Search results

The purpose of this paper is to empirically analyze what effects the headquarters’ (HQ) business strategy and corporate culture, the local network embeddedness of the foreign subsidiary, and HQ-subsidiary communication have on the staff localization of foreign subsidiaries. The authors carry out empirical analysis on how localization of foreign subsidiaries ultimately affects the performance of foreign subsidiaries.

This study is an empirical analysis on the determinants of staff localization and the relationship between staff localization and corporate performance. In this study, the five hypotheses were proposed and tested using survey data. The authors randomly selected a total of 800 companies as subjects and conducted a survey. The final 222 survey data including HQs and subsidiaries were used for empirical analysis. The statistical analyses such as reliability test, factor analysis and regression were used.

This study shows that there was a higher level of staff localization by the foreign subsidiary when the investment goal was market-oriented investment, the Korean foreign subsidiary had stronger local network embeddedness and there was better HQ-subsidiary communication. In addition, the relationship between localization and subsidiary performance shows an inverted U-shape. Such results will give various implications to companies.

The research that takes a multilayered consideration on factors of the HQ, subsidiaries, and the HQ-subsidiary relationship is rare. To overcome such limitations, this study carried out a survey in order to find more in-depth decision factors. Specifically, this study analyzed the effects of three large aspects of investment goals and corporate culture from the aspect of the HQ, local network embeddedness from the aspect of foreign subsidiaries, and the level of HQ-subsidiary communication from the aspect of HQ-subsidiary relations, and how they affect staff localization.

The paper seeks to explain the collaborative intent, trust development, and conflict resolution in a headquarters‐subsidiary relationship in a new product launch context in an emerging market.

Grounded theory development is employed through personal interviews with senior executives of selected multinational firms operating in Turkey.

A major challenge in collaboration is convincing both parties to the dyad that the expertise of the other party is essential for effective collaboration.

The findings are based solely on looking at the subsidiary side of the subsidiary‐HQ dyad in a single country, which limits their generalizability. Since we did not interview the HQ side of this dyad, speculations made about the possible reactions of HQ personnel to subsidiary actions must be interpreted with caution.

The perceptions of both parties play a far more important role than the facts or perceptions of just one party when it comes to relationships and conflict resolution. Both parties need to pay more attention to the possible causes of means incongruence and take perception gaps and the other side's needs and expertise into account when approaching collaboration and conflict resolution.

Agency theory is extended to a multinational firm‐subsidiary context in order to suggest mechanisms for resolving conflict through increased communication, greater trust in each other's capabilities, and greater collaboration in meeting common challenges. A diagnostic and prescriptive framework and mechanisms are also offered through which disruptive conflict can be transformed into functional conflict and collaboration.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how differences in the institutional environments of a multinational enterprise (MNE) shape the role of management control systems (MCSs) and social capital in the headquarter (HQ)-subsidiary relationship of an emerging economy MNE.

A case study design was adopted in this research in order to understand how the differences in the institutional environments of an MNE shape the design and use of MCSs. Data were gathered by means of semi-structured interviews, document analysis and observations. Interviews were conducted at the Nigerian HQ and UK subsidiary of the Nigerian Service Multinational Enterprise (NSMNE).

The study found that the subsidiary operated autonomously, given its residence in a stronger institutional environment than the HQ. Instead of the HQ depending on MCSs means of coordination and control, it relied on social capital that existed between the HQ and subsidiary to coordinate and integrate the operation of the foreign subsidiary studied.

The evidence from this research indicates that social capital could be effective in the integration and coordination of multinational operations. However, where social capital becomes the main mechanism of coordination and integration of HQ-subsidiary operations, the focus may have to be, as in this case, on organisational social capital and the need to achieve group goals, rather than specifically designated target goals for the subsidiary. The implication of this is that it may limit the potential of the subsidiary to explore its environment and search for opportunities. These are important insights into the relationship between developed country-based subsidiaries and their less developed countries-based HQs.

A practical implication of this research is in the use of local or expatriate staff to manage the operation of the subsidiary. While previous studies on the MNE, from the conventional perspective of multinational operation, suggest that expatriates may be sent to the subsidiary to head key positions so as to enable the HQ to have control of the subsidiary operation, it is different in this case. The NSMNE has adopted a policy of using locals who have the expertise and understanding of the UK institutional environment to manage the subsidiary’s operation.

This research sheds some light on how development issues associated with a multinational institutional environment may shape the business activities and the relationship between the HQ and subsidiary. It gives some understanding of how policies and practices may have different impacts on employees as businesses attempt to adjust to pressures from their external environment(s).

The reliance on social capital as a means of coordination and control of the foreign subsidiary in this study is significant, given that previous studies have indicated that multinational HQs normally transfer controls and structure to foreign subsidiaries as a means of control. Also, while previous studies have suggested that MNEs HQ have better expertise that enables them to design and transfer MCSs to foreign subsidiaries, this study found that such expertise relates to the institutional environment from which the HQ is operating from. Through the lens of institutional sociology theory, these findings directly contribute to the literature on the transference of practices and control systems in international business discourse.

With this chapter, we seek to shed light on the question how headquarters (HQ) can cope with geographic distance and effectively transfer relevant knowledge to their subsidiaries. By constructing a mediating model, we aim at disentangling the effects of geographic distance on the relevance of HQ knowledge to their subsidiaries, via the creation of a shared context between HQ and their subsidiaries. We tested our hypotheses using partial least squares based structural equation modelling on a sample of 124 European subsidiaries. We did not find a significant direct relationship between geographic distance and HQ knowledge relevance. Yet, we found support for our mediation hypotheses that geographic distance makes it more difficult for HQ to establish a shared normative and operational context, but that both dimensions of shared context can help HQ to transfer relevant knowledge to their subsidiaries. We contribute to the research on knowledge flows in multinational corporations (MNC) by investigating knowledge relevance directly rather than knowledge flows as such. We also advance our understanding of shared context in HQ-subsidiary relationships by showing that shared context comprises an operational and a normative dimension. Moreover, we contribute to social learning theory in basing our reasoning on the idea that shared practices and social relationships help overcoming distance to manage knowledge transfer more effectively. Finally, we add to the research of distance in international business by conceptualizing space, organizational context and knowledge transfer in one comprehensive model.

In this paper, the authors contribute with insights on competition and cooperation in multinational enterprises with a focus on challenges related to these governance mechanisms in a knowledge development context. The mechanisms have been widely recognized as important for developing knowledge, but their contradicting nature implies considerable complexity when it comes to governance. The complexity is further increased as a result of the headquarters-subsidiary relationships. The aim of this paper is to contribute with theoretical and empirical insights on these aspects by focusing on the research question: How and why does competition and cooperation in an MNE emerge over time?

A manufacturing MNE with headquarters (HQ) in Sweden is analyzed on both HQ and subsidiary levels. Interviews with 24 managers in Sweden and India have been performed.

The study illustrates that competition and cooperation are integral aspects in HQ-subsidiary relationships. The results show that both competition and cooperation depend on environmental, organizational and object-related conditions and that these conditions influence the dynamics of the interplay. The importance of including a subsidiary perspective and the interdependencies in an MNE setting are emphasized.

The authors add to the discussion on the interplay between competition and cooperation as they play an important role for knowledge development in MNEs. The results indicate that they do not take place simultaneously, and therefore, the authors suggest that the dynamic can be better understood by focusing on the interplay and analyze the concepts separately.

How headquarter (HQ) and subsidiary actors end conflicts and reach agreements is an important but still under-researched question in multinational corporations (MNC) literature. This conceptual article approaches these conflict dynamics from the Convention Theory perspective. Convention Theory draws attention to justice principles (known as “order of worth”) and to the material aspects in relations between MNC actors. We offer a framework that contributes to HQ-subsidiary relations research in three ways: (1) it links conflicts to justice principles, (2) it enriches the understanding of the stability of agreements, and (3) it sheds light on the activities needed for realizing preferred arrangements.

Purpose – The purpose of this chapter is to develop a more fine-grained model of the relationship between multinational corporation (MNC) external embeddedness and subsidiary contribution to firm-level competitive advantage.

Methodology/approach – We briefly review previous international management literature and show that the conception of MNC embeddedness in external networks is often simplistic. We develop the concept of the HQ–subsidiary dyad being externally embedded and derive propositions on how this more holistic concept of MNC embeddedness influences subsidiary contribution.

Findings – We argue that subsidiary contribution depends not only on the relational embeddedness dimension of the subsidiary but that there is a complex interplay between several embeddedness dimensions on multiple levels. We suggest that the much emphasized effect of subsidiary relational embeddedness might be contingent on the HQ's own relationships, and the structure of the overall network. We also develop propositions which show that subsidiary relational embeddedness mediates the relationship between overall network structure and subsidiary contribution.

Research limitations – For the sake of theoretical stringency, we keep other influencing factors such as MNC strategy and specific subsidiary mandates as constant.

Originality/value of the chapter – Subsidiaries are an important source of firm-level competitive advantage. Subsidiary resources have also been shown to develop to a large extent in relationships with external actors. Despite this importance, we argue that our understanding of how the MNC is embedded in external networks and how this in turn influences subsidiary contribution is limited. This chapter attempts to make a first step into filling this gap.

The role of HQ in the contemporary MNC has recently received a good deal of research attention. This article argues that the contemporary MNC requires an organizational model that can embrace different perspectives of the HQ role. The same HQ must at times hierarchically lead the firm and at other times assume a more passive, facilitative role that allows direct interaction and decision making among the subunits to coordinate interdependency within the firm. To achieve this integration, the article proposes a contingency model that specifies when the HQ should assume a hierarchical role and when it should assume a facilitative role.

We investigate the extent to which headquarters’ perceived knowledge about overseas R&D subsidiaries influences the level of control over them. We confirm that headquarters’ knowledge about its overseas R&D subsidiaries lowers the level of control over them. Surprisingly, however, granting legitimacy to R&D subsidiaries does not necessarily lead to a reduction in headquarters’ control. In addition, R&D subsidiaries’ legitimacy does not influence the effect of headquarters’ knowledge about them on the level of control. Although headquarters’ knowledge about R&D subsidiaries tends to grant them legitimacy, the effect of that legitimacy seems rather minimal. These findings imply that headquarters are reassured when it reduces its control over the subsidiaries based on updated knowledge about their current situations rather than on an already-established positive image of those subsidiaries.

This chapter investigates the antecedents to the development of the three components of subsidiaries’ absorptive capacity (ACAP): recognition, assimilation and application of transferred knowledge in the context of the vertical flow of social and environmental accounting and reporting (SEAR) knowledge from the HQ to acquired subsidiaries. Our analysis is based on an embedded multiple case study of a UK-based MNC, informed by 44 semi-structured interviews and capitalising on agency theory and socialisation theory. Prior knowledge is not a sufficient explanation to the development of ACAP but it is also dependent on organisational mechanisms that will trigger the learning processes. Depending on the nature and degree of the social, control and integration mechanisms, the effects of prior stocks of knowledge on ACAP may vary. Our propositions only hold for one direction of knowledge transfer. The study is based on an embedded multiple case study in one sector which restricts its generalisation. It excludes the specific relationships between the three ACAP learning processes and the existence of feedback loops. Our findings suggest that the HQ’s mix of social, control and integration mechanisms should account for initial stocks of SEAR knowledge. The contribution lies in uncovering the interaction between heterogeneous levels of prior knowledge and organisational mechanisms deployed by the HQ fostering ACAP. We address emerging issues regarding the reification of the ACAP concept and highlight the potential of agency theory for informing studies on HQ-subsidiary relations.