This chapter examines the case of Tata Motors Limited (TML), one of the leading automotive firms in India’s automotive industry. It demonstrates that TML is a market leader in India’s fast-growing automotive industry. TML fulfils the three market-leadership conditions – market share, global reach and innovation – exceptionally well. The sources of this leadership are described through a series of firm, sector and country level factors. However, maintaining leadership on a continuous basis for a reasonably long time must not be taken for granted. Leadership positions may be easily challenged in a globalized market and potential new leaders may emerge to challenge what is currently presumed to be an unassailable leadership position. For this reason, a leader must continue to be vigilant from the innovation point of view. In this respect, for TML, continued innovation is the accepted corporate strategy.
This chapter analyses the case of Cipla as a market leader in India’s pharmaceutical industry, which itself is a leader in India’s manufacturing industry. Cipla meets all the three conditions of market leadership: market dominance, global reach and innovation. Cipla has had a significantly long history of development and has enjoyed success in serving both domestic and foreign markets better than many of its domestic rivals. It has been a trailblazer for pioneering low-cost, lifesaving drugs and, as a result, it is a highly respected company in India. The chapter seeks to explain the source of leadership in terms of firm-level and sector-level factors. Knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship is a key factor. The firm has a strong vision and focused corporate strategy. Cipla has also taken advantage of three sector-level factors, namely the patent regime, technology contributions from public research institutes (PRIs) and the higher-education sector. In a number of ways, the origins of Cipla’s leadership are similar to those discussed in the Tata Motors case: a key factor common to both is the knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship. Although the founding entrepreneurs wield overall control, the management of both companies is in professional hands. In both cases, the contribution of both sectoral and country-level factors have been important.