The Colonial Pipeline: Prepare for the Unexpected

Featured

Hello everyone! I would like to share this new commentary of mine that was recently published in The Hill and MSN among others. I hope everyone has enjoyed a safe Memorial Day weekend.

Prepare for the Unexpected

Michael R. Czinkota

     Music aficionados connect the month of May with Mozart’s minuet written as a five year old” komm lieber Mai und mache…,” but for many Americans this year the link came from a curtailment of gas It was reported that almost 80 percent of fuel depots in Virginia and North Carolina were running on empty. Lines of cars seeking gas quickly brought back eerie memories of the 1970s.

    That shortfall is said to stem from private sector adversaries who had successfully shut down the flow of liquid energy. The result was a major decline in distribution capacity, particularly of Colonial Pipeline. Evildoers apparently had employed software manipulations to severely disrupt fuel flow. They informed their targets that this ransomware disruption would prevent the flow of gas until a large payoff had been made. The amount ranged between 5 to 20 million dollars. Colonial could not reverse the impact. Payment was allegedly made, and the energy flow was slowly restored.

    A lack of gas sounds bad enough, but it may be only one of simultaneously appearing evils. If the action was meant to distract, what was the issue to be covered up? What nation gets the next turn? If this was just a preparation for future malfeasance, what obligations will arise and how costly will they be? When taking off shoes as a security precaution at an airport, it is not just the action that matters but rather the rationale and background that makes such actions necessary.  Research at Georgetown has clearly indicated that the long-term indirect effects of terrorism far outweigh the short-term direct ones. When combining all these cost factors one can conclude that somewhere someone is cooking our goose and we struggle to protect limited targets and save up the ransom money.

    We need to find and combat the culprits of such threats, and often it is us. With all our elegant computerization and artificial intelligence, we have largely lost control of management capabilities both at work and at home. At the same time, we are increasingly exposed to sudden shifts in our lives. We often work without backup with rising risk. Only five years ago, who would have prepared for a large and convenient “home office”? Many of us encounter a lack of clarity in communication that weakens our capabilities The Covid-based loss of one whole school year will offer serious repercussions for years to come.

    Here is a collateral damage example. My family went to dinner leading up to an outdoor performance. We had explained our plans well in advance, including the dinner timeline so that we would be punctual. The time came and went, but no hosts were in sight. We knocked on the kitchen door where we found waiters in distress. As they told us, the computer did not perform and they did not know how to directly deal with pricing, adding, and allocating meal expenses to guests. What a pity!

    We need an annual event devoted to catching up. That time would help us to see and test the shortfalls in our understanding of processes. Flipping a switch or pushing a button should alert the system that attention is needed. Those on the controls need to know why they have just undertaken a measure and what it does. We need to remember what we may have forgotten. We must recall with a personal, replicable event the rationale, causality, and linkages of our actions. Doing so will greatly strengthen our capabilities to plan, understand, and reduce risk exposure.

BETTER OFF?

Featured

Hello! This is a new commentary of mine that was recently published in CEOWORLD Magazine. I have included an excerpt below, and you are welcome to read the full commentary through the link at the bottom.

Less than a decade ago many economic players pronounced the triumph of global marketing. Governments encouraged market-based decision rules of economic games. Those who invoked benefits of government planning and state monopolies rapidly encountered substantial public doubt. Ten years is a long time for firms and their customers. Conditions have changed. Back then, competitive market conditions held preference. Nations that had turned away from mandated economies found rewards in very strong growth rates. There were sharp expectations for growing political freedom, greater increases in life expectancy, higher literacy rates, and a better overall standard of living. Firms encountered substantial benefits

Read More Here: https://ceoworld.biz/2021/03/28/better-off/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=CEOSocial&utm_campaign=SocialWarfare

Marketing Management: Past, Present, and Future

Featured

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

Featured

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