slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Industry studies are important, but not sufficient PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Industry studies are important, but not sufficient

Industry studies are important, but not sufficient

112 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Industry studies are important, but not sufficient

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Distribution of industrial capabilities vary by industry Labor/skill requirements, costs, and availability vary by industry Product characteristics vary (size and weight, last-minute configuration) Technologies for design, production, and supply-chain coordination vary Regulations differ by product and industry Distinct business cultures Institutional factors vary (rules, regulations, certifications, insurance, etc.) “Industry studies,” firm level research, including qualitative research Problem: how to compare industries, aggregate findings, and set policies. Industry studies are important, but not sufficient

  2. Increased outsourcing Computerization of product design Computerization of process technology Formalization and segmentation of work tasks (e.g., services offshoring) Increasing market volatility and industry clock-speed (Fine) Increasing geographic scope of production systems Better integration of geographically dispersed production systems Increasing services trade The rise of a new, global-scale supply-base Rising affiliated trade (but may be global suppliers…) The global value chains framework is an overarching rubric that can help to tie these trends together New features are global suppliers, global buyers, and value chain modularity, which eases coordination between the two. Cross-cutting trends

  3. The global value chains framework Comparison with other frameworks So what? Structure of the Presentation

  4. Based on a paper by: Gary Gereffi, Duke University John Humphrey, IDS Timothy Sturgeon, MIT Published in: Review of International Political Economy, 12(1) 2005 Summary of approach with related literature can be found at the Global Value Chains Initiative website: PART I: The governance of global value chains: an analytic framework

  5. 1. Transaction Costs Economics Key concept: Asset specificity Academic field: Institutional economics 2. Production Network Theory Key concepts: Trust, reputation, repeat transactions, social networks, geographic proximity, power Academic fields: Economic sociology, economic geography 3. Complementary Competencies Key concepts: Resource view of the firm, learning, core competence, co-evolution (bi-lateral and industry levels) Academic fields: Strategic management, operations management, evolutionary economics Theoretical Underpinnings(starting point: industrial organization)

  6. 1. Complexity of information required for a transaction 2. Extent to which this information can be codified 3. Supplier capabilities in relation to a transaction’s requirements Three Variables

  7. Three variables Two options for each - High or Low Eight possible outcomes

  8. The Matrix

  9. Discard Three Combinations While this combination does not yield a governance type, per se, it is an extremely important outcome because it is the reality for the vast majority of suppliers in developing countries.

  10. Five GVC Governance Types Low High Network org. forms

  11. Lead Firm Lead Firm Lead Firm Component and Material Suppliers Component and Material Suppliers Five GVC Governance Types Market Modular Relational Captive Hierarchy End Use Customers Integrated Firm Value Chain Relational Supplier Full-package Supplier Turn-key Supplier Price Suppliers Captive Suppliers Materials Degree of Explicit Coordination Low High Degree of Power Asymmetry

  12. Codification vs. innovation Increasing supplier competence vs new suppliers and new requirements Stable value chain roles (process upgrading) vs. competitive bundling and re-bundling (functional upgrading) Global value chain dynamics:Opposing forces

  13. Some Dynamics in Global Value Chain Governance  increasing complexity of transactions (harder to codify transactions, effective decrease in supplier competence)  decreasing complexity of transactions (easier to codify transactions effective decrease in supplier competence)  better codification of transactions (open or de facto standards, computerization, digitization)  de-codification of transactions (technological change, new products, new processes)  increasing supplier competence (decreased complexity, better codification, learning)  decreasing supplier competence (increased complexity, new technologies, new entrants)

  14. New product introduction in electronics manufacturing Product Firm Contract Manufacturer SMT placement Solder Re-flow Test Final Assembly Industrial design Electronic design Circuit board layout (Gerber file) Design for performance (size, weight, speed, power consumption) Foundry IC Design House Lithography Deposition Test Dicing Electronic design Circuit geometry (GDS2 file) “Pinch point” in the flow of activities (Baldwin and Clark) Codified, standardized hand-off at the inter-firm link

  15. New product introduction in electronics manufacturing Product Firm Contract Manufacturer SMT placement Solder Re-flow Test Final Assembly Industrial design Electronic design Circuit board layout (Gerber file) Design for performance (size, weight, speed, power consumption) Foundry IC Design House Lithography Deposition Test Dicing Electronic design Circuit geometry (GDS2 file) • (re)DFx • Design for manufacturability (yield) • Design for cost reduction • Design for test • Design for reliability (quality) and repair • Design for supply chain availability • Design for environmental compliance and recycling

  16. Gereffi: Global commodity chains Williamson, Powell, Ouchi, and Adler: Hybrid organizational forms (networks) located between markets and hierarchies Herrigel and Wittke: Sustained contingent collaboration Dicken et al: Actor-network theory PART II: Comparison with other frameworks

  17. Why we felt we needed to move beyond the GCC framework (other than confusion over the connotations of the word “commodity”):convergence in global value chain structure toward external networks demanded more network types than Buyer Driven Producer Driven -> Captive, Relational, and Modular (Technology and Capital Intensive) Buyer Driven (Labor Intensive) Producer Driven (Technology and Capital Intensive) Retailers Retailers Retailers Branded Technology Firms Vertically Integrated Transnational Manufacturing Firms Product Strategy, System Architecture and Detailed Design Contract Manufacturers Contract Manufacturers The GCC typology was based on a static view of technology and barriers to network entry, but both are dynamic because of technological change and learning.

  18. Comparison with other industrial organization frameworks Market Network organizational forms Hierarchy

  19. Comparison with actor-network theory (as discussed in Dicken et al, 2001)

  20. Industry-independent Began with research on electronics, autos, and apparel, but has worked well with research on horticulture and services Highlights industry differences within a unified framework Focus on roles played by firms in the chain Fragmentation and functional specialization Bundling and re-bundling of functions Focus on power in the chain Market power Coordination power, fishbone (captive) vs. web (relational) Operational model Predicts outcomes based on variable characteristics Interdisciplinary approach Has theoretical elements recognizable to economists, sociologists, geographers, and management Builds on inter-disciplinary debate over modularity, which includes engineers and business historians as well Simple framework with a manageable number of variables Appealing to policymakers and activists seeking to understand and improve the position of specific firms, industries, and locations in the global economy. Works within with a defined set of variables and outcomes that help to define research questions Framework strengths

  21. Firm-level analysis “leaves out” workers, gender, race, ethnicity, place Institutional context and path dependence matter Local, national, regional Corporate strategy and culture matter “Open pathways” at the firm level (Berger, 2005) Firm’s can and do choose governance forms International regulations matter National, bi-lateral, multi-lateral; agreements between states and multi-lateral institutions can influence global value chain patterns Underdeveloped view of consumption (productionist approach) Advanced users have power in the chain Consumer cultures and geographies can bring new meaning to products and services Multiple, overlapping, and dynamic value chain governance forms are the norm Pragmatic collaboration (Helper, MacDuffie, and Sabel) Sustained contingent collaboration (Herrigel and Wittke) Hybrid collaboration (MacDuffie and Helper) Massive coordination (Murtha et al) Framework limitations

  22. Upgrading (or not) in global value chains Consolidation, modularity, and growing knowledge intensity in GVCs affects inclusion and exclusion for late entrants Increased geographic flexibility poses new challenges for adjustment in advanced economies Part III: So What?

  23. Supplier Upgrading (and Downgrading) in Global Value Chains • More customers • Product upgrading • Inter-sectoral upgrading • Base process focus Few customers Few capabilities CAPTIVE MODULAR De-codification and reduced competence through technological change, new requirements, and new competitors RELATIONAL FULL PACKAGE SUPPLIER • More capabilities • Process upgrading • Functional upgrading • Functional bundling Many customers Many capabilities

  24. GVC Governance TypesLinks to Industrial Upgrading and Policy