Google has acquired more than ten European and United States companies and groups in 2011, which increase complexity and difficulty of operation and management. Google also build partnership with other company or organization whose business varies from advertisement, scientific research and space industry. It also puts pressure on the management of the whole organization. In 2011, Google owned sale office located in 17 countries and 36 data centers located in 15 countries (Google Website, 2014).Result from these factors, the transnational strategy can help Google to optimize global efficiency, national responsiveness and worldwide learning simultaneously. A good example to show Google’s specialization in varying laws of different countries is that Google adjusted its Terms of service to c
Показать всеomply with local laws through restricting keywords. It can be observed clearly that the optimization of national responsiveness has been achieved through decentralization and nationally self-sufficiency.86360-86995Table 3: Organizational Configurations00Table 3: Organizational Configurations11430039370Figure 5: Centralized Hub (Microsoft) vs. Decentralized Federation (Google)00Figure 5: Centralized Hub (Microsoft) vs. Decentralized Federation (Google) -1670058509000273812014033500406400165735Centralized HubCentralized Hub3175000165735 Decentralized Federation Decentralized Federation 5. Innovation30480114300Table 4: Types of Innovation00Table 4: Types of Innovation00Source: Bartlett and Beamish, 2011Source: Bartlett and Beamish, 2011As described before Microsoft is the company with International mindset. Recognizing the need to innovate in order to gain competitive advantage, Microsoft in general, engages in the Centre-for- local innovation. The new opportunities are often spotted in home country and the centralized capabilities and resources of parent company are used to create the product. The company exceeded $1 billion dollars with suppliers all over U.S. It is a significant milestone for Microsoft. In local-for-local innovation processes the closer proximity of units and smaller size is facilitating cross-functional integration. In Microsoft however, the situation is a bit different. In the article by Reed, 2013 he raises the issue whether Microsoft is too big for its own good. Their innovations like, for example, video console, search engine, cloud computing services, extending mouse and keyboard with touch sensors are the mash-up the business and thus put Microsoft in direct completion with Google that has more experience in creating and implementing innovations. Worth mentioning is the fact that Microsoft is now moving away from center-for-local innovation. It is opening Microsoft Innovation centers all over the world for example in Belgium, India and Poland.“Serial innovators like Google give employees time to explore ideas -- even though some of those ideas turn into massive failures” (Harford, 2011). Google represents the globally linked type of innovation. It pools the resources and capabilities of parent, subsidiary and partners to create and manage the activity jointly. This type of innovation allows Google to take market intelligence from one part of the organization and link it to specialized expertise located in second entity. The good example is Google’s Driverless Car. The software powering Google's cars is called Google Chauffeur and is implemented to some cars of Toyota for testing (Claburn, 2014). However the main issue here is the high costs of coordinating the operations. In complex integrated network of interdependence it is very difficult to harmonize the flow of goods, financial, human and technological resources and information. That is why Google has a culture that breed’s experimentation. Employees are encourage to exchange knowledge for example by allowing then to use 20% of their time to work on anything they want. Google and Microsoft both focus immensely on creativity, however each company uses the type of innovation that suits their strategic mind set and core capabilities.6. Conclusion- The Future and Global Role of Google and Microsoft5080005588000As the two corporations- Google and Microsoft are getting more attractive these decades, it may concern the future of their global role under the trend of economy in the 21th century. In the final decades of the last century, the powerful forces of globalization caused a period of growth that drove the overseas development and expansion of many multinational economies, so as the Google and Microsoft. Also, the evolving trade and investment should take into consideration. Globalization was viewed as a powerful engine of economic growth, while spreading the benefits around the world, but in fact as a latest term of corporations’ exploitation. In many developing area, firms are tend to set manufacturing process locally when the labor force and land would cost less than that put it on the origin. As technical producer, Google and Microsoft contain hardware production that used in pads and phones, which might mainly designed by the firm internally but produced in other lines located all around the world. Discontent was growing when the gap became broader result in the rapid growth of advanced corporations’ fortune (Joseph, 2002). The challenge facing those successful companies could not be ignored. Actually, the poverty problem is basically relying on the government-funded aid programs in a long term around the world. While according to the World Bank that many people was living under the poverty threshold, countries like China and India indeed performed well in transfer the investment from multinational corporations that under the globalization program, by enlarge the employment in expanding large firms such as Google and Microsoft.Additionally, those forms may pay more attention on the responsibility when standing beyond the developing world; whether they are tend to be exploitive or transformative, they have to make a difference, and lead a change. Over time, there are expectations of those corporations that operating globally, and bring economic, societal and regulatory reforms. According to Vernon (1997), the biggest achievement these years was the evolving attitudes of those firms toward their sense of corporate social responsibility and their commitment to a strategy of sustainability. It terms of what Google and Microsoft perform globally, in both hardware production and research of operating system, it could explain the huge success of these two thumbs when they move toward responsive and transformative roles responding the changing needs of the world. Also, the consumer could benefit from the reasonable transform and compete of the leading firms.7. References- Group Part Acs, Z.J. and Sany, J (2009) Measuring the social value of Innovation: The cases of Muhammad Yunus, Grammeen Bank and Bill Gates, Microsoft. Advances in the Study of Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Economic Growth (19): 143-170Bartlett, C. and Beamish, P. (2011). Transnational Management. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Bellis, M. (2014). Microsoft - History of a Computing Giant. [online] About. Скрыть
за 10 минут
Эта работа вам не подошла?
У наших авторов вы можете заказать любую учебную работу от 200 руб.
Оформите заказ и авторы начнут откликаться уже через 10 минут!
Заказать курсовую работу