Globalization is the intensification process of cultural, political, economic and cultural ties throughout the entire world. The principal aim of globalization is the bringing together of both the socio-economic as well as the political theories all over the globe. Moreover, it equally ensures presence of all aspects of the world in any particular global arena. Increased trade barriers breakdown and increased world market integrations are the major dealings of globalization. Moreover, globalization can be viewed as the systematic restructured evolution interactive phases between nations through the breakdown of barriers in communication, culture, commerce and many other areas of concern.
The major impact of globalization is that it brings about instances of technology changes in the commercial and industrial companies. On a more selective ground, new technology is indeed brought about in the process of globalization. Nonetheless, opposition of globalization by some companies does not translate to complete isolation from the international forum. But as per to date, no globalization advocate calls for selectivity of the process. More precisely, Pepsi and Coca-Cola companies are found in many countries though they offer very little in terms of new technological advancements. In addition to the two, designer clothes and cosmetic manufacturers also bring non- consequential new technology. The same situations can be replicated in the cases of non-durable consumer goods manufacturers and a majority of the advertising companies. Moreover, the impact of globalization is less significant in the developing countries. For instance, the investment in consumer goods and automobiles manufacture in these countries is detrimental to the cultures and structures of the existing companies. This is because the assembly lines and capital equipment used in the production processes are mostly imported. Furthermore, this has the implication that little development and design work is carried out in the particular countries. Thus, in majority of the instances, all that takes place is the assembling locally of kits that are knocked-down. Therefore, the end analysis in these countries is the stagnation of the particular countries commercial and industrial companies due to the fact that the up gradation of technology is not equivalent to that of the developed nations. On the other hand, proponents of unrestricted globalization argue that it yields unconditional liberalization and thus, resulting to the attraction of high capital investment and technology all over the world economies. Consequently, allowing the world??™s Pepsis and Cokes to enter all the world markets also brings in other major global enterprises. However, the existence of these global enterprises all over the states of the world leads to sucking out of technology rather than enhancing. This is because majority of the technological investments are based on divisions give research assistance to the other developed countries counterparts, or the development of software when demanded. In addition, no manufacturing plants are set up or any agreements on technology transfer are signed with the commercial and industrial companies in the developing countries. Similarly, the parent companies market and own all the developed technology meaning that the accruing benefits to the local enterprises as a result of this technological globalization are very few. The worst outcome is that these global enterprises have access to all the privileges and perks for the exploitation of the commercial and industrial companies??™ intellectual capital. These privileges comprise of write-offs and breaks as pertains to taxation. Moreover, some companies are driven out of business or worse more their structures distorted due to the preferential treatment given to the global enterprises in the process of scarce resource allocation.
Most of the globalization advocates claim that on a majority of cases, it leads to growth acceleration in both the commercial and industrial companies rather than destroying them. However, a critical analysis in past years Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) has revealed that a greater portion of the investment has not been applied in new productive capacities creation. On the contrary, most of the investments have been channeled in the taking over of the accessible enterprises or towards speculative stock market investments. As a result, majority of the Multi National Corporations and, the world??™s best known IT companies have recorded no benefits from the substantial high inflow of Foreign Direct Investments.
On the other hand, arguments for the globalization process are mostly based on the practice of transparency by multinational enterprises in their day to day business dealings as well as the upholding of the work place ethics. However, numerous instances do exist where these corporations not only portray lack of transparency and ethics, but have in the real essence led to breakage of the law. In the next place, efficiency is another most repeated argument favoring globalization as far as commercial and industrial companies are concerned. Nonetheless, the definition of efficiency is usually not that clear. On another point, the instigators of globalization are of the opinion that the mere presence of multinationals as a result of globalization would lead to a significant decrease of corrupt practices. They opine that the ending of corrupt practices is crucial for the restoration and upholding of commercial and industrial companies efficiency.
In conclusion, globalization has had dynamic impact on the cultural and structural organization of majority of the commercial and industrial companies. However, while the spread and power of globalization seems to have had tremendous growth, MNCs and individual governments do not have the necessary control they would want to exercise. This has resulted to the multiplication of technologically and ecologically driven.