Search results1 – 5 of 5
We develop a concept of the global factory, first introduced by Buckley and colleagues (2004, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2014), as a stand-alone construct associated with…
We develop a concept of the global factory, first introduced by Buckley and colleagues (2004, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2014), as a stand-alone construct associated with significant predictive capacity, discuss dynamics of success of the global factory, and identify and analyze social mechanisms deployed by the lead firm head office.
We conceptualize the global factory as a form of a flagship network and augment internalization theory with insights from interorganizational networks research to explore the dynamics of the global factory’s origination and functioning.
We clarify under what conditions a global factory-type network is more likely to emerge and describe social mechanisms generated by the lead firm head office to help the global factory sustain itself and thrive. We argue that in order to benefit from potential efficiencies of the global factory, the lead firm head office must deploy combinations of social mechanisms. We further argue that the role of the lead firm head office is that of a joint value orchestrator and a social broker, in addition to the controlling intelligence function.
Future work on the global factory should include further conceptualization of social mechanisms deployed by the lead firm, exploration of operating mode heterogeneity within the global factory, and large-scale empirical research.
Lead firm managers should embrace the role of the joint value orchestrators and implement social mechanisms described in this chapter to facilitate smooth operation of the global factory.
Global factory governance further increases multinationals’ geographic reach and market power; yet, it is not a universal recipe for market success, and therefore global factories’ power to shape the global economy should not be overestimated.
By linking the global factory to networks literature, we have suggested a novel way to view the concept and articulated more fully its underlying assumptions. Further research on the global factory will help advance our understanding of the dynamics of the global economy and the role of multinationals, their head offices, and their managers in shaping the economy.
This paper seeks to demonstrate that internalization theory, as a “complete” theory of the firm, is particularly well equipped to analyze multinational enterprise (MNE…
This paper seeks to demonstrate that internalization theory, as a “complete” theory of the firm, is particularly well equipped to analyze multinational enterprise (MNE) regional strategies, thanks to its joint transaction cost economics and resource‐based foundations.
This paper builds on recent work by Wolf, Egelhoff, and Dunemann to show that internalization theory's predictions on MNE regional strategy are superior to those suggested by several other conceptual frameworks. For each of the 11 hypotheses formulated by Wolf and his co‐authors, an alternative is proposed here that is consistent with internalization theory predictions.
MNE regional strategy is an important empirical phenomenon. Internalization theory, as a powerful conceptual framework with general applicability, simplicity and accuracy, allows in‐depth analysis of MNE regional strategies.
Internalization theory scholars need to find new ways of operationalizing MNE firm‐specific advantages (FSAs), as well as MNE resource recombination trajectories, to predict accurately when and how MNEs will pursue regional versus global strategies.
MNE senior management should rethink international expansion strategies and realize that most large MNEs actually pursue regional, not global strategies.
Even the world's largest MNEs have great difficulty engaging in novel resource recombination across the globe, and their alleged market power should therefore not be overestimated.
International business scholars should embrace internalization theory as the general theory of the MNE, rather than looking for insight from theories not intended – nor properly equipped – to study strategies of the world's most complex entrepreneurial organizations.