About Michael Czinkota

Professor of International Marketing, Business and Trade at Georgetown University, Washington, DC, U.S. and University of Kent, Canterbury, UK - http://www.faculty.msb.edu/index.htm http://www.twitter.com/#!/michaelczinkota http://www.facebook.com/169628456631

How Grateful Will the U.S. Be?

Featured

A new commentary published in CEO World and the Daily Tribune

Hello! I would like to share my most recent commentary on Hungary and Prime Minister Orban. Please find the complete text below.

The other day I was watching a Tucker Carlson talk show that focused on Hungary. Several reasons motivated my interest: One was that Hungary is hardly ever mentioned in broadcasts or social media, and if so, only with heavy negativity, as the bad guy. For example, US President Joe Biden referred to Hungary´s democratically elected Prime as a “thug.” Second, Carlson’s visit provided me an opportunity to instantly check claims made since my wife was in Hungary. It was also a good opportunity to improve my understanding of the Hungarian condition and also of my analysis resulting from my investigations: That Hungarians are not feckless monopolists living in a scrapped together dictatorship. There are, and in April next year again will be, serious elections which, so far have resulted in clear and stable majorities. As reported by their embassy communications, their “thug” made major contributions by accommodating, feeding and clothing Afghani refugees. The education sector in Hungary, particularly at the university level, is said to be under strong government directive and control. I could not find that in conversations, but rather encountered domestic university conditions of good structure and high repute. Students are ready for discussions and analysis about great varieties of topics. Hungarian Nobel prize winners are extraordinarily frequent subjects. Most recently, Katalin Kariko was a major contributor to the mRNA development, the basis of the Pfizer Covid vaccine. My excellent Washington dentist tells me about Istvan Urban of Budapest where he goes for learning and training. When Mr. Carlson interviewed the Hungarian Prime Minister Orban, the thoughts on encouraging families, education and support of students and his definitions of national boundaries did not appear very controversial. The policy steps taken have yielded good results. Orban also has developed his own approach to government response to incoming migration. Guided by his belief that 10 million Hungarians cannot accommodate a large number of migrants, he has his border guards support migrants and then have them escorted back to the other side of the border. I have witnessed large groups of migrants pick fruit trees bare within minutes, leaving their owners without income and food. When implemented, Orban’s policy was firmly rebuffed by Europeans, even though by now they have adapted his approach as well. Hungary has given much ongoing support to Europe. Even though located on the verge between Asia and Europe, its society has always seen itself as clearly a part of Europe. It has held European occupants at bay as a member of the Austrian-Hungarian empire, limited the century-long occupation by the Turks, and gloriously lost battles that protected the West. I remember when in 1956, in an eerie similarity to Afghanistan today, American encouragement led to all-Hungarian revolutions against the occupying Soviet forces that resulted in many killings and emigrations from Hungary. I remember, as do many others, how the Hungarian politician Gyula Horn opened the border from Hungary to Austria, which permitted East Germans to flee in large numbers and triggered the beginning of German reunification. For all these good measures delivered by Hungary, I have great difficulty finding any long-term gratitude as payback. Yes, politics tends to be reflected by the steps of the moment, but perhaps, as we appear to redesign relations, obligations, and renew spheres of interests, this might be the right time to forge relations that are based on long-term history, making up for past services rendered within a Europe in flux. Such obligations deserve to be addressed clearly and driven by transparency. Trying to make opposition whither by silencing it or ignoring it will not work in an era of global communication. Closer and better recognition of the past may well be the key to a realignment and a better future for all. In conclusion, the dimensions highlighted by Tucker are true. His perspective of Hungary, confirmed by my wife and my personal insights emerge with little challenge. I wish the country well.

Marketing Management: Past, Present, and Future

I’m pleased to announce the publication of my new book! Marketing Management: Past, Present, and Future is now available for pre-order on Amazon. Please check out the link to purchase it down below.

This textbook provides students with comprehensive insights on the classical and contemporary marketing theories and their practical implications. A fourth, revised edition of Marketing Management, the text features new classical and contemporary cases, new interdisciplinary and cross-functional implications of business management theories, contemporary marketing management principles, and futuristic application of marketing management theories and concepts. The core and complex issues are presented in a simplified manner providing students with a stimulating learning experience that enables critical thinking, understanding, and future application.

https://www.amazon.com/Marketing-Management-Springer-Business-Economics/dp/3030669157

Trade Policy and International Marketing Under Reagan and Trump: An Abstract

The following is an abstract of a new piece I have been working on with my colleague Professor Gary Knight. I hope you enjoy it and please feel free to leave your comments below.

Michael Czinkota, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA, czinkotm@georgetown.edu
Gary Knight*, Willamette University, Salem, OR, USA, gknight@willamette.edu

                                                                  ABSTRACT

We investigate the international marketing implications of the international trade policies of US Presidents Ronald Reagan (‘Reagan’) and Donald Trump (‘Trump’). Today, in international trade, tariffs are low, averaging about 3% in the advanced economies and 10%-15% in the emerging markets. The average tariff across all goods worldwide is about 6%, down from 18% in 1990.  Meanwhile, world trade has increased consistently. China is now the most important trading partner of the US, providing both a huge market and supplying a great variety of products.


In the 1970s, a goods trade deficit emerged in the US and persists to the present day. In our research, we found that the administrations of both presidents sought to reduce the US trade deficit, and defend and enhance the international marketing performance of US firms.  In the early phase of his administration, trade policy under Reagan was restrained but became more assertive. Reagan focused on the trade deficit with Japan and on enhancing international market opportunities for US firms. But Reagan’s policies fell short of their goals. Today, the US faces a much larger trade deficit, primarily with China. Trump adopted policy goals similar to those of Reagan. Trump’s approach has been more assertive. Like Reagan, however, Trump’s policies have fallen short of achieving the intended goals.

In this paper, we provided empirical background and discussed the policies and outcomes of the policies of Reagan and Trump. We highlighted implications for firms’ international marketing efforts and performance, and as well as directions for future research.  We pointed to research opportunities for scholars. Research might investigate better, smarter trade policy, and examine benchmarking by reviewing various trade policy approaches, of the US and other nations, and then examining those successful in achieving intended goals.  Scholars might seek to identify appropriate strategies and tactics for enhancing the performance, of nations and of firms. 

Implications suggest that companies need to increase their competitive advantages in global trade. The US needs to increase its national competitive advantages by improving national factors of production and implementing smarter economic policies that promote US business. Public policymakers should emphasize investing in infrastructure, for example, in communications technologies that can increase the effectiveness of the management of firms’ value chain operations. Broadly, firm strategy and public policy should aim to improve performance on in the areas of entrepreneurship, innovation, and productivity, in order to make US companies more competitive in the global marketplace. An important research step will be the anticipated identification of trade policy shifts and the concurrent effects on business planning and policy development. Looking forward, the Biden administration will have to juggle its promise of bolstering domestic investment in infrastructure and US firms while also growing US importance within World Trade.

Keywords: International trade policy; International marketing; Tariffs; Protectionism; Public policy

References Available Upon Request