Search results

This paper aims to introduce economic history as a new stream of international business (IB) research. It offers a long-term perspective on how the IB has evolved over time, focussing on the interplay between multinational enterprise and the nation state.

The paper uses existing scholarly literature on international economic history to develop eight key propositions regarding the interface between the politics and economics of foreign direct investment (FDI).

There is a rivalry between nation states and competition between firms. These two forms of conflict interact. Nations use their leading firms as instruments of international policy while leading firms rely on political and financial support from home nations. Using historical evidence and cross-country comparisons, the paper explains has the scale and scope in IB activity have changed dramatically over time.

There is scope for more detailed historical studies on national policies towards inward and outward FDI.

It is important to see the recent international economic policies of China in a long-run historical perspective and to appreciate the similarities between its policies and those of other countries in the past.

Many of the potential economic gains generated by FDI may be lost through an excessive commitment of resources to the pursuit of military power as a foundation for international political power.

This paper challenges IB researchers to widen their horizons.

This paper aims to argue that management capability is a complement to ownership advantage. Ownership advantage determines the potential of the firm, and management capability governs the fulfilment of this potential through overcoming barriers to growth. The economic theory of the firm is central to the theory of the multinational enterprise (MNE).

Multinationals play an important role in coordinating the international division of labour through internal markets. The paper reviews the economic principles that underlie this view. The analysis is applied to a variety of issues, including out-sourcing, geographical dispersion of production and regional specialisation in marketing.

The economic theory of the firm is central to the theory of the MNE. Recent literature on multinationals, however, makes only limited reference to the economic theory of the firm. Optimal internalisation equates marginal benefits and costs. The benefits of internalisation stem mainly from the difficulties of licensing proprietary knowledge, reflecting the view that MNEs possess an “ownership” or “firm-specific” advantage. The costs of internalisation, it is argued, reflect managerial capability, and in particular the capability to manage a large firm.

The paper demonstrates the value of the economic theory of the firm in analysing the strategy, structure and size of multinational firms. It restates classic economic principles and applies them to contemporary issues, including the performance and survival of multinational firms in current times.

Book review by William H. A. Johnson. Casson, Mark et al., eds. The Oxford Handbook of Entrepreneurship, New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006. ISBN 9780199288984

This chapter complements the one that appeared as “History of the AIB Fellows: 1975–2008” in Volume 14 of this series (International Business Scholarship: AIB Fellows on the First 50 Years and Beyond, Jean J. Boddewyn, Editor). It traces what happened under the deanship of Alan Rugman (2011–2014) who took many initiatives reported here while his death in July 2014 generated trenchant, funny, and loving comments from more than half of the AIB Fellows. The lives and contributions of many other major international business scholars who passed away from 2008 to 2014 are also evoked here: Endel Kolde, Lee Nehrt, Howard Perlmutter, Stefan Robock, John Ryans, Vern Terpstra, and Daniel Van Den Bulcke.

This paper aims to analyze the research productivity and impact of the finalists of the AIB best dissertation award, now titled the Buckley and Casson Award, but from 1987 to 2012 the Farmer Award. Specifically, this paper examines whether there is a relationship between winning the best dissertation award and subsequent publication productivity and impact. Relationships between academic institution and institutional geographic location and finalists are also examined.

The paper examines 25 years of citation counts and the number of publications in Google Scholar of Farmer Award winners and finalists of the AIB best dissertation award from inception in 1987 to 2009, with cited publications as a measure of productivity and citations as a measure of impact. Top performers in productivity and impact are identified, and the averages of winners and non-winners are analyzed in aggregate, over time and per year. Data on finalists' institution and geographic location of institution are analyzed to describe the importance of location and institution to the award.

It is found that the overall average citations of the winners of the award is less than that of the non-winners, and that in the large majority of years the non-winners have an average citation count higher than that of the winners. However, taking averages in five year increments shows more mixed results, with non-winners performing better in two periods and winners performing better in two periods, with the remaining period being split as to research productivity and impact.

Aggarwal et al. in this journal summarized a variety of data on Farmer Award finalists from the 1990s to gain insights on institutions represented by finalists, the publication record of finalists, and content of dissertations, among other characteristics. This paper updates some of the insights from that paper by examining data on award winners from 1987 to 2013, and adds further insight by examining for the first time cited publications and citation counts winners and non-winners for the same period excluding the last two years.

John Dunning introduced the OLI (Ownership‐Location‐Internalization) paradigm 37 years ago to explain the origin, level, pattern, and growth of MNEs’ offshore activities. Over the years, OLI has developed into perhaps the dominant paradigm in international business (IB) studies. However, the costs of being a paradigm are reflected in Dunning’s efforts to include an ever‐expanding array of IB theories and phenomena under the OLI “big tent.” In this paper, we focus specifically on the O in the OLI paradigm, tracing the history of Dunning’s ownership advantages. We argue that the modifications of O advantages over the past 37 years, as Dunning attempted to bring all IB phenomena and IB‐related theories under the OLI “big tent,” has had mixed results. However, we continue to believe that the typology of ownership advantages retains its relevance for IB scholars; that O advantages cannot and should not be subsumed within internalization advantages; and that O advantages are necessary for explaining the existence and success of the MNE as an organizational form

The purpose of this paper is to review the key analytical principles of internalisation theory as a general theory of the multinational enterprise (MNE). It illustrates the vitality, relevance and flexibility of the approach in explaining the continued evolution of the MNE. As a grounded social science theory, it provides, in combination with history and economic geography, satisfying and novel explanations of the key phenomena of the modern globalising economy.

This paper examines the origins and principles of internalisation theory as the foundation theory of the MNE. It considers internalisation theory in the context of current and mainstream theories and concepts in the field of international business.

Internalisation theory is equally valid for the MNEs of yesteryear as it is for those today. The theory continues to have strong explanatory power for MNE activity. Current research areas, such as multiple embeddedness, fine-slicing of the value chain, etc., and other theories, such as dynamic capabilities and the resource-based view, either are subsets of internalisation and thus explained by the theory, or contain weakness and/or inconsistencies not found in internalisation theory.

This paper coherently synthesises internalisation theory, its origins and evolution. It shows how commonly held and current concepts and theories are related to internalisation theory or have weaknesses, thus making internalisation theory a superior theory to explain the MNE, and identifies potential applications of the theory to novel research areas in the field of international business.

This article is concerned with the role of theory in explaining the inter‐industry variation of vertical integration (VI). Why, for example, is the world aluminium industry highly integrated (Stukey, 1983) whereas the tin industry is not (Hennart, 1982)? The article is not concerned with explaining differences in the average level of VI across countries, although these are undoubtedly significant (Chandler and Daeins, 1980).

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.

This chapter analyses the rise of the ‘global factory’ – the globally integrated network centred on a focal multinational enterprise. This is a response to the increased volatility of the global economy and involves the creation of systems that allow flexibility in both the location and the control of increasingly ‘fine-sliced’ activities, the avoidance of monopoly and the evolution of new management skills. Foreign direct investment is only one strategy amongst several utilised by globally integrated multinationals.