Abstract
Emerging economies as destinations for offshoring value activities is now a widely recognized fact. Much of the academic writing on this phenomenon focuses on showing how access to low-cost inputs provides an opportunity for firms to compete more profitably. In this paper, we argue that, with the opportunity set for distributing the value activities across the world expanding, internationally oriented firms also enjoy the opportunity to be more entrepreneurial in their strategies. Such entrepreneurial globalization, however, calls for simultaneous changes in multiple aspects of the firm. Drawing on case studies of European firms of different sizes, we show how firms have sought to rethink their businesses from ground up, reconfigure their value chain activities globally, leverage the resources of other firms, create strategic options for their firms, and have improved their competitive position in the market. Such firms may well be in the vanguard of an industrial renaissance in Europe, a continent that has hitherto been less receptive to the use of offshore opportunities offered by emerging economies. We conclude by identifying some implications for managers, policy makers, and academic researchers.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The four case studies below were originally done as part of research work funded by the consulting firm Value Leadership Group (VLG) based in Frankfurt, Germany. They have earlier been published as stand-alone case studies by VLG in 2006. See Value Leadership Group (2006).
- 2.
DeDuCo’s ways of disaggregating the value chain and dispersing it between Belgium and India according to the level of value creation illustrate well the theoretical arguments made along those lines by other researchers [Yoshino and Rangan (1995); Mudambi (2007, 2008)]. What is interesting is that this approach in a service industry follows a similar strategic pattern seen in manufacturing by firms like Nike (Yoffie 1991) and Acer (Everatt et al. 1999).
- 3.
This need to develop new organizational processes and routines to facilitate better coordination across geographically disbursed value chain activities is a good instance of the important role such conscious development of organizational capabilities play in entrepreneurially reinventing and implementing firm-level strategies. Other researchers have pointed out that such linkage economies (Zollo and Winter 2002; Marrone et al. 2007) permit not only coordination across value activities but also possibly learning and innovation (Mudambi 2008).
- 4.
In the authors' assessment, over the last several years, both IBM Global Services and Accenture have transformed themselves into powerhouses in the global IT services industry through an “entrepreneurial globalization” process similar to what we have outlined above. Both firms now have more employees in India than in the United States but their global business reach has grown dramatically during this period. In the global medical systems industry, GE seems to have followed a similar approach (Khanna and Weber 2005).
- 5.
This assessment is strongly supported by the success of the Silicon Valley’s Apple in recent years. It is now among the most valuable technology companies (WSJ 2012). Much of this success could be attributed to the way it disaggregates the value chain across hundreds of firms across the globe and managing that network flexibly and effectively as narrated in a long and insightful story in the New York Times recently (Duhigg and Bradsher 2012).
- 6.
The authors of this chapter are working on a long-term research project looking at many of the research questions listed here.
References
Bhagwati J (2004) In defense of globalization. Oxford University Press, New York
Caves RE (1982) Multinational enterprise and economic analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Cohan P, Rangan US (2010) Capital rising: how capital flows are changing business systems all over the world. Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Dobbs L (2004) Exporting America. Warner Business Books, New York
Dossani R, Kenney M (2007) The next wave of globalization: relocating service provision to India. World Dev 35(5):772–791
Duhigg C, Bradsher K (2012) How the U.S. lost out on i-phone work. New York Times, New York. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/business/apple-america-and-a-squeezed-middle-class.html?scp=3&sq=apple&st=cse. 21 January 2012
Everatt D, Tsai T, Cheng B (1999) The Acer group’s China manufacturing decision, Version A. Ivey Case Series #9A99M009, Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario
Feenstra R, Hanson G (1997) Foreign direct investments and relative wages: evidence from Mexico’s maquiladoras. J Int Econ 42:371–392
Friedman TL (2005) The world is flat. Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux, New York
GEM (2010) Global entrepreneurship monitor report. Babson College, Wellesley and London Business School, London
Haskel JE, Slaughter MJ (2000) Have falling tariffs and transportation costs raised US wage inequality? NBER working paper no. 7539, February 2000
Immelt JR, Govindarajan V, Trimble C (2009) How GE is disrupting itself. Harvard Bus Rev 1–11 (September–October 2009)
Khanna T, Weber J (2005) GE medical systems, 2002. Harvard business school case study, Harvard Business Publishing, Boston, 9-702-428
Marrone JA, Tesluk PE, Carson JB (2007) A multilevel investigation of antecedents and consequences of team member boundary-spanning behavior. Acad Manag J 50(6):1423–1439
Mudambi R (2007) Offshoring: economic geography and the multinational firm. J Int Bus Stud 38(1):206–210
Mudambi R (2008) Location, control and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries. J Econ Geogr 8(5):699–725
Price Waterhouse Coopers Canada (2004) Fine balance: the impact of offshore IT services on Canada’s IT Landscape. Price Waterhouse Coopers, Toronto
Samuelson P (2004) Where Ricardo and Mill rebut and confirm arguments from mainstream economists supporting globalization. J Econ Perspect 18(3):135–146
Schumpeter JA (1934) Theory of economic development: an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Stigler G (1951) The division of labor is limited by the extent of the market. J Political Econ 59:185–193
Thornberry N (2006) Lead like an entrepreneur. McGraw-Hill, New York
Timmons JA, Spinelli S (2003) New venture creation: entrepreneurship for the 21st century, 6th edn. McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York
Value Leadership Group (2006) European IT companies in Europe. Frankfurt, Germany. http://www.value-leadership.com/
Wall Street Journal (2006) Game over: how Amazon’s dream alliance with toys ‘R’ Us went so sour: online, retail powerhouses clash in court over tie-up; selection vs. exclusivity. WSJ, 23 January 2006, p A1
Wall Street Journal (2012) Apple gaining some breathing room as the most valuable company. WSJ. http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2012/01/31/apple-gaining-some-breathing-room-as-most-valuable-company/?KEYWORDS=Apple
Yoffie D (1991) Nike: A (Condensed). Harvard Business School Case, Boston, HBS Case # 9-391-238
Yoshino MY, Rangan US (1995) Strategic alliances: an entrepreneurial approach to globalization. Harvard Business School Press, Boston
Zollo M, Winter SG (2002) Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organ Sci 13(3):339–351
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag London
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Srinivasa Rangan, U., Schumacher, P. (2013). Entrepreneurial Globalization: Lessons From the Offshoring Experiences of European Firms. In: Pedersen, T., Bals, L., Ørberg Jensen, P., Larsen, M. (eds) The Offshoring Challenge. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4908-8_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4908-8_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-4907-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-4908-8
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)