Studio Ghibli Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Studio Ghibli - Essay Example Studio Ghibli's success is thanks largely to one man. Its co-founder and main film-maker, Hayao Miyazaki, is regarded as one ÃŽ ¿f the greatest animation directors in the world. His fans include the Aardman director Nick Park and the Pixar supremo John Lassiter, who says ÃŽ ¿f Miyazaki's work: "His worlds are the most magical, special, unusual places you have ever seen." The company, founded in 1985, takes its name from the word that Italian pilots in Libya at the beginning ÃŽ ¿f the Second World War gave to a hot Saharan wind. Miyazaki was quoted as saying that he wanted to "blow a hot wind through the world ÃŽ ¿f Japanese animation". Japanese animation was previously the domain ÃŽ ¿f pre-teen Pokemon fans and ÃŽ ¿f antisocial adolescent boys who revelled in the more unsavoury fringes ÃŽ ¿f anime - the Urotsukidoji films, with their eroticised demon rape sequences, are a particularly unpleasant example. But Ghibli quickly rose to be the dominant force in Japanese animation; the company is so well loved in Japan that there is a six- month waiting list to secure entry tickets to the Ghibli Museum in Tokyo. But while Studio Ghibli has long been a cultural phenomenon in Japan, its elevated profile overseas is due largely to the success ÃŽ ¿f two films: Princess Mononoke and Spirited Away. In recent years the studio has developed a strong relationship with US studio Pixar. Before the latter's recent corporate break from Disney, Toy Story director John Lasseter helped to finesse a US distribution deal for Ghibli at the Mickey Mouse giant. But despite Ghibli's increasing profile in the West, Suzuki insists the studio still makes films only for Japanese audiences.

The current internationalisation policy with respect to global Essay

The current internationalisation policy with respect to global strategy theories - Essay Example This essay discusses that Marks and Spencer started its operation back in the 19th century with a stall on Kirkgate market in Leeds. The company targeted clients with above average income and provided high quality garments. The company also sells luxury food items. It was the first retailer in Britain to achieve 1 Billion pound pre tax income. The company operates in different countries today but its market share is not as it was before. The company’s internationalisation process failed drastically which made the company lose its clients. The international operations of Marks and Spencer were contributing a mere 1.25% to the pre tax income of the whole firm by 2000. This shows how Marks and Spencer failed drastically in going global. Marks and Spencer started its formal internationalisation through acquisition in Canada in1973. Therefore Marks and Spencer was not new to internationalisation in 2000 but still the company did this bad. International sales consisted of 25% of com pany’s retail floor but still its contribution to company profits was negligible. This is clear evidence of the failure of internalisation of the company. The company used different modes of entry ranging from acquisition to franchising. Mostly Marks and Spencer attempted to establish its own stores abroad through acquisition but franchising was also used in countries with less population. The policy of controlling everything on its own is deeply engrained in the culture of the company as managers usually like to do something by themselves. This is why acquisition were mainly preferred for both food products and clothing line while franchising was used when market was too small to start operations directly. The main problem of the company was its strict bureaucratic culture. This culture hindered the flow of innovative ideas within the company as senior management was not interested in newer ideas (Case Study Marks and Spencer, 2011). This is what led to the downfall of the c ompany both in the international arena and in UK. The company wanted to grow but its growth strategy was based on traditional mindset of acquisition. They thought they could continue to grow like before if they persisted using their same old business strategy but while doing so they ignored competition and changing business environment. Research suggests that bureaucratic culture lowers innovation and performance of firms (Homburg & Pflesser, 2000). This is one of the reasons why internationalisation went bad for Marks and Spencer. There was also lack of vision when it came to internationalisation within the company. They focused too much on daily activities without taking into account the long term direction the company should take (Case Study Marks and Spencer, 2011). This also had an adverse effect on the global performance of the company because it