In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Introduction In his most recent book, Thomas Friedman (2008) cited a Daimler advertising slogan used to promote its Smart “Fourfor” compact car. The slogan reads as follows: “German engineering, Swiss innovation, American nothing.” This slogan implies that the automobile advertised is superior because it is the product of German engineering and Swiss innovation and has no input from designers or manufacturers in the United States. On the one hand, this particular slogan describes the unfortunately weak competitive position of and low esteem in which U.S. automobile manufacturers are held throughout the world. On the other hand, it suggests a weak or ineffective understanding of cross-cultural dynamics and the capabilities that are held by U.S. firms. Thus, it likely explains one of the major reasons that Daimler’s acquisition of Chrysler failed so miserably. Although this acquisition had the potential for creating considerable synergy between the two companies because each had some valuable capabilities that were complementary to each other (Hitt et al. 2001), the merger failed. It failed partly because Daimler dominated the American manufacturing operations after acquiring Chrysler and lost many of the most qualified and capable managers and engineers in the Chrysler organization. Further, it failed to effectively integrate the two businesses. As a result, it eventually had to sell off the Chrysler assets at a considerable loss from its original purchase price. C H A P T E R 1 3 Title VI and the Global Competitiveness of U.S. Firms Michael A. Hitt 283 In the current global competitive landscape, it is absolutely essential that businesses , regardless of their home base, have an effective understanding of different cultures and different countries’ institutional environments. Without this understanding , they are unlikely to be competitive in international markets and even unlikely to be successful in their home domestic market competing against multinational firms with home bases in other countries (Hitt et al. 1998; Hitt et al. 2009). Globalization has led to a penetration of many domestic markets by foreign firms, making these markets much more competitive than in previous times. As such, Hitt and He (2008) suggest that we can no longer discuss globalization in the future tense. Firms now must operate in a highly dynamic and rivalrous global competitive landscape. In our current environment, major country stock exchanges across the world are interrelated, with each affected by the others. Currencies’ values fluctuate regularly and sometimes significantly. For reasons noted above and more, the economic crisis in the later part of the first decade of the twenty-first century is global, rather than domestic. To help prepare U.S. citizens, U.S. businesses, and U.S. society in general to better operate in this dynamic and complex environment, there has been a series of legislation, regulations, and programs developed by the U.S. federal government that speak to these concerns. In this chapter, I review briefly the history of the relevant legislation and programs, with special focus in this chapter on their effects on business education and the competitiveness of U.S. firms. On the front of the Norlin Library at the University of Colorado, there is a statement chiseled into the stone facing stating, “Who knows only his own generation remains always a child.” Thus, it is important to understand history to better understand the present and the opportunities for the future. The following sections examine the history of Title VI and U.S. business competitiveness. History—Title VI and Global Competitiveness The 1950s–1960s The history of important legislation begins with the passage of TitleVI of the National Defense Education Act of 1958 (NDEA). Although U.S. concern for international education to support growing foreign relations had begun in the 1930s and strongly increased after the establishment of the United Nations, the NDEA itself was precipitated by the launch of the Sputnik satellite by the Soviet Union in 1957, which produced widespread alarm in the United States; Congress responded with the passage of the NDEA, including Title VI. The original beneficiaries of Title VI were intended to be individuals entering the teaching profession or entering public service. The second important piece of legislation is the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, referred to as the Fulbright-Hays Act. This act was aimed at promoting foreign exchange programs, in the hope of better coordinating 284 M I C H A E L A . H I T T [3.138.175.180] Project MUSE (2024-04-25 07:58 GMT...

Share