Advertisement

Journal of International Business Studies

, Volume 50, Issue 8, pp 1424–1439 | Cite as

Decision-making in international business

  • Peter Buckley
  • Mark CassonEmail author
Perspective

Abstract

This paper builds on preceding papers. It distinguishes three domains of international business theory: the boundaries of the multinational enterprise, the external environment of the enterprise and its internal structure. The central concern of internalisation theory is the boundaries of the firm. Any general theory of international business must also analyse the external environment and internal structure. Competition dominates the external environment while co-operation dominates internal structure. Different models of decision-making are required for each. Different theories of decision-making must therefore be integrated in order to transform internalisation theory into a general theory of international business. This paper examines how this can be done.

Keywords

internalisation international business multinational enterprise decision-making organisation rationality 

Résumé

Le présent article s’appuie sur les articles précédents. Il distingue trois domaines de la théorie de l’international business: les frontières de l’entreprise multinationale, l’environnement externe de l’entreprise et sa structure interne. La préoccupation centrale de la théorie de l’internalisation est les limites de l’entreprise. Toute théorie générale de l’international business doit également analyser l’environnement externe et la structure interne. La concurrence domine l’environnement externe tandis que la coopération domine la structure interne. Différents modèles de prise de décision sont nécessaires pour chacun d’eux. Différentes théories de la prise de décision doivent donc être intégrées afin de transformer la théorie de l’internalisation en une théorie générale de l’international business. Le présent article etudie comment cela peut être fait.

Resumen

Este artículo se basa en los artículos anteriores. Distingue tres dominios de la teoría de negocios internacionales: los limites de la empresa multinacional, el entorno externo de la empresa y su estructura interna. La preocupación central de la teoría de internalización son los límites de la empresa. Cualquier teoría general de negocios internacionales tiene que analizar el entorno externo y la estructura interna también. La competencia domina el entorno externo, mientras que la cooperación domina la estructura interna. Diferentes modelos de toma de decisiones se requieren para cada uno. Diferentes teorías de toma de decisiones tienen entonces que ser integradas para transformar la teoría de internalización en una teoría general de negocios internacionales. Este artículo examina cómo puede hacerse esto.

Resumo

Este artigo baseia-se nos artigos anteriores. Ele distingue três domínios da teoria dos negócios internacionais: os limites da empresa multinacional, o ambiente externo da empresa e sua estrutura interna. Os limites da empresa são a preocupação central da teoria da internalização. Qualquer teoria geral dos negócios internacionais deve analisar o ambiente externo e a estrutura interna também. A concorrência domina o ambiente externo, enquanto a cooperação domina a estrutura interna. Diferentes modelos de tomada de decisão são necessários para cada um. Diferentes teorias de tomada de decisão devem, portanto, ser integradas para transformar a teoria da internalização em uma teoria geral dos negócios internacionais. Este artigo examina como isso pode ser feito.

摘要

本文建立在前面的论文的基础上。它区分了国际商务理论的三个领域:跨国企业的边界、企业的外部环境及其内部结构。内化理论的核心问题是公司的边界。国际商业的任何通用理论都必须分析外部环境和内部结构。竞争主导外部环境, 而合作则主导内部结构。它们各自都需不同的决策模型。 因此, 不同的决策理论必须进行整合, 以便将内化理论转变为国际商务的一个通用理论。本文探讨了如何做到这一点。

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the editors of the special issue for their comments on previous drafts.

References

  1. Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. 2007. Balancing subsidiary influence in the federative MNC: A business network view. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(5): 802–818.Google Scholar
  2. Asmussen, C. G., Larsen, M. M., & Pedersen, T. 2016. Organizational adaptation in offshoring: The relative performance of home- and -host country learning strategies. Organizational Science, 27(4): 911–928.Google Scholar
  3. Baer, M., Dirks, K. T., & Nickerson, J. A. 2013. Microfoundations of strategic problem formulation. Strategic Management Journal, 34(2): 197–214.Google Scholar
  4. Bouquet, C., & Birkinshaw, J. 2011. How global strategies emerge: An attention perspective. Global Strategy Journal, 1(3–4): 243–262.Google Scholar
  5. Buckley, P. J. 2009. The impact of the global factory on economic development. Journal of World Business, 44(2): 131–143.Google Scholar
  6. Buckley, P. J. 2010. The role of headquarters in the global factory. In U. Andersson & U. Holm (Eds.), Managing the contemporary multinational—The role of headquarters: 60–84. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  7. Buckley, P. J. 2011. International integration and coordination in the global factory. Management International Review, 51(2): 269–283.Google Scholar
  8. Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. 1976. The future of the multinational enterprise. Basingstoke and London, England: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. 2019. The internationalization theory of the multinational enterprise: Past, present and future. British Journal of Management. Early view, ISSN 1467-8551.Google Scholar
  10. Buckley, P. J., Chen, L., Clegg, L. J., & Voss, H. 2016. Experience and FDI risk-taking: A microfoundational reconceptualization. Journal of International Management, 22(2): 131–146.Google Scholar
  11. Buckley, P. J., Devinney, T. M., & Louviere, J. J. 2007. Do managers behave the way theory suggests? A choice-theoretic examination of foreign direct investment location decision-making. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(7): 1069–1094.Google Scholar
  12. Cantwell, J. A. (Ed.). 2003. International business and the eclectic paradigm: Developing the OLI framework. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Casson, M. C. 1991. Economics of business culture: Game theory, transactions costs and economic performance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Casson, M. C. 1995. Information and organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Casson, M. C. 2003. The entrepreneur: An economic theory. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  16. Casson, M. 2014. Coase and international business: The origin and development of internalisation theory. Managerial and Decision Economics, 36(1): 55–66.Google Scholar
  17. Casson, M. C. 2016. The theory of international business: Economic models and methods. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  18. Casson, M. 2018. The theory of international business: The role of economic models. Management International Review, 58(3): 363–387.Google Scholar
  19. Casson, M., Porter, L., & Wadeson, N. 2016. Internalization theory: An unfinished agenda. International Business Review, 25(6): 1223–1234.Google Scholar
  20. Casson, M., & Wadeson, N. 2018. Emerging market multinationals and internalisation theory. International Business Review, 27(6): 1150–1160.Google Scholar
  21. Coase, R. H. 1937. The nature of the firm. Economica, 4(16): 386–405.Google Scholar
  22. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. 1963. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  23. Dixit, A. K., & Pindyck, R. S. 1994. Investment under Uncertainty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Eden, L. 2003. A critical reflection and some conclusions on OLI. In J. A. Cantwell (Ed.), International business and the eclectic paradigm: Developing the OLI framework: 277–297. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Egelhoff, W. G. 1988. Organizing the multinational enterprise-an information-processing perspective. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
  26. Egelhoff, W. G. 1993. Information-processing theory and the multinational corporation. In S. Ghoshal & E. Westney (Eds.), Organization theory and the multinational corporation: 182–210. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  27. Felin, T., Foss, N. J., & Ployhart, R. E. 2015. The microfoundations movement in strategy and organization theory. The Academy of Management Annals, 9(1): 575–632.Google Scholar
  28. Forsgren, M., & Johanson, J. 1992. Managing internationalization in business networks. In M. Forsgren & J. Johanson (Eds.), Managing networks in international business: 1–16. Philadelphia, PA: Gordon & Breach.Google Scholar
  29. Foss, N. J., & Pedersen, T. 2014. Microfoundations in strategy research. Strategic Management Journal, 37: E22–E34.  https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hennart, J. F. 1982. A theory of multinational enterprise. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hirshleifer, J. 1989. Time, uncertainty and information. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  32. Hirshleifer, J., & Riley, J. G. 1992. The analytics of uncertainty and information. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Hutzschenreuter, T., Kleindienst, I., Gröne, F., & Verbeke, A. 2014. Corporate strategic responses to foreign entry: Insights from prospect theory. Multinational Business Review, 22(3): 294–323.Google Scholar
  34. Hymer, S. H. 1976. The international operations of national firms: A study of direct foreign investment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  35. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. 2009. The Uppsala internationalization process model revisited: From liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(9): 1411–1431.Google Scholar
  36. Knight, F. H. 1921. Risk uncertainty and profit. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  37. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1996. What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organization Science, 7(5): 502–518.Google Scholar
  38. Kostova, T., & Roth, K. 2002. Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: Institutional and relational effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1): 215–233.Google Scholar
  39. Neal, R. M. 1996. Bayesian learning for neural networks. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  40. Penrose, E. 1959. The theory of the growth of the firm. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  41. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2008. Internalization theory and its impact on the field of international business. In J. J. Boddewyn (Ed.), International business scholarship: AIB fellows on the first 50 years and beyond: 155–174. Bingley, England: Emerald Group Limited.Google Scholar
  42. Scott, W. R. 1981. Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  43. Simon, H. A. 1961. Administrative behaviour (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  44. Simon, H. A. 1967. Models of man. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  45. Simon, H. A. 1982. Models of bounded rationality and other topics in economics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  46. Stopford, J. M., & Wells, L. T. 1972. Managing the multinational enterprise. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  47. Thite, M., Wilkinson, A., & Budhwar, T. (Eds.). 2016. Emerging-market multinationals: Strategic players in a multipolar world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Verbeke, A., & Yuan, W. 2005. Subsidiary autonomous activities in multinational enterprises: A transaction cost perspective. Management International Review, 45(2): 31–52.Google Scholar
  49. Westney, E. 1993. Institutionalization theory and the multinational corporation. In S. Ghoshal & E. Westney (Eds.), Organization theory and the multinational corporation: 53–76. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  50. Williamson, O. E. 1975. Markets and hierarchies. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  51. Williamson, O. E. 1985. The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, Relational Contracting. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  52. Winter, S. G. 2013. Habit, deliberation, and action: Strengthening the microfoundations of routines and capabilities. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(2): 120–137.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of International Business 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for International BusinessUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK
  2. 2.Department of Economics and Henley Business SchoolUniversity of ReadingReadingUK

Personalised recommendations