From the passage, it becomes crystal clear that Wal-Mart has not managed to maintain its stand in the market in relation to the number of customers, range of services they offer, and the number of stores they have in different countries. The reason for all this is a failure to learn the cultures and norms underlying the target market in countries where they resolve to set their stores. This exposed them to immense struggle in order to maintain their part in the market since they also faced bitter rivalry from local competitors in those markets. Actually, Wal-Mart could not manage to keep up its normal formula for success in a way that it had to change business strategies and, in extreme cases, it had to quit. In its wake to adjust to the nature of market, Wal-Mart was compelled to stop restricting the use of the name of the founder in foreign stores which brought forth the largest earnings. It also integrated acquisitions with more sensitivity. Even though it could not strenghen its market position in some countries, good news was that it could help crack other big markets and forge with aggressive program towards foreign acquisitions. In the midst of all woes, Wal-Mart has managed to move on with size giving it increased leverage with its suppliers, joining unions in China which became its centerpiece for international expansion and continuing its success in markets where it started to settle, especially in Mexico. Nevertheless, its influence in some markets was interfered with by changes in consumer tastes and preferences based on social class, culture, amount of earnings, and the number of stores in different markets.
Analyzing the methods and modes of competition employed by Wal-Mart, there is a need for improvements thus bringing the rating of its general performance to be average. This is illustrated by the fact that its experiences in most of the developed nations such as South Korea, Great Britain, and Germany had been less successful, more so, in Germany, where they announced their pulling out in 2006. Wal-Mart would be more successful in national environments where managers understand the cultures of the citizens and are able to communicate with them to understand what they need at specific times and develop and control the line of merchandise. Besides, this can happen in places where there is no bitter rivalry or stiff competition in a way that the existing retailers can collaborate to form a joint venture. In other words, Wal-Mart can enjoy success in national environments where habits of people are changeable and can be contained by businesses. The best example of this scenario is Mexico where it enjoys its biggest success and stability hence can be used as a reference standard. Wal-Mart would be least successful in environment with well established local rivals who have managed to match the habits and consumer preferences, for instance, in Germany, South Korea, and Great Britain; their discount strategy could not work due to well established competitors. Weighing the chances of Wal-Mart succeeding in China a decade from now, it becomes clear to me that they will manage to be successful just like in Mexico. What makes it an easy catch for Wal-Mart is the fact that there is no stiff rivalry, and the Chinese are free to bargain hence they can reinforce their low price strategy. Besides, they are able to adjust to Chinese culture, for example, displaying food uncovered because Chinese do not like dead fish. In addition, they are able to embrace the unions in China which make them a part of Chinese market. This implies that with time they would be able to reach the market to adapt to their strategies that would give them an upper hand.