Tingson, Melchisedec D.

“Globalization trend in response to Globally influenced economic unification.”

The globe is today more connected than ever because to decades of scientific

development and improvements in international collaboration. The term "globalization"

refers to the increasing interconnectedness of economies, cultures, and people across a

wide range of countries as a result of technology, cross-border trade in goods and

services, and global flows of money, labor, and information. In the past, nations have

formed economic alliances to fund these endeavors. But when the Cold War came to an

end and these agreements for cooperation had a significant impact on modern society,

the phrase began to be used more frequently (PIIE, 2022). But how did the world

respond in terms of globalization in a post-pandemic situation.

One of the pre-cursors that would be determined during, and mid-pandemic situation is

the relatively large significance of the “Zoom Effect”. To which multiple MNEs encourage

remote operations such as the well-known Google, and Amazon company, offering

occupations with the “Work from Home” benefit. By this advantage, amidst the

pandemic, such big enterprises would still have the capability to resume its operations.

This is one of the most important things that caught my interest as a reader,

presumably, economical freeze would be foreseen amidst the situation, and less work

force would be observed, however, with the zoom effect, the economy would not remain

in a stagnant situation. Another thing that I’ve learned in compensation of the previous

statement, is that Globalization offers lesser risk, there will probably be a little rise in
risks felt by future generations. However, the prior adjustments will lessen or even

eliminate these hazards, to which all these adjustments, predominantly were incurred by

a catastrophic globally influenced event which is the pandemic. And lastly, the epidemic

demonstrated how interconnected and twisted the movement of goods and services had

become by disrupting supply chains and mobility. Even while many countries developed

investment plans to safeguard essential resources, protectionism grew as a result. With

the continuous tensions that resulted an arousal of nationalism and protectionism, the

current state flow of goods demanded more attention on how supplies would be

circulated, unrelated with the post pandemic situation, one perfect example would be

the tension of Russia and Ukraine that mostly disrupted the chain of oil and gas.

Throughout the paper, the 3 things that are completely unclear to me as a reader is first;

The pandemic may have taught us many things, even though the full scope of the

epidemic's long-term impact is yet unclear, there are other lessons that may be learned.

One of which is that while the factors that caused and characterized the outbreak won't

eliminate globalization, they will change how it is seen. If the current globalization era

will be coming to an end, and us spectators would foresee change, wouldn’t that change

incur a dramatic increase in terms of workforce growth? Leading to a substantial less

need of manpower. Second, It is now obvious that increased closeness between the site

of production and the customer is necessary to prevent shortages in the case of future

crises as a result of the pandemic's disruption of supply chains, however, more

countries sought to seek independence such as the India, with the leading efficiency in

terms of rising nationalism. And lastly, “The art of global management has always been
to seek the optimum middle ground between integration and fragmentation, between

standardization and adaptation, and between resilience or assurance on the one hand

and efficiency/cost reduction on the other”, with this subject matter contemplating the

importance and relevance to distinct branches of the economy, would it be a perfect

catalyst to propagate the new era of globalization?

The 3 things I used to think about the topic is why globalization was already deemed

successful beforehand, such example is the glory of Rome, with the ambition of an

Emperor to conquer and unification of culture, the economical viability foreseen was

already successful at hand, to which, not just an event would trigger success in

globalization, but such certain greed for ambitions as well. Next thing I always think

about this topic is the importance of 5G technology, as it displayed such magnificent in

terms of technological advancement with network importance. And lastly, Closer

relationship between buyers and sellers that echoed the venerable concept of

“Keiretsu”.

The 3 things I want to ask about in response about this article is first, aside from MNEs,

would there be opportunities for small companies within a third-world company incur the

benefits of globalization? Would globalization uphold the increase of economic growth

within a less technological viable country? And lastly, would a unified world order

determine a better result for globalization?

In overall, globalization produces a much more substantial connection throughout the

globe. In contrast to the doomsday predictions of a post-pandemic future marked by

increased global risks, economic decoupling, disruption of global value chains, and the

end of globalization, the changes brought about by rising nationalism and protectionism

will be minor rather than fundamental. Thanks to advancing technology and other cross-

border business strategies, multinational organizations may readily manage and

eliminate these somewhat elevated risks.