The Much Hyped US-China Complex in Indian Media
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 31st Oct. 2016
The argument in the Indian media around blockade of Chinese goods seems specious. With all hype and show around make in India and the ‘evil Chinese influence on global geo-politics, there seems little takers amongst the most impacted US, Japanese of Korean Electronics manufacturers to shift some of the manufacturing to India. This is even as some of the brands in these countries have had pronounced and enviable market leadership positions in many market segments. In fact, not only old and establish products (for which eco-system might be a huge reason) continue to be manufactured in China, but even new product-lines also seems to be going there on the pre-text there is a larger market of relatively richer customer (and we don’t know as of yet, why this could not be have been an export from India. The lack of ability to disrupt manufacturing seems more of a reason to vent ire in from of ‘boycott’ movement.
While the experts had argued labour laws as a big cause. Now there are at least some state/s where labour laws do not seem to be much of a hindrance or at least Indian labour force could be turned competitive by investing in manufacturing technology in these state/s. For the initial investments, there should not be difficulty to acquire land and anyways the information about projects where the hurdle of land has been solved, may not be necessarily encouraging. The role of ability to fund such projects and risk-taking, or taxation has been blunted by international competition. What basically is needed are measures where market access for domestic players could give them some enduring competitive advantage. Since the measure designed around cost of production (of standard products) or profits (basis taxation or accounting jugglery) are easily replicated, and so these have to be measures around our cultural diversity, harnessing it as a source of strength. This is because ‘products’ and solutions need to support the cultural diversity of the globe, which has been hit by standardized products and on cost competitiveness related factors. Now with environment taking political importance over cost, we still have not been able to push the case for protection of cultural diversity even though it is politically much touchier subject and its impact is felt much more on the people.
In spite of this and our so called strength in soft power, including some Indian having relations including business relations in almost every nation, however our research on this matter or even intentions to support our industry to come out with much greater culturally attuned products, is less than desired. The effort to support industry define technology standards in line with our own culture is also perhaps much less although it can be said that the industry itself has also done very little in this regard. The continuous focus to outcompete basis cost or media-based promotions/brand power, seems to be our buying competitive hype factors of competitors, rather than identifying some parameter where our population can compete on a more equitable basis. While the Indian brands under ‘Personal care’ products have started doing a bit better, this is on the back of some of Indian product industry, taking interest in local cultures and coming out/acquiring local brands, style and herbal formulations of these geographies. While we have been trying hard to sell Indian entertainment media to say Africa, however productions of Indian Directors regards African Safari/s, cultural events or Food/Famine etc. are regularly well received via the American/Local media and may have done so without much effort. While the IT sector has started off with its Co-innovation models, however much of it is targeted towards developed world or rather well funded entrepreneurs to offer them some dependable team rather than taking reasonable punt on emerging markets basis equity-related factors. However, this actually sets stage to highlight an important competitive differentiator to compete in markets to begin with and evolve in line with the competitive streak of the population.
In fact rather than highlighting our comfort with multiple cultures we have tended to hype Indian culture, the way some other nations would hype their cultural superiority. This has made the path more rather than less cumbersome for the population. And, worse that we are still blaming lack of competitiveness of the population rather than identifying and developing the competitive streak. The strength of the country in services in any case more susceptible to the impact of the culture of the importing country, in any case. So it may be better that India focusses on cultural impact on requirements around design, techno-functional specs and usage related factors (on product and services) which may impact feature sets needed or level of hand-holding/support needed in the market. It may be noted that while Europe has been reasonably successful in marketing of cultural ‘value’ products globally, however these has been mostly its home grown products which acquired a demand over the period of time. India has over a period seen its domestic cultural products come up the value curve, however now the challenge should be to help countries with their domestically valued ‘cultural’ products acquire better market demand. A multi-domestic strategy to take products and services to global market might be more helpful for the corporate and population. Subsequently the impact of these cultures on many other products/services related features may rise in demand and improve viability for fulfillment, utilizing the cost-effective and technically qualified man-power.
It may be noted that much greater degree of communication with the markets, and may require to evolve such a supporting eco-system in terms of raising education level. This may require some government initiatives before private sector is able to see the light on its own, which would again depend upon its ability to evolve products, supporting eco-system and capture markets while ensuring competitiveness (of the production-services mix) at the same time. For now the private sector, would continue to evolve by recruiting from amongst the diaspora in order to evolve suitable products to capture the market, however it would need to convince people of its intentions and ability, before market starts taking it seriously to run the business profitably overtime and evolve the ecosystems.
What may be required- is not what may be discussed
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 31st Oct. 2016
The argument in the Indian media around blockade of Chinese goods seems specious. With all hype and show around make in India and the ‘evil Chinese influence on global geo-politics, there seems little takers amongst the most impacted US, Japanese of Korean Electronics manufacturers to shift some of the manufacturing to India. This is even as some of the brands in these countries have had pronounced and enviable market leadership positions in many market segments. In fact, not only old and establish products (for which eco-system might be a huge reason) continue to be manufactured in China, but even new product-lines also seems to be going there on the pre-text there is a larger market of relatively richer customer (and we don’t know as of yet, why this could not be have been an export from India. The lack of ability to disrupt manufacturing seems more of a reason to vent ire in from of ‘boycott’ movement.
While the experts had argued labour laws as a big cause. Now there are at least some state/s where labour laws do not seem to be much of a hindrance or at least Indian labour force could be turned competitive by investing in manufacturing technology in these state/s. For the initial investments, there should not be difficulty to acquire land and anyways the information about projects where the hurdle of land has been solved, may not be necessarily encouraging. The role of ability to fund such projects and risk-taking, or taxation has been blunted by international competition. What basically is needed are measures where market access for domestic players could give them some enduring competitive advantage. Since the measure designed around cost of production (of standard products) or profits (basis taxation or accounting jugglery) are easily replicated, and so these have to be measures around our cultural diversity, harnessing it as a source of strength. This is because ‘products’ and solutions need to support the cultural diversity of the globe, which has been hit by standardized products and on cost competitiveness related factors. Now with environment taking political importance over cost, we still have not been able to push the case for protection of cultural diversity even though it is politically much touchier subject and its impact is felt much more on the people.
In spite of this and our so called strength in soft power, including some Indian having relations including business relations in almost every nation, however our research on this matter or even intentions to support our industry to come out with much greater culturally attuned products, is less than desired. The effort to support industry define technology standards in line with our own culture is also perhaps much less although it can be said that the industry itself has also done very little in this regard. The continuous focus to outcompete basis cost or media-based promotions/brand power, seems to be our buying competitive hype factors of competitors, rather than identifying some parameter where our population can compete on a more equitable basis. While the Indian brands under ‘Personal care’ products have started doing a bit better, this is on the back of some of Indian product industry, taking interest in local cultures and coming out/acquiring local brands, style and herbal formulations of these geographies. While we have been trying hard to sell Indian entertainment media to say Africa, however productions of Indian Directors regards African Safari/s, cultural events or Food/Famine etc. are regularly well received via the American/Local media and may have done so without much effort. While the IT sector has started off with its Co-innovation models, however much of it is targeted towards developed world or rather well funded entrepreneurs to offer them some dependable team rather than taking reasonable punt on emerging markets basis equity-related factors. However, this actually sets stage to highlight an important competitive differentiator to compete in markets to begin with and evolve in line with the competitive streak of the population.
In fact rather than highlighting our comfort with multiple cultures we have tended to hype Indian culture, the way some other nations would hype their cultural superiority. This has made the path more rather than less cumbersome for the population. And, worse that we are still blaming lack of competitiveness of the population rather than identifying and developing the competitive streak. The strength of the country in services in any case more susceptible to the impact of the culture of the importing country, in any case. So it may be better that India focusses on cultural impact on requirements around design, techno-functional specs and usage related factors (on product and services) which may impact feature sets needed or level of hand-holding/support needed in the market. It may be noted that while Europe has been reasonably successful in marketing of cultural ‘value’ products globally, however these has been mostly its home grown products which acquired a demand over the period of time. India has over a period seen its domestic cultural products come up the value curve, however now the challenge should be to help countries with their domestically valued ‘cultural’ products acquire better market demand. A multi-domestic strategy to take products and services to global market might be more helpful for the corporate and population. Subsequently the impact of these cultures on many other products/services related features may rise in demand and improve viability for fulfillment, utilizing the cost-effective and technically qualified man-power.
It may be noted that much greater degree of communication with the markets, and may require to evolve such a supporting eco-system in terms of raising education level. This may require some government initiatives before private sector is able to see the light on its own, which would again depend upon its ability to evolve products, supporting eco-system and capture markets while ensuring competitiveness (of the production-services mix) at the same time. For now the private sector, would continue to evolve by recruiting from amongst the diaspora in order to evolve suitable products to capture the market, however it would need to convince people of its intentions and ability, before market starts taking it seriously to run the business profitably overtime and evolve the ecosystems.