Search results

Is the development of local innovation capabilities enough for foreign subsidiaries in emerging markets to be able to integrate into global R&D projects? The authors argue that it is not. The purpose of this paper is to show the central role of R&D capacities when it comes to inserting foreign subsidiaries in emerging markets into global R&D projects.

The study investigated 131 foreign multinational subsidiaries operating in Brazil. For each subsidiary, the authors surveyed two to five directors or C-level executives from innovation, R&D, engineering, product development and projects. the authors used structural equation modeling for analysis.

The results indicate that product and process innovations alone do not guarantee the insertion of the emerging market subsidiaries into global innovation projects. Such insertion depends on the subsidiary’s accumulation of R&D capacities.

The results reinforce the central issue of building product and process innovation capabilities as the first step toward a blueprint for global projects. However, the effort is not limited to these initiatives. Product and process innovation efforts need be reverted in headquarters’ eyes in order for subsidiaries to gain R&D center status. To achieve this, subsidiaries must align their technological innovations with multinational corporations’ innovation strategies.

In authors’ view, this study contributes to the literature in three main areas: the evolutionary process of innovation capability in subsidiaries, the reverse innovation debate and the discussion of subsidiaries’ initiatives.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

Globalisation is generally defined as the “denationalisation of clusters of political, economic, and social activities” that destabilize the ability of the sovereign State to control activities on its territory, due to the rising need to find solutions for universal problems, like the pollution of the environment, on an international level. Globalisation is a complex, forceful legal and social process that take place within an integrated whole with out regard to geographical boundaries. Globalisation thus differs from international activities, which arise between and among States, and it differs from multinational activities that occur in more than one nation‐State. This does not mean that countries are not involved in the sociolegal dynamics that those transboundary process trigger. In a sense, the movements triggered by global processes promote greater economic interdependence among countries. Globalisation can be traced back to the depression preceding World War II and globalisation at that time included spreading of the capitalist economic system as a means of getting access to extended markets. The first step was to create sufficient export surplus to maintain full employment in the capitalist world and secondly establishing a globalized economy where the planet would be united in peace and wealth. The idea of interdependence among quite separate and distinct countries is a very important part of talks on globalisation and a significant side of today’s global political economy.

Technology and product development processes are increasingly subject to internationalization, and the importance of research and development (R&D) activities carried out offshore is increasing. Therefore, firms tend to take a global view of their operations and rethink their R&D processes in a global perspective. This means that existing foreign R&D units may be subject to evolution and change of role. Based on an empirical research on 12 multinationals operating in technology‐intensive industries, studies how the role of foreign R&D units changes within multinationals and attempts to identify whether there is an evolutionary pattern of international R&D. Concludes that the evolutionary processes of foreign R&D are related to both the need to increase the effectiveness of the R&D process at global level (assigning global mandate to the units where there are the key resources), and to improve the global efficiency of the R&D process (avoiding duplications and rationalizing the geographical presence).

This paper aims to propose practical recommendations in accordance with the strategic roles played by research and development (R&D) in multinational companies (MNCs).

This study applies a qualitative method to investigate the talent management (TM) practices implemented in MNCs’ R&D units.

The findings identify four R&D strategies and four sectors of TM practices. Furthermore, there exists an alignment between R&D strategies and TM practices.

This paper has several limitations. This qualitative research is exploratory, and larger samples or quantitative methods are needed to ensure the wider applicability of the findings. When possible, longitudinal studies yield superior results in revealing the evolving strategic roles of R&D subsidiaries and their TM practices. The authors used China as the research context, and similar studies in other emerging countries with active R&D activities are required to further validate or complement the findings in this study.

This study has some practical implications for companies with regard to aligning their TM practices with R&D strategies.

R&D units play an increasingly significant role in MNCs and TM is a key issue. However, there is a lack of TM research focusing on R&D employees by taking strategies into account.

The article aims to explain how the drivers of subsidiary evolution influence a multinational company's (MNC) research and development (R&D) subsidiary's evolution over time.

The article draws on insights from a longitudinal comparative case study of three Swedish MNCs' Indian R&D units.

The study shows that the evolution of R&D units is a triangular showdown among headquarter assignments, local market constraints, and opportunities, and that subsidiary choice is an important driver of both mandated extension and stagnation. We summarize our findings in various propositions that emphasize different drivers over time and that highlight the strong impact of a subsidiary's understanding of the corporate immune system on the evolution of that subsidiary's R&D mandate.

Drawing on the common limitations of a case study approach, further research is needed to test the suggested propositions with larger samples, ideally with subsidiaries in other emerging and developed markets.

The study illustrates the risks involved for subsidiary managers when pushing an R&D mandate-related initiative too far and provoking the corporate immune system. For headquarters management, the study highlights the importance of understanding that the development of R&D competence and capability at a subsidiary cannot be guided solely by headquarter assignments and local market characteristics; rather, the subsidiary's initiatives also need to be considered.

The study contributes to the literature on R&D internationalization by showing how the drivers of subsidiary evolution influence a subsidiary's R&D mandates over time and that subsidiary choice is an important driver of both mandated extension and stagnation.

The purpose of this paper is to extend the discussions on globalisation from production to R&D. It investigates how R&D and production interact with each other in their globalisation processes.

The research aim is developed by identifying the gaps in the reviewed literature. This paper is based on four case studies undertaken in one Chinese manufacturing, one Danish pharmaceutical and two Danish manufacturing companies. The cases provide a sound basis for developing an understanding of the interaction between the globalisation of R&D and production.

This paper identifies three approaches the case companies followed to globalise their production and R&D: interactive globalisation, separated globalisation and a possible combination. The paper indicates that research and development might have to be treated separately with regard to their globalisation, and proposes industry and country characteristics as the key factors for globalisation approach selection, and site capability and strategic decision as the impacting factors for globalisation evolution.

This paper emphasises the dispersion of R&D activities, which is seldom addressed by existing internationalisation theories. Its investigation provides a foundation for the further extension of current internationalisation theories to consider global R&D. Moreover, the theoretical gap in the existing literature between global R&D and production is noted. This paper bridges this gap by clarifying the interaction between R&D and production in their globalisation, conceptualising three globalisation approaches, and proposing tentative factors that have impacts on approach selection and management.

Cities are host to many of the world’s knowledge intensive research and innovation clusters. As such, they are likely to be attractive locations for emerging market multinational enterprises (MNEs) seeking to engage in knowledge seeking “springboard” type firm-level catch-up strategies. The purpose of this study is to therefore explore whether city-based research-intensive clusters containing deep pools of location bounded (i.e. “sticky”) knowledge are a stronger driver for greenfield research and development (R&D)-related FDI projects for Chinese MNEs than they are for developed market MNEs.

The authors use logistic modelling on 97,163 worldwide greenfield FDI projects to explore the relative likelihoods of Chinese MNEs engaging in R&D-related greenfield (i.e. “strategic asset seeking”) FDI projects as well as how city type (global or research-intensive cluster city) moderates this relationship for Chinese MNEs.

The authors find that Chinese MNEs are more likely to engage in overseas R&D FDI projects (compared with other types of project) than DMNEs and that research-intensive city clusters hold a stronger attraction for Chinese MNEs than developed market MNEs.

The authors discuss how the research contributes to the debate on emerging market MNE catch-up theory, as well as that on sub-national city location choice, by highlighting the growing importance of sub-national geography to understanding strategic asset seeking related greenfield FDI.

Sub-national city location choice is an important driver of strategic asset seeking FDI for Chinese MNEs, one that both national and local city level policymakers should pay attention to.

Chinese FDI via aggressive mergers and acquisitions to acquire key technologies has been restricted in recent years. Policymakers must consider whether they may also wish to restrict Chinese greenfield FDI in R&D-related projects, which now exhibit a pronounced upward trend.

The authors highlight the growing importance of sub-national geography to understanding strategic asset seeking related greenfield FDI in Chinese MNEs (and how it plays, more generally, a central role in their strategies).

Prior studies on product standardization–adaptation in multinational corporations (MNCs) have revealed environmental factors that can influence the choices of MNCs. However, these studies have not shown how these choices are made behind the scenes in new product development (NPD). In many industries, MNCs face the dual pressures for product standardization and adaptation from the environment. This study aims to explore how MNCs facing dual pressures can make choices of product standardization–adaptation in NPD.

A qualitative case study of four high-performing MNCs was conducted. The four MNCs were selected using the theoretical sampling approach. Data were collected, mainly through 74 semi-structured interviews. Coding was conducted and four aggregate dimensions were generated.

This study reveals that choices of product standardization–adaptation are made through a process in MNCs’ NPD, including four steps – organizing for NPD, organizational diversity, cross-unit integration and combination of design practices. In addition, MNCs adopt different process variants to address different environmental pressures.

This research focuses on high-performing MNCs in manufacturing industries. Future research can explore different types of firms.

Managers in MNCs should focus more on the process of choices for product standardization–adaptation, than on the level of product standardization–adaptation. They should also keep monitoring the environmental pressure and employ experienced engineers.

By focusing on NPD, the authors shift the attention from product standardization–adaptation to product feature standardization–adaptation in MNCs, which is a fresh and refined perspective. The authors show a process in NPD composed of activities and mechanisms that managers might use for handling product standardization–adaptation challenges in MNCs. The authors contribute to the area of cross-unit integration in MNCs’ NPD by revealing mental mechanisms for mitigating tensions in cross-unit interactions.

Deriving a measure of efficiency of public-funded organizations (primarily not-for-profit organizations) and ranking these efficiency measures have been major subjects of debate and discussion. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the relative performances of public-funded research and development (R&D) organizations functioning across multiple countries working on similar research streams. The authors use multiple measures of inputs and outputs for this purpose.

The authors use the data envelopment analysis (DEA) as the primary methodology of analysis The keywords highlighting the major research areas in the field of non-metrology, conducted by National Physical Laboratory (NPL), India, were utilized to select the global comparators working on similar research streams. These global comparators were three R&D organizations located in the USA and one each located in Germany and Japan. The relative efficiencies of the organizations were assessed with the following output variables – external cash flow, and the numbers of technologies transferred, publications and patents; and the following input variables – amount of grants received from the parent body, and the number of scientific personnel working in these public R&D organizations. The authors follow the output-oriented measure of efficiency at constant return to scale and variable return to scale, along with scale efficiencies.

The performance of NPL, India under multiple dimensions has been evaluated relative to its global comparators – the National Institute for Materials Science, Japan; the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, USA; Fritz Haber Institute of the Max Planck Society, Germany; the National Centre for Atmospheric Research, USA; and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA. The study indicates suggested measures and a set of targets to achieve the best possible performance for NPL and other R&D organizations. In most cases of efficient local but not so efficient global efficiency scores indicate that, on an average, the actual scale of production has diverged from the most productive scale size.

The approach highlights the utilization of the DEA methodology for relative R&D performance assessment of global comparators. The discriminatory analysis has brought into sharp focus the dichotomy between local efficiency and global efficiency scores of these units and issues of scale size and regional disparities. The outcome of this approach is dependent upon correct selection of input and output variables and data availability.

The study results have profound implications for the management of public R&D institutions across nations working on similar-focused research streams, but functioning within different societal, economic, and political contexts.

The present work, being perhaps one of the few multinational studies of relative performance assessment of pubic-funded R&D organizations working on similar research streams, signifies the relevance of such an approach in the field of R&D/innovation management. This has opened up new avenues for further research in this area.