Introduction
Business performance is one of the most significant components for the economic prosperity of any country. With this in mind, it is the obligation of any country’s federal government to ensure that the business strategies employed are beneficial in every way possible. Competitive Intelligence is a strategy that is common in the business market. However, its effectiveness in any business setting is dependent on a variety of factors including management.
Unlike Japan which is historically was but later shifted from being a communal system of government, Russia has maintained such traditions (Furet 2000). Japan is currently a capitalist country with only few traces of communism being witnessed in the remotest parts of the country. On the other hand, Russia has not shown any interests of shifting to allow for market liberalization. This great difference in the cultural and historic situation of the two countries explains the reason why Russia was the first to embrace the whole issues of competitive intelligence (Beer 1999). Research has revealed that while Russia employed that system in 2002, Japan had to wait until 2008 for the registration and operation of the same (Richardson 2004). The other challenge was in the selection of the qualified and experienced personnel who would steer the way forward for the competitive intelligence.
Competitive Intelligence (CI) is the act of gathering; analysis and distribution of information concerning a company’s products, services and competition amongst other factors hence enabling managers make strategic decisions (Gilad, 2003). Japan has had a solid historical background in gathering information with the aim of overcoming competition in different sectors of the economy. This is contrary to Russia where the level of competitive intelligence is not as high as that of Japan. This can be the reason why Japan is amongst the world’s super powers because it has been able to counter competition from other countries especially on matters concerning technology.
The culture of being thorough in gaining a high competitive advantage in the global market has been transferred from generation to generation in Japan (Comai 2007). The Japanese government has been highly supportive in matters concerning the country’s welfare in having an advantage over other countries in matters involving economic growth and development. Government performance is one of the most significant aspects for any country’s business welfare (Dishman 2003). This has not been the case with Russia because the main products that Russia deals with in the global market are not very competitive. Russia enjoy a less competitive market of oil and other gas products hence the reason why its competitive intelligence tactics are not as advanced as those for Japan (Daniels 1994). This has been the major reason why the levels of competitive intelligence have been different between Japan and Russia.
The Japanese Government can be best described as one which highly embraces capitalism (Harvey 1990). It becomes difficult to embrace the ethics that are required for the success of competitive intelligence (Adami 2006). It is said that the capitalist’s economies are more concerned with making the profits at the expense of the people to whom they are directly offering such services. Another characteristic of the capitalists is that the market is run by the forces of demand and supply and the government has little say on the prices or regulation of the business prices (Hayek 2000). Reasons based on capitalism give an explanation as to why Japan is on the fore front in competitive intelligence because its main focus is on profit maximization. Contrary, the Russian government relies on communism in its governance. The country is concerned with improving the socio-economic status of its citizens. This goal explains why the country is not so much concerned with competitive intelligence as Japan.
Government involvement on a country’s overall performance in business is a factor that can result to different levels of competitive intelligence (Fleisher 2006). The Japanese government is highly concerned with the levels of technological advancements in other countries such as China. For this reason the competition strategies laid are of high standards. Japan is always coming up with new competitive strategy skills for its welfare in the global market. This is contrary to Russia where government participation on matters concerning competitive intelligence is at a lower level because of few competitors in the world market. The government is considered to be one of the most important aspects in matters concerning business and the intelligence required to operate the businesses (Blenkhorn, 2005).
Japan has been able to prosper in the global market because its system of gathering information for purposes of competitive has been ethical and legal. The country promotes high ethical behavior and this has been enhanced by ensuring high standards of education to the population. Business ethics is imperative for any country’s economic growth and development (McGonagle 2003). This has been the same case with Russia but the system has not been as vigorous as that in Japan. Education in Japan is an aspect which has been highly valued thereby ensuring that the businesses are operated under business ethics principles.
The fact that Japan’s strategy is mainly based on science and technology brings the difference in competitive intelligence with Russia. Competitive intelligence in Russia is based on oil, gas and pharmaceutical products. Science and technology has become one of the most competitive aspects of the 21st century hence the reason why competitive intelligence in Japan is of high significance (Fuld 2005). Gas, oil and pharmaceutical products are not very competitive in the global market hence the reason why competitive intelligence in Russia is at a considerably lower level (Joaquin 2007).
Technology has been known to advance on a regular basis thereby requiring constant monitoring (Knip 2003). This fact prompts Japan to keep a close eye on other countries which advanced in science and technology such as China. On the contrary Russia has less to worry on matters concerning competition in the oil, gas and pharmaceutical industries (Joaquin 2007). These products are not as competitive as technology hence the difference in levels of competitive technology between Russia and Japan. The more competitive a country’s products will be in the global market, the higher the level of competitive intelligence will be required (Shaker 2004). The high the competition in the provision of a particular set of products and services the higher the level of competitive intelligence required (Haag, 2006).
The gap between the levels of competitive intelligence between Japan and Russia is considerably large. The gap created due to difference in competitive intelligence is the same gap that creates the difference in the economies of different countries (Prescott 1999). This has been associated to several factors such as technology, the difference in the provision of the economic products and services and the involvement of the federal governments amongst other factors. Japan has been on the fore front in competitive intelligence compared to Russia despite the fact that Russia was the first to embrace the concept (Ackerman 2005). However, both countries exhibit characteristics of being highly competitive in the global market.
Conclusion
From the above analysis of the two countries in terms of their governance, one would deduce the reason why the competitive intelligence was delayed in Japan for about six years after Russia had acquired it. The attitude of the two societies towards the competitive intelligence was affected by the perception and beliefs that people held. For the Russians, the move would further improve the face of the society due to the profits that would be gained. For the Japanese, employing the system which requires high levels of ethics from the business community would deny them a chance of making abnormal profits. Therefore the difference between the two countries was based on the historic and the cultural beliefs and experiences that the two communities had on the whole issue of business practice and the distribution of the natural resources.
Reference:
Haag S. (2006). Management Information Systems for the Information Age. London: McGraw-
Hill Ryerson.
Gilad, Ben. "The Future of Competitive Intelligence: Contest for the Profession's Soul",
Competitive Intelligence Magazine, 2008, 11(5), 22
Dishman, P., Fleisher, C.S., and V. Knip. "Chronological and Categorized Bibliography of Key
Competitive Intelligence Scholarship: Part 1 (1997-2003), Journal of Competitive
Intelligence and Management, 1(1), 16-78.
Fleisher, Craig S., Wright, Sheila, and R. Tindale. "Bibliography and Assessment of Key
Competitive
Intelligence Scholarship: Part 4 (2003-2006), Journal of Competitive
Intelligence and Management, 2007,
4(1), 32-92.
Knip, Victor, P. Dishman, and C.S. Fleisher. "Bibliography and Assessment of Key Competitive
Intelligence Scholarship: Part 3 (The Earliest Writings-1989), Journal of Competitive
Intelligence and Management, 2003, 1(3), 10-79.
Fleisher, Craig S. and Babette E. Bensoussan. (2003). Strategic and Competitive Analysis:
Methods and
Techniques for Analyzing Business Competition. New York: Prentice Hall,
Upper Saddle River.
Fuld, Leonard M. (2005). Competitor Intelligence: How to Get It, How to Use It, New York:
Wiley.
Gilad, Ben and Tamar Gilad. (2008). The Business Intelligence System. NY: American
Management Association, Chicago: LP Press.
Blenkhorn, D. and C.S. Fleisher (2003). "Teaching CI to three diverse groups: Undergraduates,
MBAs, and Executives," Competitive Intelligence Magazine, 6(4), 17-20.
Fleisher, C.S. (2003). "Competitive Intelligence Education: Competencies, Sources and Trends,"
Information Management Journal, March/April, 56-62.
Prescott, J. (1999). "Debunking the Academic Abstinence Myth of Competitive Intelligence,"
Competitive Intelligence Magazine, 2(4).
McGonagle, J. (2003). "Bibliography: Education in CI," Competitive Intelligence Magazine,
6(4), 50.
Gilad, Ben and Jan Herring. "CI Certification - Do We Need It?", Competitive Intelligence
Magazine, 2001, 4(2), 28-31.
Blenkhorn, D. and C.S. Fleisher. (2005). Competitive Intelligence and Global Business.
Westport, CT:
Praeger.
Shaker, Steven and Richardson, Victor (2004). "Putting the System Back into Early Warning".
Competitive Intelligence Magazine, 7(3), May-June.
Comai, Alessandro and Tena, Joaquin (2007). "Early Warning Systems for your Competitive
Landscape", Competitive Intelligence Magazine, 10(3), May-June.
Furet, Francois, Furet, Deborah Kan (2000). "The Passing of An Illusion: The Idea of Communism In the Twentieth Century", University of Chicago Press, ISBN 978-0-226-27341-9
Daniels, Robert Vincent (1994) "A Documentary History of Communism and the World: From Revolution to Collapse", University Press of New England, ISBN 978-0-87451-678-4
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels (1998) "Communist Manifesto", (Mass Market Paperback - REPRINT), Signet Classics, ISBN 978-0-451-52710-3
Dirlik, Arif (1989) "Origins of Chinese Communism", Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-505454-5
Beer, M (1999). "The General History of Socialism and Social Struggles Volumes 1 & 2", New York, Russel and Russel, Inc.
Adami, Stefano(2006) 'Communism', in Encyclopedia of Italian Literary Studies, ed. Gaetana Marrone - P.Puppa, Routledge, New York- London,
Abu-Lughod, Janet L (1991). Before European Hegemony The World System A.D. 1250-1350. New York: Oxford UP, USA,
Ackerman, Frank; Lisa Heinzerling (24 August 2005). Priceless: On Knowing the Price of Everything and the Value of Nothing. New Press. pp. 277. ISBN 1565849817
Harvey, David (1990). The Political-Economic Transformation of Late Twentieth Century Capitalism.. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers. ISBN 0-631-16294-1.
Hayek, Friedrich A. (1975). The Pure Theory of Capital. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-32081-2.
