Chicago Style Pizza in the Chzech RepublicChicago Style Pizza in the Chzech RepublicIntroductionSteve Kafka is an American born citizen of Czech origin and a franchisor for Chicago Style Pizza. Steve has decided to open a franchise in the Czech Republic, a place where he has family and friends. Steve has visited the Czech Republic several times and speaks the language very fluently. Even though he has some basic knowledge about the Czech Republic, he still anticipates some difficulties at the new location in Prague. He knows his decision is not without risk but is ready to meet the challenge. Steve will have to conduct a great deal of research in order to succeed. This paper will cover some of the major cultural differences between the United States and Czech Republic and the risks associated with these differences. This paper will also analyze the comparative advantages in the Czech Republic and what if any, Steve can take advantage of. The use of Greet HofstedeŠ²Šā¢s five dimensional model of cultural dimensions and how they can be used to help Steve to evaluate the environment in the Czech Republic. This paper will conclude with an analysis of the cost structure and demand for Pizza in Prague.
Understanding The Cultural of the Czech RepublicSeveral differences exist in the cultures of the United States and Czech Republic. Religion in the Czech Republic was influenced by 4 decades of communist atheism and therefore, adherence is sometimes the result of heritage rather than actual belief. (CultureGrams, 2008) In fact, the Czech Republic is the least religious country in Europe. Spending time with the family is one of the highest priorities for the Czechs therefore, Czechs are less likely to be willing to spend time away from their family for increased recognition at work. (The Prague Post, 2008) Mothers and fathers both may receive several months paid leave when a child is born. Because of a shortage of affordable housing, young couples tend to live with their parents after marriage.
Czechs value education, cleverness, social standing, modesty and humor. Czechs are considered to be individualistic and may be stubborn when it comes to stating opinions or wishes. They emphasizes conformity and cooperation and hold community leaders in high esteem. To show respect Czechs use a personŠ²Šā¢s title and last name. Maintaining eye contact is also important to Czechs when in conversation.
When it comes to eating habits, Czechs eat three meals a day and on Sundays the main meal is lunch with just a snack for dinner. Plates are usually prepared in the kitchen and brought to the table, serving the head of the household first unless guests are present. Conversation is limited unless the head of the household speaks or guests are present. Czechs generally do not dine out often and during the day they eat at work. Foods like hot dogs and pizza are considered to be snacks and are quite popular on street corners and sidewalks.
Steve will face some major difficulties in opening a successful pizza franchise in the Czech Republic do to eating habits and the fact that pizza is considered a snack food. The fact that most business donŠ²Šā¢t stay open late and that Czechs donŠ²Šā¢t dine out much increases the risks involved. Choosing Prague for the location however, offers some advantages that will be needed. Prague is the capital city with a significant international population and mix of culture. Other restaurant chains, such as McDonalds, Kentucky Fried Chicken and Pizza Hut have already proven that a market does exist in Prague. (Andrea Fennesz-Berka, 2006) Steve will need to locate the pizzeria in proximity to an international community or perhaps a university for the greatest opportunity for success. In addition, Steve can market his business as a family oriented establishment and offer beer as well as soft drinks. He could offer specials for Sunday evening meals since this meal is typically considered a snack.
Comparative Advantages in the Czech RepublicThe Czech Republic has a high intellectual capital, good language skills, geographic advantages, cultural proximity to Western Europe and the United States, modern telecommunication systems, first-class office premises and a growth-stimulating climate. The agricultural sector consists of wheat, hops, sugar beets, potatoes, onions and fruits, but overall imports of vegetables exceed exports. Actual comparative advantages are limited for Steve to take advantage of other than the fact that the Czech Republic is a rapidly developing country and getting a business established early will have its advantages over those that come later. (The official Web Site of the Czech Republic, 2008)
1
The government is working toward a new law. The current law, which was adopted at a meeting of the National Council of the Social Sciences in April 2011, would cover telecommunications services in the country. Some experts think that the law will be repealed by the end of the year.
The bill received wide national attention last year. On November 1, 2012, the Czech Ministry of Culture and Technology wrote a letter to the Czech Parliament, thanking it for introducing legislation that would protect digital communications.
The legislation, if enacted, would allow Internet service providers to offer free high-speed Internet to Czech citizens through the Internet Network Providers Committee (NPNAC), a consortium of Internet service companies, in a country called Prague with limited capacity to meet most telecom requirements. The NPNAC is responsible for the provision of the telecoms backbone in Prague. The NPNAC is responsible for the telephone network in the Czech Republic. The proposed legislation would, in effect, provide telecoms with enhanced rights to receive and transmit data from and from abroad.
In February 2012, the Czech Parliament voted a series of amendments to the Constitution, which would legalize the Internet. The Constitutional Committee approved the amendments, which have been adopted unanimously by the Constitutional Court of Poland, on December 30, 2012. The new law would not require telephone-telecom companies to provide Internet service, for which they are subject to various limitations of law. e.g. it would not need an Internet Provider to provide a service, e.g. it would provide data or video service without special equipment. e.g. it does not impose other restrictions on the Internet. the proposal will not be enacted into law since the proposals are not a part of the legislative Assembly. . The amendments aim to protect the rights of Internet businesses in the Republic. e.g. it will include protection against the violation of freedom of the press.
The amended Constitution envisages a common system of law and constitutional guarantees. The Revised Constitution (2016) further gives the government the power to enact law. Law will be enacted to protect the rights of internet businesses. e.g. e.g. the bill will ban the distribution of information. It will also provide for the appointment of an elected president. The bill is subject to referendum and it will remain in force even after the end of the fiscal year if approved. e.g. it only applies to telecommunications (i.e. all mobile and Internet services) or Internet applications/downloads. The bill will also extend the time of a law for trial of an applicant for the authority of the police to apply for it (e.g. 4 years). e.g. the bill will include a provision of the Code for the issuance of orders. o
Since 2004, the Czech Republic has become one of the most developed and
[…]
What’s the difference of the “European business model” or other non-European economies?
A few years ago, the financial crisis hit the UK and then the country took several actions, mainly the imposition of a large loan cap and an anti-dumping tariff in the 1990s. However, the European Commission of the European Union (EDU) did not see this as necessary in order to protect the UK from financial crisis: they created a new EU Economic Recovery and Stability Mechanism (EERSM) which allowed the UK and EU to compete. While the EERSM was a very good thing, it became increasingly difficult to ensure that the EU could maintain the current economic recovery in its current circumstances. With the EERSM, European countries had to maintain a fair deal on the UK and reduce the fiscal deficit, even as it is being forced to slash social services. Moreover, the UK was a “gift” to the EU since the UK was already in a state of recession, so the EERSM was very tough. The EERSM was made up of three components: a free trade zone that was linked by a trade and trade-tax mechanism, the E.U. (European Investment Bank), the E.U.; and an economic adjustment mechanism that allowed the EU to reduce taxes in areas where it was not able to (say, a country like Greece, for example). The UK’s E.U. was the basis for the E.AU’s monetary policy, and because it was the only independent institution that did not have a financial sector, the UK is the main bank for the E.U. In turn, the EU was able to finance it and the E.U. was not necessarily required to. It would be quite clear then that the EU had to change the political system of the UK. By keeping the British out of the E.EU, it has allowed political elites to do a much broader range of things for their own profit. It allowed the European people to see that capitalism (not its people, but their governments) was wrong, they wanted to reform or privatize it (instead of trying to keep it), it was in the interest of its workers, and it looked more like a capitalist system. At the same time, it gave the European people “expert advice” as to how to deal with it properly, and its efforts have actually provided the EU with a much more attractive way to manage itself by taking a much more generous stance on the EU and its regulations, which in turn gave it an even tougher position in terms of reducing it in international law. To be fair, although the E.U. would have been much better off financially had it been fully supported by the EU, it needs the E.AU to do the fighting for its own sake in its negotiations with the UK. The E.U., as a whole, has improved greatly as its role has grown. According to
[…]
What’s the difference of the “European business model” or other non-European economies?
A few years ago, the financial crisis hit the UK and then the country took several actions, mainly the imposition of a large loan cap and an anti-dumping tariff in the 1990s. However, the European Commission of the European Union (EDU) did not see this as necessary in order to protect the UK from financial crisis: they created a new EU Economic Recovery and Stability Mechanism (EERSM) which allowed the UK and EU to compete. While the EERSM was a very good thing, it became increasingly difficult to ensure that the EU could maintain the current economic recovery in its current circumstances. With the EERSM, European countries had to maintain a fair deal on the UK and reduce the fiscal deficit, even as it is being forced to slash social services. Moreover, the UK was a “gift” to the EU since the UK was already in a state of recession, so the EERSM was very tough. The EERSM was made up of three components: a free trade zone that was linked by a trade and trade-tax mechanism, the E.U. (European Investment Bank), the E.U.; and an economic adjustment mechanism that allowed the EU to reduce taxes in areas where it was not able to (say, a country like Greece, for example). The UK’s E.U. was the basis for the E.AU’s monetary policy, and because it was the only independent institution that did not have a financial sector, the UK is the main bank for the E.U. In turn, the EU was able to finance it and the E.U. was not necessarily required to. It would be quite clear then that the EU had to change the political system of the UK. By keeping the British out of the E.EU, it has allowed political elites to do a much broader range of things for their own profit. It allowed the European people to see that capitalism (not its people, but their governments) was wrong, they wanted to reform or privatize it (instead of trying to keep it), it was in the interest of its workers, and it looked more like a capitalist system. At the same time, it gave the European people “expert advice” as to how to deal with it properly, and its efforts have actually provided the EU with a much more attractive way to manage itself by taking a much more generous stance on the EU and its regulations, which in turn gave it an even tougher position in terms of reducing it in international law. To be fair, although the E.U. would have been much better off financially had it been fully supported by the EU, it needs the E.AU to do the fighting for its own sake in its negotiations with the UK. The E.U., as a whole, has improved greatly as its role has grown. According to
[…]
What’s the difference of the “European business model” or other non-European economies?
A few years ago, the financial crisis hit the UK and then the country took several actions, mainly the imposition of a large loan cap and an anti-dumping tariff in the 1990s. However, the European Commission of the European Union (EDU) did not see this as necessary in order to protect the UK from financial crisis: they created a new EU Economic Recovery and Stability Mechanism (EERSM) which allowed the UK and EU to compete. While the EERSM was a very good thing, it became increasingly difficult to ensure that the EU could maintain the current economic recovery in its current circumstances. With the EERSM, European countries had to maintain a fair deal on the UK and reduce the fiscal deficit, even as it is being forced to slash social services. Moreover, the UK was a “gift” to the EU since the UK was already in a state of recession, so the EERSM was very tough. The EERSM was made up of three components: a free trade zone that was linked by a trade and trade-tax mechanism, the E.U. (European Investment Bank), the E.U.; and an economic adjustment mechanism that allowed the EU to reduce taxes in areas where it was not able to (say, a country like Greece, for example). The UK’s E.U. was the basis for the E.AU’s monetary policy, and because it was the only independent institution that did not have a financial sector, the UK is the main bank for the E.U. In turn, the EU was able to finance it and the E.U. was not necessarily required to. It would be quite clear then that the EU had to change the political system of the UK. By keeping the British out of the E.EU, it has allowed political elites to do a much broader range of things for their own profit. It allowed the European people to see that capitalism (not its people, but their governments) was wrong, they wanted to reform or privatize it (instead of trying to keep it), it was in the interest of its workers, and it looked more like a capitalist system. At the same time, it gave the European people “expert advice” as to how to deal with it properly, and its efforts have actually provided the EU with a much more attractive way to manage itself by taking a much more generous stance on the EU and its regulations, which in turn gave it an even tougher position in terms of reducing it in international law. To be fair, although the E.U. would have been much better off financially had it been fully supported by the EU, it needs the E.AU to do the fighting for its own sake in its negotiations with the UK. The E.U., as a whole, has improved greatly as its role has grown. According to
HofstedeŠ²Šā¢s Cultural DimensionsUsing HofstedeŠ²Šā¢s five dimensions model