Subsidiary Autonomy and Expatriate Retreat

  • Ralf Bebenroth
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Business book series (BRIEFSBUSINESS)


This second chapter examines how two factors, subsidiary autonomy and the retreat of expatriates, influenced Japan-based foreign subsidiaries to either temporarily close their offices or relocate them out of the Tokyo (Kanto) area. It can be shown that subsidiaries with higher degrees of autonomy changed their status significantly more often. This means that the more autonomous the subsidiaries were, the more costly it was for the headquarters in the aftermath of the disaster. In contrast to the transaction cost theory, which argues that better performing subsidiaries have higher levels of autonomy, my findings indicate that a lower level of autonomy would be better to prevent unnecessary closings or relocations in the case of a crisis.


Foreign Firm German Firm Reduce Transaction Cost Transaction Cost Theory Affiliate 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.


  1. Almeida P, Phene A (2004) Foreign owned subsidiaries and knowledge creation: the influence of MNC and host country innovation. Strateg Manag J 25:847–864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Birkinshaw J (1996) How multinational subsidiary mandates are gained and lost. J Int Bus Studies 27(3):467–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Birkinshaw J, Hood N, Young S (2004) Subsidiary entrepreneurship, internal and external competitive forces, and subsidiary performance. Int Bus Rev 14(3):227–248Google Scholar
  4. Brewster C, Sparrow P, Harris H (2005) Towards a new model of globalizing human resource management. Int J Human Resource Manag 16(6):949–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bruning NS, Bebenroth R, Pascha W (2011) Valuing Japan-based German expatriate and local manager’s functions: do subsidiary age and managerial perspectives matter? Int J Human Resource Manag 22(4):778–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Churchill AG (1979) A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J Mark Res 16(1):64–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dunning J (2000) Regions, globalization, and the knowledge economy: the issues stated. In: Dunning J (ed) Regions, globalization, and the knowledge economy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  8. Egelhoff W, Gorman L, McCormick S (1998) Using technology as a path to subsidiary development. In: Birkinshaw J, Hood N (eds) Multinational corporate evolution and subsidiary development. Macmillan, BasingstokeGoogle Scholar
  9. Hennart JF (1991) The transaction cost theory of joint ventures: an empirical study of Japanese subsidiaries in the United States. Manag Sci 37:483–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kim JO, Mueller CW (1978) Factor analysis: statistical methods and practical issues. Sage, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  11. McDonald F, Warhurst S, Allen M (2008) Autonomy, embeddedness, and the performance of foreign owned. Multinational Bus Rev 16(3):73–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mudambi R, Navarra P (2004) Is knowledge power? Knowledge flows, subsidiary power and rent-seeking within MNCs. J Int Bus Studies 35(5):385–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Nihon Keizai Shinbun (2011) Kansai no chintai offisu (iten juyou) nobiru, gaishikei chuushin, tankiriyo he jouken kanwa mo (Increase of temporary demand in rental office space in Kansai area by foreign companies). 6 April, p 3Google Scholar
  14. Nunnally JC (1978) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. O'Donnell S (2000) Managing foreign owned subsidiaries: agents of headquarters or an independent network? Strateg Manag J 21:525–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ogura Y, Oda K, Tanita Y (2011) Higashi nihon daishinsai: gaishikei, Tokyo dasshutsu (genpatsu jiko no eikyo shinpai) [East Japan Earthquake: foreign companies out of Tokyo (worries about effect of atomic accident)]. Mainichi Shinbun, 22 March, p 6Google Scholar
  17. Perez J, Pla-Barber J (2005) When are international managers a cost effective solution? The rationale of transaction cost economics applied to staffing decisions in multinational corporations. J Bus Res 58:1320–1329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rai A, Borah S, Ramaprasad A (1996) Critical success factors for strategic alliances in the information technology industry: an empirical study. Decision Sci 27(1):141–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Richards M (2001) U.S.multinational staffing practices and implications for subsidiary performance in the U.K and Thailand. Thunderbird Int Bus Rev 43(2):225–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schaffer RA, Rhee JH (2005) Consider cost and strategy when choosing between expatriate and host-national managers. J Bus Manag 11(1):59–71Google Scholar
  21. Yomiuri Sinbun (2011) Genpatsu jiko ni binkan, gaishikei shain kikoku no ugoki (Sensitive against atomic accident, transfer home of employees from foreign companies). Yomiuri Shinbun, 7 AprilGoogle Scholar
  22. Tan D, Mahoney JT (2006) Why a multinational firm chooses expatriates: integrating resource-based, agency and transaction cost perspectives. J Manag Studies 43(3):457–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Utsunomiya Yuichi (2011) Higashi Nihon Dai Shinsai: Jouhoukyoten mo nishi nihon he natsu no teiden risuku kaihi (Great East Japan Earthquake: information center move to the west. Prevention of summer shortage energy risk). Mainichi Shinbun, 14 March, p 7Google Scholar
  24. Young S, Tavares A (2004) Centralizafion and autonomy: back to the future. Int Bus Rev 13(3):215–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Ralf Bebenroth 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ralf Bebenroth
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Research Institute for Economics and Business AdministrationKobe UniversityKobeJapan
  2. 2.Asia Africa Institute on sabbatical leaveHamburg UniversityHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations