Acer’s strategy has been described as “divide and conquer.” Compare and contrast this to Lenovo’s strategy.
To compare both Acer’s and Lenovo, they were both leaders in personal computers and software. They both had a market share worth millions of dollars. Lenovo had emerged as the market leader in the personal computer industry in the Asia Pacific Region except in Japan with a market share of 11.3% for leading PC Companies in terms of market share. Acer’s had the leading marketer of Notebook and desktop PCs in greater China. Acer’s posted sales of 11.3% billion which also produces other products such as flat-screen monitors and personal digital assistants. Acer’s was able to become Taiwan’s number one exporter by manufacturing and marketing computers sold under its own brand name. In my opinion, the divide and conquer with Acer’s means it is easier to handle the little companies instead of one large company. Acer’s believed that it was important to build a name locally (regional) before going global. With Lenovo they wanted to move straight to global. Lenovo wanted to start marketing out of the Asia Pacific region to areas such as Hong Kong and Spain.
Explain how the “global markets-Local Markets” paradox figures into Stan Shih’s strategy for China.
Global Markets are the products of the company. The company is trying to expand their products across the board but with the Local Markets it’s all about the people; the people in the company and the customers. The company will have to think outside the box which is global but it has to act local by taking care of the people who buy and sell the product. With this in mind, someone who thinks globally is still a product of his or her own culture. Stan Shih’s Strategy for China was that it is crucial for Acer to develop a strong brand image in China before moving on to other countries. Work with Markets that share the same characteristics is better than moving your product to a different region...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document