EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Two great economists, Thomas Friedman and Pankaj Ghemawat clash against each other on their published books named ‘World is flat’ and ‘The World Isn’t Flat’ respectively which focuses on one single point of debate viz. GLOBALIZATION. This assignment is to conduct a critical review on both these thoughts and accordingly come up with a relevant conclusion along with a strong, supporting argument for the same. The conclusion will then lead to analysis of an emerging market/company and provide suggestion based on the learning. INTRODUCTION Thomas Friedman, an American Journalist and Author had published a book named ‘The World Is Flat’ in the year 2005 referring to the concept of Globalization and how it had connected people around the world …show more content…
Friedman was not only supported by Pro-Globalizers but also by Anti-Globalizers who thought giant Globalization tsunami is going to wreck all lives as mentioned by T. Friedman. To prove the assumption of T. Friedman with respect to his perspective on the Globalization theory for which he had considered the invention of Steam Ship, Rail and Telegram, P. Ghemawat did a historical search where he found that the details of the same were stated as a fact by David Livingston in the year 1850, that these inventions enabled great connectivity of East Africa with the rest of the world – which was not the reality as the claim was way ahead of its time. As P. Ghemawat was a person who believed not only in facts but also on figures, he had conducted lots of surveys before he decided to publish his writing. The data he collected were related to things that could happen within national borders or cross national borders, out of which Cross Border Data was the key to shed light which he analyzed for better perspective to his theory that World Isn't Flat. The data he presented shows various aspects of a cross border component as a percentage of the total value based