Discuss this issue with other Syvum members in this forum.  Feel free to
   post your own points or your essays here for the benefit of others, or to
   receive feedback.

Posted at: Wed Mar 10 03:47:37 2004 (GMT)

   The universal truth that competition leads to success is also applicable in
   business. I strongly support the view that competition can bring changes in
   the established way of doing business.
   
   Quality is the most import aspect of any product. Due the absence of a
   common quality system in the industry, it is unable for the end user to
   understand the whether he is getting what he paid for. Absence of commonly
   accepted quality system gives freedom for the industrialist to follow his
   own production standards in varying countries. For example the quality
   system followed by world famous electrical company ABB will be different
   from that of a local company in India. Hence the comparison of the products
   of these two companies will be apparently difficult assess.
   
   On the other hand in order to compete in the global market, the industries
   have to produce quality products. It is essential that the industries have
   to adopt the global stadrads to sell their product in the world market.
   Hence this competition leads to the improvement of the quality of the
   products and the deployment of an International organization to monitor or
   to set standards for quality control. For example the quality system ISO
   9000 adopted all over the world is a well-known example for this.
   
   Competition compels the industries to improve their customer support
   facilities. Customers tend to buy products with better after sale service.
   Different companies opened their own service centers all over the world to
   cater the need of the customer. Example, Sony Corporation has its own
   authorized serve centers for their products everywhere.
   
   Healthy competition can avoid monopoly by any business group. Any company
   from any country can produce the same products with same quality standards
   set by the international organization. This in turn favors the customer to
   get better product at reasonable price and the business becomes more
   transparent. 
   
   In its entirety competition can bring changes and which can improve business
   globally. Of course any industry, which fails to meet the global challenge
   will wither away without any doubt. However the end result of competition is
   an improvement to business and a better world to live in.

Posted at: Wed Jun 30 08:31:07 2004 (GMT)

   In this era of cut-throat competition, a business should run as fast as
   possible for survival.
   Competition can force company to improve, make changes in marketing strategy
   and achieve ultimate goal of any business that is profit. From this angel we
   can certainly say that it is a healthy competition as it is giving good
   results. But sometime when businesses start concentrating only on
   competition and forget their social responsibility, or do unethical act then
   competition becomes unhealthy.
   
   A healthy competition forces a company to update and to think differently
   and innovatively. It requires business to be on alert to changes and
   happenings such as launch of a new product by the competitor, change in
   sales strategy, or change in pricing policy. Business has to think ahead of
   competitor to achieve success. Businesses do product innovation to grow
   their market share in market resulting in bigger revenues and hence
   achieving ultimate goal of any business that is profit. Sometime companies
   also take social responsibility and help society with the purpose of making
   goodwill in market.
   
   On the other hand, unhealthy competition can ruin a company. Competition
   based on cheating, bribing or other such practices is unhealthy and
   unethical. The focus here is toward adopting tactics to merely get ahead of
   the competitor rather than adopting methods toward true improvement in the
   company. The corporate accounting scandals in U.S. business market are a
   good example of unethical practices caused by severe competition.
   
   To conclude, competition has several plus effects on business than
   otherwise. So it is certainly advantageous to any business until it is
   practiced in healthy productive way

Posted at: Tue Jul 11 22:17:24 2006 (GMT)

   
   Hi All,
	 Change is inevitable,If our forefathers did not found out wheel,Light
   and so on,we wont be living in a comfortable position today.Today's Buisness
   demands each and every individual to change quickly and think
   innovatively.So there is a healthy sign of competition among the
   peers,Organization and society.
		   The Drive in todays market is adding something innovatively
   to the product or service so that the market improves for those
   organisations hitting highly in the NASDAQ stock exchange.This helps those
   organisations to keep fighting against it's Competitor and enlarging their
   Global Buisness Day by Day.This strategy in turn increases one's product or
   service to Cutomers and High Customer satisfaction.
   New Products,New Technology Innovation and New Invention is made possible
   only because of the Competition.It helps in Improving the country's Economic
   Growth to many fold, thus making that country as one of the Gaint in the
   Globe.

Posted at: Mon Aug 7 11:44:39 2006 (GMT)

   > Discuss this issue with other Syvum members in this forum.  Feel free to
   > post your own points or your essays here for the benefit of others, or to
   > receive feedback.
   
   Hi All,
   
    Just like its inevitable to breath for living, competition is important for
   businesses to excel in todays global arena.
       I would like to share a little history of events that took place in
   defining todays economic condition of this world. It has been viewed in the
   past that world economy took two seperate ways one favouring free markets
   mostly suported by capitalists, and other favouring closed economy which was
   popular among developing countries or in countries favoring communism. 
   
   From the history also it is evident that free markets, where competition is
   the basic of any business have taken a huge lead over closed market.
   Competition not only helps consumers to get better products but also keep
   the industries that are competing to get maximum market share on their toes.
   Its beneficial to both customers and producers, customers get better quality
   products and producers daily invent new ways to reduce costs, increase
   quality and innovate new prducts to increase market share. Even lot of new
   products or range of products are launched by innovative producers to match
   the requirments of customers or even innovate a new product completely 
   unknown previously like sauna belt.	Which makes industries to be more
   innovative and attentive to market changes. Survival of the fittest is the
   Mantra of today as more and more countries are opening up their frontier for
   free trade. 
   
   I would like to share example of Indian automobile industry here. In 1980's
   there were only one major car manufacturer and one scooter(two wheeler)
   manufacturer before india opened up its markets for free trade or
   competitive markets where number of units to be produced and the end price
   of the product was decided on the market condition unlike earlier.
   Competition among manufacturers not only increased the quality of product
   but it also increas the market base and create new segments all together.
   That directly increased the profit for manufacturers, here there may be lot
   of other factors which can help in improving the sales. After competition
   was instilled by foreign manufacturers Indian manufacturer also started
   using best practices and started implimenting them for example JIT which
   reduces inventory level and reduces overall cost of the product. This also
   increased the quality and new improved versions of vehicle were also
   launched. Meanwhile competition was also good for foreign manufacturers who
   learned the best local practices to cut down there costs and in few cases
   local vendors were promoted to global levels by these big MNC's. For example
   sundram clayton which produces fastners for automobiles won a major contract
   for producing lids for Daimleyr Chrysler.
   Moreover now a days competition is taking place on global level which gives
   business from different nations to compete may be in a completely alien land
   to both the competing parties. This gives edge to the business which have
   faced competition earlier and had developed learning habits among its
   employees.
   In the end I would like to mention the simple example of an athlete who
   regulrly updates him to win the race. I wonder if there were no one to
   compete him why he would have upgraded him. Its only competition which keeps
   the importance of winning and it holds true for todays businesses also which
   compete globally to win its customers.

Posted at: Mon Aug 28 09:52:03 2006 (GMT)

   It's a universal truth that the competition can bring changes to the market
   capitalization and innovation. It compels the market players to look for
   more targets and profit maximization which can avoid the monopoly. For
   example the beauty peagent like Miss World, Miss Universe, etc. Prior to
   1994 the rate of wining titles was almost negligible for India but in 1994,
   both Miss Universe (Shushmita Sen) and Miss World (Aishwarya Rai) won the
   titles and this set a chain reaction for India. The impact of such peagent
   shows can be analysed by looking at the Cosmetic market in India. Prior to
   1994 there were a few cosmetic brands in India like Lakme, Ponds, etc but
   after this India's cosmetic market was flooded with many global players like
   Loreol, Garnier. These players garnered the huge potential by launching
   different products and services for Indian customers.
   
   Competition not only boost the innovation but also it derives the demand and
   price control. For example, in India the detergent brands like Tide, Surf
   Excel, Ariel were in dominant position and their detergent product were
   almost at the same cost of about Rs 55 ($1.2)per 500 gm but in 2004 the
   prices droped to almost Rs. 24 ($ 0.6) per 500gm and still the companies
   were earning huge pofits, good advertisements were as usual. So, all these
   players did some cost cuttings in manufacturing, schemes to compete with
   each other.
   
   Competition also led to Mergers & Acquisitions like the recent Mittal Steel
   and Arcelor merger. This made the Mittal Steel having a strong global
   presence , better utilization of resources and made huge profits. Another is
   of Indian Airlines and Air India merger into Indian airlines. This helped it
   in reducing costs, better resource management, huge profits to shareholders
   and reducing the losses to both of them. For example, for a flight from city
   A to city B both career had flights and if the passenger traffic was less
   then the post per flight would be more and this led to losses. But now the
   pessenger traffic can be handled better for same destinations.
   
   But, competition can also led to dissolving of some domestic key players.
   For example, because of the opening of mega retail chains and shopping
   malls, SMEs are running in huge losses and also it is causing accessbility
   problems to the customers. These retail chains are at the outskirts of the
   city which is causing the accessbility problems, traffic congestions, etc.
   Shops at the street corner are also loosing business because of cheaper
   products and services provided by these mege retail outlets. Also, large
   plots of land is required and instead of using that land for agricultural
   use these are alloted to the big corporations for the setup.These areas are
   getting littered with the wastes from these outlets wich led to water and
   land pollution. If the land is used for agricultural usage then the import
   of food grains will reduce. Another example is in fabrics industry. Domestic
   brands in India like DCM, Bhilwara (India brand), Grasim, etc were dominat
   in the 1990s but because of stiff competition and better fabric with more
   designer looks and latest trends these brands are almost vanished from
   Indian market.
   
   In the end I want to say that Cometition is a must for quixotic players for
   their monoply and better services to the customer.

Posted at: Mon Nov 20 09:34:44 2006 (GMT)

   Competition is advantageous to business but not always. A competition can be
   healthy or unhealthy. Healthy competition refers to a situation where both
   players enjoy level playing field. While a healthy competition is
   advantageous to business an unhealthy competition is not. Let me present
   arguments to support my view.
   
   In healthy competition all the players have stake in the market and they
   strive hard to stay ahed or become market leader. This propels  companies to
   go for technological and operational innovations. Take the example of
   telecom sector. Good competition has resulted in a lot of value added
   services and creative strategies. In this process consumer is the ultimate
   beneficiary.
   
   Last 15 years of Indian business present compelling example of how
   competition can force businesses to change the strategy and innovate in
   order to become market leaders. Before opening of the market, Indian
   companies had hardly any name in the world market. But after 1991 same
   companies are striving hard and are continuously incraeseing their presence
   in the world market through organic and inorganic growth. Take the example
   of Tata steel-Corus or Birla-Novelis deals. 
   
   However, if competition is not fair, big companies eat up the small
   ventures/companies unethically and create monopolistic market. This hampers
   the innovation in bussiness. For example, in 1990s Hindustan Lever Limited(
   now Hindustan Unilever ltd.) bought stocks of Nirma washing powder and
   during rainy season dumped in the market denting the credibility of the
   latter to maintain its monopoly. Which resulted in almost extinction of
   Nirma from the market.
   
   Also, opening of Indian economy has resulted in extinction of traditional
   industries like handicraft. This is because demestic players are not
   organized and lack sufficient resoureses as compared to international
   players.
   
   Thus we clearly see that competition is not always good foe thr businesses.
   It is advantageous only when it offers a level playing field. 

Posted at: Mon Mar 19 02:52:51 2007 (GMT)

   Issue Topic 3. Competition is invariably advantageous to a business because
   it compels changes to improve established methods.
   
   
   I agree with the statement above that competition is advantageous to the
   business.
   
   Competition can be of two different nature i.e. internal competition in
   business and external competition. Both are more or less interlinked but
   actually they are quite different.
   
   In case of internal competition, business gets person who can bring
   innovation to the established methods. Methods can be from the broad
   spectrum of topics starting from the production line to Human resource
   practice and the list is endless. Challenge lies every where and a bright
   and competitive brain can challenge the existing practices to bring in
   innovative ideas which in turn slowly percolate down to the market space
   which enhance the competitive aspect of the company. For an example, with
   proper HR policies, company can attract the best and brightest, then give
   them a challenging and rewarding career. In turn, these bright people
   deliver product, methodology and strategy, those are cutting-edge. This
   enables the company to compete with its peers in the market effectively.
   
   External competition is directly with the peers in the market space.
   Everybody strives for cheaper, more efficient product. To achieve this
   companies adapt innovative methods to cut the cost and deliver effectively.
   Slowly over the past centuries we have seen, companies are getting slimmer
   and smarter. ‘Consumer is the king’ is more evident now, than it has
   been anytime in past. Competition is getting global in nature and to survive
   companies need to re-engineer the methods. Change is the only thing that is
   constant in market. The bottom line is, change and survive or perish.
   
   Most striking example is low-cost air carriers in market. In every continent
   these airlines are giving a fight to the business of their big and
   established peers. There is always a segment in the market which is not
   properly served or dissatisfied with the current process. The key to capture
   market is to give service to this segment and this is precisely what these
   low-cost carriers did. Rather than employing costly methods low cost
   airlines have ripped apart the established methods of handing the way things
   work. Now more people are traveling at a fraction of cost of that the normal
   airlines charge. This has helped the market enormously. As the loss piling
   up at big airlines, we can see many innovations in offing and at the end of
   the day, it’s the market which has benefited. All these are the result of
   competition.
   
   Again to summarize, competition has enormous advantage to the business as
   they start fight for the same pie with others. The end result is better
   product at cheaper price.

Posted at: Sun Jul 22 01:12:58 2007 (GMT)

   Issue Topic 3. Competition is invariably advantageous to a business because
   it compels changes to improve established methods.
   
   I totally agree with the statement given above.
   
   I would like to start the argument by stating that consumer satisfaction is
   the main reason behind competition between several companies and that
   compels companies towards innovation. When competiotn exists, companies tend
   to provide something new to customer to attract his attention. There by the
   companies will  be benefited in the from of more profits and consumer is
   benefited in the form of quality, price and variety of products.
		   For example, consider automobile industry.There is always
   competition between various companies for providing features according to
   the user and providing it at affordable cost. Because of this consumers now
   have vast pool of cars to select from according to their requirements and
   the one who satisfies the consumers more will gain more profits.
		 Another example to support the above argument is textile
   industry.Companies which provide more appealing clothes to consumers will
   reap the benefits out of it. This very idea of impressing the customer leads
   to production of clothes at cheaper rates, inclusion of more variety in the
   clothes and more importantly improvement of quality of the clothes.
		Till now we have discussed about external competition. One more
   aspect of competiton lies within the company. Thats between the employees.
   When healthy competition exists between employees, the output will be
   qualitative and this helps both the employees and the company. 
   
	 I therefore conclude by saying that competiton is advantageous to any
   business and the end result is always good for the consumers.

Posted at: Wed Apr 8 05:19:05 2009 (GMT)

	  competition is the opportunity for every organization to become
   turely success. A close examination revels that employees feel more satisfy
   when they accept various challenges rather than engaged in only one, this is
   partly because engaged in various field helps them to evaluate their
   products with others and also pron and cons can be identified.
	   the main reason is that, the member of any organization will give
   more interest towards the satisfaction of consumer rather than their own
   benefit. for example, now a days the competition of noodles ans snacks is
   increasing as these are the very common food among youngsters. so the
   company should give more attention towards their taste rather than the
   price. 
	    and of course consumer have right to choose there product as what
   will be good for them. similarly they will choose the quality products. in
   this manner the organization can produce new and quality products which is a
   way of advantage for them.
	   however, many people think that monopoly market will be better
   rather than the competition market because in monopoly market consumer have
   no choice as they are compel to purchase only one product, but in my view
   this is not a good way of selling goods in the market because different
   people have different taste and choice. 
	  in conclusion competition is the way through which we can identify
   our weakness, and i think that the main point is to make sure that in
   competition we should not repeat our mistake rather we should learn new
   ideas to improve our porduct

Posted at: Sat Jun 13 05:48:20 2009 (GMT)

   > The universal truth that competition leads to success is also applicable
   > in business. I strongly support the view that competition can bring
   > changes in the established way of doing business.
   > 
   > Quality is the most import aspect of any product. Due the absence of a
   > common quality system in the industry, it is unable for the end user to
   > understand the whether he is getting what he paid for. Absence of
   > commonly accepted quality system gives freedom for the industrialist to
   > follow his own production standards in varying countries. For example the
   > quality system followed by world famous electrical company ABB will be
   > different from that of a local company in India. Hence the comparison of
   > the products of these two companies will be apparently difficult assess.
   > 
   > On the other hand in order to compete in the global market, the
   > industries have to produce quality products. It is essential that the
   > industries have to adopt the global stadrads to sell their product in the
   > world market. Hence this competition leads to the improvement of the
   > quality of the products and the deployment of an International
   > organization to monitor or to set standards for quality control. For
   > example the quality system ISO 9000 adopted all over the world is a
   > well-known example for this.
   > 
   > Competition compels the industries to improve their customer support
   > facilities. Customers tend to buy products with better after sale
   > service. Different companies opened their own service centers all over
   > the world to cater the need of the customer. Example, Sony Corporation
   > has its own authorized serve centers for their products everywhere.
   > 
   > Healthy competition can avoid monopoly by any business group. Any company
   > from any country can produce the same products with same quality
   > standards set by the international organization. This in turn favors the
   > customer to get better product at reasonable price and the business
   > becomes more transparent. 
   > 
   > In its entirety competition can bring changes and which can improve
   > business globally. Of course any industry, which fails to meet the global
   > challenge will wither away without any doubt. However the end result of
   > competition is an improvement to business and a better world to live in.
   
   
   
   Is the univerisal truth that competiton brings success true in all aspects
   or just i bissness. I have been tring to research on this universal truth
   because I joined a 12 step group that is competitive and the women to knock
   each other out and make them feel as though they can not do well. this
   grtoup is suppoisedly based on univerisal truth however I wondwer if this is
   whats best when I am already struggeling with beliving in myself. I have
   been caused alot of pain by this competitiveness. I wonder if I should suck
   it up and go compete. 
   >

Posted at: Mon Nov 22 05:24:56 2010 (GMT)

   In general, having a competitor is not always favourable for a company. On
   the contrary, opponents share the market and force a competitor company to
   make extra expenses, that may result in fall in profits. I disagree with the
   author’s point of view and the reasons for my belief are as follows.
   
   First, when an organization is a monopolist in the certain area it becomes a
   price maker and is able to exercise control over prices. For example, the
   first mobile operator in Armenia had the sole right of providing mobile
   service, and up to the end of the monopolistic contract issue date the cost
   of call for a minute was the highest in the world. Customers had no choice
   and had to pay what was offered to them. The company had made a excess
   profit till other corporations entered the market and prices declined.
   Obviously, the absence of opponents was unfavorable for consumers but
   favorable for the mobile service provider. 
   
   Second, in term of competition firms have to improve the quality of products
   in order to have a privilege or not to fall back from competitors.
   Competition presses companies to offer new products with improved quality,
   which rises expenses. To supply competitive products and services firms
   should apply innovations, advanced technologies, train their staff and so
   on. In this case, again, consumers benefit, but firms do not as much.
   Besides, competitors entice away a number of clients which decline the
   firm’s turnover.
   
   Moreover, monopolistic firms do not need to spend much money on
   advertisement, as their services and products are known to clients since
   they are the only suppliers and providers. Otherwise they should advertise
   their products to attract clients.
   
   Summing up all the examples and reasons mentioned above we can conclude that
   the presence of a competitor is in general benefitial for consumers, as
   price decreases and quality improves, but for a company being a monopolist
   in the market is more favorabel and cheaper. 

Posted at: Wed Jun 8 12:14:38 2011 (GMT)