Cross Cultural perspectives

The company decided to use was Struck Corporation. Struck has been an iconic symbol in the coffee industry here in the United States. It is a place where people go to meet, work; do school work, and many other things. Struck Corporation has created an atmosphere that makes people feel okay with spending six dollars or more on a latte. Although its great success in the United States and many other countries, Struck has really struggled to thrive in Europe. Struck CEO Howard Schultz traveled to Italy in 1983 and was really inspired by their espresso bars.He saw the potential in the concept off coffee house thriving in Seattle. Schultz really took that idea and sculpted it into everything the American people were looking for. As the company grew and expanded into other countries, it eventually came full circle and ended up back in Europe, where the idea began. This would prove to be more off struggle than expected. You would think that Struck would thrive in a country that lives off cof fee and tea. The espresso and latte experience in Europe is an everyday thing; apart of the culture.Struck is having a difficult time bringing an American version of a coffee shop to Europe. Its reputation of having a fast food type atmosphere isn't doing the trick. The European people need a more intimate experience. One problem that Struck is having in Europe is the way they serve the coffee. The iconic paper cup and sleeve isn't cutting it in Europe. I feel it portrays a cheaper product. Also, Struck has a fast food type environment. When in Europe the coffee shops are sit down restaurants almost. Struck needs to learn how to adapt to the European cafe culture.Struck very modern look and dcore have not been keeping up with the elaborate dcore of the cafeg's in Europe. In 2012 the New York Times captured a picture of a beautifully decorated coffee shop. It had big comfortable velvet chairs that filled the room. Chandeliers line the ceilings and just a beautiful atmosphere. To my s urprise it was a Struck. They were successful in creating an atmosphere that holds to European tradition. In Europe you do not go to a coffee shop to be waited on. Even though they do have servers they do not work on tips.All of this is very different from an American coffee shop. Struck has really perfected coffee shops here in America. Instead of an elaborately decorated room, it's more Of a modern and sleek area for enjoying your favorite cup of coffee. Also, there are no servers coming to your table, but energetic baristas brewing amazing coffee with a smile and a small conversation. Struck may be on to something in Europe trying to adapt to their way of doing things. In order to keep turning a profit out in Europe they must continue to disguise themselves as a local coffee shop.In the New York Times article In Europe, Struck Adjusts to a Cafe Culture where they quote local coffee goers. Daphnia Monitor 19 year old Parisian said, â€Å"We see stars like Kim Sardinian in all the magazines walking around with a Struck,† and, â€Å"My friends and I come because it's hip. † What this tells me is that the American lifestyle is being mimicked. Especially when very famous influential people are going to Struck regularly. There are several viable solutions for Struck in Europe. The key would be to not spend extra money but to shift the money that is being spent.When opening new stores, Struck would have to go about the dcore in a different way. Change from paper cups and sleeves to mugs and plates, and still stay true to being environmentally friendly. Last, the training and Struck team should never change. Struck can change the dcore by going from a modern look and shift it to very elaborate looking decorations. Interior decorations in Europe don't have the same color schemes as we have here in the United States. Having big comfortable chairs of some kind of fabric instead of modern chairs and leather couches.Incorporating chandeliers and mirrors to make the rooms kick bigger and fancier. One major misconception of Struck in Europe is the iconic coffee cups and sleeves. Unfortunately this is perceived as a lesser product, even though this is not the case. This will save money in several different types of cups, sleeves, and much more. A coffee cup that can be rewashed and reused will save a lot of money and will take very minimal water to wash. Also, adding Rupee's favorite treats to accompany the drinks will be a great addition. If the ambiance was altered and the cups changed, the consumer will not know he difference.They are judging the coffee before they even get a chance to taste it. Some are lured in by the fact that it is an American company enjoyed by the stars. American celebrity endorsements and maybe invitations to store openings would help raise customer interest. Customers will continue to drink it as long as it is portrayed and interpreted as cool or hip. Lastly, the employee training is key. This is something th at must not be tainted no matter what changes around them. Customer involvement and connection has been and continues to be absolutely crucial part of Struck success.This is what separates Struck from any other coffee shop American or European. Continuing to hire fun, charismatic, and hardworking people no matter what culture and nationality is essential to the company thriving anywhere. Also, putting the Correct people in management is a key part Of the team. In conclusion, there are several WAP to lure in the European people to Struck. Adapting to European culture can and will be very beneficial. SSH fitting the image slightly but keeping the priorities in tact will be essential. Changing from paper to glass mugs will help lower costs and bring people onto the stores. Cross cultural perspectives The international market is the primp situation for all companies, even though almost every organization experiences growth as time passes. The main goal of almost every big business Is to be able to reach the largest market and enable growth; the international market. There are many different things that International markets bring to an organization, advantage wise, for Instance a bigger brand name, international market shares, Investors, or even growth that will allow the capability to be able to manufacture many products for a lot less expensive labor cost.Even though most companies want to go big or go home, there are bound to be many different obstacles and difficulties in making the bigger picture happen. Between going national and international, there are so many deferent moral and social responsibilities that must be overcome as the organization progresses through the ranks to be a worldwide international organization. The organization that I choose is the Levi Strauss compa ny, I love the Jeans and there is an over abundant amount of information available to the public about the history of their organization.Levi Strauss and Company, which Is based In San Francisco, California has actually been one of many different companies that have been able to overcome all the adversity and become an International organization and one of the largest retail sale producers In apparel. The organization has their headquarters in California, but they are able to operate and be successful with their different plants and operations in 110 different nations across the globe. Breaking down the split of what their income as a company is generally split from the United States and outside the border to a ear 50/50 split.Actually, Levi Strauss has recently been dealing with issues with foreign organizations to incorporate stockholders, media sites, investment companies, and even employees' right's unions. There were noted to be a lot of different reasons that people were getti ng upset with Levi Strauss and Company, but one of the major reasons Levi Strauss and Company incurred so much trouble was in their two plants in Bangladesh. There was mass confusion about the laws and stipulations In that country compared to the united States.What was stated Is that Levi Strauss was ring employees that were below the minimum age requirement, but in all actuality, in Bangladesh, there are different laws as to how old an individual must be to work in a similar plant as Levi Strauss and Company. The minimum age for an individual to work at a manufacturing plant comparable to Levi Strauss and Company is sixteen. When one looks at the history of Bangladesh, there is nothing out of the ordinary to see children, ages fifteen and younger to be out in the workforce and helping with their families household income.One issue in Bangladesh to be specific is their lack f producing a birth certificate to prove age, another issue that has been brought up is the lack of nutrition for the supposedly younger kids, who most likely look younger than they actually are. Even though these younger people are working In different Levi Strauss' plants, these types of situations are very evident and continuous even though the Conditions of Engagement for and from Levi Strauss and Company. Levi Strauss isn't the first one to be in the microscope from external stakeholders for child As an ethical international company, Levi Strauss seems to have the moral views of he majority of people. To ensure they stay ethical, there are a few things that the organization must follow like the encouragement of dialogs interactions, motivation of involvement in making decisions, adjusts personal as well as company goals and conducts, imposes direct responsibility for expecting and addressing ethical crises.These would be the most basic ethical requirements required by Levi Strauss along with an international anti bribery plan, a global rule of business actions, and An anti- corruption plan. During the year 2008, the organization was once again in the spotlight from many external pressures by the way they were breaking different child labor laws, like the way that Uzbekistan has been doing the same thing. Not only did Levi Straus help take care of the issue, but they have confessed that they have worried about the problem for a very long time.Following the different problems, Levi Strauss and company went through major changes including no use of any product coming from Uzbekistan. Being involved in such a critical matter, Levi Strauss and company took added measures to relieve the pressure and stress from the child labor laws by not only ruminating employees that were part of the infractions, but would continue to help assist them with full pay and benefits contingent on them going to school and completing that for themselves and their families.Laws against labor of underage is definitely a major concern for Levi Strauss, but unfortunately with having 110 differe nt countries subject to the same standards, there are always other obstacles for the organization to overcome because they are such a large international organization. One of the other obstacles that happens more often than almost anything is discrimination in the workplace. This has actually become more of a recognized problem and enforced almost worldwide, not Just in the United States.Many attempts to regulate discrimination are moral and the practices therein are sure to find their way into problems. In Vietnam, operational corruption is one of the biggest moral challenges to overcome, and it includes Levi Strauss and Company. Corruption in organizations has been noted to take away three to four percent of the world's total gross domestic products each year. In one of the latest researches, 67% of business proprietors inVietnam presume that they will have to pay for a bribe at some stage in a particular year to carry on in business operations (Inrush & Areola, 2010) These two ex amples are not even scratching the surface as to what an international organization must face on a daily basis to keep their head above water and to keep themselves profitable. The way that Levi Strauss and Company have been able to continue to be successful is the fact that they were able to instate one set of written rules and guideline to have as a basis for all of their companies and plants around the world to abide by.This type of action is Just a preventative method that instills the idea and provides a little insurance plan to help prevent allegations of wrongdoings. Levi Strauss and Company is much like all international companies in the way that they have to uphold their integrity and ensure that they are conducting business in a throughout the company, a simple memo will not suffice. There must be people all over the world at all the different plants making sure that the code of ethics provided by the company are met and are not too specific to follow by all employees.If t hese hypes of actions have been thought of years ago, there probably would never have been an issue in Bangladesh and the underage labor that was happening and they could have avoided that completely. Many, many businesses are striving for the international market in today's society. They are all wanting growth and potentially higher earnings. Social and Moral factors are often overlooked and ignored when businesses are up and coming. There will never be a way for one method or one set of rules to govern any international company from one end to another.Arrangements according to the environment and he nation are essential clues to help adjust for each little market in the bigger picture of international business. The more of the little things each international companies do to ensure moral and social obligations, the longer and more thriving their business will become and continue to prosper. References Five compliance and ethics issues to consider in Vietnam. 2010, Gregory Inrush & Fernando Areola. Retrieved from http://knowledgeable. Thunderbird. Dude/ research/2009/11/04/Vietnam/ Levi Strauss & Co. (Unknown) 2010. Retrieved from http://en. Wisped. Org/wick/Levi_Strauss_&_Co. Cross Cultural Perspectives For many years, Nike Inc has been known worldwide as the champion of athletic gear producers, being a global leader in business and marketing. The company experienced a tremendous growth between 1970s and 1990s, dominating the global athletic footwear and apparel market (Cartey, 2002). However, in 1990s, Nike started facing a fierce criticism for its unethical practices of conducting business in developing countries.Critics accused Nike for poor working conditions, exploitation of cheap overseas labor, and violation of minimum wage and overtime laws in countries, such as China, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Mexico, where the company had outsourced its manufactures. Instead of using ethical means to developing a global brand, Nike used child labor and every possible cheap way to increase its profits. Like many other U. S. companies, Nike manufactures its products in third world countries. Workers in these manufactures may earn as little as 12 cents per hour, working in unsafe, even dangerou s working environments.These manufactures are called sweatshops, and have triggered many objections from human right organizations for violating the basic human rights. Victoria Carty (2002) explains that: The Internet has significantly accentuated awareness of the controversies surrounding Nike’s business culture and practices. Information regarding corporate abuses has spread quickly through cyberspace, bringing bad publicity to new levels of awareness, and has facilitated mobilization among activists.It has also provided the resources and environment essential for organized mobilization in the form of a new social movement (NSM). When the labor activists and scholars began observing Nike’s labor practices, they discovered systematic violations of workers’ rights in Nike factories. Their findings resulted on health and safety absences in the working environment, discrimination against trade unions, forced overtime, unfair wages, and increasing production quota s whenever workers met them.Since assembly line workers in developing countries could not have success against the exploitation, citizens from the international community begun advocating for them and started an anti-Nike campaign to confront these unethical issues and demand corporate social responsibility and respect for human rights. These manufactures, on the other hand have allowed developing countries to expend their exports and improve their economies. Therefore, many debates have developed about globalization and global labor practices.While critics seek regulations to restrict the use of sweatshop labor, economists think that such regulations will harm the world’s poor. Proponents, who support sweatshops, argue that free trade without labor restrictions generates future prosperity and, therefore, better working conditions for the host country, by providing developed countries with access to cheaper goods. In turn, opportunities to exploit cost advantages in export ma rkets are greater. Based on their research, even terrible jobs provide some positive outcomes to a society, by benefiting others, who are not part of this employment.Workers can also earn job-related skills and provide benefits to the society at large. Eventually, a durable economic growth will improve the economic and social conditions of these people. That is why the economist Paul Krugman supports Myerson’s economic theory that â€Å"The overwhelming mainstream view among economists is that growth of this kind of employment is tremendous good news for the world's poor† (Arnold & Hartman, 2005). Sweatshops are the optimal solution for a developing nation’s economy.According to Arnold and Hartman (2005), â€Å"†¦the argument states that, however much we may not like some of what we see in the labor conditions of developing nations, this is the market at work; and the market works to generate overall improvements in economic welfare for a society. † They consider a moral obligation to perform actions that better enhance the overall satisfaction of these societies. Therefore, they argue, as many sweatshops as possible must be created and maintained. Is their evaluation legitimate?Generally, market economies have the potential to create tremendous economic growth in poor countries; ethical responsibilities would be that businesses which seek to benefit from that growth not do so by exploiting the human and natural resources of host countries (DesJardins, 2011). Although free markets generate benefits, certain boundary conditions hold firm. The relation between workers and their employers should be such that workers are fully informed about occupational health risks and their employment is truly voluntary, not through coercion.People must be able to make rational decisions about their self-interest, and no child should be held to the terms of any contract they enter into. Critics of sweatshops argue that workers may agree to work under poor conditions, because they have no other option to earn income, and they may not have enough information, prior to being employed in those sweatshops. Once they have made such choices, it would be extremely difficult for them to get out of a labor agreement and return to the previous circumstances.That is why the fact that workers agree to work under poor conditions does not mean they agreed to the kind of conditions they face. DesJardins (p. 280) explains that â€Å"Someone who chooses to surrender her money to an armed robber is also relatively better off than she otherwise would have been, but this fact does not justify the actions of the robber. † So, there is not a well-functioning free market in these countries. In contrast, they cause a social disruption, because people leave from their villages to depend on public social services in urban areas.An increased population in urban areas worsens sanitation and housing resources. Job losses from the closed factorie s in these countries result in a higher poverty. What should Nike do to show an ethical responsibility to business in these host countries? First, it should not tolerate any discretionary exploitation in the contractors it employs—for example, when managers try to extort sexual favors from vulnerable workers. Second, it should insist that the established labor laws be obeyed and also that governments enforce those rules uniformly.This will do away with impure structural exploitation. Third, it should press for structural solutions that end the exploitability of labor and do its fair share to repair the background circumstances that make taking unfair advantage possible. Certainly it should not lobby for policies that perpetuate or strengthen the structural conditions that permit businesses to exploit workers. In 1990s Nike started facing criticism from different human right organizations for poor labor conditions of its workers in foreign countries, in particular in Asian cou ntries.Nike has violated the minimum wage and overtime laws in these countries and has used the exploitation of the poor people to gain billions of dollars. These events have triggered many critics and economists to discuss and analyze the situation from a variety of ethical frameworks. Nike has tried to take actions to curb its practices and observe these manufactures to ensure that child labor is not being used. However, there is still much to do for applying the same ethical responsibility standards inside U. S. as well as in international business. Cross Cultural Perspectives For many years, Nike Inc has been known worldwide as the champion of athletic gear producers, being a global leader in business and marketing. The company experienced a tremendous growth between 1970s and 1990s, dominating the global athletic footwear and apparel market (Cartey, 2002). However, in 1990s, Nike started facing a fierce criticism for its unethical practices of conducting business in developing countries.Critics accused Nike for poor working conditions, exploitation of cheap overseas labor, and violation of minimum wage and overtime laws in countries, such as China, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Mexico, where the company had outsourced its manufactures. Instead of using ethical means to developing a global brand, Nike used child labor and every possible cheap way to increase its profits. Like many other U. S. companies, Nike manufactures its products in third world countries. Workers in these manufactures may earn as little as 12 cents per hour, working in unsafe, even dangerou s working environments.These manufactures are called sweatshops, and have triggered many objections from human right organizations for violating the basic human rights. Victoria Carty (2002) explains that: The Internet has significantly accentuated awareness of the controversies surrounding Nike’s business culture and practices. Information regarding corporate abuses has spread quickly through cyberspace, bringing bad publicity to new levels of awareness, and has facilitated mobilization among activists.It has also provided the resources and environment essential for organized mobilization in the form of a new social movement (NSM). When the labor activists and scholars began observing Nike’s labor practices, they discovered systematic violations of workers’ rights in Nike factories. Their findings resulted on health and safety absences in the working environment, discrimination against trade unions, forced overtime, unfair wages, and increasing production quota s whenever workers met them.Since assembly line workers in developing countries could not have success against the exploitation, citizens from the international community begun advocating for them and started an anti-Nike campaign to confront these unethical issues and demand corporate social responsibility and respect for human rights. These manufactures, on the other hand have allowed developing countries to expend their exports and improve their economies. Therefore, many debates have developed about globalization and global labor practices.While critics seek regulations to restrict the use of sweatshop labor, economists think that such regulations will harm the world’s poor. Proponents, who support sweatshops, argue that free trade without labor restrictions generates future prosperity and, therefore, better working conditions for the host country, by providing developed countries with access to cheaper goods. In turn, opportunities to exploit cost advantages in export ma rkets are greater. Based on their research, even terrible jobs provide some positive outcomes to a society, by benefiting others, who are not part of this employment.Workers can also earn job-related skills and provide benefits to the society at large. Eventually, a durable economic growth will improve the economic and social conditions of these people. That is why the economist Paul Krugman supports Myerson’s economic theory that â€Å"The overwhelming mainstream view among economists is that growth of this kind of employment is tremendous good news for the world's poor† (Arnold & Hartman, 2005). Sweatshops are the optimal solution for a developing nation’s economy.According to Arnold and Hartman (2005), â€Å"†¦the argument states that, however much we may not like some of what we see in the labor conditions of developing nations, this is the market at work; and the market works to generate overall improvements in economic welfare for a society. † They consider a moral obligation to perform actions that better enhance the overall satisfaction of these societies. Therefore, they argue, as many sweatshops as possible must be created and maintained. Is their evaluation legitimate?Generally, market economies have the potential to create tremendous economic growth in poor countries; ethical responsibilities would be that businesses which seek to benefit from that growth not do so by exploiting the human and natural resources of host countries (DesJardins, 2011). Although free markets generate benefits, certain boundary conditions hold firm. The relation between workers and their employers should be such that workers are fully informed about occupational health risks and their employment is truly voluntary, not through coercion.People must be able to make rational decisions about their self-interest, and no child should be held to the terms of any contract they enter into. Critics of sweatshops argue that workers may agree to work under poor conditions, because they have no other option to earn income, and they may not have enough information, prior to being employed in those sweatshops. Once they have made such choices, it would be extremely difficult for them to get out of a labor agreement and return to the previous circumstances.That is why the fact that workers agree to work under poor conditions does not mean they agreed to the kind of conditions they face. DesJardins (p. 280) explains that â€Å"Someone who chooses to surrender her money to an armed robber is also relatively better off than she otherwise would have been, but this fact does not justify the actions of the robber. † So, there is not a well-functioning free market in these countries. In contrast, they cause a social disruption, because people leave from their villages to depend on public social services in urban areas.An increased population in urban areas worsens sanitation and housing resources. Job losses from the closed factorie s in these countries result in a higher poverty. What should Nike do to show an ethical responsibility to business in these host countries? First, it should not tolerate any discretionary exploitation in the contractors it employs—for example, when managers try to extort sexual favors from vulnerable workers. Second, it should insist that the established labor laws be obeyed and also that governments enforce those rules uniformly.This will do away with impure structural exploitation. Third, it should press for structural solutions that end the exploitability of labor and do its fair share to repair the background circumstances that make taking unfair advantage possible. Certainly it should not lobby for policies that perpetuate or strengthen the structural conditions that permit businesses to exploit workers. In 1990s Nike started facing criticism from different human right organizations for poor labor conditions of its workers in foreign countries, in particular in Asian cou ntries.Nike has violated the minimum wage and overtime laws in these countries and has used the exploitation of the poor people to gain billions of dollars. These events have triggered many critics and economists to discuss and analyze the situation from a variety of ethical frameworks. Nike has tried to take actions to curb its practices and observe these manufactures to ensure that child labor is not being used. However, there is still much to do for applying the same ethical responsibility standards inside U. S. as well as in international business.