c
  

 


   
 
c   c


p

        
 



       pp
pp




p


p 





 






c 
  
 
c  c
  c

 
The globalization process has been neatly described as ³the expansion of free-market relations
and economic liberalism´. Financier George Soros has defined its essence as ³the development
of global financial markets, the growth of transnational corporations, and their increasing
domination over national economies. A less restrictive definition by Peter Dicken sees
globalization, or ³the complex interaction between Trans-National Corporations and states set
within the context of a volatile technological environment as something much less fundamentally
economic than the previous quotations suggest.

Seemingly determined to place globalization within a more inter-disciplinary conceptual

framework, Britain¶s Department for International Development define the big G as ³the
growing interdependence and interconnectedness of the modern world through increased flows
of goods, services, capital, people and information. The process is driven by technological
advances and reductions in the costs of international transactions, which speed technology and
ideas, raise the share of trade in world production and increase the mobility of capital´. Or, in
layman¶s terms, ³how our lives are becoming increasingly intertwined with those of distant
people and places around the world ± economically, politically and culturally.

Thus, in many ways, globalisation is many things to many people, the definitions each adopts
largely conforming to his or her own particular worldview or set of social and economic
circumstances, experiences or prejudices. Seeing globalisation merely in terms of economic
liberalism ignores the powerful effects of cultural exchange, both benign and destructive. Seeing
globalisation as some battle for hegemony between nation states and powerful non-state actors
ignores the non-global actuality of most trans-national business. As human geographers point
out, global processes are in fact complex strata of varied relationships and interactions
connecting and influencing people in diverse places and organizations. World environments and
histories are not shaped in some predetermined fashion from above. Rather, they¶re shaped by a
multitude of forces, frequently change, and are experienced differently from place to place and
person-to-person.
All that said, any understanding of globalization has at its heart two main notions ± free trade and
the role government have in it.
The free market economic system, as currently practiced, has been shown to promote more
economic growth and prosperity than any other economic system. Of the four main economic
systems, two, traditional and market, are not currently practiced A form of traditional economy
may be practiced by remote tribes in New Guinea or the Amazon but of course this takes place
within the sovereign territory of a recognized nation state. Pure market economies don¶t exist
and are unlikely to as long as governments exist and special interest groups have their ear. The
two systems most familiar to us from the 20th Century are planned and mixed economies. Since
the collapse of the Soviet system, planned economies are not as prevalent as they once were but
still exist in states like North Korea, Iran and Cuba. While the current phase of globalization has
been spurred by that collapse, the negative effects of economic liberalism, particularly in
emerging and less developed nations, could give rise to another era of centrally planned
economies. Popular discontent with economic upheavals has been exploited recently by autocrats
like Venezuela¶s Hugo Chavez to return his country¶s economic system back a more familiar
command system.

 !p"#$% #
&'(%$
[ Productive resources privately owned
[ Allocation of resources determined automatically by the price system
'&)!$!&*
[ Productive resources owned by the tribe
[ Allocation of resources determined by leaders or tribal groups

!+%)
[ Productive resources mainly privately owned but with some state ownership
[ Allocation of resources mainly determined automatically by the price system but with
some government influence
*&%)
[ Ôost productive resources owned by the state
[ Allocation of resources mainly determined by the state
.
System Characteristics
Traditional [ Productive resources owned by the tribe
[ Allocation of resources determined by leaders or tribal groups

Ôarket [ Productive resources privately owned

[ Allocation of resources determined automatically by the price system
Planned [ Ôost productive resources owned by the state
[ Allocation of resources mainly determined by the state
Ôixed [ Productive resources mainly privately owned but with some state ownership
[ Allocation of resources mainly determined automatically by the price
system but with some government influence

Ôixed economic systems are largely the norm ranging in the intensity of their adherence to free
market principles. On one extreme Taiwan has a heavily market dominated economy, while
China at the other extreme is still largely centrally planned, though with increasing degrees of
free private enterprise. It is this variation in the degree of openness of national economies that
make globalisation the chimera it is. Commenting on the widespread belief in the inevitability of
globalisation, economist Philip Legrain bluntly reminds us of the lessons of history. ³We have
opened our borders to international trade over the past fifty years; we can close them again´

The openness of national economies is measured by a formula taking the average of exports and
imports of goods and services and dividing this by current GDP in U.S. dollars. Applying this
formula to five apparently similar freemarket economies show wide degrees of actual openness.
Figure 2: International trade openness

Our understanding of how globalised the world actually is challenged when we study the
economic statistics of first world nations. While the United States symbolises globalisation for
many people around the world it is sobering to consider that nine-tenths of what Americans
consume is produced within the U.S. While the first wave of globalisation in the 19th Century
was in many ways an outcome of British economic policy, three-quarters of British shop
purchases are of domestically made goods, nine-tenths goods from within the E.U
So why is it that purported freemarket economies can in practice be relatively closed to trade?
There are many obvious reasons. Culturally, locally made food products are more likely to
appeal to the New Zealand palate than, say, the Ôongolian one because they are made by people
who understand Kiwi tastes. Ôany services, for example hairdressing, can only be traded locally.
These factors are examples of the naturally occurring restraints on globalisation. Other restraints
can be summed under the notion of protection, the deliberate policy on the part of governments
to erect trade barriers such as tariffs or quotas in order to protect domestic industries from
foreign competition.

Arguments to support protective practices are many. Some are economic arguments; others
based more on political or emotive concerns. A major argument and one that carries a lot of
weight with voters is that protection is necessary to combat unemployment. This argument is at
its most attractive during recessionary periods, as most dramatically seen in the depression of the
1930s. The arguments points to the benefit gained by diverting expenditure away from imported
goods to locally made economies. Not only do the workers in that industry benefit through
secure employment, but the local businesses they trade with benefit too.


p


Arguments for the protection of domestic industry
Economic Arguments
Non-Economic Arguments
Ôajor
Ôinor
Political motivation
Environmental protection
Strategic reasons
Infant industry argument
To combat unemployment
To promote diversification in trade
Retaliation for tariffs imposed by other countries
To protect a home market
Protection against competition of cheap foreign labour
To prevent dumping.
Of course, while this relatively easy and expedient political measure can produce tangible
benefits, there are many counter-arguments against it. For one, protecting goods at home will
cause a similar reaction in other countries, thus reducing the ability of New Zealand exports to
compete. On top of that, reducing imports of a foreign product will cause unemployment in that
country, reducing foreign workers ability to buy New Zealand products. Protection will also
discourage innovation in our domestic industry, reducing our competitiveness in the long term.
Finally, this practice comes up against the theory of competitive advantage.

Few economic theories are as perplexing, counterintuitive and fundamental to our understanding
of modern economics as David Ricardo¶s Law of Comparative AdvantageThe theory holds that
countries can benefit from trade even if one of those countries has an absolute advantage in the
production of all goods and servicesTo understand the theory we can look at two countries
Ôundania and Lalaland. Both produce jandals and singlets. The efficient industries of Ôundania
are able to make 100 jandals and 140 singlets per hour worked. Over in crumby Lalaland the
workers are able to produce only 80 jandals per hour worked and a decidedly poor 60 singlets.
Purely on the basis of these figures, Ôundania has an absolute advantage in producing both
jandals and singlets and would probably be best having nothing to do with shoddy Lalaland and
their drunken oafs of workers. In international production terms, based on the universal 40 hour
week, world production of jandals would be 180 x 40hrs = 7200 units and singlet production
would be 200 x 40 = 8000 units.

Jandals Singlets
Ôundania 100/hr 140/hr
Lalaland 80/hr 100/hr
However, what if the factor costs of the Ôundania jandal production was more efficient than that
of the Lalanian and Ôundanian workers switched all their time to jandal production. The extra
40 hours formerly spend producing singlets would now allow Ôundania to produce 8000 units of
jandals a week. This would free the Lalanians to concentrate on singlets, now producing 8000 a
week. While overall world production of jandals has remained stable, jandal production has
increased considerably. Ôundanians have a comparative advantage in jandal production and
world production has risen due to their specialization, even though before their decision they had
an absolute advantage over their neighbours in the production of both commodities. Tied to this
theory is the principle known as Say¶s Law, often summarised as ³supply creates its own
demand´ Overall supply of jandals and singlets has increased, and with higher productivity and
wages comes the increased ability of both Ôundanians and Lalanians to consume more.
When Ricardo made his arguments in the 19th Century, the structure of world trade was quite
different from today. In 1888, 76% of world trade was in agricultural commodities and 9% in
manufactures. One hundred years later agricultural products only accounted for 9% of world
trade, 57% of it being in manufactures and 34% accounting for servicesIn today¶s economy it is
more important for a nation to develop competitive advantage in advanced industrial production
than its ability to benefit from the comparative advantage of ³inherited endowments of factors of
production´ like land and minerals. While traditional thought focused on cost efficiencies due to
factor or scale advantages, now advantage is created through continuous innovation and change.
Critics of globalisation as currently manifested point to the apparent effects of Comparative
Advantage theory as applied by bodies like the IÔF in developing nations. While the theory
suggests that a country¶s income will be enhanced by moving resources from less to more
productive uses, Stiglitz suggests that in practice resources in the developing world are often
moved from low productivity uses to º
 productivity uses. After liberalising their trade under
developed world pressure, developing countries see their inefficient industries close due to
competition from their more efficient foreign competitors. While Comparative Advantage would
suggest that new, more productive jobs would be created once the old, inefficient industries and
protectionist policies have gone, in reality job creation is more a result of capital and
entrepreneurship, two things that developing nations are most lacking .

Proponents of free market theories point to decentralisation of control, economic motivation of

producers and consumers, efficiencies of production and the rapid communication of information
on market activity to consumers and producers are inherent strengths of the systemThe key
strengths of the free market have been summarised as:

1. Adam Smith¶s free market µinvisible hand¶ co-ordinates economic activity, thus
removing the need for a huge bureaucracy of planners.
 2. Consumers have powerful economic incentives to learn and maintain skills that are
valuable to other people. Likewise, producers have powerful economic incentives to
produce goods and services that people value.
3. Producers have powerful economic incentives to produce goods and services using
production methods that minimise resource use and minimise waste.
4. Information is quickly and efficiently generated and passed on to consumers and
producers that prevent shortages and surpluses of goods.

There are also apparent weaknesses in the system, though whether these manifest themselves due
to the imperfection of the system or the inadequacy of its implementation is open to debate.
These apparent weaknesses include the propensity for the free market to create winners and
losers, characterised by wide gaps between rich and poor. The move towards a more freemarket
economy has seen great social upheaval in many nations across the world. Commenting in the
early 1990s Graeme Hunt pointed out that ³freemarket structural change«such as deregulation
or greater consumption does not necessarily produce immediate economic gains. In fact, through
increasing unemployment, it can have the reverse effect´. The dilemma most politicians face is
to balance the need for good economic policy against the short-term pain like unemployment that
some of those policies can create. As Buchholz has it, ³we may define good economics as
policies that produce positive gains even though victims may be created. Because even good
economic policies often produce victims, economists have a very tough time persuading
democratic governments to take good advice. Good economics may not be popular economics,
especially in the short run´

The human features of globalisation are naturally the most controversial. On one hand an
economist like Legrain can say that we will never live in a truly global world as long as
geographical and local cultural differences remain. Legrain suggests that humans are largely
sedentary creatures, preferring to stay in their own patch rather than moving to outside
unknowns. The great human feature of the first era of globalisation was the spectacular mass
migrations of people across the world. America largely welcomed and absorbed millions of Irish,
Germans, Italians, Russians, Scandinavians etc. Ôasses more settled in Australia, New Zealand,
South Africa and Latin America. Non-European migrations saw millions of Indians and Chinese
spread to every corner of the world. All were prompted largely by poverty, lack of opportunity or
repression in their own lands. Free and easy movement of labour is now a luxury relatively few
can achieve. Even once highly in demand Europeans face stringent residency rules to come to
countries like New Zealand or the U.S. The poor Irish who sailed in squalid, but legal, µcoffin
ships¶ to America have now been replaced by poor Asians sailing in highly illegal coffin ships to
Australia. ³The salient feature of globalization is that it allows financial capital to move around
freely: by contrast, the movement of people remains heavily regulated´. Soros believes that the
globalisation of financial markets has radically transformed the ability of the post-1945 µwelfare
state¶ to tax capital, and thus provide a ³social safety net´ for those segments of society least able
to adapt to the quantum changes in the labour market. Without freer movement of people,
globalisation will remain only a partly evolved notion.

At the core of much economic debate is the question of government and what role it does or
should play in the economy. When an eminent economist like Joseph Stiglitz says, ³I believe
governments need to ± and can ± adopt policies that help countries grow but that also ensure that
growth is shared more equitably´, we could nod our head at the noble sentiment, but still
question the statement. What is the relationship between policy and practice? Should
governments stay out of economics? If not, to what degree should they interfere? Is human
equity possible or desirable or simply some unnatural, though laudable sentiment? Theories on
effect of government policy have been a central feature of economic history.
³Ôercantilists«said government generally helps the economy«Smithians said that government
hurts. Keynesians said government helps. Ôonetarists said government can help, but often hurts.
Public Choice economists said that governments usually hurts«Rational Expectations
economists laugh at all their predecessors and proclaim that government intervention is an
illusion«which cannot change reality very much´
New Zealand in 2006 has a sprightly, if vulnerable, mixed market economy characterised by
solid freemarket policies and cautious, if growing, government intervention. Our national
prosperity is largely centred on the continuation of the globalizing process, particularly the
creation of truly open markets in the first world economies. The effects on New Zealand society
of a global economic retreat into protectionism and isolationism would be severe.
  ,-..
.


While other trade barriers such as tariffs and quotas have been considerably reduced under the
role of GATT/WTO, antidumping activities are threatening to become the most important trade
restricting device. Thinking about antidumping as a modern trade instrument, one might find it
hard to imagine that the origin of antidumping practices dates back to a century ago when
Canada adopted the first antidumping law in 1904.

Prior to the 1980s, there were only a few countries who were relatively active in pursuing
antidumping actions. They are nowadays regarded as 5 traditional users, and these include
Canada, the United States, the European Union, Australia, and New Zealand. Today the situation
changes a lot. Ôore than 75 countries (treating the EU as one) have adopted antidumping law
and the number of antidumping investigations has risen sharply during the last two decades.

The increasing use of antidumping policy has gained a lot of attention from policy makers as
well as academics. The 1990s witnessed a fast growing body of literature concerning several
aspects of antidumping. This leads economists to a consensus that antidumping actions do a lot
more harm than good. An eminent trade theorist, Arvind Panagariya, even suggests that
antidumping should be outlawed.

According to the WTO rules, a firm is said to dump if it sells its product in another country at a
price less than the normal value. The normal value is defined as the price it charges in its local
country, or in a third country, or the constructed price (the constructed price is calculated by the
authority concerned when the first two are unavailable). Therefore, it does not matter whether a
foreign firm sells at a higher or lower price than the domestic ones; as long as the price charged
in the domestic country is below that in its own country, the firm can be found allegedly
dumping.

Nevertheless, one may still believe that dumping is unfair because products of the same quality
should be priced equally wherever they are sold. But, thinking about it more carefully, it is rather
strange if the prices are identical everywhere. There are so many factors that make price differ
across markets; tariff, market size, demand structure, and so on. Ôoreover, dumping can be
viewed as a sign of price discrimination. This common business practice is acceptable
domestically and there is no reason why it cannot be done internationally. If it is good to sell
concert tickets to school students at a cheaper price than those for adults, why is it bad to sell
medicines in Uganda at a price less than in the United States?

The only unacceptable type of dumping is predatory dumping which is rather similar to the
wrong perception mentioned above except that price differential between two countries needs to
be taken into account as well. By all means, this kind of dumping is really harmful. Fortunate
enough, it is very unlikely (if ever possible) that predatory dumping could occur at all. In theory,
if we allow new entrants to compete in the market, the dumping firm will never be able to raise
the price up, and it will never be able to sell below cost forever either. In reality, there is no
evidence of such kind of dumping.


,  ,

Ôargin of dumping forms the basis for investigation. The extent to which the product in question
undercuts the price of domestic like products is defined as the margin of dumping. To establish
the margin of dumping, one would have to determine the normal price of the product being
dumped, and price at which the product is being exported, or dumped. In general, the margin of
dumping is determined by subtracting the export price of the product from the normal selling
price of the product. However, this may involve a complex calculation by incorporating several
factors, requiring adjustments and construction of the cost factors. The normal price of the
product is determined by its average price as sold in the domestic market of the exporting
country, during the normal course of trade. If the pricing of the product cannot be determined,
then the normal price will be determined by examining the selling price of similar products.
Section 2.2 provides that ³ when there is no sales of like product in the ordinary course of trade
in the domestic market of the exporting country, or because of the particular market situation or
the low volume of sales in the domestic market of the exporting country such sales do not permit
a proper comparison, the margin of dumping shall be determined by comparison with a
comparable price of the like product when exported to an appropriate third country, provided that
this price is representative, or with cost of production in the country of origin plus a reasonable
amount for administrative, selling and general costs and for profits.´


 /&$0$!)1 /!2

The AD filing trends world over during the post-WTO era indicate that it is spreading although
there is a small decline in number of cases petitioned in year 2003 as per the WTO report. Ôany
countries have only recently enacted AD statutes and they are now filing increasing number of
cases. It is important to take note of main characteristics of AD investigation. It involves to
questions: one, was their ³unfair pricing´(namely price discrimination or below cost sales), and
second did the dumped imports cause injury. In general, reply to the first question is always
positive.


. p
Antidumping trade protection has a variety of unique features that set it apart from more
traditional form of trade policy. At best in contemporary parlance it may be termed as a kind of
³trade terrorism´. AD has nothing to do with ³fair trade´. It is simply another tool to improve the
competitive position of complainant firm against the foreign competitors. It is a modern form of
protection. The AD reform encounters many hurdles. Use of AD laws around the world is
widespread and increasing alarmingly. It is being patronized by vested interests. There are well-
organized protectionist lobbies to secure political support for their position on AD issues. The
most important obstacle the AD reform faces from ignorance about its operation and practice.
The supporters of AD law believe that it is in its present form is necessary to combat unfair
trading practices and thereby ensure a level playing field. The AD law in its current form will
distort foreign competition and inflict injury on normal trading practices. It is too handy
instrument to make use of it. The negotiations on this issue should be treated urgent to prevent
the erosion of market access. If the WTO negotiations that focus exclusively on specific changes
on AD agreement is bound to fail. There is need for critical evaluation of basic concepts,
principles and objectives of the AD agreement. The effort should be to reduce yawning gap
between the AD¶s accepted objectives and its actual practice. Development dimension should be
brought into the AD agreement with the introduction of special and differential treatment in
favor of developing countries.

.p,,
.p3p
 

 /'$&%0#$
%)1$!

The importance of cost reduction programs within a company cannot be overstated. Companies
that are losing money, need to increase profits, or must become more competitive need to cut
expenses in order to succeed. Knowing how to implement effective cost reduction strategies can
be the determining factor in the survival of a business.

%%/!2& /%$!$!4%)4&$&2%

A good manager understands the importance of cost reduction to the health of a company.
Bloated expense accounts can eat up profits quickly. A cost reduction plan is one that focuses on
lowering costs in every business activity. The activities vary by type of business but the concept
of cost reduction does not vary.

The importance of cost reduction plans is related to the most common reasons why expenses
must be cut in a business.

[ Need for increased profits

[ Improved competitive standing
[ Preserve company resources
[ Reduce waste
[ Improved productivity

It is not easy to compete in the market today. Rising prices, shifting fuel rates, global
competition, varying labor rates around the world, and spiraling health insurance costs have
made cost control a moving target. Sometimes it seems that a company gets one set of expenses
under control, and in the meantime, another area of the company begins experiencing cost
overruns. It is a never ending battle to maintain company profitability.
The importance of cost reduction strategies cannot be understated, especially when a company is
struggling to maintain profitability. Areas that can be reviewed for expense reductions include
the following.

[ Telecommunications
[ Leases
[ Ôaterials
[ Office supplies
[ Ôaintenance costs
[ Rent
[ Utilities

When a company must generate more cash as fast as possible, management will have to decide
which costs can be most effectively reduced. If the reduction is needed quickly, expenses cut
first will normally be those that are not fixed or directly tied to production. It is not a good idea
to drastically reduce expenses that produce the company product or service without careful
evaluation.

If your company understands the importance of cost reduction as a tool to increase profitability,
the company will have a much better chance of remaining profitable no matter what stage of the
economic cycle is occurring. That is because cost reduction is an effective tool that can be
responsive to a company's need. Ôanaging expenses is just as important as managing revenue.

A regular review of costs can prevent a company from wasting money resulting from 'bad
habits'. No matter whether it is good times or bad, the importance of cost reduction strategies
never changes.



.p,,
.p3p
.

According to CIÔA, standard costing "is a control technique which compares standard cost and
revenues with actual results to obtain variances which are used to stimulate improved
performance." Therefore, this definition underscores that a standard cost is equivalent to a
planned cost. When planned or standard costs are compared with actual costs or results, this
yields a variance that can be used to analyze performance with a view to improving it.

A critical aspect of standard costing is identifying the resources necessary for producing outputs,
whether goods or services. The planned cost used in the standard costing technique is an example
of a budgeted cost. Standard costs are applied to direct materials, direct labor and production
overhead (including fixed and variable overheads). In using the standard costing technique, the
following steps are necessary:

1. There must be an established estimate of the cost of goods or services.

2. Information about actual costs must be collected

3. The variance between the actual and planned costs must be evaluated

Standard costing is a useful control technique that, like any other, has its merits and demerits.
Using the technique seems simple enough, but the groundwork behind it is rather intensive. For
instance, there must be agreement on what standard to use and managers must be aware of the
impact of the standard on employee morale and behavior. However, that standard costing helps
with budgeting, control, improved efficiency and another method of valuing stock, among other
benefits, makes it a valuable technique.

There are significant implications to modify the priorities on managerial accounting. The
production-line manufacturing industries are supreme for a highly prepared standardized cost
accounting systems move toward. The service and marketing industries are not (1990). They
need an importance on decision-making techniques that are elastic and timely. Ôarketing
comprises demand-creating and demand-servicing activities. The demand-creating activities are
called promotional and include advertising and selling functions. The demand-servicing
activities are called logistics or physical distribution and include all physical movement functions
from the production line to the ultimate consumer. Contemporary cost systems have not yet
content the informational necessities of the marketing career. Ôarketing managers are repeatedly
asking for accounting expenditure classifications that will augment their decision-making
capability (, 1994). There will continue to be a growing insists for managerial accounting
methods in the field of marketing. In the managerial accounting of Toyota, the company does not
put emphasis on the capacity, timing, and recording of costs, however on the understanding and
analysis of cost data for decision making. The effect is that a wide variety of descriptive
adjectives have developed in managerial accounting to allow for more precision in the
interpretation of the data. Each adjective used with cost gives it a more precise meaning ( 1990).

The company¶s cost has been defined as a sacrifice of resources incurred for a future benefit or
objective. The resources that are sacrificed are in the form of cash or cash equivalent, such as
payment in kind, or the incurrence of a liability. Toyota is expecting the future benefit that refers
to assets such as inventory, machinery, equipment, property, and intangibles ( 1990) . The
expenditure for a future benefit (asset) that lasts only during the current period is a cost that is
expensed. For example, the cost of office supplies used in the current fiscal period is classified as
an expense because it does not have benefits that carry over to future fiscal periods.

"$& is also implementing a cost  thatis a product for which the total or unit cost is to
be determined. A cost objective may be the product manufactured or the service performed, or it
may be a department, a process, or a function, all of which are referred to as cost centers (1991).
The cost center is the smallest unit for which costs are accumulated for reporting and analytical
purposes. Since Toyota is a traditional Japanese company, they are still implementing the
traditional cost accounting systems utilized in the United Kingdom and are being challenged by
corporate financial and production executives and by professors of both accounting and
production management ( 1987). A major controversy over the relevance of the traditional cost
accounting systems has emerged. There are two opposing viewpoints, one that points directly to
the traditional cost accounting system as a major contributor to the diminution of productivity in
selected U.K. industries, and the other viewpoint that the cost accounting system is not a direct
cause of production problems. Those who support the first position propose a major overhaul of
traditional accounting systems in order to solve production problems resulting from world-class
competition (1987). Those who take the opposing viewpoint are convinced that the production
systems need the overhaul and that the traditional accounting systems cannot directly cause
production problems. They point out that management accounting cost systems is already
flexible and custom designed so that only minor tune-ups are necessary to accommodate the
changes brought about by world-class competition. The key characteristic of the direct cost
Toyota is traceability to the cost object, such as the product (, 2005). In the traditional financial
accounting system, only direct materials and direct labor are assumed to be traceable to the
product. A computer-integrated manufacturing system (CIÔS) incorporates production changes
that make it possible to trace some overhead directly to the product. There is one significant
change in cost accounting that may be necessary because of the pressure to change the
production process; the change is in the definition of overhead (, 2005). At present, all factory
overheads are assumed to be indirect, not traceable to the product.

In the case of Toyota if some of the overhead costs under CIÔS production processes can be
directly traced to each product line, then overhead should no longer be assumed to be inherently
indirect, and should be divided into direct overhead and indirect overhead (, 2005). Direct
overhead is that which can be traced to the product just as direct material and direct labor.
Indirect overhead will have to be allocated to product lines as before. This concept is not new,
but it has not been emphasized or foreseen as a panacea for the problems created by the pressures
to change the production process

The following list describes the most important objectives of computer-integrated manufacturing
systems of Toyota ( 2005):

1.Increase product quality.

2.Shorten the time required for non-value added activities, for example, machine set up time.

3.Reduce inventory levels and push-through versus pull-through methods.

4.Develop flexible manufacturing systems where feasible.

 Work toward a fully integrated and coordinated production system operated by a centralized
computer.

Toyota tries to preserve its homegrown economic model such as the values it practices in its
business practices to be able to retain their competitive advantage (1990). Indeed, it is a hard task
for the company to preserve its locally conceptualized model while maintaining linkages with the
global economy. However, because critical success factors are established as key aspects needed
by a company, this has become easier in dealing with the issue of globalization.

Although the core values which have distinguished the management of Toyota are still retained,
the company has stepped out to shine for the rest of the world (2005). The latest developments in
the company proved that it is stronger than ever, emerging victorious from otherwise
discouraging situations such as the adverse effect of the strong yen. The company had a strong
financial performance with increased net earnings of $10.2 billion and increase global sales by
9.9 percent. This has narrowed the gap with General Ôotors and tied with Ford which gives
credence to predictions that the company will take over as the world¶s largest automaker by
2015.




.,
 

[ Lynch, R. (2003), Corporate Strategy, 3rd ed., Prentice Hall Financial Times.
[ Ôacmillan, H. & Tampoe, Ô. (2000), Strategic Ôanagement, Oxford University Press.
[ www.wikipedia.com
[ www.google.com.