Business Strategies (Spring 2022): Under Armour Case Analysis

This case study analyzes the performance of Under Armour, focusing on the reasons behind its downturn in North America starting in 2016. It evaluates the competitive rivalry in the North American market, assessing competitive forces through a five-force analysis and identifying Under Armour's core and distinctive competencies. The study also includes a SWOT analysis to determine the overall attractiveness of Under Armour, examines key strategic elements, and identifies the company's generic competitive strategy. A weighted competitive strength assessment against Nike and Adidas, along with financial analysis, is provided. The study also discusses key issues confronting Under Armour's management team and concludes with recommendations for further improvement. The analysis highlights operational inefficiencies, competitive pressures, and the importance of innovation and strategic adaptation in the sports apparel industry. The report also includes tables and figures for better understanding and clarity of the analysis.

Submitted on 29-April-2022
Business Strategies
(Spring 2022) sec. 02
Under Armour
Group Case
Analysis

Executive Summary
The study has shed its light on reasons and causes of Under Armour’s performance downturn
which initiated during 2016. Apart from this, strengths, industrial forces confronting the firms
and core competencies, distinctive sources or competencies has been evaluated in this report.
The financial performance analysis, strategic issues and a set of constructive
recommendations have also been provided in this study.
1

Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................3
1. Causes as well as reasons behind Under Armour performance downturn in North America,
appearing for first time in Q4, 2016...........................................................................................3
2. Critical evaluation of strength of competitive rivalry in North American market.................3
3. Assessment of four competitive forces, confronting Under Armour in light of five-force
analysis.......................................................................................................................................4
4. Determination and illustration of core competencies of Under Armour................................5
5. Discussion of Under Armour’s distinctive competence.........................................................6
6. Overall attractiveness of Under Armour in light of SWOT analysis.....................................6
7. Key strategic elements of Under Armour’s strategy..............................................................8
8. Five generic competitive strategy having resemblance competitive approach of Under
Armour.......................................................................................................................................8
9. Weighted competitive strength assessment against Nike as well as Adidas Group...............9
10. Conducting financial analysis including ratio calculation.................................................12
11. Key issues Confronting Under Armour’s management team............................................14
12. Recommendations and suggestions for further improvement............................................14
Conclusion................................................................................................................................14
2

Introduction
Rising protectionism, geopolitical tension including global pandemic has led to several issues
for the entire apparel industry including the Sports ware segment as well. Since, founded by
1996, the popular sport apparel making company has made sport apparel with performance-
enhancing fabrics, which can provide comfort and other functionalities regardless of any kind
of weather. The current report has shed its light on causes and reasons of Under Armour
performance downturn in 2016. Apart from this, strength of competitive rivalry of this
company, core competencies, five forces analysis, SWOT analysis, key strategic elements has
also been highlighted in this study. Preference has also been given in analysing key issues
confronting the management team, determination of weighted competitive strength and
financial analysis of this firm.
1. Causes as well as reasons behind Under Armour performance downturn in North
America, appearing for first time in Q4, 2016
In reference to the case study, during the initiation of 2020, Under Armour basically headed
into tremendous sales difficulties for five consecutive years. In addition to this, based on 2016
sales outlook, it is evident that in the North American Market, there is weakening demand for
Under Armour’s products. The provided facts and figures also reveal that 2016 quarterly
revenue of Under Armour in 2016 is same as the quarterly revenue of FY 15. It is reduced
around 25.7%, 21.5% and 15.6% in Q1, Q2 and Q3 of FY16 respectively. Critical analysis of
performance downturn in UA, which first appeared in FY16, further reveals Operational
inefficiencies of this firm. The transition towards “product-category management structure”,
“reengineered organisation’s go-to-market process” further entails that product innovation,
product design, seasonal products delivery time might not be maintained properly by this
firm. As per the views of Shad et al. (2019), inefficiency in managing business operations
mainly diminishes work quality, enhances risks including preventing a business from
achieving its strategic goals. Furthermore, the $140-$150 million restructuring plan further
pinpoints inappropriate control in maintaining profit margin, poor speed of response in
shifting towards consumer preferences and so on. As per Jagtap and Duong (2019),
innovation to existing processes and products contributes higher productivity and profits and
reduces costs. Thus, all these aspects provide a solid indication that due to operational
inefficiencies, poor management of inventory including failure to maintain product innovation
and design might be the underlying reasons or causes for the performance downturn of UA in
the North American market.
3

2. Critical evaluation of strength of competitive rivalry in North American market
Competitive rivalry in the North American market is quite fierce. Evaluating market share of
multinational companies, competitive rivalry in a particular market can be determined
(Zeibote et al. 2019). The case study reveals the fact that amidst taking sizable restructuring
method, UA could not be able to foresee a quick but relevant turn around in North American
market while headed to 2018. While the operational revenues of this company have escalated
up 4% to $5.2 billion, the operational income of UA has plummeted more than $ 50 million.
As a result of this, the company needs to encounter huge operational losses. For instance,
while the operating income was $27.8 million in FY17, the net revenue was $4976.6 million
in the same financial year. On the other hand, the sports apparel competitor Nike has total
brand revenue of $15216 million with a profit margin of 25.6% during 2017 financial year.
According to Pogodina et al. (2020) a series of factors like business strategic planning,
business diversity, market saturation, and slow but steady growth in market have helped in
determining competitive rivalry of the market. In essence, the business diversity of Nike,
Adidas, including lack of differentiation in Under Armour, has depicted competitive rivalry in
the North American market. In supporting the argument, the case study reveals the fact that
the net sales of sports apparel brands like Adidas and Reebok were £18993 and £1843
respectively. Thus, the increasing amount of net sales as well as enhancement of profitability
of several top-notch sports apparel brands in the North America market in turn provides clear
indication that a huge number of globally renowned sports apparel brands headed into this
market during 2018.
3. Assessment of four competitive forces, confronting Under Armour in light of five-
force analysis
Forces Impact
Competitive rivalry High
Bargaining power of suppliers High
Customers bargaining power High
Threat of new entrants Moderate
Threat of substitute services as well as
products
High
4

Table 1: Five force analysis of North America’s sports apparel market
(Source: Baxter, 2019)
Analysis:
As per the case study, the North American sports apparel market has been ruled by several
top-notch market players such as Nike, Under Armour, Adidas, Eastbay, Reebok, Russell
including several other marketers of sports apparel brands. Thus, the presence of world-
famous Sports Apparel brands in turn makes the competitive rivalry tremendously high.
Simultaneously, the presence of multinational apparel brands as well as several other big and
small markets of this industry makes the supplier and customer’s bargaining power high.
Since suppliers get the opportunity to offer raw material to other brands and customers get
opportunity to purchase a similar range of product from others in a cost-effective manner due
to the presence of a series of sports apparel brands. As per Prinsloo et al. (2019), threats of
substitute products are high when companies outside the sector offer more attractive products
in a cost-effective manner. The presence of wide number competitors within as well as
outside of the sports apparel industry of North America makes the substitute product threat
high, as customers always prefer to buy those goods which are attractive as well as cost-
effective. In reference to the case study, the global athletic footwear market has been expected
to be enlarged by $114.8 billion by FY22, with growth of CAGR 2.1% from FY16-FY 22.
Simultaneously, growth of the sports apparel market in the US was around 113.4 million USD
during FY21 (Statista.com, 2022). Taking into consideration the growth rate, it can be
expected that the threat of new market entrants is also quite high.
4. Determination and illustration of core competencies of Under Armour
Core competencies mainly refer to experience as well as a wide plethora of skills, which in
turn reflects organisational strategic strength (Gupta et al. 2020). The facts and figures
highlighted in case study pinpoints that UA’s core competencies lie in organisational
tendencies to incorporate innovative technology in ongoing footwear models. For instance,
designing under-fit cushioning technologies, charged cushioning, UA HOVR technology
including several other outsole constructions has defined the core competencies in
incorporating technology in apparel manufacturing systems. Apart from this, triplet number of
new footwear models/styles, ability to generate smart shoe models, the ClutchFit technology
of UA including different variety of close infused with modern technology (HEATGEAR,
COLDGEAR, Clutchfit have depicted core competencies in making revolutionary apparel
clothes and footwear. According to Rieckmann (2018), taking sound initiatives or generating
ideas of improvement further reflect core competencies of an organisation. In essence,
5

acquiring MapMyfitness including European renowned fitness app, Food-logging app as well
as Endomondo has highlighted UA’s initiatives to become more innovative and thus, it
reflects organisational core competencies.
5. Discussion of Under Armour’s distinctive competence
Distinctive competence refers to a quality as well as superior characteristic which vividly
distinguishes a firm than its competitors (Schiuma et al. 2021). In this context, critical
evaluation of resource strength of this firm in turn depicts that Enthusiastic leadership of
Kevin Plank has depicted distinctive competence or key human resource strength which can
be likely to be viewed as source of distinctive competence. Organising digital and fitness
technology in an absolutely new business division under the leadership of SVP of Digital
revenue has highlighted Armour’s distinctive competence. Thus, the presence of all these
factors distinguishes this firm in comparison to other competitors and enables them to achieve
tremendous growth. As per the ideas of Hamdan et al. (2020), the ability to innovation,
customer satisfaction, possessing skills, technology and design implementation has reflected
distinctive competencies of a firm. Capability to merge digital engineering, digital media as
well as digital products can be considered as distinctive competencies of this firm. In terms of
achieving customer satisfaction UA creates a “multifaceted dashboard which utilised four
independently and innovative functioning apps. For instance, applications like MapMyfitness,
MyfitnessPal, UA record and Endomondo can also be considered as distinctive competence of
this firm to achieve recognition and enhance customer satisfaction. Thus, by using
enthusiastic and transformation leadership, development and integration of applications,
preparation of dashboard and dividing marketing campaigns under several segments, such as
sports marketing, retail marketing, media promotion has reflected the human resource
strength and distinctive competencies, which has helped Under Armour’s business to achieve
success.
6. Overall attractiveness of Under Armour in light of SWOT analysis
6

Strength Weakness
● Ample amount of financial strength
● Huge availability of products across
17,000 retail store locations across the
globe
● 13,500 points of distribution in entire
North America
● Capability to open company-owned
brand stores in high traffic North
American retail location
● Unique Shop-in-shop approach to
enhance sales
● Unique product design concept with
effort to design and innovate product
with visible technology.
● Use of premium quality fabrics around
42% in products of Under Armour.
● Enthusiastic leadership
● Operational inefficiency
● Bankruptcy as well as subsequent
liquidation of stores during 2016
● Inappropriate inventory management
● Inappropriate handling of Go-to-market
process
Opportunity Threats
● Opportunity to achieve huge amount of
market share through maintaining
transition
● Integrating with suppliers and innovation
in products and services give
opportunities to retain its fame as one of
top sport apparel brand
● The sudden rise of Adidas Group and
competitive pressure given by this
German-based brand has led to threats
for UA
● Increased dominance of Nike across
North America and rise of other
multinational sports apparel brands has
led to threats for UA.
Table 2: SWOT analysis for Under Armour’s attractiveness
(Source: Underarmour.com, 2022)
7

Analysis
Based on the facts highlighted in the provided case scenario, the wider distribution channels
across NA, enthusiastic leadership, wider product portfolio, Unique sales enhancement
approach have helped to achieve profitability in the North America market. On the other
hand, failed to manage inventory, incidents of bankruptcy, store liquidation have become the
matter of concern of this organisation. As per Iotti and Bonazzi (2018), incidents of
bankruptcy have reflected organisational risk, which may lower profit margin as well. The
rise of Adidas, Nike and other small and multinational brands in turn poses immense threats
to this firm in the North America market. Thus, by integration with key suppliers and
partners, the business can achieve growth opportunities.
7. Key strategic elements of Under Armour’s strategy
Setting proper vision and sharing mainly a collective mission is considered to be an essential
element of an organisational business strategy (Bauwens et al. 2020). Critical analysis of the
views of CEO Frisk as well as founder Kevin Plank, it can be found that the ways Under
Armour compete with potential market rivals will allow them to continue to succeed
(Youtube.com, 2019). Accordingly, the company has made plans for transition while
continuously working on to achieve organisational goals. As per the case study, the potential
“2020 restructuring initiative” is considered to be one of the key strategic elements of UA’s
strategy since it helps in rebalancing UA’s cost base and help the firm to manage its cash flow
generation. Besides this, UA’s principal business activities in FY20 were marketing,
developing and distribution of branded footwear, performance apparel including other sports
accessories for youth, men as well as women. Maintaining “sales-to-national”, as well as
“direct-to-consumer sales”, has been the key part of UA’s marketing and sales strategy,
which has helped them to achieve huge amounts of profit. Most importantly, growth strategy
through off-price sales promotion, brand advertising, promotional activities, inclusive
product-line strategy, distinctive marketing, brand management and promotional strategy,
differentiated distribution strategy are some other key strategic elements. On top of that, UA’s
initiative to “Connected Fitness” is also part of the company's strategic element which in turn
enhances brand inclusiveness of this organisation.
8. Five generic competitive strategy having resemblance competitive approach of Under
Armour
8

Figure 1: Five generic competitive strategy
(Source: Chapter 05, lecture slides)
There are mainly five different types of generic competitive strategies, which predominantly
followed by organisation to create a different brand value in the customer’s mind (Leber et al.
2018). As per, Saidia et al. (2021) through utilising generic strategy, a firm can position itself
in a respective industry by concentrating on core organisational elements and business-level
strategies. For instance, “charged cotton products”, “advanced synthetic fabrics”, “Infrared
and application of ceramic print technology” inside of sports apparel, “UA HOVER-
Cushioning wrapped mesh web” and application MapMyRun-power sensor” have
highlighted differentiated product-offering capability of UA. All these approaches in turn
depict the fact that among the five generic competitive strategies, UA’s strategy closely fits
with “Broad Differentiation strategy”. According to Chzhan et al. (2019), product
differentiation mainly gives reasons to consumers to select a brand over the other market
rivals. Regular up-gradation of products as likely to be pronounced as next-generation fabrics
with enhanced performance once again give clarified indication regarding following “broad
differentiation strategy” by UA. Although Under Armour is involved in Cost-cutting battles
with two biggest rivals (Nike and Adidas) in EMEA location, the increasing focus on making
products differentiated for athletes has provided clear indication of following a broad-
differentiation generic strategy.
9. Weighted competitive strength assessment against Nike as well as Adidas Group
9

Weighted competitive strength assessment
Under Armour Rival 1 (Nike) Rival 2( Adidas)
Strength
measure/Key
success
factors
Importa
nce
weight
Strength
rating
Weighte
d score
Strength
rating
Weighte
d score
Strength
rating
Weighted
score
Product
quality/produ
ct
performance
0.15 9 1.35 10 1.5 8 1.2
Manufacturi
ng capability
0.30 8 2.4 9 2.7 8 2.4
Technological
skills
0.10 8 0.8 9 0.9 8 0.8
Reputation in
North
America
0.10 4 0.4 8 0.8 6 0.6
Customer
service
capabilities
0.10 5 0.5 7 0.7 7 0.7
Distribution
and product
innovation
capability
0.25 8 2 9 2.25 5 1.25
Summation
of
Importance
weights
1.00
10

Overall
weighted
competitive
strength of
each
competitor
7.45 8.85 6.95
Table 3: Weighted competitive strength Assessment of UA, Nike as well as Adidas
Group
Analysis:
“Weighted Competitive Strength assessment” helps in assessing market competition to help
higher management to devise informed business decisions (Caldwell et al. 2019). As of 2020,
Nike as well as Adidas has become two potential rivals of the North American Sports Apparel
market. Although Under Armour has applied a series of product innovation, inventory
management including having a wider distribution, In comparison to Nike, UA might
encounter a series of trouble. As per case study, in the US, Nike itself has 15000 retail
accounts with 217 retail outlets. The distribution centres in the US are 6 and across the globe,
it is 67, which is greater than UA and Adidas Group. Spreading of distribution centres across
the globe helps in product distribution to a wider spectrum of audiences (Katsikeas et al.
2019). The Adidas group might have 15000 Franchised Reebok and Adidas integrated retail
stores, but in terms of product value, Nike is superior to UA and Adidas. Thus, based on Nike
position and assessment and calculated weighted average, UA has a net competitive
disadvantage while competing against Nike throughout the globe. In contrast, the company
has a competitive advantage in comparison to Adidas Group, while being involved in global
competition.
10. Conducting financial analysis including ratio calculation
11

Financial performance analysis
Ratio analysis Formula for
calculating
ratio
2019 2018 2017 2016
“Long-term
debt-to-capital
ratio”(Leverage
ratio)
“Long-term
debt/
Long-term
debt +
Total
stockholders
’ equity”
592.7/2742.8
=0.21
728.8/2745.7
=0.26
917.0/2935.6
=0.31
817.4/2848.3=0.2
8
“Long-term
debt-to-equity
ratio”
“Long-term
debt/
Total
stockholders
’ equity”
592.7/2150.1
=0.27
728.8/2016.9
=0.36
917.0/2018.6
=0.45
817.4/2030.9=0.4
0
“Times-interest-
earned
(coverage)
ratio”
“Operating
income”/
“Interest
expenses”
236.8/21.2=1
1.16
25.0/33.6=
0.74
27.8/34.5=
0.80
417.5/26.4=
15.81
Working capital
(Liquidity ratio)
“Current
assets-
Current
liabilities”
$1280.2
Million
$1277.7
Million
$1277.3
Million
$1279.3 Million
ROE or “Return
on stockholder’s
equity”
Net
income/Tota
l
92.1/2150.1
=0.04
46.3/2016.9=
0.02
48.3/2018.6=
0.02
257.0/2030.9=0.1
2
12

Table 4: Financial performance analysis in light of ratio analysis from Exhibit 1, 2, 3
Analysis:
In terms of analysis financial performance, working capital underpins the case or money
available to an organisation for performing day-to-day operations (Muleya and Mupeta,
2019). More or less similar working capital highlights the year-on-year cash available to firms
in terms of conducting operational duties has not been enhanced, which represent challenges
in earning cash inflows. ROA indicates the firm's capability to achieve profit (SUKESTI et al.
2021). The significant reduction ROA reflects after 2016, the stockholders are unable to earn
more return on assets. The reduced ROE in turn also highlights financial issues by
highlighting stockholder’s inability to earn return on their invested capital. The time-interest
earned coverage ratio is also decreasing year-on-year after 2016, highlighting lesser interest
coverage earning. The reduction of Debt-to-capital ratio has highlighted organisational
capability to borrow funds and thus, it shows that cash inflow is not appropriate in UA.
11. Key issues Confronting under Armour’s management team
During mid-2018, UA’s management team has failed to generate modest revenue by selling
their Sports apparel footwear products. As per Zhao et al. (2021), by focusing on pricing
strategy, offering proper discounts invigorating organisational sales channels, an organisation
can achieve the desired revenue. Decline of UA’s profitability and stemming of profitability
management issues from improper price discounting, further highlight key issues, confronting
UA’s top management.
Around 2% erosion of total revenue of North America has further indicated poor management
decisions in managing operational activities and thus, confronting the Management team.
According to Dutta et al. (2021), an organisation must focus on product quality to ensure
escalation of repeat purchases. Erosion of revenue, operating loss of around $25 million has
indicated the issues facing the management team and indicates UA’s inability in terms of
grabbing customer attention.
12. Recommendations and suggestions for further improvement
Lowering the organisational expenses and focusing on smart inventory management
In order to ensure that the turnaround strategy of UA is put in place, Plank needs to focus on
lowering operational expenses. As per Žunić et al. (2018), by expanding the customer base
and smart inventory management, an organisation can achieve a significant amount of profit.
Thus, it will help Plank to maintain a positive performance outcome.
Revising marketing offers and implement competitive pricing
13

Re-evaluation of product offers has helped an organisation to determine flaws in marketing
and sales strategy (Pontikes and Rindova, 2020). Accordingly, by providing products at
competitive pricing, Plank can ensure success of turnaround strategy by ensuring more
product sales.
Conclusion
From the above study, it can be summed up by adding those managing sales, distribution
strategy, and other operational strategies, UA can enhance performance output. Additionally,
by conducting thorough evaluation of financial ratios, the strategic shortcomings can also be
determined by this organisation.
14

Reference
 Bauwens, T., Huybrechts, B. and Dufays, F., (2020). Understanding the diverse scaling
strategies of social enterprises as hybrid organizations: The case of renewable energy
cooperatives. Organization & Environment, 33(2), pp.195-219.
 Baxter, G., (2019). A strategic analysis of Cargolux Airlines International position in the
global air cargo supply chain using Porter’s Five Forces Model. Infrastructures, 4(1), p.6.
 Caldwell, J.M.E., Alexander, F.J. and Ahmad, C.S., (2019). Weighted-ball velocity
enhancement programs for baseball pitchers: a systematic review. Orthopaedic Journal of
Sports Medicine, 7(2), p.2325967118825469.
 Chzhan, E.A., Tynchenko, V.S., Kukartsev, V.V., Fedorova, N.V., Yamshchikov, A.S. and
Krivov, D.A., (2019, August). Essence and classification of the agribusiness organizations
competitive strategies. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol.
315, No. 2, p. 022106). IOP Publishing.
 Dutta, G., Kumar, R., Sindhwani, R. and Singh, R.K., (2021). Digitalization priorities of
quality control processes for SMEs: A conceptual study in perspective of Industry 4.0
adoption. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 32(6), pp.1679-1698.
 Gupta, S., Drave, V.A., Dwivedi, Y.K., Baabdullah, A.M. and Ismagilova, E., (2020).
Achieving superior organizational performance via big data predictive analytics: A dynamic
capability view. Industrial Marketing Management, 90, pp.581-592.
 Hamdan, M.K., El Talla, S.A., Al Shobaki, M.J. and Abu-Naser, S.S., (2020). The Effect of
Choosing Strategic Goals and Core Capabilities on the Creative Behavior of Organizations.
 Iotti, M. and Bonazzi, G., (2018). Analysis of the risk of bankruptcy of tomato processing
companies operating in the inter-regional interprofessional organization “OI Pomodoro da
Industria Nord Italia”. Sustainability, 10(4), p.947.
 Jagtap, S. and Duong, L.N.K., (2019). Improving the new product development using big
data: A case study of a food company. British Food Journal.
 Katsikeas, C., Leonidou, L. and Zeriti, A., (2019). Revisiting international marketing strategy
in a digital era: Opportunities, challenges, and research directions. International Marketing
Review.
 Leber, M., Ivanišević, A., Borocki, J., Radišić, M. and Ślusarczyk, B., (2018). Fostering
alliances with customers for the sustainable product creation. Sustainability, 10(9), p.3204.
 Muleya, G. and Mupeta, S., (2019). Challenges and Strategies in the Implementation of Civic
Entrepreneurship in the Governance of the University of Zambia.
15

 Pogodina, T.V., Muzhzhavleva, T.V. and Udaltsova, N.L., (2020). Strategic management of
the competitiveness of industrial companies in an unstable economy. Entrepreneurship and
Sustainability Issues, 7(3), p.1555.
 Pontikes, E.G. and Rindova, V.P., (2020). Shaping markets through temporal, constructive,
and interactive agency. Strategy Science, 5(3), pp.149-159.
 Prinsloo, J., Sinha, S. and von Solms, B., (2019). A review of industry 4.0 manufacturing
process security risks. Applied Sciences, 9(23), p.5105.
 Rieckmann, M., (2018). Learning to transform the world: Key competencies in Education for
Sustainable Development. Issues and trends in education for sustainable development, 39,
pp.39-59.
 Saidia, A.A., Ayodele, M.S. and Maxwell, W.P., (2021). Firm level strategy and value
creation in small businesses: The Nigerian experience. Gadjah Mada International Journal of
Business, 23(2), pp.193-214.
 Schiuma, G., Schettini, E., Santarsiero, F. and Carlucci, D., (2021). The transformative
leadership compass: six competencies for digital transformation entrepreneurship.
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research.
 Shad, M.K., Lai, F.W., Fatt, C.L., Klemeš, J.J. and Bokhari, A., (2019). Integrating
sustainability reporting into enterprise risk management and its relationship with business
performance: A conceptual framework. Journal of Cleaner production, 208, pp.415-425.
 Statista.com, (2022).Activewear in the U.S. - statistics & facts.
 SUKESTI, F., GHOZALI, I., Fuad, F.U.A.D., ALMASYHARI, A.K. and NURCAHYONO,
N., (2021). Factors affecting the stock price: The role of firm performance. The Journal of
Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 8(2), pp.165-173.
 Underarmour.com, (2022). About the Company.
 Youtube.com, (2019).Under Armour Will Be a Louder Brand in 2020, Incoming CEO Frisk
Says.
 Zeibote, Z., Volkova, T. and Todorov, K., (2019). The impact of globalization on regional
development and competitiveness: cases of selected regions. Insights into Regional
Development, 1(1), pp.33-47.
 Zhao, L., Karaivanova, A. and Zhang, P., (2021). The complementary role of the WTO in the
enhancement of the base erosion and profit shifting project. World, 2(2), pp.267-294.
 Žunić, E., Delalić, S., Hodžić, K., Beširević, A. and Hindija, H., (2018, November). Smart
warehouse management system concept with implementation. In 2018 14th Symposium on
Neural Networks and Applications (NEUREL) (pp. 1-5). IEEE.
16