Reference no: EM131263061
According to the PDF case material, answering the following short-answer-questions in your thoughts and words, you don't need to do research on that. You don't have to write super long on each question as long as you have one page in double space.
Homeplus: Riding the Korean Retailing Rollercoaster
The Objective of the case is to illustrate the need for local responsiveness and global efficiency
1) Analyze Korea's economic situation when Tesco entered the market in 1999. What were the main factors that induced the market entry of Western retail firms?
2) Evaluate the joint venture creation by Tesco and Samsung. What were the pros and cons for Tesco to choose a joint venture with a local partner as its mode of entry in Korea? What were the pros and cons from Samsung's perspective?
3) What are the most important characteristics of the Korean retail market? What challenges do these pose for foreign retailers? What are possible ways for them to meet these challenges?
4) Evaluate the entry strategies and managerial policies adapted by Walmart, Carrefour and Tesco in the Korean market. What are the possible reasons why Walmart and Carrefour failed and Tesco succeeded in Korea?
5) Identify the core competences of Homeplus compared with its current competitors. Assess its competitive position through a SWOT analysis.
6) What are the major challenges that Homeplus is facing now? How should it meet these challenges to secure sustainable growth I the Korean retail industry?
Taiwan: Only the Paranoid Survive
The objective of this case is to describe an evolution of the Taiwanese economy, the policies and institutions that shape it and a variety of indicators of its economic performance.
1) How well has the Taiwanese economy performed since the KMT takeover in 1950?
2) To what factors do you attribute this performance?
3) Evaluate the role of the Taiwanese state in the establishment of a semi-conductor industry in Taiwan? Was its role positive or negative, and why?
4) As you compare the diagnoses of The Economist and Robert Wade, what lessons do you take away from this case?