It seems like the products Samsung builds via this operating model are either very expensive for the customer or very low margin for Samsung (or both). Taken alone, transportation costs from Asia to Buenos Aires then to Rio Grande and back must be astronomical when compared to what Samsung ordinarily pays to move a finished good from Asia straight into market. On top of that, as I think you’ve mentioned in class a few times, labor and overhead costs in Argentina are relatively high. Are Argentine consumers willing to pay the premium for these products due to the difficulties associated with the currency (i.e., an inability to save money securely and therefore a willingness to invest in luxury goods)? Or is Samsung simply too dominant now? Why haven’t Samsung’s competitors followed suit?
Meta indeed. I’m curious as to how the executive education program factors into the operating model and whether “students” and “alumni” of that program contribute in a similarly synergistic manner (with regards to influence emanation) as do current students and alumni. More generally, I suppose the million dollar question, so to speak, is how much each of these processes contributes to overall value capture, but I imagine that would be quite difficult to measure given the fact that many of these processes feed into others, as you mentioned. Synergy to the max. Great post, and thanks for sharing.