Advertisement

Determinants of Functional Responsibilities of Subsidiaries and Methodology of the Empirical Study

  • Marlena Dzikowska
Chapter

Abstract

The chapter presents a model of the determinants of the functional responsibilities of subsidiaries. In particular, the chapter presents argumentation for the existence of a complex set of relationships between functional responsibilities of a subsidiary and the subsidiary’s pool of distinct capabilities, initiative, internal and external embeddedness, and supply environment. In sum, the proposed model sets out what we believe are the drivers of a subsidiary’s functional responsibilities in the multinational enterprises’s value network. The model is deliberately eclectic, in that no single theory can adequately capture the whole phenomenon. Furthermore, the chapter delineates measures used in the empirical part of the book (Chap.  5), and presents the data-gathering process and the sample characteristics.

Keywords

Functional responsibilities Subsidiary evolution Distinct capabilities Embeddedness Subsidiary initiative Supply environment Environment dynamics MNE 

References

  1. Allred, Brent B., and K. Scott Swan. 2004. Contextual influences on international subsidiaries’ product technology strategy. Journal of International Management 10 (2): 259–286.Google Scholar
  2. Ambos, Tina C., Ulf Andersson, and Julian M. Birkinshaw. 2010. What are the consequences of initiative-taking in multinational subsidiaries? Journal of International Business Studies 41 (7): 1099–1118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersson, Ulf. 1999. Some notes on subsidiary network embeddedness and its effects on the multinational corporation. Department of Business Studies Uppsala University Working paper 1999/3.Google Scholar
  4. Andersson, Ulf, and Mats Forsgren. 1996. Subsidiary embeddedness and control in the multinational corporation. International Business Review 5 (5): 487–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andersson, Ulf, Mats Forsgren, and Ulf Holm. 2001. Subsidiary embeddedness and competence development in MNCs – A multi-level analysis. Organization Studies 22 (6): 1013–1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. ———. 2002. The strategic impact of external networks: Subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal 23 (11): 979–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Andersson, Ulf, Ingmar Björkman, and Mats Forsgren. 2005. Managing subsidiary knowledge creation: The effect of control mechanisms on subsidiary local embeddedness. International Business Review 14 (5): 521–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Andersson, Ulf, Mats Forsgren, and Ulf Holm. 2007. Balancing subsidiary influence in the federative MNC: A business network view. Journal of International Business Studies 38 (5): 802–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Andersson, Ulf, Henrik Dellestrand, and Torben Pedersen. 2014. The contribution of local environments to competence creation in multinational enterprises. Long Range Planning 47 (1–2): 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Andreosso-O’Callaghan, Bernadette, and David Jacobson. 1996. Industrial economics and organisation. London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  11. Andrews, Kenneth R. 1987. Concept of strategy. Homewood: Dow Jones-Irwin.Google Scholar
  12. Armstrong, J. Scott, and Terry S. Overton. 1977. Estimating non-response bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research 14 (3): 396–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Asmussen, Christian G., Torben Pedersen, and Charles Dhanaraj. 2009. Host-country environment and subsidiary competence: Extending the diamond network model. Journal of International Business Studies 40 (1): 42–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Astley, Graham W., and Edward Zajac. 1990. Beyond dyadic exchange: Functional interdependence and sub-unit power. Organization Studies 11 (4): 481–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Axelsson, Björn, and Geoff Easton. 1991. Industrial networks: A new view of reality. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Badowska, Sylwia. 2014. Współpraca przedsiębiorstw z jednostkami badawczo-rozwojowymi w tworzeniu i rozwoju innowacji produktowych w sektorze spożywczym w województwie pomorskim. Journal of Management and Finance 12 (2): 35–53.Google Scholar
  17. Bartlett, Christopher A., and Sumantra Ghoshal. 1986. Tap your subsidiaries for global reach. Harvard Business Review 64 (6): 87–94.Google Scholar
  18. ———. 1989. Managing across borders. The transnational solution. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  19. Benito, Gabriel R.G., Brigitte Grøgaard, and Rajneesh Narula. 2003. Environmental influences on MNE subsidiary roles: Economic integration and the Nordic countries. Journal of International Business Studies 34 (5): 443–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Birkinshaw, Julian M. 1995. Taking the initiative: Value-adding strategies for Canadian subsidiaries. Business Quarterly 59 (4): 97–102.Google Scholar
  21. ———. 1996. How multinational subsidiary mandates are gained and lost. Journal of International Business Studies 27 (3): 467–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. ———. 1997. Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: The characteristics of subsidiary initiative. Strategic Management Journal 18 (3): 207–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. ———. 1998. Corporate entrepreneurship in network organizations: How subsidiary initiative drives internal market efficiency. European Management Journal 16 (3): 355–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. ———. 1999. The determinants and consequences of subsidiary initiative in MNC. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 24 (1): 9–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. ———. 2000. Enterprise in the global firm. Enterprise and renewal. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. ———. 2001. Multinational corporate strategy and organization: An internal market perspective. In Multinational corporate strategy and organization: An internal market perspective, ed. Neil Hood and Stephen Young, 55–79. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  27. Birkinshaw, Julian M., and Nick Fry. 1998. Subsidiary initiatives to develop new markets. Sloan Management Review 39 (3): 51–61.Google Scholar
  28. Birkinshaw, Julian M., and Neil Hood. 1997. An empirical study of development processes in foreign-owned subsidiaries in Canada and Scotland. Management International Review 37 (4): 339–364.Google Scholar
  29. ———. 1998. Multinational subsidiary evolution: Capability and charter change in foreign-owned subsidiary companies. Academy of Management Review 23 (4): 773–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. ———. 2000. Characteristics of foreign subsidiaries in industry clusters. Journal of International Business Studies 31 (1): 141–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Birkinshaw, Julian M., and Allen J. Morrison. 1995. Configurations of strategy and structure in subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies 26 (4): 729–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Birkinshaw, Julian M., and Jonas Ridderstråle. 1999. Fighting the corporate immune system: A process study of subsidiary initiatives in multinational corporations. International Business Review 8 (2): 149–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Birkinshaw, Julian M., Neil Hood, and Stefan Jonsson. 1998. Building firm-specific advantages in multinational corporations: The role of subsidiary initiative. Strategic Management Journal 19 (3): 221–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Birkinshaw, Julian, Neil Hood, and Stephen Young. 2005. Subsidiary entrepreneurship, internal and external competitive forces, and subsidiary performance. International Business Review 14 (2): 227–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Bishop, Paul, and Harold Crookell. 1986. Specialization in Canadian subsidiaries. In Canadian industry in transition, ed. Donald G. McFertridge, 305–385. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  36. Bouquet, Cyril, and Julian M. Birkinshaw. 2008. Weight versus voice: How foreign subsidiaries gain attention from corporate headquarters. The Academy of Management Journal 51 (3): 577–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Brandt, William K., and James M. Hulbert. 1977. Headquarters guidance in marketing strategy in the multinational subsidiary. Columbia Journal of World Business 12 (4): 7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Burger, Anže, Björn Jindra, Philipp Marek, and Matija Rojec. 2018. Functional upgrading and value capture of multinational subsidiaries. Journal of International Management 24 (2): 108–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Cantwell, John A. 1991. The international agglomeration of technological activity. In Global research strategy and international competitiveness, ed. Mark C. Casson, 104–132. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  40. Cantwell, John. 2009. Location and the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies 40 (1): 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Cantwell, John, and Ram Mudambi. 2005. MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandates. Strategic Management Journal 26 (12): 1109–1128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Cerrato, Daniele. 2006. The multinational enterprise as an internal market system. International Business Review 15 (3): 253–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Chandler, Alfred D. 1963. Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of industrial enterprise. Cambridge, MA: The M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
  44. Chang, Sea-Jin, and Philip M. Rosenzweig. 2009. Subsidiary capability development in multinational enterprises: An empirical investigation. In Managing subsidiary dynamics: Headquarters role, capability development, and China strategy, Advances in international management, ed. Joseph L.C. Cheng, Elizabeth Maitland, and Stephen Nicholas, vol. 22, 93–121. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ciabuschi, Francesco, Ulf Holm, and Oscar Martín Martín. 2014. Dual embeddedness, influence and performance of innovating subsidiaries in the multinational corporation. International Business Review 23 (5): 897–909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Cooper, Arnold C. 2001. Networks, alliances and entrepreneurship. In Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new integrated mindset, ed. Michael A. Hitt, R. Duane Ireland, S. Michael Camp, and Donald L. Sexton, 203–222. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  47. Cooper, Arnold C., and Cleyton G. Smith. 1992. How established firms respond to threatening technologies. The Executive 16 (2): 55–70.Google Scholar
  48. Cox, Eli P. 1980. The optimal number of response alternatives for a scale: A review. Journal of Marketing Research 17 (4): 407–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Cray, David. 1984. Control and coordination in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies 15 (2): 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Crookell, Harold H. 1986. Specialization and international competitiveness. In Managing the multinational subsidiary, ed. Hamid Etemad and Louis Seguin-Delude, 102–111. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Czyżewska, Dorota. 2016. Cele i narzędzia współpracy nauka-biznes w dokumentach strategicznych Unii Europejskiej i Polski. Studia Ekonomiczne. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach 16 (271): 55–65.Google Scholar
  52. D’Cruz, Joseph R. 1986. Strategic management of subsidiaries. In Managing the multinational subsidiary, ed. Hamid Etemad and Louis Seguin-Delude, 211–236. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  53. Davis, Lee N., and Klaus E. Meyer. 2004. Subsidiary research and development, and the local environment. International Business Review 13 (3): 359–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Delany, Ed. 2000. Strategic development of the multinational subsidiary through subsidiary initiative-taking. Long Range Planning 33 (2): 220–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Dillman, Don A. 1991. Design and administration of mail surveys. Annual Review of Sociology 17 (1): 225–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. ———. 2007. Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  57. Dillman, Don A., Robert D. Tortora, and Dennis Bowker. 1999. Principles for constructing web surveys. Accessed online at: http://claudiaflowers.net/rsch8140/PrinciplesforConstructingWebSurveys.pdf
  58. Dimitratos, Pavlos, Ioanna Liouka, and Stephen Young. 2014. A missing operationalization: Entrepreneurial competencies in multinational enterprise subsidiaries. Long Range Planning 47 (1–2): 64–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Dörrenbächer, Christoph, and Mike Geppert. 2010. Subsidiary staffing and initiative-taking in multinational corporations—A socio-political perspective. Personnel Review 39 (5): 600–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Dunning, John H. 1980. Toward an eclectic theory of international production: Some empirical tests. Journal of International Business Studies 11 (1): 9–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. ———. 1981. International production and the multinational enterprise. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  62. ———. 1988a. The eclectic paradigm of international production: A restatement and some possible extensions. Journal of International Business Studies 19 (1): 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. ———. 1988b. Explaining international production. London: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  64. Dzikowska, Marlena, and Ulf Andersson. 2018. A dynamic framework of subsidiary strategic roles. Paper presented at the annual meeting for the European International Business Academy, Poznań, December 13–15.Google Scholar
  65. Enright, Michael J., and Venkat Subramanian. 2007. An organizing framework for MNC subsidiary typologies. Management International Review 47 (6): 895–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Figueiredo, Paulo N. 2011. The role of dual embeddedness in the innovative performance of MNE subsidiaries: Evidence from Brazil. Journal of Management Studies 48 (2): 417–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Filippov, Sergey, and Geert Duysters. 2014. Exploring the drivers and elements of subsidiary evolution in several new EU member states. International Journal of Emerging Markets 9 (1): 120–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Forsgren, Mats, and Cecilia Pahlberg. 1992. Subsidiary influence and autonomy in international firms. International Business Review 1 (3): 41–51.Google Scholar
  69. Forsgren, Mats, and Torben Pedersen. 1998. Centres of excellence in multinational companies: The case of Denmark. In Multinational corporate evolution and subsidiary development, ed. Julien M. Birkinshaw and Neil Hood, 141–161. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Forsgren, Mats, Ulf Holm, and Jan Johanson. 1995. Division headquarters go abroad: A step in the internationalization of the multinational corporation. Journal of Management Studies 32 (4): 475–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. ———. 2005. Managing the embedded multinational. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Fratocchi, Luciano, and Ulf Holm. 1998. Centres of excellence in the international firm. In Multinational corporate evolution and subsidiary development, ed. Julien M. Birkinshaw and Neil Hood, 189–209. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Frost, Tony C., Julien M. Birkinshaw, and Prescott C. Ensign. 2002. Centres of excellence in multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal 23 (11): 997–1015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Galunic, Charles D., and Kathleen M. Eisenhardt. 1996. The evolution of intracorporate domains: Divisional charter losses in high-technology, multidivisional corporations. Organization Science 7 (3): 255–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Gammelgaard, Jens, and Torben Pedersen. 2010. Internal versus external knowledge sourcing of subsidiaries and the impact of headquarters control. In Managing the contemporary multinational—The role of headquarters, ed. Ulf Andersson and Ulf Holm, 211–230. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  76. Gammelgaard, Jens, Frank McDonald, Andreas Stephan, Heinz Tüselmann, and Christoph Dörrenbächer. 2012. The impact of increases in subsidiary autonomy and network relationships on performance. International Business Review 21 (6): 1158–1172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Ghemawat, Pankaj. 2007. Redefining global strategy. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  78. Ghoshal, Sumantra. 1986. The innovative multinational: A differentiated network of organizational roles and management processes. Boston: Harvard Business School.Google Scholar
  79. Ghoshal, Sumantra, and Christopher Bartlett. 1991. The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network. Academy of Management Review 15 (4): 603–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Ghoshal, Sumantra, and Nitin Nohria. 1989. Internal differentiation within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal 10 (4): 323–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Grossman, Gene M., and Elhanan Helpman. 2005. Outsourcing in a global economy. Review of Economic Studies 72 (1): 135–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Gulati, Ranjay. 1998. Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal 19 (4): 293–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Gupta, Anil K., and Vijay Govindaraian. 1991. Knowledge flows and the structure of control within multinational corporations. Academy of Management Review 16 (4): 768–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. ———. 2000. Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal 21 (4): 473–496.Google Scholar
  85. GUS. 2013 (2017). Działalność gospodarcza podmiotów z kapitałem zagranicznym (The economic activity of business units with foreign capital). Warsaw: Main Statistical Office Poland.Google Scholar
  86. Hagedoorn, John, and Geert Duysters. 2002. Learning in dynamic inter-firm networks: The efficacy of multiple contracts. Organization Studies 23 (4): 525–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Håkansson, Håkan, and Jan Johanson. 1993. The network as a governance structure: Interfirm cooperation beyond markets and hierarchies. In The embedded firm, ed. Gernot Grabher, 35–51. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  88. Harzing, Anne-Will. 1999. Managing the multinationals: An international study of control mechanism. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  89. Harzing, Anne-Wil, and Niels G. Noorderhaven. 2006. Knowledge flows in MNCs: An empirical test and extension of Gupta & Govindarajan’s typology of subsidiary roles. International Business Review 15 (3): 195–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Hedlund, Gunnar. 1981. Autonomy of subsidiaries and formalization of headquarters-subsidiary relationship in Swedish MNCs. In The management of headquarters-subsidiary relationship in multinational corporations, ed. Lars Otterback, 25–78. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  91. ———. 1986. The hypermodern MNC: A heterarchy? Human Resource Management 25 (1): 9–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Hitt, Michael A., R. Duane Ireland, S. Michael Camp, and Donald L. Sexton. 2001. Strategic entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial strategies for wealth creation. Strategic Management Journal 22 (6–7): 479–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Hoffman, Richard C. 1994. Generic strategies for subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of Managerial Issues 6 (1): 69–87.Google Scholar
  94. Hogenbirk, Annelies E., and Hans L. van Kranenburg. 2006. Roles of foreign owned subsidiaries in a small economy. International Business Review 15 (1): 53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Holm, Ulf, and Torben Pedersen, eds. 2000. The emergence and impact of MNC centres of excellence. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  96. Holm, Ulf, Anders Malmberg, and Örjan Sölvell. 2003. Subsidiary impact on host-country economies d the case of foreign-owned subsidiaries attracting investments into Sweden. Journal of Economic Geography 3 (4): 389–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Holmström, Christine. 2010. Managing the transfer of externally embedded subsidiary knowledge: The role of headquarters’ control mechanisms. In Managing the contemporary multinational—The role of headquarters, ed. Ulf Andersson and Ulf Holm, 231–253. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  98. Jensen, Peter, and Torben Pedersen. 2011. The economic geography of offshoring: The fit between activities and local context. Journal of Management Studies 48 (2): 352–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Jindra, Björn. 2005. A strategy view on knowledge in the MNE – Integrating subsidiary roles and knowledge flows. East-West Journal of Economics and Business 8 (1/2): 43–71.Google Scholar
  100. Jindra, Björn, Axèle Giroud, and Joanna Scott-Kenne. 2009. Subsidiary roles, vertical linkages and economic development: Lessons from transition economies. Journal of World Business 44 (2): 167–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Kerlinger, Fred N. 1986. Foundations of behavioral research. 3rd ed. New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.Google Scholar
  102. Keupp, Marcus M. 2008. Subsidiary initiatives in international research and development. Saarbruecken: Suedwestdeutscher Verlag fuer Hochschulschriften.Google Scholar
  103. Kogut, Bruce, and Harbir Singh. 1988. The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies 19 (3): 411–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Kogut, Bruce, and Sea-Jin Chang. 1991. Technological capabilities and Japanese foreign direct investment in the United States. Review of Economics and Statistics 73 (3): 401–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Kogut, Bruce, and Udo Zander. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science 3 (3): 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. ———. 1993. Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies 24 (4): 625–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. KPMG. 2013. Działalność badawczo-rozwojowa przedsiębiorstw w Polsce. Warszawa: KPMG.Google Scholar
  108. Krishnan, Rishikesha T. 2006. Subsidiary initiative in Indian software subsidiaries of MNCs. Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers 31 (1): 61–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Kuemmerle, Walter. 2002. Home base and knowledge management in international ventures. Journal of Business Venturing 17 (2): 99–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Li, Xiaoying, Xiaming Liu, and Howard Thomas. 2013. Market orientation, embeddedness and the autonomy and performance of multinational subsidiaries in an emerging economy. Management International Review 53 (6): 869–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Lieberman, Marvin B., and David B. Montgomery. 1998. First-mover (dis)advantages: Retrospective and link with the resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal 19 (12): 1111–1125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Madhok, Anoop. 1997. Cost, value and foreign market entry mode: The transaction and the firm. Strategic Management Journal 18 (1): 33–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Mahnke, Volker, Markus Venzin, and Shaker A. Zahra. 2007. Governing entrepreneurial opportunity recognition in MNEs: Aligning interests and cognition under uncertainty. Journal of Management Studies 44 (7): 1278–1298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Malmberg, Anders, Örjan Sölvell, and Ivo Zander. 1996. Spatial clustering, local accumulation of knowledge and firm competitiveness. Human Geography 78 (2): 85–97.Google Scholar
  115. Manolopoulos, Dimitris, Pavios Dimitratos, Stephen Young, and Spyros Lioukas. 2009. Technology sourcing and performance of foreign subsidiaries in Greece: The impact of MNE and local environmental contexts. Management International Review 49 (1): 43–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. McEvily, Bill, and Akbar Zaheer. 1999. Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal 20 (12): 1133–1156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Meyer, Klaus E., Ram Mudambi, and Rajneesh Narula. 2011. Multinational enterprises and local contexts: The opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness. Journal of Management Studies 48 (2): 235–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Mudambi, Ram, Torben Pedersen, and Ulf Andersson. 2014. How subsidiaries gain power in multinational corporations. Journal of World Business 49 (1): 101–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. NBP. 2015. Kwartalny raport o rynku pracy w II kw. 2015 r. Warszawa: Narodowy Bank Polski.Google Scholar
  120. Nelson, Richard R., and Sidney G. Winter. 1982. A theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  121. Nohria, Nitin, and Sumantra Ghoshal. 1994. Differentiated fit and shared values: Alternatives for managing headquarters-subsidiary relations. Strategic Management Journal 15 (6): 491–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Ottaviano, Gianmarco I.P., and Diego Puga. 1999. Agglomeration in the global economy: A survey of the ‘new economic geography’. The World Economy 21 (6): 707–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. PAP. 2017. Polski rynek pracy jest nieprzyjazny dla pracowników. Czas na reformy. Business Insider Polska, April 21.Google Scholar
  124. Pearce, Robert. 1999. The evolution of technology in multinational enterprises: The role of creative subsidiaries. International Business Review 8 (2): 125–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Peng, Mike W. 2004. Outside directors and firm performance during institutional transitions. Strategic Management Journal 25 (5): 453–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Peng, Mike W., and Anne S. York. 2001. Behind intermediary performance in export trade: Transactions, agents, and resources. Journal of International Business Studies 32 (2): 327–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Picard, Jaques. 1980. Organizational structures and integrative devices in European multinational corporations. Columbia Journal of World Business 15 (1): 30–35.Google Scholar
  128. Porter, Michael E. 1990. The competitive advantage of nations. New York: The Free Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Poznańska, Krystyna. 2016. Współpraca małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw z podmiotami zewnętrznymi w zakresie innowacyjności. Studia Ekonomiczne. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach 280: 143–156.Google Scholar
  130. Raţiu, Cătălin, and Rick Molz. 2010. Multinationals and corporate environmental strategies: Fostering subsidiary initiative. In The multinational enterprise in developing countries, ed. Cătălin Raţiu, Rick Moltz, and Ali Taleb, 179–193. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  131. Richardson, George B. 1972. The organisation of industry. The Economic Journal 82 (327): 883–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Robinson, William T., Claes Fornell, and Mary Sullivan. 1992. Are market pioneers intrinsically stronger than later entrants? Strategic Management Journal 13 (8): 609–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Roth, Kendall, and Allen J. Morrison. 1992. Implementing global strategy: Characteristics of global subsidiary mandates. Journal of International Business Studies 23 (4): 715–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Rugman, Alan M., and Alain Verbeke. 1992. A note on the transnational solution and the transaction cost theory of multinational strategic management. Journal of International Business Studies 23 (4): 761–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. ———. 2001. Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal 22 (3): 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. ———. 2003. Extending the theory of the multinational enterprise: Internalization and strategic management perspectives. Journal of International Business Studies 34 (2): 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Rugman, Alan M., Alain Verbeke, and Wenlong Yuan. 2011. Re-conceptualizing Bartlett and Ghoshal’s classification of national subsidiary roles in the multinational enterprise. Journal of Management Studies 48 (2): 253–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Ryan, Paul, Majella Giblin, Ulf Andersson, and Johanna Clancy. 2018. Subsidiary knowledge creation in co-evolving contexts. International Business Review 27 (5): 915–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Sargent, John, and Linda Matthews. 2006. The drivers of evolution/upgrading in Mexico’s maquiladoras: How important is subsidiary initiative? Journal of World Business 41 (3): 233–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Schmid, Stefan, and Andreas Schurig. 2003. The development of critical capabilities in foreign subsidiaries: Disentangling the role of the subsidiary’s business network. International Business Review 12 (4): 755–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Scott-Kennel, Joanna. 2001. The impact of foreign direct investment on New Zealand industry. Hamilton: University of Waikato.Google Scholar
  142. Shane, Scott, and Sankaran Venkatraman. 2000. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review 25 (1): 217–226.Google Scholar
  143. Short, Jeremy C., David J. Ketchen, and Timothy B. Palmer. 2002. The role of sampling in strategic management research on performance: A two study analysis. Journal of Management 28 (3): 363–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Sirmon, David G., Michael A. Hitt, and R. Duane Ireland. 2007. Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: Looking inside the black box. Academy of Management Review 32 (1): 273–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Sölvell, Örjan, and Ivo Zander. 1995. Organization of the dynamic multinational enterprise. International Studies of Management & Organization 25 (1-2): 17–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Taggart, James, and Neil Hood. 1999. Determinants of autonomy in multinational corporation subsidiaries. European Management Journal 17 (2): 226–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Verbeke, Alain, and Wenlong Yuan. 2013. The drivers of multinational enterprise subsidiary entrepreneurship in China: A new resource-based view perspective. Journal of Management Studies 50 (2): 236–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. White, Roderick E., and Thomas A. Poynter. 1984. Strategies for foreign-owned subsidiaries in Canada. Business Quarterly 49 (2): 59–69.Google Scholar
  149. Yamin, Mohammad, and Ulf Andersson. 2011. Subsidiary importance in the MNC: What role does internal embeddedness play? International Business Review 20 (2): 151–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Zhou, Changhui, and Tony S. Frost. 2005. R&D Co-practice and ‘reverse’ knowledge integration in multinational firms. Journal of International Business Studies 36 (6): 676–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marlena Dzikowska
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of International CompetitivenessPoznań University of Economics and BusinessPoznańPoland

Personalised recommendations