Mastering the Make-in-India Challenge

India is changed country with the developments and the Governmental support for high Growth. It is going through a massive change face.  There could be resistance for these sudden changes, but the transformation is to sustain a new India.

Business scenario is a new one now.  I have seen the stability of quality brands which does not affect people.  They are willing to pay for the best and looking for a high value status.  Brands like Coke, and Mac may have face turbulent waters only because of its self creating storms.  People are educated and does not want any disruptive substances that threaten their own life.

 Indian platter offers due to many of the policies such as lower labor cost, better infra, lower taxes etc, though may have some administrative bottlenecks.  India is trying hard to remove these bottlenecks. India has an intelligent and skillful work force and willing to contribute.  Though China is trying to flood world market with low cost items, but in many cases unacceptable conditions. Remember the toxic toys of China. 

Looking for growth, India has the talent.

India is the second biggest population in the world that has many problems to solve, especially in social relationship. it only be tackled by local wisdom combined with global practice. adaptation is the key

The analysis of Indian economy has some essentialities that one must factor in for pragmatic approach.
1.	It’s a populous country with demographic dividend & burden of increasing middle class (consumption) for next 2 decades.
2.	It’s a heterogeneous country in all aspects of purchasing power, geography, localized cultures as good as many countries in itself. A less than portfolio approach might not be sustainable for business market share.
3.	The definition of premium/luxury would always be price/quality/value tested as competition for wallet will remain intense. The most profitable & sustainable market share would be affordable luxury brand.

In a prismatic analysis the followings would be more readily see the progress on ground beyond verbatim, considering the policy making framework & its administrative legacy that exists and at best can be upended but not reinvented.
1.	Piece meal approach by orchestrating & leveraging existing institutions has rarely seen the result for the objective it was started. Thought leadership & integrated from start as a SPV can only provide political dividend in 5 years, else would remain nonstarter.  
2.	Integrated Industrial clusters beyond the Cities/metro would will provide the appropriate threshold by combination of cost/value, resource/talent availability/grooming, sustainable development & quality of life with job creation. Historically, the manufacturing capabilities of significant contribution has been achieved only by the PSU’s & few corporates by building a pivot with combinatorial choice of strategy.     
3.	With GST in place, a logistic hub per state can itself increase supply chain efficiency by 30%, lift the GDP by 0.50% with million new hands in work place by adopting hub & spoke model. However, this requires lot of unbundling of departments & departure from capital/headquarter mind set for creating institutions, authorities & floating SPV’s & raising funds successfully as listed entities to make it happen. 
The idea of new India is feasible by going beyond incrementalism with Impact & build for purpose initiatives. As far as global Brand names are concerned, they are highly profitable corporates and would be evaluated in public eye & support by what they bring to table for economy beyond market presence. In a democracy if most profitable corporates need incentives to setup a shop then it would be political difficult to reduce subsidies where millions live below poverty line. These global brands most probably would not touch the lives of masses in any meaningful way in next decade to support the cause. We are living in an era of Glocalization (Global Localization) and business strategies which are aligned to that school of thought will take off the ground faster.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed are personal in nature and does not reflect the official policy or position of any organization.

The strategy suggested for "Mastering the Make-in-India Challenge" appears to be more appropriate for the bygone era and not for today’s economy. As widely discussed in the literature, particularly in MITSMR, for last several years, the global economy is undergoing radical transformation under the impact of disruptive forces of technology & new business models unleashed by the IV Industrial Revolution (or, Second Machine Age). The authors of this article are still looking at the whole economy and all its sectors through a generic prism, more appropriate to an asset-based (rather asset-sharing) economy. For example, it is difficult to agree with the criticism of iPhone’s pricing strategy in India, because the authors are looking at the product as a mere physical mass of hardware without considering its platform value. Extending the logic put forwarded by Erik Brynjolfsson, Andrew McAfee and by some other researchers, for acquiring a leadership position in India, it is critical for Apple to focus on how to attract more and more app developers who can provide solutions for millions of problems to a market of billion individuals. With the smartphone-market growing at a breakneck speed – reaching almost the bottom of the pyramid – Apple needs to focus how it can fulfill the demands of the Indian population, particularly for its lower and lower-middle strata, in all kinds of products and services. These products can range from very basic to most sophisticated, starting from education, healthcare, and run-of-the-mill consumer products for the poorest of the poor to high-value consumer & lifestyle products. 
Even in an asset-heavy sector, like the automobile,  the scene is changing very fast. But the article, it seems, is suggesting the industry to drive ahead looking at the rearview mirror. 

However, while acknowledging the mind-boggling speed of the game-changing innovations, it is important to recognize the fact that the rate of transition to the innovation economy is different for different products. Therefore, the suggested strategy in the article might still work for some category of goods or sectors for a few more years. Those products or services need to be identified before mastering the challenges before them. 
In the changing environment and connected world, where collaboration on idea development has become the source of sustainable competitive advantage the researchers also need to answer a more fundamental question: does Make-in-India make any sense in this changed world and if yes, then how should it be understood.