Search results

This chapter is an extension of a recent work that has examined the intra-regional sales of large multinational enterprises (MNEs). First, we examine the interaction between the performance of MNEs and four proxies for their firm-specific advantages (FSAs). This includes: firm size, knowledge (as represented by research and development (R&D)), marketing ability, and industry type. We find that FSAs in R&D and service sector type are best exploited within the home region. In contrast, the FSA firm size is better exploited by global and bi-regional firms. Second, we find that a service MNE tends to be more home-region oriented and has a higher proportion of intra-regional sales than a manufacturing firm.

The paper aims to motivate more rigorous theoretical and empirical specification of the home regionalization phenomenon, in particular the dynamics of shifting advantage over time within a multinational enterprise. It aims to improve dialogue among regionalization researchers.

Contrasting the economizing and behavioral perspectives on internationalization, the paper presents five different archetypes of the home‐regionalization phenomenon. These archetypes are predicated on strategic management stylizations of competitive advantage.

The paper demonstrates that the notion of home regionalization as a dominant and superior model for firm internationalization remains a promising yet under‐explained and inconsistently articulated thesis. By introducing and exploring the archetypes, it shows the diversity of home‐regionalization theses, and the prospect that multiple forms of regionalization may be at play for different firms, industries and locations.

The paper presents the full complement of archetypes of the home‐regionalization phenomenon and explores their corresponding assumptions. These explorations open up new empirical and theoretical research avenues for distinguishing any genuine region effects.

The current paper seeks to analyze to what degree theories from different fields of social science are able to explain the home‐region orientation of MNCs. This is necessary since there has been only a relatively narrow, economics‐oriented explanation for such an orientation.

The analysis is based on a thorough review of the literature that refers to a MNC's home‐region orientation and on different theories from the social sciences.

The paper shows that several theories from economics, psychology, and sociology are able to explain an MNC's home‐region orientation.

The paper contributes to the development of a more multi‐faceted explanation of why MNCs generally prefer a home‐region orientation. The paper derives propositions that are consistent with each theory. These propositions can be tested empirically in subsequent research studies.

The paper discusses a number of different theories and streams of research that can be used to conceptually explain and gain insight into the phenomenon of a home‐region orientation for MNCs

The purpose of this paper is to examine the determinants of home-region strategy of the multinational subsidiary and the impact of such a strategy on its performance. The author draws upon new internalization theory to develop a theory-driven model and empirically tests the simultaneous relationships between home-region strategy and performance of the subsidiary.

The author tests the model using a simultaneous equation statistical technique on an original, new data set of publicly listed multinational subsidiaries operating in the ASEAN region, with parent firms’ headquarters across the broad triad.

There are three significant findings. The first finding is that subsidiary-level downstream knowledge (marketing advantages), and the geographic location of the subsidiary in the same home region as of the parent firm are key antecedents of a subsidiary’s home-region strategy. The second finding is that a subsidiary’s profitability reduces home-region orientation; however, home-region strategy has an insignificant effect on performance. The third finding is that these subsidiaries generate on average 92 per cent of their total sales in the home region (the Asia Pacific).

The author advances the existing literature on the regional nature of parent-level multinational enterprises by demonstrating that their quasi-autonomous subsidiaries also operate mainly on a home-region basis.

This paper aims to conduct a longitudinal analysis of the patterns of internationalisation of multinational corporations and provide a measure of their degree of globalisation at the firm-level. There is much debate in the literature on the regional nature of the globalisation of multinational corporations (Rugman and Oh, 2013).

The authors use firm-level sales data to analyse the location of sales and patterns of globalisation of 1,276 companies across ten countries and ten industries from 1998-2012.

The results show that while international sales are rising and the proportion of home region-oriented firms is falling, the majority of sales of the companies in our data set continues to be in the Triad, with little growth in non-Triad regions. The authors find one common theme for the majority of countries, an increase in sales to Asia yet concentrated in just four industries, financials, basic materials, oil and gas and technology. Despite an increase in the percentage of host-region, bi-regional and global companies, 62.6 per cent of the firms have not changed multinational classification over the 15-year period, 43.1 per cent have not expanded out of their home region and 16.4 per cent have not expanded out of their home market. The authors find some evidence of liabilities of interregional foreignness at the industry and country level. The authors show regional sales are moving towards matching global economic activity for the 50 most globalised firms in our study but less so for the other firms in our sample. Overall, the results show that the majority of the growth in internationalisation comes from a small minority of firms.

The authors make several advances across the literature on internationalisation, including a more in-depth longitudinal analysis of firm-level multinationality than exists to date and a novel method of measuring firm-level globalisation.

The fact that many international companies remain strongly orientated towards their home region has been highlighted in the work of several international business scholars. This work has given rise to the concept of “the liability of inter‐regional foreignness”. This paper aims to argue that the data that have so far been exploited in this debate are too aggregated and that more attention needs to be paid to differences between different types of companies if we are to better understand the reasons for this liability of inter‐regional foreignness and how companies can overcome it.

This paper uses trade data to explore levels of global and regional orientation in international exchanges of goods. It disaggregates the trade data by type of product (final goods or inputs to production), level of technology (high, medium and low tech) and direction of flow (imports and exports).

The paper finds striking differences between regions, types of products and trade direction. The trade data do not show an overwhelming home region bias in exchanges, but neither are these exchanges overwhelmingly global. Companies in different regions and different sectors seem to experience the liability of inter‐regional foreignness differently. In particular there is some evidence that high‐tech companies may be less subject to such difficulties. These findings imply that more attention needs to be paid to sectoral differences when analysing international business.

The trade data also suffer from some aggregation bias, as highlighted in the paper. In addition the inability to differentiate between inter‐ and intra‐firm trade limits the usefulness for theory building. However the results do provide some pointers for further research and imply that greater attention should be paid to the type of company and its position in the supply chain when considering the impact of the liability of inter‐regional foreignness.

The debate so far has been based on either Fortune 500 data or foreign direct investment data. Both of these datasets mix companies with very different market structures and operating practices. The originality of this work is to explore macro data extensively and look at exchanges differentiating by type of good. The results have implications for work on aggregated datasets. Simply differentiating by technology alone may lead to interesting variations in findings from firm‐level studies.

The aim of this paper is to shed light on recent debates in this journal on differences in home‐region orientation depending on type of company and the home region in which they are based.

The paper looks at the structure of trade (imports and exports) across different types of goods in order to shed light on differences between sectors and types of technology. The paper also explores structures across regions in order to shed light on regional differences.

This research indicates that there are major differences in structures of trade between different types of goods. However, these differences do not necessarily conform to a clear pattern across different technological levels and differ between regions and the direction of trade. The fact that Asian cultures have greater psychic distance from European and North American cultures is not reflected in higher levels of home‐region orientation.

The paper helps to clarify some of the hypotheses on home‐region orientation recently identified in this journal and, thus, helps to advance theories about why this orientation is so prevalent. The main limitations are related to the methodology. Using trade data, the paper cannot define the boundaries of the firm and, therefore, can only make conclusions at the macro level. These conclusions can, nevertheless, help to orient work at the micro level to further explore the key questions which recent work has raised.

Limited comparative work across sectors or technologies has been undertaken in the context of the debate on home‐region orientation. Differentiating between different types of goods can help to give us insights into why so many companies tend to focus so consistently on their home region, while others are more global.

The purpose of this paper is to model and test the dynamics of home-regional and global penetration by multi-national enterprises (MNEs).

Drawing on international business (IB) theory, the authors model MNEs adjusting their home-regional and global market presence over time. The authors test the resulting hypotheses using sales data from a sample of 220 of the world’s largest MNEs over the period 1995-2005. The authors focus specifically on the relationship between levels of market penetration inside and outside the home region and rates of change in each domain.

The authors demonstrate that MNEs do penetrate both home-regional and global markets, often simultaneously, and that penetration levels often oscillate within an MNE over time. The authors show firms’ rates of regional and global expansion to be affected by their existing regional and global penetration, as well as their interplay. Finally, the authors identify differences in the steady states at which firms stabilize their penetration levels in the home-regional and the global space. The findings broadly confirm the MNE as an interdependent portfolio with important regional demarcations.

The authors identify complex interdependencies between home-regional and global penetration and growth, paving the way for further studies of the impact of regions on MNE expansion.

This study analyzes the relationship between multinationality and performance of 1,247 US multinational enterprises (MNEs) over the period of 1995‐2004 by utilizing Tobin’s q theory. Internationalization is a double‐edged sword: foreign intangible assets create a firm’s value, while, at the same time, internationalization itself degrades the value by raising transaction costs and uncertainty in foreign operations. The empirical results show that US MNEs cannot increase their performance merely by developing their intangible assets in the rest of the home region (Canada and Mexico). Conversely, US MNEs rarely suffer from a liability of foreignness in their home region.

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.