International Business Environment

Assignment Brief

PGBM04 International Business Environment

Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion of this module, students will have demonstrated.

Knowledge

K1 Their understanding of the concepts, terminology & theoretical models associated with international business policies and strategies.

K2 An understanding of the political, socio-cultural, economic and technological factors that have been found to influence variations in international organisational business structures and management styles.

K3 An awareness of the relationship between national and organisational cultures

K4 Their knowledge of the conceptual theories of ‘internationalisation, innovation and competitive advantage’ to different industries and locations Skills

S1 How to apply relevant theoretical concepts to real-world business (environment) dilemmas and issues, producing a diagnosis and possible solutions.

You are expected to develop your own arguments for each, based on your own critical reflection, as well as reading and discussion in the workshops. This is not a closed-book assessment. You are expected to use research-based academic work, such as journal articles, books, and other sources. Remember to provide full references, using Harvard referencing, at the end of each answer for any material that you refer to.

Knowledge:

1. Critically review and apply concepts, terminology & theoretical models associated with international business policies and strategies.
2. Demonstrate an understanding of the political, socio-cultural, economic and technological factors that have been found to influence variations in international organisational business structures and leadership and management styles
3. Critically assess the relationship between national and organisational cultures
4. Relate the conceptual theory of ‘internationalisation’, innovation and competitive advantage to different industries and locations

1. As an individual apply relevant theoretical concepts to real-world business (environment) dilemmas or issues, producing a diagnosis and suggesting possible outcomes.
2. Drawing on relevant theory, critically compare and contrast the activities of two companies (of your choice) in the same industrial sector, as they develop new technology to try to maintain their competitive advantage. In doing so consider their current achievements and potential for sustaining high performance.
3. To what extent will the alleged rising power of the BRICs and the MINTs alter the balance of power in the global financial and political institutions? What are the implications for multinational enterprises seeking to access and develop business in these markets?
4. For a global company from a BRIC economy contemplating a joint venture with a foreign partner in a European Union country (of your choice) what are the cultural difficulties likely to be 4 | Page encountered? In addition what are your recommendations for how to enable the joint venture to succeed? 
5. As an adviser to a government of a developing economy, you are asked to provide a critical analysis which sets out what policies the government could pursue to
1. bolster national innovative capacities;
2. maximize the benefit of the from technology transfer afforded by its inward investors in manufacturing

Sample Answer

Sustaining Advantage through New Technology in Electric Vehicles Tesla and BYD

Introduction

Electric vehicles have become a proving ground for technological leadership and operational excellence. Among the most visible competitors are Tesla and BYD, firms that grew from different contexts yet now contest the same global market. This essay critically compares how each company develops and deploys new technology to maintain competitive advantage. It applies established theories of competitive strategy and innovation, and it evaluates both current achievements and prospects for sustaining high performance.

Strategic lenses for comparison

Porter’s idea of competitive advantage frames how firms create and defend value through cost leadership or differentiation. The resource based view and the dynamic capabilities perspective add depth by emphasising rare, inimitable resources and the organisational routines that let firms sense opportunities, seize them, and reconfigure assets over time. Disruption theory and diffusion of innovations help to explain how new technologies reshape markets and how quickly users adopt them. These lenses guide the analysis of Tesla and BYD.

Technology portfolios and trajectories

Tesla’s technology stack prioritises software centric differentiation. The firm invests heavily in in house operating systems, over the air updates, driver assistance algorithms and a vertically integrated powertrain. Its vehicles are designed around a centralised electronic architecture that reduces parts complexity and allows new features to be rolled out to the fleet rapidly. In energy storage, Tesla developed its own battery modules and packs, co locating cell production with partners and pushing proprietary manufacturing processes for higher energy density and faster throughput. The company’s approach to autonomy has been vision first, building large scale data pipelines and custom chips to process camera inputs, aiming for an end state where software progress drives step changes in perceived value.

BYD’s portfolio evolved from its origins in battery manufacturing. That heritage underpins its leadership in cost effective lithium iron phosphate chemistries, blade style cell to pack integration and flexible platform designs. BYD’s strength lies in production engineering and component breadth. It manufactures batteries, motors, power electronics and increasingly its own semiconductors, enabling tight cost control and rapid design iteration. BYD’s software is improving, yet its distinctive trajectory has been to standardise robust, affordable technologies at scale rather than to differentiate primarily through cutting edge software features.

Both firms are converging on integrated skateboard platforms, thermal management innovations and tighter electrical architectures. The difference is emphasis. Tesla pursues performance and software led user experience as primary levers, while BYD pursues manufacturability, reliability and cost discipline across a very broad product range.

Continued...