Subsidiary Business Networks and Opportunity Development in Multinational Enterprises: A Comparison of the Influence of Internal and External Business Networks

  • Mohammad Yamin

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to make a contribution to understanding the nature of opportunity development within the multinational enterprise (MNEs). As explained in Chapter 1, opportunity development is broadly understood as new technological resource combinations and capability development.

Keywords

Phene Arena Volatility Lost Phan 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes and Innovation: a Longitudinal Study, Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 425–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almeida, P., Song, J. and Grant, R. (2002). Are Firms Superior to Alliances and Markets? An Analysis of Cross Border Knowledge Building, Organisation Science, 13 (2), 147–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersson, M., Holm, U. and Holmstrom, C. (2001). Relationship Configuration and Competence Development in MNC Subsidiaries, in H. Håkansson and J. Johanson (Eds) Business Network Learning. London: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  4. Andersson, U. and Forsgren, M. (1996). Subsidiary Embeddedness and Control in The Multinational Corporation, International Business Review, 5 (5), 487–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andersson, U., Johanson, J. and Vahlne, J-E. (1997). Organic Acquisition and The Internationalisation of The Business Firm, Management International Review, 37 (2), 67–84.Google Scholar
  6. Andersson, U. and Pahlberg, C. (1997). Subsidiary Influence and Strategic Behaviour in MNCs: An Empirical Study, International Business Review, 3, 319–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Andersson, U. and Forsgren, M. (2000). In Search of Centres of Excellence: Network Embeddedness and Subsidiary Roles in Multinational Corporations, Management International Review, 40 (4), 329–50.Google Scholar
  8. Andersson, U. and Holm, U. (2002). Managing Integration of Subsidiary Knowledge in The Multinational Corporation — A Note on The Role of Headquarters, in V. Havila, M. Forsgren and H. Håkansson (Eds) Critical Perspectives on Internationalisation. London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  9. Andersson, U., Forsgren, M. and Holm, U. (2001a). Subsidiary Embeddedness and Competence Development in MNCs — A Multi-Level Analysis, Organization Studies, 22 (6), 1013–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Andersson, U., Forsgren, M. and Pedersen, T. (2001b). Subsidiary Performance in Multinational Corporations: The Importance of Technology Embeddedness, International Business Review, 10, 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Andersson, U., Forsgren, M. and Holm, U. (2002). The Strategic Impact of External Networks: Subsidiary Performance and Competence Development in The Multinational Corporation, Strategic Management Journal, 23, 979–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Andersson, U. Forsgren, M. and Holm, U. (2004). Fighting for Power: Subsidiary Influence on Strategic Decisions in The Federative MNC, Unpublished paper, Department of Business Studies, Uppsala university.Google Scholar
  13. Arajuo, L. (1999). Knowing and Learning as Networking, Management Learning, 29 (3), 317–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Astley, G. and Zac, J. (1990). Beyond Dyadic Exchange: Functional Interdependence and Subunit Power, Organization Studies, 11(4), 481–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Blankenburg-Holm, D., Eriksson, K. and Johanson, J. (1999). Creating Value through Mutual Commitment to Business Network Relationships, Strategic Management Journal, 20, 467–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Belussi, F. and Areangeli, F. (1998). A Typology of Networks: Flexible and Evolutionary Firms, Research Policy, 27, 418–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bettis, R. and Prahalad, C. (1986). The Dominant Logic: A New Linkage between Diversity and Performance, Strategic Management Review, 7 (6), 485–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bettis, R. and Prahalad, C. (1995). The Dominant Logic: Retrospective and Extension, Strategic Management Journal, 16, 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Birkinshaw, J. (1996). How Multinational Subsidiary Mandates are Gained and Lost, Journal of International Business Studies, 27 (3), 467–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Birkinshaw, J. (1997). Entrepreneurship in Multinational Corporations: The Characteristics of Subsidiary Initiatives, Strategic Management Journal, 3, 207–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Birkinshaw, J. and Hood, N. (1998). Multinational Subsidiary Evolution: Capability and Charter Change in Foreign-Owned Subsidiaries, Academy of Management Review, 23 (4), 773–96.Google Scholar
  22. Birkinshaw, J. and Ridderstrale, J. (1999). Fighting the Corporate Immune System: A Process Study of Subsidiary Initiatives in Multinational Corporations, International Business Review, 8, 149–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Buckley, P. and Casson, M. (1976). The Future of the Multinational Firm, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  24. Buckley, P. and Casson, M. (1998). Models of The Multinational Enterprise, Journal of International Business Studies, 29 (1), 21–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Burt, R. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Cantwell, J. (1989). Technological Innovations and Multinational Corporations, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  27. Cantwell, J. (2000). Theories of International Production, in C. Pitelis and R. Sugden, (Eds), The Nature of the Transnational Firm, 2nd edn, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Coase, R. (1937). The Nature of The Firm, Economica, 4, 386–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Dunning, J. (1993). Multinational Enterprise and The Global Economy, Wokingham: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  30. Dunning, J. (1998). Location and The Multinational Enterprise: Neglected Factor? Journal of International Business Studies, 29 (1), 45–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dunning, J. and Lundun, S. (1998). The Geographic Source of Competitiveness of Multinational Enterprise: An Econometric Analysis, International Business Review, 7 (2), 115–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Florida, R. (1997). The Globalisation of R…D, Research Policy, 26, 85–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Forsgren, M., Holm, U. and Johansen, J. (1995). Division Headquarters Go abroad — A Step in The Internationalisation of The Multinational, Journal of Management Studies, 32 (4), 475–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Forsgren, M., Pedersen, T. and Foss, N. (1999). Accounting for The Strength of MNC Subsidiaries: The Case of Foreign-Owned Firms in Denmark, International Business Review, 2, 181–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Forsgren, M., Johansen, J. and Sharma, D. (2000). The development of MNC Centres of Excellence, in U. Holm and T. Pedersen (Eds), The Emergence and Impact of MNC Centres of Excellence, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  36. Forsgren, M. (2004). Use of Network Theory in MNC Research, in V. Mahanke and T. Pedersen (Eds), Knowledge Flows, Governance and the Multinational Enterprise: Frontiers in International Management Research, London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  37. Foss, N. and Pedersen, T. (2002). Transferring Knowledge in MNCs: The Role of Sourcing of Subsidiary Knowledge and The Organizational Context, Journal of International Management, 8, 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Frost, T. (2001). The Geographic Sources of Foreign Subsidiaries’ Innovations, Strategic Management Journal, 22, 101–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ghoshal, S. and Bartlett, C. (1990). The Multinational Corporation as an Interorganizational Network, Academy of Management Review, 15 (4), 603–25.Google Scholar
  40. Ghoshal, S. and Nohria, N. (1997). The Differentiated MNC: Organizing Multinational Corporations for Value Creation, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Publishers.Google Scholar
  41. Goodall, K. and Roberts, J. (2003). Repairing Managerial Knowledge-Ability over Distance, Organization Studies, 24 (7), 1153–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gupta, A. and Govindrajan, V. (1991). Knowledge Flows and The Structure of Control within Multinational Corporations, Academy of Management Review, 16 (4), 768–92.Google Scholar
  43. Gupta, A. and Govindrajan, V. (2000). Knowledge Flows within Multinational Companies, Strategic Management Journal, 21, 473–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hansen, M. (1999). The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organisational Subunits, Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 82–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hansen, M. (2002). Knowledge Networks: Explaining Effective Knowledge Sharing in Multiunit Companies, Organization Science, 13 (3), 232–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hedlund, G. and Ridderstrale, J. (1995). International Development Projects: Key to Competitiveness, Impossible or Mismanaged, International Studies in Management and Organisation, 25 (1–2), 156–84.Google Scholar
  47. Holm, U. and Pedersen, T. (Eds) (2000). The Emergence and Impact of MNC Centres of Excellence, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  48. Holm, U., Johanson, J. and Thilenius, P. (1995). Headquarters Knowledge of Subsidiary Network Contexts in the Multinational Corporations, International Studies of Management and Organisation, 1–2, 97–120.Google Scholar
  49. Hymer, S. (1976). The International Operations of National Firms, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  50. Johanson, J. and Mattsson, L-G. (1994). The Markets as Networks Tradition in Sweden, in G. Laurent, G. L. Lilien and B. Prass (Eds), Research Traditions in Marketing, Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  51. Kogut, B. (1983). Foreign Direct Investment as a Sequetial Process, in C. P. Kindelberger and D. Audresch (Eds), The Multinational Corporation in the 1980s, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  52. Kogut, B. (1990). International Sequential Advantages and Network Flexibility, in Bartlett, Doz and G. Hedlund (Eds), Managing the Global Firm. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  53. Kogut, B. and Kulatilaka, N. (1994). Operating Flexibility, Global Manufacturing, and The Option Value of a Multinational Network, Management Science, 40 (1), 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kostova, T. and Roth, K. (2003). Social Capital in Multinational Corporations and A Micro-macro Model of Its Formation, Academy of Management Review, 29 (2), 297–317.Google Scholar
  55. Lane, P. and Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative Absorptive Capacity and Interorganisational Learning, Strategic Management Journal, 19 (5), 461–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Leung, S. and Tan, C. (1993). Managing across Borders: an Empirical Test of the Bartlett and Ghoshal Organisational Typology, Journal of International Business Studies, 24, 3449–64.Google Scholar
  57. March, J. (1991). Exploration and Exploitation in Organisational Learning, Organisation Science, 1, 15–28.Google Scholar
  58. McLoughin, D. and Horan, C. (2002). Markets as Networks: Notes on a Unique Understanding, Journal of Business Research, 55, 535–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Medcof, J. (2001). Resource-based Strategy and Managerial Power in Networks of Internationally Dispersed Technology Units, Strategic Management Journal, 22, 909–1012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mudambi, R. (1999). MNE Internal Capital Market and Subsidiary Independence, International Business Review, 8, 197–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. O’Donnell, S. (2000). Managing Foreign Subsidiaries: Agents of The Headquarters or an Interdependent Network? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 525–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Pearce, R. (1999). The Evolution of Technology in Multinational Enterprises: The Role of Creative subsidiaries, International Business Review, 2, 125–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Penrose, E. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  64. Phene, A. and Almeida, P. (2003). How do Firms Evolve? The Patterns of Technological Evolution of Semiconductor Subsidiaries, International Business Review, 12, 349–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ragan, S. (1998). Do Multinationals Operate Flexibly? Theory and Evidence, Journal of International Business Studies, 29 (2), 217–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Regnér, P. (2003). Strategy Creation at The Periphery: Inductive versus Deductive Strategy Making, Journal of Management Studies, 40 (1), 57–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Ruef, M. (2002). Strong Ties, Weak Ties and Islands: Structural and Cultural Predictors of Organisational Innovation, Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(3), 427–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Schmid, S. and Schuring, A. (2003). The Development of Critical Capabilities in Foreign Subsidiaries: Disentangling The Role of The Subsidiary’s Business Network, International Business Review, 12, 755–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Subramaniam, M., Rosenthal, S. and Hatten, K. (1998). Global New Product Development Processes: Preliminary Findings and Research Propositions, Journal of Management Studies, 35, 773–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Szulanki, G. (1996). exploring Internal Stickiness: Impediments to Transfer of Best Practice within The Firm, Strategic Management Journal, 17, 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tasoukas, H. (1996). The Firm as a Distributed Knowledge System, Strategic Management Journal, 17 (special issue), 11–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tsai, W. and Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks, Academy of Management Journal, 41 (4), 464–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Tsai, W. (2000). Social Capital, Strategic Relatedness and The Formation of Intraorganizational Linkages, Strategic Management Journal, 29 (2), 297–317.Google Scholar
  74. Tyre, M. and Von Hippel, E. (1997). The Situated Nature of Adaptive Learning, Organization Science, 8 (1), 71–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. UNCTAD (2000). World Investment Report 2000: Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions, New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  76. Von Hippel, E. (1988). The Sources of Innovations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Yamin, M. (1999). ‘An Evolutionary Analysis of Subsidiary Innovation and Reverse Transfer in Multinational Enterprises, in F. Burton, M. Chapman and A. Cross (Eds), Multinational Enterprises, Transaction Costs and Internal organisation, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  78. Yamin, M. (2002). Subsidiary Entrepreneurship and The Advantage of Multinationality, in V. Havila, H. Håkansson and M. Forsgren (Eds), Critical Perspectives on Internationalisation, London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  79. Yamin, M. and Otto, J. (2004). Patterns of Knowledge Flow and MNE Innovative Performance, Journal of International Management, 10 (2).Google Scholar
  80. Zander, I. and Sölvell, O. (2002). The Phantom Multinational, in V. Havila, H. Håkansson, and M. Forsgren (Eds), Critical Perspectives on Internationalisation. London: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pervez Ghauri, Amjad Hadjikhani and Jan Johanson 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Yamin

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations