Xiaomi's Institutional Advantage: Implications for Global Expansion

From an institution-based view:

How has xiaomi been able to leverage the institutional environment in china to challenge global players such as samsung and apple?

What obstacles would it have to overcome to similarly succeed in india or brazil? From a resource-based.

What resources has xiaomi been able to create to enable its growth in china?

Do you believe it has a sus-tainable advantage in china?

What obstacles to transferring resources to india and brazil is xiaomi likely to experience, and how do you suggest overcoming them? 

Focused on the vast and fast-growing chinese market, xiaomi sold only 3% of its smanphones outside of china, compared to lenovo's 16% and huawei's 41%. Following the example of its chinese peers, xiaomi decided to first focus on other emerging economies, starting in india and then brazil and russia. Xiaorni's first major international venture was in india, where its €90-a-piece smartphones undercut key competitors including global players samsung and apple, as well as local start-ups micromax, karbonn and spice. However, xiaomi found india more difficult to penetrate than china. While both are emerging economies, the chinese experience was only of limited use in india. In particular, the online sales channels have been  so farless effective: First, xiaomi does not enjoy the same attention in online tech circles and hence did not gather the same extent of buzz. In part, this was because many chinese like xiaomi because it represents the chinese entrepreneurial spirit, an appreciation that is difficult to replicate abroad. Second, online retailing was still in its infancy in india, mainly because the physical infrastructure to bring online ordered products to consumers is not in place. Thus xiaomi adapted its business models by collaborating with phone operator bbarti airtel and electronics retailer mobilestore to develop more traditional distribu-tion channels but this increases its costs. A different challenge of internationalization is the possibility of global competitors claiming intellectual property rights (1pr) infringement. Ipr disputes are common among smartphone giants; apple and sam-sung have been fighting court battles in several countries for years. While the nature of ipr is often dis-puted, claims of ip infringement have become an effective, if costly, weapon of competition. In china, many nclivlill' vviindoia go to settings to action.