Global connectedness dims

For years I have been reading that the world has gone global. Countries and companies are all globally connected, at least that is what I thought. Globalness is a key driver of strong reputation and seriously sought after by the most admired. Well, I was wrong. According to the DHL Global Connectedness Index, we are not as connected we we thought. Connectiveness in DHL's index is measured by both the depth of connectiveness (how internationalized a country's economy is) and breadth (how many countries it connects with).  Breadth is now  4% lower than it was in 2005 and depth is below what it was in 2007 but 10% higher than it was in 2005, having recently rebounded. Why would that be? Certainly the global recession has had an effect by limiting global capital flows. That makes sense. And companies are also less likely than before to place their investment dollars in foreign countries. I guess so.

Europe is the most globally connected region. This is probably good except if economies in your union are tanking. Another fascinating finding is that distance and borders still matter, even online. The researchers behind this Index note that most international capital flows stay within region and the same goes for online connections -- they stay closest to home and decrease with distance.

Here are some facts on which countries were the most and not so very connected out of the 140 countries in the Index. It shows that the world is not as flat as we thought. And it shows that companies still have their work cut out for themselves in terms of building global reputations and developing markets for their goods. We are more insular than I imagined.

Netherlands (#1)

Britain (#6)

Germany (#9)

France (#17)

U.S. (#20)

Japan (#42)

India (#62)

China (#74)

Brazil (#77)