PERSPECTIVES OF INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT

Perspectives of International Management



Perspectives of international management

Introduction

This paper intends to provide a critical analysis of the continuing relevance of the state to international management provided by Peter Dickens when he states that 'state really does matter.' The arguments raised by Peter in favor of the dominant role of states will be analyzed and critiqued accordingly. I believe that the state must reflect a role only to support the economic development and not creating hindrances in the process of international management. State's role must be to promote globalization through free markets rather than controlling the markets and economic development. Further, at least two models of alternative capitalism will be discussed in order to make reference to the analysis. Various roles of state described by Peter will also be analyzed.

Discussion

Peter Dickens has argued about the relevance of the state to the international management. He has opposed the fact that the changes in economic power have taken the control out of the hands of states. I believe that the concept of neo liberals about market fundamentalism is quite relevant in order to critique the ideas presented by Peter. Peter in order to convincing that 'state really does matter' ignored the various underlying facts of today's modern world.

In today's world, the international management has become much easier due to reduced trade barriers. Businesses in developed economies are looking for business opportunities in foreign countries. This search of opportunities has reduced the role of states as the basic requirement for achieving success globally requires for being competent and effective enough in international management; however suggesting that the role of the state has been undermined.

The development of technologies and enhancement in communication systems has actually empowered the market or businesses to gain economic power. The privatization of states' assets is also a one major factor that depicts the undermined role of states in the economy. Various trade and financial movements observed in United States and United Kingdom provides the justification that market is being successful in gaining economic power. The role of the states has appeared to be problematic to many of the politicians themselves (Peter, 2011).

Peter's argument that the financial crises of 2008 have changed the importance of 'free markets' is vague, and I, somehow do not agree to his idea. The role of states cannot be completely undermined at any point in time; however, depicting that all the economic power must be controlled by the governments is not a good idea. The financial crisis did impact the dominance of free market but it does not mean that all the power must be given back to the states. I believe that the role of the states must be such that supports the free market and provide the necessary guidance wherever needed. If the states start controlling their markets, economies cannot develop in the manner as they must. Governments must depict such a role that improves the financial sectors of countries rather than controlling the financial ...