Jim Foley - Bradley UniversitySuresh Sethuraghavan - CGN & Associates

NASBITE International Annual Conference, April 2010, Austin, TX

} Background ? An Historical Perspective? Current Models

} Emerging Markets? Relevance Today? Differing Needs

} Bradley & CGN Research Partnership? Approach? Outcome – The EMARQ® Model

} Discussion? Next Steps; Your Involvement !

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN2

} CORE – Company Organizational Readiness to Export? Developed in the late 1980’s by Tamir Cavusgil at

Bradley University? Later refined at Michigan State University? Remains available on Global Edge and the CITD site

– El Camino College globaledge.msu.edu elcamino.citd.org/trade_info/index.cfm

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN3

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN4

} How long has your company been exporting?} How many employees?} Gross sales?} International sales growth rate?} Do you have your own international sales distribution

organization?} What is the scope of your marketing?} Timeframe / attitude for corporate payback?} Current level of international activities?} Access to capital?} Knowledge of foreign cultures?} Prior knowledge of international business?} Management and foreign language capability?

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN5

} Attitude toward international market opportunities – opportunistic, seasonal fluctuations, enhancement of competiveness, reduce risk, etc.

} Product issues: extend life-cycle, exploit unique technology, adaptations

} Management commitment including development of plan, proactive market selection, etc.

} Country specific strengths: market acceptance, tariffs, logistics, IPR, competitive position

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN6

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN7

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN8

} This indexing study is conducted by MSU-CIBER to help companies compare the Emerging Markets with each other on several dimensions. ? Eight dimensions are chosen to represent the market potential of a country over a scale of 1 to 100. ? Each dimension is measured using various indicators, and are weighted in determining their contribution

to the Overall Market Potential Index. Example:

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN9

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN10

} Today companies accept (generally) that they must go global

} Resources in support of global trade have improved tremendously

} Global Trade facilitation has improved (technology, logistics, communication)

} Landscape is also more competitive

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN11

} BRIC(K) and VISTA countries continue to represent significant export opportunities

} In particular U.S. companies are in a good position with technology emerging markets are seeking:? Manufacturing? Energy? Medical / bio sciences? Services

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN12

} Risk is higher? Reliable & up-to-date Information? IPR enforcement? Political and economic risk

} Market-related challenges greater? Distribution channels vary in accessibility and

strength? Cultural differences more pronounced? Price pressure? Local talent & competency levels? Local competitive environment

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN13

} To explore how these higher risks and challenges impact a firm’s ability to enter emerging market, and sustain success

} To identify issues for clients (and students) so we can make them more effective working in emerging markets

} Identify the factors that determine a firm’s readiness to go to a specific emerging market

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN14

} Goals: ? To capture the key issues & challenges for a firm as it

enters an emerging market? To help a firm identify specific weaknesses (and

strengths) related to that entry? To provide a benchmark against other firms

} EMARQ is specific to a firm and to a selected market

} Helps to show the interdependencies of the various elements

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN15

EMARQ

Core Competencies•Strategic Commitment•Financial•Human Capital•Supporting Activities

Internal Strengths•R & D + IP Development•Technology•Market Intelligence•Marketing & Brand Equity

Execution Elements•Entry Mode & Channel Management•Scale of Operations•Supply Chain & Logistics•Knowledge of Doing Business

} All of the 12 elements have been broken down into sub-elements

} Online survey has been developed against which a firm rates their position on each sub-element on a scale:

Strongly disagree / Moderately disagree / Neutral / Moderately Agree / Strongly Agree

} We then use a back-end model to convert this to a score

} Certain items can also be flagged as a critical go/no-go issue to be address, which is separate from the final EMARQ score

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN18

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN22

} Do you see this as relevant to your clients and students?

} How could you use this model?} We need data from both highly qualified firms

and those less so against which we can develop benchmarks

EMARQ ©2010 BU / CGN24