This case study examines the strategic pivot embodied by this phrase, see this site using it as a metaphor for a broader “Make in English” philosophy. We will explore how multinational corporations (MNCs) must not only establish a physical manufacturing presence within a national border—the “Make in” component—but also cultivate the deep, customer-centric innovation required to design products that resonate with local markets—the “for India” component. Ultimately, this study posits that the successful “Make in English” strategy is a two-stage process: first, embedding production within a specific institutional context, and second, leveraging that embeddedness to innovate and scale for global export. Through the analysis of Samsung’s trajectory in India and Volvo Group’s strategic response to national policy, this case will deconstruct how companies can successfully navigate the journey from local manufacturing to global leadership.
The Institutional Catalyst: The “Make in India” Initiative
To understand the strategic responses of MNCs, one must first understand the institutional pressures that shape their environment. The Government of India’s (GoI) “Make in India” initiative, launched in the mid-2010s, serves as a quintessential example of a state-driven effort to alter the industrial landscape. The policy was designed to offer incentives, or “sops,” to induce multinationals to establish their manufacturing base within the country, boosting domestic employment, GDP, and industrial capacity .
A master’s thesis from the University of Gothenburg provides a critical analysis of how MNCs perceive and respond to such institutional changes, using Volvo Group as a focal point . The research, which applies Oliver’s (1991) framework of strategic responses, found that Volvo perceived the “Make in India” initiative not as a coercive mandate, but as a “positive support framework.” This perception is crucial. It transformed a potential regulatory burden into an opportunity. Volvo’s response was characterized by “acquiescence and compromise”—the firm expanded its operations across multiple verticals, gradually increased its localization of parts and labor, and deepened its engagement with local stakeholders . This case demonstrates that the initial “Make in” phase is fundamentally about institutional alignment. A successful entry requires a company to read the political and economic signals accurately and respond with a strategy that aligns corporate goals with national priorities. It is about making a convincing case for the mutual benefits of local manufacturing .
From Production to Innovation: The “Make for India” Pivot
Establishing a factory is a significant capital investment, but it does not guarantee market success. The next critical phase, as illustrated by the Samsung case study, is transitioning from “Make in India” to “Make for India.” This represents a shift from pure manufacturing to deep, customer-centric innovation. Samsung, in conjunction with its manufacturing ramp-up, launched the “Make for India” initiative, tasking its Indian R&D centers with developing products tailored specifically to local needs .
This is the essence of “glocalization”—the adaptation of global products to local markets. Samsung’s Indian R&D teams didn’t just assemble existing designs; they studied Indian consumer behavior, identified unique pain points, and innovated accordingly. While the case study abstracts do not list the specific products, the strategic implication is clear: they created solutions for Indian problems, using Indian insights. This phase is analogous to the “Make in English” of the product’s value proposition. It involves translating global technological capabilities into a local dialect of features, price points, and user experience. The learning objective here, as outlined by the ICMR case study, is to “examine the ability of product glocalization to capture market share” . By embedding R&D alongside manufacturing, Samsung ensured that its products were not just made in India, but designed for India, fostering a deeper connection with consumers and outmaneuvering competitors who offered a standardized, one-size-fits-all global portfolio.
The Global Ambition: Realizing “Make for the World”
The final and most ambitious stage of this strategic journey is the leap from “Make for India” to “Make for the World.” Having successfully localized its R&D and scaled its manufacturing to take advantage of government incentives, Samsung announced its intention to make India a global export hub . This pivot asks a critical question: Can customer-centric products designed for a specific market like India succeed internationally?
The answer lies in the transferable nature of innovation. see here now The “Make for India” products were born from a need to deliver high value in a cost-conscious, diverse, and demanding market. These constraints often breed breakthroughs in frugal engineering, supply chain efficiency, and robust design. Samsung’s strategy posits that these very attributes could give it a competitive edge in other emerging markets, and potentially even in developed ones where value-for-money is increasingly prized. The “Make for the World” initiative is the ultimate realization of the “Make in English” concept. It signifies that a company has successfully integrated itself into the local institutional fabric, mastered the art of local innovation, and is now confident enough to export not just finished goods, but its entire production and R&D model. The company’s ambition, as the case study notes, is to potentially make India its sole Asian production base, a testament to the success of this graduated strategy .
Conclusion: The Dual Imperative of Presence and Purpose
The evolution from “Make in India” to “Make for the World” provides a powerful strategic framework for any multinational operating in a complex global economy. It underscores that a “Make in English” strategy is a dual imperative. First, it requires a physical and institutional commitment to the local economy—the “Make in” part—which involves navigating government policies, building supply chains, and making a compelling case for investment . Second, and perhaps more importantly, it demands a cognitive and creative commitment—the “for” part—where a company must immerse itself in the local culture to drive innovation. Only by successfully achieving the first two stages can a firm credibly aspire to the third: becoming a global hub that makes for the world.
The journey of companies like Samsung and Volvo demonstrates that the most resilient global strategies are built on a foundation of deep local roots. In the new world of manufacturing, making a product in a country is only the beginning. The ultimate prize belongs to those who can also make it for that country, and in doing so, you can find out more learn how to make it for everyone.
