
The Balance of Power Theory
Reading from Rourkes work, it is evident that the Balance of Power paradigm is the one philosophical theory that has undergone a series of historical developments, assuming diverse forms and points of view. The overall theoretical conception has, however, remained much relevant to global economic and political affairs (Rourke, 2008, pg198-331).
John Rourke, a renowned researcher on International relations politics, notes that the balance of power paradigm is a theory explaining the state of equilibrium between two or more forces competing for power and superiority. He contends that this state of parity is characterized by diplomatic behaviors, aimed at empowering one’s State while trying to topple others in a more politically maneuvered approach (Rourke, 2008, pg 198-331).
Predictions of the Balance of Power theory
This theory has often been used in analyzing the recent events of the Middle East, a region flawed with importunate conflicts and wars. From the February 6th, 2007, New York Times article, titled,” In the public view, Saudis counter Iran in the region”, we are faced with a typical scenario where the balance of power theory may be called upon to help clarify certain issues on regional disputes.
The battle that takes a center stage in the Middle Eastern States is actually composed of remarkable unfolding events. Dominating the struggles are Saudi Arabians and Iranians, both trying to weigh their regional strengths on the economic and political powers. According to the New York Times Article, as Saudi Arabia opts to take a central, aggressive control in reshaping regional conflicts, Iran fabricates ways of benefiting from the civil war tones, to counter the Saudis. In reaction to this, the Saudis heighten their public movements in Iran. They also ally with the Sunni-led of Lebanon, a move aimed at establishing itself as a superpower in the region. Manifestations of power balance continue to unveil, with Iran embarking on the nuclear program. Consequently, the U.S is threatened to be overtaken by Iran, as the world superpowers. The Bush administration decides to support Saudi Arabia against Iran. These are clear indications that each of the rival states seems to be in an unstable state when their regional economic and political influences are on the verge of dwindling. The balance of power theory is therefore justified in this case.
Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations theory
The Clash of Civilization theory is among the most controversial theories in history. Many critics discord it as a non-substantive claim, not universally plausible. It, however, underscores the fact that Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilization theory has also been one of the most philosophical and influential over the Centuries. This theory contends that regional or global disputes are not the result of economic and political ideologies, but the consequences of conflict between civilizations (Rourke, 2008, pg 198-331). Civilizations, according to Samuel Huntington, are cultural entities composed of nationalities, ethnic groupings, regions, and some other tenets that distinguish the states from one another.
Predictions of Huntington’s theory
Considering this theoretical conception, we can see the sense of cultural disparities highlighted in the New York Times Article. There are indeed a number of nationalities from different geographical regions involved in disputes, not necessarily because of economic and political reasons, but partly as a result of their differences in religious doctrines, cultures, and social norms.
Assessment of the two theories
While the balance of power theory views International relations in terms of economic and political powers, Huntington’s Clash of Civilization theory begs to diverge by perceiving the same on the basis of cultural entities. Conversely, both of them agree that conflicts and disputes are common factors in International relations. The point is thus on how to help settle the regional disputes.
Conclusion
In the case of the “Saudi counter Iran region”, the balance of power theory promises more solutions as compared to Huntington’s Clash of Civilization theory. The latter keeps the States on the toe. In efforts of trying to strike a balance in their economic and political superiorities, no state is likely to lag behind others. The former, that is, Samuel Huntington’s theory, does not promise much in this case. It rather concentrates more on cultural identity and self-awareness that may take some time before the different entities come to terms with their socio-political and economic realities. Balance of power theory is therefore preferable in analyzing the Middle East disputes.
References
Rourke, John. International politics on the world Stage.12th Ed. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.2008.124-450.
FedEx, UPS, And DHL Comparative Analysis
The difference in Investment strategy between FedEx and UPS
FedEx in comparison to UPS focuses more on operating independently. The management in all its companies is given the freedom to make independent decisions to deliver the best kind of service to its customers in their consequent markets. They, therefore, end up serving more people using a wider area of service. FedEx has got two main focuses in terms of how they have brought about change; these are operations and strategies. In looking at operational changes, we realize that the company has implemented newer systems, structures and has adapted more recent advanced technologies to improve its business strategies. Strategic changes that they use include a recent vision statement that is more focused.
On the other hand, the strategy adopted by UPS involves great investment in partner businesses of distribution and logistics, creative use of technology, the attraction of talent, and encouraging innovation. In addition, UPS has a business strategy that focuses on the customer (Levy, 2001, para.2). It aims at studying the demand and behaviors of the customer so that to improve its services to its customers.
In my view, FedEx is more structured and more advantaged compared to its competitor. This is because; as much as one would want to make the customer more comfortable, FedEx’s structure enables them to reach out to more, thus increasing its customers. The fact that the companies run independently gives them more freedom to analyze their customers’ tastes and needs. This makes it easy to enable them to supply their customers with what they require. In addition, their products are designed according to their customers’ preferences; thus enhancing their satisfaction.
FedEx’s “move communicate and shoot” strategy
Considering that the company is the top amongst its competitors, the company has decided to take up this challenge as a means to keep it ahead of its competitors. This strategy is simply a move that will see to it that the company does not stall on its investment in technology. The reason why this is a good strategy for FedEx is that it is the only available way to keep on top. Its focus on innovation rather than copying what others do to hang on top makes it the only way to survive. The CIO explains that they spend more than $1 billion just on technology (Colvin, 2006, p.2).
Sincerely speaking, it is a rather ambiguous plan for other up and coming companies and the reason is that these companies may not have enough resources in terms of information, humans, and finance to purely invest in such a way to make them a top brand. It is more sensible for such companies to take time and reach a competitive place at which such ambiguous strategies as these would become of effect.
By saying that his company is “in the business of engineering time” the CIO of FedEx tries to imply that his company is trying to create products or services that will assist its customers to get their different work done within the timeline they were supposed to (Colvin, 2006, p.4). I would want to believe that this is a good strategy seeing as time seems to be of the essence for virtually everyone in this shrinking and changing world. People would love to have jobs done faster and in a more efficient way. Anything that would make this happen would be highly welcomed. IT assists the group work more effectively. Its main task is to offer communication solutions to other businesses. In an example, FedEx can be able to provide tracking systems for a company’s cargo in three different fields: The internet, the website for the company, and finally, shipping software created by FedEx.
Analysis between FedEx, UPS, and DHL
For FedEx, services provided range from transportation of parcels, various business services, and also e-commerce services. It also provides shipping services, air cargo distribution, and also custom clearance services. It has revenues worth $33.16 billion as of 2009. In addition, it extends a service that offers 10-20% discount using certain American delivery services. Stock prices are high for the company at 107. An increase of $500000 since 1999 reveals the extent to which it’s doing well. It has a P/E ratio of 27implying that the company is getting more and more internet affiliated.
As for DHL, revenues stand at a high of $33.1million. This has been a drop from $44 billion with other numbers reading as follows: Operational expenses are at $54.2million and gross profit is at $9.8million per year on average. UPS concentrates its delivery overseas as it does more mail delivery, feeding over 70million people per week. In addition, it also provided outsourcing for mail.
Finally, we have UPS. The revenues thereof are at a high of $78 altogether. Nevertheless, it has been making losses of$2billion as of 2009. Other figures include annual expenses of 64million per year and shares of the company going at $2.31 per share. Just like FedEx UPS concentrates its delivery on overseas shipping, with an expanded luggage shipping structure. Custom clearance services and air transport of cargo are also common features of UPS.
FedEx War on terrorism
It is quite attractive for any terrorist organization to transport its devices (for example bombs) through some of these services provided by the company. Nevertheless, the CIO makes it clear that the chains of services that are owned by FedEx are a bad place to have vices like that going on. The company keeps a record of its usual customers; therefore anyone coming in as a new subscriber to this service must pass through a series of checks to ensure safety and top-ranking security. The CIO also explains that the company works closely with the DEA, FBI CIA, and other anti-terrorism organizations to curb the vice (Colvin, 2006, p.4).
Reference List
Colvin, Geoffrey. (2006). The Colvin Interview: The CIO. C-Suit Strategies.
Levy, Mitchell. (2001). Case Study: United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS). PeachPit.