Search results

The purpose of this paper is twofold: to analyse what theories assume about multinational enterprises (MNEs) when they claim these are superior and to discuss possible explanations for why MNE superiority seems to be dominant in the international business (IB) research field.

A common theme in mainstream IB theories is that multinational enterprises (MNEs) are superior in terms of cost efficiency and innovativeness compared with other types of organizations. A closer look at transaction cost economics (TCE)/internalization theory, evolutionary theory and dynamic capability theory reveal a bias toward MNE supremacy because of how MNEs are conceptualized as firms and therefore fail to explain the essence of “multinational advantage”. These revelations and the strong dependence on the benevolence to provide unbiased data means that MNE supremacy posited by mainstream IB theories is as much a rationalized myth as an empirical fact.

Although mainstream theories differ when it comes to the building blocks that constitute MNE supremacy, they have one attribute in common: they are silent as to why MNEs are superior compared with, for example, domestic firms or other types of economic agents. Irrespective of whether the focus is the strength of the hierarchy, the skill of managers or a common identity, nothing in the theories tells us that these factors are more pronounced in MNEs than in other types of economic actors.

The paper deals with the issue of multinational advantage. It claims that mainstream theories of MNEs tend to assume, explicitly or implicitly, that MNEs are superior in terms of cost efficiency and innovativeness compared with other types of economic agents. The analysis demonstrates that this tendency is a consequence of how MNEs are conceptualized as firms in the different theories as well as of the strong dependence in IB research on the benevolence of MNEs to provide unbiased data. It is concluded that MNE supremacy posited by mainstream IB theories is as much a rationalized myth as an empirical fact.

Transaction cost economics sees a broad spectrum of governance structures spanned by two types of economic adaptation: autonomous and cooperative. Stakeholder theorists have drawn much inspiration from transaction cost economics but have not paid explicit attention to the centrality of the idea of adaptation in this literature. This study aims to address this gap.

The authors develop a novel conceptual framework applying the distinction between the two types of economic adaptation to stakeholder theory.

The authors argue that the idea of cooperative adaptation is particularly useful for describing the firm’s collaboration with primary stakeholders in the joint value creation process. In contrast, autonomous adaptation is more relevant for firms interacting with secondary stakeholders who are not directly engaged in joint value creation and may not have formal contractual relationships with the firm. Accordingly, cooperative adaptation can be seen as vital for resolving team production problems affecting joint value creation, whereas autonomous adaptation addresses how the firm maintains legitimacy within the larger stakeholder environment.

Similar to its significance for transaction cost economics, the distinction between the two types of adaptation equips stakeholder theory with a new systematic understanding of a potentially broad spectrum of firm–stakeholder collaboration forms.

This chapter presents a critical analysis of the wealth current practices of multinational firms as wealth predators; and relevant references from the theory of multinational corporations and globalization from a Marxist perspective. The Marxist approach has also contributed to a theory of the self-expansion of capital (internationalization of the circuits of capital) on a global scale, within an analysis of the differentiation and of inequality.

The main aim of this paper is to verify whether the modern mainstream economic theory of multinational enterprise that explains foreign direct investment (FDI) from developed countries is also able to account for investment decisions of multinational enterprises (MNEs) from emerging economies.

Using Knowledge-And-Physical-Capital (KAPC) model as an analytical framework and Poisson-pseudo maximum likelihood estimation technique, the authors identify determinants of FDI flows from emerging economies. The data set consists of 38 home and 134 host countries during the period 2000–2012. Empirical evidence supports high explanatory power of KAPC model. Further, compared with the earlier Knowledge-Capital (KC) model, results confirm the importance of physical capital.

The estimation results confirm the hypothesis that mainstream economic theory can explain FDI flows from the emerging economies by highlighting the roles of total market size, skilled-labor abundance, investment and trade costs and geographical distance between two countries.

This study casts doubt on the alternative way that the KAPC model suggests to distinguish between horizontal and vertical FDI. The argument that horizontal MNE headquarters would be relatively more abundant than vertical MNE headquarters in countries that are abundant in physical capital relative to skilled labor seems reasonable but the idea of variable specification in the estimated equation should be revised.

Firms should be allowed to move their resources freely into and out of specific activities, both internally and internationally across border. To reach that goal, governments of potential host countries can adopt several measures, most importantly remove restrictions on payments, transfers and capital transactions and open previously closed industries to welcome foreign investment. In addition, to improve investment climate in general, governments need to pay attention to enhancing security of property rights, regulating internal taxation (i.e. corporate income tax), guaranteeing adequacy of infrastructure, efficient functioning of finance and labor markets and fighting against corruption.

The location choice of emerging investors set priority on similarity in economic size, geographical and cultural proximity. It is because shared borders or common official languages would reduce information costs and enhance information flows. Also, investors consider horizontal FDI (with motivation to expand market demand) as one of main modes of entry into a foreign market and a substitute for export. Likewise, distance is often understood as an important investment friction.

The outstanding contribution is that the research has uncovered the positive and statistically significant effect of physical capital on FDI activity, which has not been discussed in the earlier KC model. However, at the same time, the study casts doubt on the KAPC model's argument that relative abundance in physical capital to skilled labor between two countries determines FDI types and suggests that this argument and its empirical model specification should be carefully reviewed.

This study aims to examine the effect of exploratory innovation offshoring on the level of hierarchical control and how this effect is moderated by transnational and dynamic environments.

This study draws on a sample of 148 Taiwanese multinational enterprises to examine their governance decisions on foreign investments.

Findings show that the more innovation offshoring is exploratory, the higher the level of hierarchical control will be used by multinational enterprises (MNEs) and that transnational and dynamic environments have different moderation effects on the positive exploratory innovation offshoring-hierarchical control relationship.

This study has two theoretical implications. First, this study extends the concept of complexity from a transaction attribute level (problem) to an environmental level (transnational environment) and finds that exploratory innovation offshoring and transnational environments interactively impact governance choices. Second, this study distinguishes between two sources of technological uncertainty – uncertainty due to transaction-level attributes (exploratory innovation offshoring) and external environments (dynamic environments) and finds that exploratory innovation offshoring and dynamic environments interactively impact governance choices.

The practical implication of this study lies in the simultaneous consideration of exploratory innovation offshoring and transnational/dynamic environments, which will allow international decision-makers to adjust/select the governance forms most appropriate for speedy responding to and handling environmental changes.

This study employs the theoretical perspectives of transaction cost economics (TCE) and resource-based view (RBV) to analyze and discuss the impact of operational environments – transnational and dynamic environments – on MNEs’ decisions on the governance structure for a given innovation offshoring.

Business research has highlighted the importance of knowledge transfer and innovation in multinational firms for better performance outcomes. However, the existing body of literature is characterized by differentiated theories, antecedents and outcomes. This study aims to address this gap by adopting a systematic approach to analyze knowledge transfer and innovation literature from the perspective of multinational organizations.

This study follows “preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses” (PRISMA) guidelines for conducting a systematic literature review. The study adopts a systematic approach for analyzing the literature using School of thought (S), Contexts (C), Methodologies (M), Triggers (T), Barriers (B), Facilitators (F) and Outcomes (O) framework (SCM-TBFO framework) devised for holistic literature review. The study analyzes 75 articles from reputed journals from 2000 to 2022.

In general, knowledge transfer and innovation in multinationals is a relatively new area and is evolving rapidly. There are many opportunities to study the various perspectives that are included in the SCM-TBFO framework. The key schools of thought included the evolutionary theory of innovation, institutional theory and internationalization theory. The studies had differing settings or contexts, including China, Europe, the USA and Taiwan. Further, key methodologies that were used included regression, case studies, structural equation modeling (SEM) and theoretical studies. Knowledge transfer and innovation triggers included competitive advantage, competitive pressure, constant requirements for better products and services, foreign direct investment (FDI) and globalization. Knowledge transfer and innovation facilitators were categorized into strategy-related facilitators, organization culture and orientation-related facilitators, and resource-related facilitators. Knowledge transfer and innovation barriers included autonomy, international knowledge dispersion, risk of knowledge leakage, search breadth, ambiguity and institutional voids. Key outcomes of knowledge transfer and innovation in multinationals included financial performance, innovation performance, knowledge flow, transfer effectiveness, patents and new product development.

By synthesizing the literature, the study aims to provide an overview of the current state of research on knowledge transfer and innovation in multinationals. The study develops a holistic model for fostering knowledge transfer and innovation in multinationals. The proposed novel framework can also be applied to perform a holistic assessment of the current literature in various research domains. Further, the study suggests future theory development and research agendas. The study also provides implications for practitioners using the framework to achieve more desirable outcomes.

Deglobalization and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have severely hindered multinational enterprise (MNE) investment. At the same time, digital technology is seriously challenging it with traditional production factor flows. Few studies have realized that the impact of digitalization is not limited to either transaction costs or the location-boundness of firm-specific advantages (FSAs), but extends to profound changes in the fundamental essence of MNEs. There is still limited understanding of this body of knowledge as a whole, including how its subtopics are interrelated. This study took the production factor change perspective to review MNE theory in the digital era. Therefore, this study aims to identify any upcoming and undeveloped themes in order to provide a platform suited to direct future research.

This paper presents a summary and a review of 151 articles published between 2007 and 2020. Such review was conducted to systematically explain the connotations and influential mechanisms of digital empowerment on MNE theory. This was achieved by using the CiteSpace citation visualization tool to build a keyword co-occurrence network.

The research findings pertain to how digitalization expands, breaks through, and even reshapes traditional MNE theory from four distinctive angles: the influential factors of internationalization, the process of internationalization, competitive advantage, and location choice. The findings are followed by the presentation of future research directions.

This paper presents an examination of MNE theory in the digital era from the perspective of production factor change. In doing so, it identifies significant theoretical innovation opportunities for future scholarly research priorities.

The paper aims to investigate the difference in total factor productivity (TFP) among those firms with and without outsourcing in a developing country like Vietnam. Also, it explores the effect of outsourcing activities on total factor productivity with a specified concentration on the Vietnamese small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

The panel data set of SMEs used in this study was originated from biannual surveys conducted under the collaboration between educational organizations and government agencies: Stockholm School of Economics (SSE), Department of Economics – the University of Copenhagen, the Institution of Labor Studies and Social Affairs (ILSSA) in the Ministry of Labor, Invalids and Social Affairs (MOLISA). In this study, the model is developed based on the production function in accordance with the model of Girma and Görg (2004). The firms’ TFP is the difference between the actual and the predicted output as with the approach by Levinsohn and Petrin (2003).

This study finds out that firms with outsourcing have higher total factor productivity than those without outsourcing activities. In addition, the more firms spend on outsourcing, the higher total factor productivity they can gain. Outsourcing to SMEs in a developing country can significantly increase its TFP by means of either maintaining core competencies or searching external resources in conducting some internal activities.

Although outsourcing has been widely applied by large firms, the research studying its impact on productivity at firm level is limited. Especially, this study can shed light on the impact for the case of SMEs in a developing economy.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate different strands of institutional theory within the internationalization process of multinational enterprises (MNEs) in developed and emerging economies. In the light of this purpose, the authors try to fill the gap in the literature through analysing the main institutional theories: neo-institutionalism, new institutional economics, comparative capitalism and the institution-based view. Therefore, the main concern is to determine the distribution of different strands of institutional theory in its subfields in this study.

This study provides a profound analysis of different strands of institutional theory within the period from 1990 to 2018 in a larger sample. With a qualitative content analysis, authors reviewed 150 articles using different strands of institutional theory at both theoretical and analytical level and accessed 25 journals published in Social Science Citations Index between 1990 and 2018. In this study, authors used the inductive approach and the qualitative content analysis (Duriau et al., 2007) and adopted a research method to investigate different strands of institutional theory within the internationalization process of MNEs in developed and emerging markets (EMs).

Coders have synthesized the strands of institutional theory in detail to analyse the theoretical contribution of the study. The strands of institutional theory have been analysed both by institutional perspective and citation analysis. Coders classify the analysis level into three main categories. These are country, headquarter and subsidiary level. Our findings are related to the basic determinants and assumptions of different strands of institutional theory. Because in new institutional economics, analysis levels are country and industry. On the other hand in institution-based view, analysis levels are country and firm. Finally in comparative capitalism, analysis levels are country and region and, in neo-institutionalism analysis level is organization itself. In this study, findings show that sociology-based institutional strands, especially neo-institutionalism, are more preferred than other theories.

This study’s content analysis is limited to scope of selected journals. However, this study may suffer from publication bias. The authors examined only peer-reviewed articles from selected journals and did not include book chapters, book reviews, editor and special issue editor articles, research notes, conference papers and congress invitations. The important theoretical limitation of this study is to clarify the different strands of institutional theory in international business literature (Aguilera and Grøgaard, 2019). The firm size of MNEs is not included in this study, but it should be involved in coding categories in future studies.

This study provides the largest sample up to now and covers developed markets and EMs. Authors analysed this research from four perspectives: theoretical foundation, methodology, location and entry mode choices. On the other hand, this study shows that the institutional environment not only mitigates or mediates the effects but also directs the effects on foreign direct investment’s internationalization process of location choice and entry strategies.

This study takes a dyadic approach to explaining merger and acquisition (M&A) deal outcomes. Acknowledging the socio-cognitive (e.g. intangible and macro-environmental) idiosyncrasies, the authors theorize that some acquirer–target dyads have a superior ability to complete complex relational transactions in an M&A deal. Specifically, deals are successful when an acquirer and a target: are similar considering their sectoral characteristics, have contextually-informed deal-making competencies, and are familiar with one another given their sectoral and institutional features.

This study uses logistic regression analysis to examine how sectoral and institutional characteristics in the acquiring and target company dyads relate to the likelihood of merger and acquisition deal completion.

Analyzing a sample of 37,560 M&A deals, the authors find empirical evidence in support of the dyadic to deal completion. The authors find that sectoral similarity and institutional familiarity in an M&A dyad can predict the likelihood of deal completion. Specifically, service multinational acquirers are more competent than their manufacturing counterparts in general, and in same-sector and same-country deals in particular. In contrast, service sector acquirers also are at a relative disadvantage vis-à-vis their manufacturing counterparts in cross-national deals.

Considering the theoretical and managerial implications, the authors identify new avenues for future research on service and manufacturing M&A dyads that can deepen the knowledge of inter-firm transaction processes.

First, the authors draw on the socio-cognitive, behavioral, and relational models to explain M&A deal process in both domestic and cross-border settings. Drawing on service vis-à-vis manufacturing sector business models, the authors predict deal completion. Second, the authors propose that familiarity between the acquiring and target companies in the form of sectoral and cross-national factors becomes pivotal to the inter-firm processes. Finally, the authors empirically demonstrate how inter-firm dynamics in a dyad can pose complex deal-making challenges, which make some acquirers especially susceptible to contextual shocks.