Search results

The capital budgeting decision for a multinational enterprise needs to take into account concepts of business policy and competitive strategy. From the modern theory of the multinational enterprise, i.e., the theory of internalisation, it is recognised that proprietary firm specific advantages yield economic rents when exploited on a world‐wide basis. Yet the multinational enterprise finds these potential rents dissipated by internal governance costs of its organisational structure and the difficulty of timing and sustaining its foreign direct investment activities. This paper examines these issues by a focus upon parent‐subsidiary relationships and the strategic nature of the capital budgeting decision for a multinational enterprise.

In this chapter, we revisit the empirical findings of Rugman and coauthors concerning the overwhelming home-regionalisation among the world's largest firms. Using a longitudinal research design and continuous measures of internationalisation, we observe a number of secular trends. Among other, we find that sales growth beyond the home region is faster than sales growth within the home region. We use our empirical results to critique and augment existing regionalisation theory. In particular, we raise doubts about the sharp distinction in the literature between expansion in the home region and expansion in host regions.

The objective of this paper is to analyze the five largest companies in the soft drink industry in the context of the regional triad theory as presented in Rugman and Brain (2003) and later in Rugman and Verbeke (2004b, 2007). We find that of the five largest companies in the soft drink industry, only Coca‐Cola meets the definition of a global company as defined by regional triad theory. National Beverage is a strictly domestic company and Cadbury, Cott, and Pepsi are bi‐regional MNEs with sales in the NAFTA and European triad regions. Coca‐Cola reports sales in five major geographic regions, which fits the criteria of a global firm

Most years, several AIB members are elected as AIB Fellows on account of their excellent international business scholarship, and/or past service as AIB President or Executive Secretary. The Fellows are in charge of electing Eminent Scholars as well as the International Executive and International Educator (formerly, Dean) of the Year, who often provide the focus for Plenary Sessions at AIB Conferences. Their history since 1975 covers over half of the span of the AIB and reflects many issues that dominated that period in terms of research themes, progresses and problems, the internationalization of business education and the role of international business in society and around the globe. Like other organizations, the Fellows Group had their ups and downs, successes and failures – and some fun too!

Alan Rugman was one of the first to examine in a systematic way the connection between the internationalization of the firm and the diversification of assets within the multinational enterprises (MNE). He has since moved on to deal with many other issues surrounding the MNE, but his major contribution to the subject of international diversification (Rugman, 1979) was for many years essential reading for anyone with serious pretensions to be or to become an international business scholar. Rugman (2005) himself sees the key idea in his early book as being an appreciation of the role of risk in foreign direct investment (FDI). MNEs in the place of individual investors, diversified their portfolio of assets, and thereby served as a vehicle for risk reduction. This argument can be applied especially before 1970, before advances in financial markets and international asset instruments enabled individual investors (or funds acting on their behalf) to directly conduct for themselves such strategies of international diversification to reduce risk.

While publications on the regional nature of multinational enterprises have sparked a lively debate about the nature and measurement of regionalization and (semi)globalization, and performance implications are starting to be addressed, the broader societal and sustainability dimensions have received limited attention. Likewise, international business research on these issues has generally not considered regionalization and its consequences. This paper extends insights from the regionalization literature and broadens the debate by exploring aspects that arise when societal and sustainability implications are taken into account as well. It outlines several areas for further research, addressing geographic scope, organizational levels, and upstream/downstream and country/industry/issue peculiarities

In the field of international business one of the most basic issues is the relationship between multinationality and performance. Several hundred studies have examined the nature of this relationship, with somewhat inconclusive results. This literature is reviewed and extended in Part B of this book. However, the main contribution of this book lies in Parts A and C which explore the regional dimension of multinationality and performance.

Internalization theory explains the existence and functioning of the multinational enterprise. It contributes to understanding the boundaries of the multinational enterprise, its interface with the external environment and its internal organizational design. Much work in the international strategic-management sphere has unfortunately not taken on board internalization-theory thinking and lacks the insights provided by this comparative institutional approach. In this chapter, we show how well-known international strategic-management models could be enriched and their normative implications altered by adopting an internalizing-theory lens.

I am honored to receive the Booz Allen Hamilton/strategy+business Eminent Scholar Award in International Management. I am even more honored to follow in the footsteps of such distinguished previous recipients of the AOM-IMD (Academy of Management-International Division) Distinguished Scholar Award as: John Child, Christopher Bartlett, Sumantra Ghoshal, John Dunning, and Yves Doz. Like them, I shall reflect here on my past contributions to scholarship, and then use this work as a building block for the major part of this paper, which is on the need for new and relevant theory in the field of international management.