Why should huge multinationals bother with the worlds poor?
Because they’re a growth opportunity. We cannot have 5 billion well informed but disenfranchised people. But look at what has been happening on the streets of Genoa, Prague, and Davos. It’s clear that poor people are getting a voice. Another reason is that, contrary to popular view, the poor actually can be a source of innovation and creativity. The poor of the world adopt the most advanced tech faster than we in the U.S. because they have nothing to forget. In U.S., all new technologies are substitutes for existing technology. So we have to absorb [the] cost of switching. Not so in developing nations. Q: You’ve likened the U.S. company approach to globalization a decade ago to “corporate imperialism,” and you note that many strategies didn’t work. How should companies approach emerging markets? A: Increasingly, companies need to address the issue of whether their strategy should be asset- or access-centric. I believe they should focus on access. If you try to get market access through
