Outsourcing has shown that the quality of work does not diminish even if someone who lives at the side of the world does the work. This situation is largely dependent on the amount and quality of investment in enriching human capital in the developing world, i.e. through a more relevant curriculum, which matches the needs of the labor market. Off shoring, on the hand, works differently. Friedman noted that off shoring involves the transfer of one factory to another place that produces the same product, in the very same way, only with cheap labor, lower taxes, subsidized energy and lower health cost. Competition among offshore sites now persists as manufacturing centers are now transferred to the developing countries. In my view, to some extent off shoring has led to a degree of exploitation especially to its low skilled labor sector. Paying its workers on subsistence, multinational companies could opt to transfer its base to another country if it sees it has cheaper labor. Leaving the other country, its low skilled labor force is forced to fend for itself. Off shoring is not about the quality of the workforce; it all boils down on how low the price of labor is. While off shoring may be an attractive approach on the short-term, its long-term effects should be considered, that of its implications to the environment in particular.

Supply sharing is a method of collaborating horizontally among suppliers, retailers and customers to create value. Friedman mentioned the coefficient of flatness -- the fewer natural resources one's company/country, the more you will dig inside yourself for innovations in order to survive. This particular concept brings into mind Rostow's - age of high mass consumption - the rise of consumerism which leveled the globe and is attributed largely to the increasing influence of capitalism. This however, is constrained by the purchasing...

Consumerism has transformed the cultural mindset in that their needs are now conditioned by the product and service line as prescribed by the west.
Globalization, which I would want to define as the encompassing transformative and catalytic character of technological advances has over the past decade ushered in a new wave of transactional arrangements between sovereign states and transnational entities. Globalization has led to the reconfiguration of hierarchical structures of interaction as the flat world is seen over the horizon. Globalization is predicated on innovation, if a firm or country cannot innovate or integrate the necessary measures to increase its competitiveness then it stands to lose in a highly predatory environment. While globalization, may be looked upon on negative perspective that is it would lead to the demise of uncompetitive small and medium firms, looking at it on hindsight it should serve as an impetus on their part. Lulling them out of their complacency by offering a value added component in their goods and services. Closing your doors to the world and waiting for domestic industries to develop would be counterproductive. Subsequently, integration has evolved into a necessity rather than an opportunity. The critical aspect is to prepare ourselves, equipping the human capital with the right skill and indoctrinating them with a good work ethic, which would transform the workforce into knowledge workers. Although this may be a Herculean task, making some incremental reforms on a sustained basis would translate to substantive gains over the long-term. Globalization would not wait for the weak. Summing it up in four words, the time is now.

Friedman, Thomas. The World is Flat a Brief History of the Twenty First Century-Updated Release 3.0. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2007.