Advertisement

Discussion of Results and Implications

  • Patrick Heinecke
Chapter
Part of the Contributions to Management Science book series (MANAGEMENT SC.)

Abstract

The empirical results of the previous chapter shed light on the success factors of regional MNC strategies, or more specifically, on the extent to which regional management autonomy and regional product/service adaptation lead to regional success – taking into consideration the influence of contextual variables on these relationships. We substantiated this novel perspective on the regional competitiveness of MNCs with further research findings about regions, regional strategies, regional success, and the regional strategy–performance relationship. Collectively, these empirical results have both theoretical and practical implications that we will present in the following.

Keywords

Regional Strategy Success Factor Regional Adaptation Regional Performance Sample Firm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Arregle, J.-L., Beamish, P. W., & Hébert, L. (2009). The regional dimension of MNEs’ foreign subsidiary localization. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(1), 86–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barkema, H. G., Bell, J., & Pennings, J. (1996). Foreign entry, cultural barriers and learning. Strategic Management Journal, 17(2), 151–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barkema, H. G., & Drogendijk, R. (2007). Internationalising in small, incremental or larger steps? Journal of International Business Studies, 38(7), 1132–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. (1987b). Managing across borders: New strategic requirements. Sloan Management Review, 28(4), 7–17.Google Scholar
  5. Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. (1989). Managing across borders: The transnational solution. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  6. Birkinshaw, J. (1997). Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: The characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 18(3), 207–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Birkinshaw, J. (1998). Corporate entrepreneurship in network organizations: How subsidiary initiative drives internal market efficiency. European Management Journal, 16(3), 355–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Birkinshaw, J. (2000). Entrepreneurship in the global firm. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Bowen, H. P. (2007). The empirics of multinationality and performance. In A. M. Rugman (Ed.), Regional aspects of multinationality and performance (Research in global strategic management, Vol. 13, pp. 113–142). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Buckley, P. J., & Ghauri, P. N. (2004). Globalisation, economic geography and the strategy of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(2), 81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark, T., Knowles, L. L., & Hodis, M. (2004). Global dialogue: A response to the responders in the special globalization issue of JIM. Journal of International Management, 10(4), 511–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Collinson, S., & Rugman, A. M. (2008). The regional nature of Japanese multinational business. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(2), 215–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Contractor, F. J. (2007a). Is international business good for companies? The evolutionary or multi-stage theory of internationalization vs. the transaction cost perspective. Management International Review, 47(3), 453–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Contractor, F. J. (2007b). The evolutionary or multi-stage theory of internationalization and its relationship to the regionalization of firms. In A. M. Rugman (Ed.), Regional aspects of multinationality and performance (Research in global strategic management, Vol. 13, pp. 11–29). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Contractor, F. J., Kundu, S. K., & Hsu, C.-C. (2003). A three-stage theory of international expansion: The link between multinationality and performance in the service sector. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(1), 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. (2005). Regional and global strategies of Japanese firms. Management International Review, 45(1), 19–36.Google Scholar
  17. Delios, A., & Henisz, W. J. (2003). Policy uncertainty and the sequence of entry by Japanese firms, 1980–1998. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(3), 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Drazin, R., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1985). Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(4), 514–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Elango, B. (2004). Geographic scope of operations by multinational companies: An exploratory study of regional and global strategies. European Management Journal, 22(4), 431–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Enright, M. J. (2005a). Regional management centers in the Asia-Pacific. Management International Review, 45(1), 59–82.Google Scholar
  21. Enright, M. J. (2005b). The roles of regional management centers. Management International Review, 45(1), 83–102.Google Scholar
  22. Geringer, M. J., Beamish, P. W., & daCosta, R. C. (1989). Diversification strategy and internationalization. Strategic Management Journal, 10(2), 109–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ghemawat, P. (2001). Distance still matters: The hard reality of global expansion. Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 137–147.Google Scholar
  24. Ghemawat, P. (2003). Semiglobalization and international business strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2), 138–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ghemawat, P. (2005). Regional strategies for global leadership. Harvard Business Review, 83(12), 98–108.Google Scholar
  26. Ghemawat, P. (2007b). Why the world isn’t flat. Foreign Policy, 159(Mar/Apr), 54–61.Google Scholar
  27. Ghemawat, P. (2008). Redefining global strategy: Crossing borders in a world where differences still matter. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  28. Goerzen, A., & Asmussen, C. G. (2007). The geographic orientation of multinational enterprises and its implications for performance. In A. M. Rugman (Ed.), Regional aspects of multinationality and performance (Research in global strategic management, Vol. 13, pp. 65–83). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Goerzen, A., & Beamish, P. W. (2003). Geographic scope and multinational enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 24(13), 1289–1306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Grosse, R. (2005). Are the largest financial institutions really “global”. Management International Review, 45(1), 129–144.Google Scholar
  31. Hambrick, D. C., & Lei, D. (1985). Toward an empirical prioritization of contingency variables for business strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 28(4), 763–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Henisz, W. J., & Delios, A. (2001). Uncertainty, imitation, and plant location: Japanese multinational corporations, 1990–1996. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3), 443–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hennart, J.-F. (2007). The theoretical rationale for a multinationality-performance relationship. Management International Review, 47(3), 423–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Kim, H. (1997). International diversification: Effects on innovation and firm performance. Academy of Management Journal, 40(4), 767–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J.-E. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm: A model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1), 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J.-E. (1990). The mechanism of internationalisation. International Marketing Review, 7(4), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kieser, A., & Leiner, L. (2009). Why the rigour-relevance gap in management research is unbridgeable. Journal of Management Studies, 46(3), 516–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kieser, A., & Nicolai, A. T. (2005). Success factor research: Overcoming the trade-off between rigor and relevance? Journal of Management Inquiry, 14(3), 275–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kostova, T., & Zaheer, S. (1999). Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 64–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kreikebaum, H., Gilbert, D. U., & Reinhardt, G. O. (2002). Organisationsmanagement internationaler Unternehmen – Grundlagen und moderne Netzwerkstrukturen. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.Google Scholar
  41. Lu, J. W., & Beamish, P. W. (2001). The internationalization and performance of SMEs. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6/7), 565–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lu, J. W., & Beamish, P. W. (2004). International diversification and firm performance: The S-curve hypothesis. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 598–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Millar, C. C. J. M., Choi, C. J., & Chen, S. (2005). Globalization rediscovered: The case of uniqueness and “creative industries”. Management International Review, 45(1), 121–128.Google Scholar
  44. Morrison, A. J., & Roth, K. (1992). The regional solution: An alternative to globalization. Transnational Corporations, 1(2), 37–55.Google Scholar
  45. Nachum, L., & Zaheer, S. (2005). The persistence of distance? The impact of technology on MNE motivations for foreign investment. Strategic Management Journal, 26(8), 747–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Oh, C. H. (2009). The international scale and scope of European multinationals. European Management Journal, 27(5), 336–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ohmae, K. (1985). Triad power: The coming shape of global competition. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  48. Osegowitsch, T., & Sammartino, A. (2008). Reassessing (home-)regionalisation. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(2), 184–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Palazuelos, E., & Fernández, R. (2009). Demand, employment, and labour productivity in the European economies. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 20(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Poon, J. P. H., Thompson, E. R., & Kelly, P. F. (2000). Myth of the triad? The geography of trade and investment “blocs”. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 25(4), 427–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Proff, H. (2000). Hybrid strategies as a strategic challenge – The case of the German automotive industry. Omega, 28(5), 541–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ricart, J. E., Enright, M. J., Ghemawat, P., Hart, S. L., & Khanna, T. (2004). New frontiers in international strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(3), 175–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rugman, A. M. (2000). The end of globalization. London: Random House.Google Scholar
  54. Rugman, A. M. (2003b). Regional strategy and the demise of globalization. Journal of International Management, 9(4), 409–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rugman, A. M. (2005b). The regional multinationals: MNEs and “global” strategic management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rugman, A. M., & Hodgetts, R. (2001). The end of global strategy. European Management Journal, 19(4), 333–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rugman, A. M., & Oh, C. H. (2007). Multinationality and regional performance, 2001–2005. In A. M. Rugman (Ed.), Regional aspects of multinationality and performance (Research in global strategic management, Vol. 13, pp. 31–43). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rugman, A. M., & Sukpanich, N. (2006a). Firm-specific advantages intra-regional sales and performance of multinational enterprises. International Trade Journal, 20(3), 355–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rugman, A. M., & Sukpanich, N. (2006b). Intra-regional sales and performance of multinational enterprises. In M. Fratianni (Ed.), Regional economic integration (Research in global strategic management, Vol. 12, pp. 131–150). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (1992). A note on the transnational solution and the transaction cost theory of multinational strategic management. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(4), 761–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2001). Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 22(3), 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2003a). Extending the theory of the multinational enterprise: Internalization and strategic management perspectives. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2), 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2004). A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(1), 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2005). Towards a theory of regional multinationals: A transaction cost economics approach. Management International Review, 45(1), 3–15.Google Scholar
  65. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2007). Liabilites of regional foreignness and the use of firm-level versus country-level data: A response to Dunning et al. (2007). Journal of International Business Studies, 38(1), 200–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2008a). A new perspective on the regional and global strategies of multinational services firms. Management International Review, 48(4), 397–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2008b). A regional solution to the strategy and structure of multinationals. European Management Journal, 26(5), 305–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2008c). The theory and practice of regional strategy: A response to Osegowitsch and Sammartino. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(2), 326–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Ruigrok, W., Amann, W., & Wagner, H. (2007). The internationalization-performance relationship at Swiss firms: A test of the S-shape and extreme degrees of internationalization. Management International Review, 47(3), 349–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Ruigrok, W., & Wagner, H. (2003). Internationalization and performance: An organizational learning perspective. Management International Review, 43(1), 63–83.Google Scholar
  71. Scherer, A. G. (2006). Kritik der Organisation oder Organisation der Kritik? – Wissenschaftstheoretische Bemerkungen zum kritischen Umgang mit Organisationstheorie. In A. Kieser & M. Ebers (Eds.), Organisationstheorien (pp. 19–61). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  72. Steil, B. (2009). Lessons of the financial crisis. Available from http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Financial_Regulation_CSR45.pdf. Accessed 17.12.09.
  73. Stopford, J. M., & Wells, L. T. (1972). Managing the multinational enterprise: Organization of the firm and ownership of the subsidiaries. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  74. Sukpanich, N. (2007). Intra-regional sales and performance. In A. M. Rugman (Ed.), Regional aspects of multinationality and performance (Research in global strategic management, Vol. 13, pp. 317–336). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Tallmann, S. B., & Yip, G. S. (2009). Strategy and the multinational enterprise. In A. M. Rugman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of international business (pp. 307–340). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Thomas, D. E., & Eden, L. (2004). What is the shape of the multinationality-performance relationship? Multinational Business Review, 12(1), 89–110.Google Scholar
  77. Van Tulder, R., Van den Berghe, D., & Muller, A. (2001). The world’s largest firms and internationalization. Rotterdam: Rotterdam School of Management/Erasmus University.Google Scholar
  78. Verbeke, A., Li, L., & Goerzen, A. (2009). Toward more effective research on the multinationality-performance relationship. Management International Review, 49(2), 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Vora, D., Kostova, T., & Roth, K. (2007). Roles of subsidiary managers in multinational corporations: The effect of dual organizational identification. Management International Review, 47(4), 595–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Whitley, R. (1984). The scientific status of management research as a practically-oriented social science. Journal of Management Studies, 21(4), 369–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Yeung, H. W.-C., Poon, J., & Perry, M. (2001). Towards a regional strategy: The role of regional headquarters of foreign firms in Singapore. Urban Studies, 38(1), 157–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Zaheer, S. (1995). Overcoming the liability of foreignness. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 341–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zaheer, S. (2002). The liability of foreignness, redux: A commentary. Journal of International Management, 8(3), 351–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Zaheer, S., & Mosakowski, E. (1997). The dynamics of the liability of foreignness: A global study of survival in financial services. Strategic Management Journal, 18(6), 439–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Zheng Zhou, K., Brown, J. R., Dev, C. S., & Agarwal, S. (2007). The effects of customer and competitor orientations on performance in global markets: A contingency analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(2), 303–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Heinecke
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Erlangen-NürnbergErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations