Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Conceptual Frameworks for Global Supply Chains
Contribution of Friedman to the economics
Key strengths in global supply chain
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Conceptual Frameworks for Global Supply Chains
Countries are afraid to go to war with each other and are trying to keep the peace, however they don’t seem to realize they are at war within themselves. Day by day the people within most countries are trying to survive. Wars come and go, however the countries will still stand if they stick together. During a war most of the country is not affected by what is going on because a small group of people usually leave to go to war while the rest of the population stays and try to fend for life. Thomas L. Friedman made a good point in his article “The Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention” however after reading Charles Duhigg and David Barboza’s article “In China, Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad” I believe the people matter more than anything. Some country’s governments are putting too much weight on other counties and the money they can make by doing business with them and not enough weight on the people in their countries that are working hazardous jobs. These governments need balance their priority like the United States does or they will have more to lose then their precious money. In “The Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention” Thomas L. Friedman describe his famous theory that states “no two countries that are both part of the same global supply chain, like Dell, will ever fight a war against each other as long as they are both part of the same global supply chain.” Basically, what Friedman’s theory is trying to say is if two countries are part of the same circle they can’t have an altercation because it would be bad for business on both sides and affect everyone else in that circle in one way or another. Both countries are looking for a way to survive this plummeting economy so they would not do anything to ruin their chance at b... ... middle of paper ... ...an’s idea is in the right mindset however it comes at a big cost that is not worth it in my opinion. Friedman thinks the country should not fight in order to keep from going to war. Keeping each country in harmony with each other is his whole point. The American companies should be responsible for work conditions outside of the United States. I believe if Americans companies have enough money to take their business out of the country then they should be able to take care of the people working for them in those foreigner countries. It is not safe and the United States needs to take responsibility for that because the country they are doing business with is to blind by money to think about their workers. Works Cited "The Dell Thory of Conflict Prevention" by Thomas L. Friedman "In China, Human Cost Are Built Into an iPad" by Charles Duhigg and David Barboza
History is full of people fighting against one another and going to war for all types of different reasons. For the most part countries go to war to either protect their way of life, or for a better way of living. We want to preserve certain aspects of life like our rights, as well as helping others gain or maintain them, we also want to be able to prosper as a country. When one or some of these things are threatened a country will go to war. Some wars that fallow this trend include the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II and the Vietnam War. Besides protecting or bettering life, war can also make or break a countries economy.
Large corporations such as Nike, Gap, and Reebok and many others from the United States have moved their factories to undeveloped nations; barely pay their employees enough to live on. Countries such as China, Indonesia, and Haiti have readily abundant cheap labor. There should be labor laws or an obligation of respecting workers to provide decent working conditions, fair wages, and safety standards.
Almost every state on Earth desires peace, so why do countries go to war so often? Between World War I and World War II alone, there were an estimated 81 million casualties (Primary Megadeaths). Each state has different values and desires and many are willing to do whatever it takes to ensure those values remain in their state as well as spread to others. War results in a failure of states to successfully bargain with one another. The most common reason for wars to occur is territorial control. Of the 155 wars in the past three centuries, 83 of them dealt with territory (Holsti). Adding more territory will often add more wealth to the state. One way it can do that is by providing goods, resources, or industries that a state needs, such as oil or minerals. Iran and Iraq fought a war from 1980-1988 partially because Iraq sought to take control of Iran’s southern oil fields, according to World Politics. Military strategy can also play a role in why states seek new territories. Finally, states can be interested in territory for ethnic, cultural, or historical reasons. A prime ex...
The society in 1984 revolves around 3 'superstates' which are Eurasia, Eastasia, and Oceania. All of these states are in a constant state of war with one another, yet all are self contained, and require no trade with one another, and therefor do not require war as a means of economical necessity. However, it is their feeling that as long as a constant state of war is prevailing, the people will be too preoccupied with the war effort to worry about whether or not the present political system is working. The government constantly reminds the people that when they win the war, Oceania will rule the world, and life will be better.
The first stage of conflict escalation develops when a divergence over some issue or frustration in a relationship proves resilient to resolution efforts. The problem remains, and leads to irritation.
Conflict resolution in Chinese societies is mainly based on Confucianism. The overriding principle of society is that the superior in a group is to be respected. When a conflict arises, Chinese will consider the nature of their relationship. Within a family structure, the superior should be obeyed, so a subordinating family member may have to be willing to sacrifice their own comfort or desire in order to maintain peace (Hwang, 1998). Sometimes a subordinating family member will simply change or forsake their original goal. In Chinese culture it is important for society to believe all is well in a family even if it is not (Hwang, 1998).
Large corporations seeking the extra dollar to pocket are willing to spend whatever it takes to reduce the cost of production and increase profit margins. Doing whatever it takes in some instances can help men moving operations overseas to developing countries who are glad to be working. These developing countries unemployment rates are extremely high, so any job that pays is great to have. Americans lose jobs to foreign workers because the American economy is one of the largest in the world and its citizens enjoy great standards of living, when juxtaposed with a city of the same size in Taiwan. Labor costs play a huge and crucial role in corporations, which in turn pay the profits to the corporate giants who run, manage, and own the businesses.
However, globalization could have an effect on conflicts and on who is involved fighting in these conflicts.
Yan, Sophia. “Apple faces new China labor allegations.” Technology, CNN Money Hong Kong. 6 September, 2013. Web. 27 July 2014.
Some citizens believe it's ungovernable to control their anger, some believe violent is the way to get others to hear them out. And other citizens believe that violence causes a vicious cycle. And believe two wrongs does not make a right. Leaving other to believe that violence is a physical privilege, and peace is a choice.
Social conflict is as old as human history (Ho-Won Jeong, 2008), it’s dynamics, process and solution has been a subject of inquiry among early thinkers—Machiavelli, Hobbes, Hume, Rousseau etc. Concived by Coser (1968) as “struggle over values or claims to status, power, and scarce resources, in which the aim of the conflicting parties are not only to gain the desired values, but also to neutralize, injure, or eliminate their rivals” (cited in Onyia 2005, p. 17). Efforts at understanding causes and dynamics of social conflict have yielded various typologies. While some of which—corelate of war (COW)—focused on inter-state related wars, thus defined conflict as “involving at least one member of intersate system on each side of the war, resulting
First of all globalization has led to exploitation of labor. We can’t ignore the fact that ethical aspects of international business deserve special attention. Corruption and engaging in illegal practice to make greater profit is a source of continuing controversy. Sometimes companies go international and move their production to foreign countries so they could employ workers for long hours, at low wages and in poor working conditions (sweat shops). They are also using child labor, the employment of children to a full time work that can be otherwise done by adults all that so they could get out of their responsibility towards their workers by avoiding paying them national insurance …When these multinational firms go abroad they forget all about principles and about human beings and their rights, according to Kent, J., Kinetz, E. & Whehrfritz, G. (2008/March24). Newsweek. Bottom of the barrel. “The dark side of globalization: a vast work force trapped in conditions that verge on slavery”, David, P. Falling of The Edge, Travels through the Dark Heart of Globalization..Nov 2008. (p62) also agrees with them when he explained his concerns about Chinese and Indians t...
“The Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention,” is a theory that is approved by multiple famous authors. The theories main points are valuable and the theory should be looked upon more seriously. In Thomas Friedman’s essay, “The Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention,” he gives examples of how global supply chains would be constructive to promoting world peace. Friedman feels that if everyone is an ally to each other in some shape or form, then no one will want to engage in war. Madeline Albright would agree with Friedman’s theory according to her writings in “Faith and Diplomacy.” Albright felt that religion should play a factor in the diplomatic system of America, in order for us to maintain some kind of peace with other nations. Friedman and Albright both were looking for a solution to world peace. Albright would agree with this theory from the religious perspective. Appiah argued that an ideal global citizen would be essential to America, in his essays “Making conversation” and “The Primacy of Practice.” Appiah felt that people must have an understanding of each other in order to get along with each other. Both Appiah and Albright would agree with “The Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention.” “The Dell Theory stipulates: No two countries that are both part of a major global supply chain, like Dell’s, will ever fight a war against each other as long as they are both part of the same global supply chain”(Friedman 125).
Countries all have different cultures none of us share the same culture. So why are we trying to make other countries be like us? There are multiple reason as to why we are going into other countries and trying to make peace that we cannot achieve, but none of them seem like a really reasonable reason why we are going into other countries and making a mess. They just want peace in the world and they just want all of the countries to get along and have peace, but that is not what they are going to get out of this. Another reason is to pretty much save our own behinds because they don’t want the countries to come over and attack us and put our country in danger. Some of these countries don’t want our help but we are giving it to them anyway and that is why they are not listening to us and turning around and stabbing us in the back. If these countries wanted our help they would go and ask for it we don’t need to be sticking our nose in other people’s business because we want to, most people don’t like other people in their business. I guess for the sake of the country that the security sector reform is important, but it causes some problems. Countries in the past 30 years that have been in transition like Afghanistan has gone from authoritarian to democratic governance, Iraq has gone from war to peace, and how I think the best way to reform the security sector within the societies in transition should go.
My group discussed which was the best strategy to prevent the balloon from bursting during CA1 and that included the use of cotton wool, masking tape, tissue paper and an ice-cream stick. Despite having varying opinions on which materials suited best, such as the paper tart tin or plastic bag, we eventually came to the consensus that the paper tart tin was the better choice as there was a higher probability that the balloon would have burst if the other material was used. The management technique we used to resolve our disagreement was definitely collaboration as we worked together towards a common goal and everyone’s suggestions were heard and considered. Even though collaboration usually takes up the lengthiest resolution to a conflict, we managed to work within the time limit and we had mutual agreement and understanding between all of us. It also led to a win-win outcome and simultaneously helped reinforce mutual trust and respect between the entire group. Additionally, it was less stressful because we had a shared responsibility of the outcome as everyone agreed on the final, binding resolution.