Competitive dynamics of an industry

at
Categories
Tags

 

Imagine you work for a firm involved in children toy manufacturing (You can also choose other industry). Now discuss the major changes in that sector over the past 25 years in terms of what
contributes to competitiveness. Who (which firms) have been the winners and losers, and why? You
are trying to get a feel in this for how technological change can shape the competitive dynamics of an
industry so think about questions like these:

How has the industry changed – and how has technology helped (or could it help) deal with these changes?
What new technologies have emerged – and how have they been used?
What are the main market demands (e.g. price, quality, design, customization, speed of
response, etc.) and how has technology affected the ability of firms to offer these?
If a new entrant came into the industry what would he/she have to offer to become a market
leader – and how might technology help them do so?
In addition to above include a framework similar to below:

Sample Solution

The children toy manufacturing sector has seen major changes in the past 25 years due to technological advances. Distribution and logistics have been greatly impacted by innovations such as automated production, inventory management systems and just-in-time delivery which have enabled manufacturers to overcome challenges faced by traditional retail stores such as limited shelf space, low customer reach, and inefficient product movement (Papagiannidis et al., 2020). These advancements have allowed companies to reduce costs while increasing their ability to scale up production quickly & easily – resulting in an increase in profitability for many firms operating within this space.

Furthermore – the development of online stores has completely revolutionized how consumers purchase toys & games. This not only allows customers to purchase products from virtually anywhere but also provides a more convenient shopping experience compared to physical store visits. Likewise – with the introduction of new technologies such as 3D printing, augmented reality applications and virtual showrooms; it is now possible for firms in this industry to offer customized solutions tailored specifically for each individual customer thus creating a more engaging user experience (Lal et al., 2019).

As far as winners & losers are concerned – giants like Mattel Inc. have been able benefit tremendously from these technological advancements especially when it comes to increasing operational efficiency & reducing costs simultaneously. On the other hand however smaller competitors who can’t keep up with larger firms technology-wise may find themselves at a disadvantage if they are unable compete effectively against them on multiple fronts (price being one example); furthermore failure innovate accordingly could lead them falling behind over time should demand shift away from them as well.

It is evident that technological change has played an important role shaping competitive dynamics within this industry mainly through improvements distribution/logistics operations while allowing companies provide better customer experiences too thanks the emergence of newer technologies mentioned earlier. Ultimately however any organization wishing remain competitive must continuously strive keep improving their processes order stay ahead competition else risk losing out potential market share long run.

such things but never always (Begby et al (2006b), Page 326-31). This is supported by Frowe, who measures the legitimate tactics according to proportionality and military necessity. It depends on the magnitude of how much damage done to one another, in order to judge the actions after a war. For example, one cannot simply nuke the terrorist groups throughout the middle-east, because it is not only proportional, it will damage the whole population, an unintended consequence. More importantly, the soldiers must have the right intention in what they are going to achieve, sacrificing the costs to their actions. For example: if soldiers want to execute all prisoners of war, they must do it for the right intention and for a just cause, proportional to the harm done to them. This is supported by Vittola: ‘not always lawful to execute all combatants…we must take account… scale of the injury inflicted by the enemy.’ This is further supported by Frowe approach, which is a lot more moral than Vittola’s view but implies the same agendas: ‘can’t be punished simply for fighting.’ This means one cannot simply punish another because they have been a combatant. They must be treated as humanely as possible. However, the situation is escalated if killing them can lead to peace and security, within the interests of all parties.
Overall, jus in bello suggests in wars, harm can only be used against combatants, never against the innocent. But in the end, the aim is to establish peace and security within the commonwealth. As Vittola’s conclusion: ‘the pursuit of justice for which he fights and the defence of his homeland’ is what nations should be fighting for in wars (Begby et al (2006b), Page 332). Thus, although today’s world has developed, we can see not much different from the modernist accounts on warfare and the traditionists, giving another section of the theory of the just war. Nevertheless, we can still conclude that there cannot be o

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.
Hi, how can I help?