Journal of Productivity Analysis

, Volume 30, Issue 2, pp 145–154 | Cite as

Optimal geographic diversification and firm performance: evidence from the U.K.

  • Nigel DriffieldEmail author
  • Jun Du
  • Sourafel Girma


This paper examines the relationship between multinationality and firm performance. The analysis is based on a sample of over 400 UK multinationals, and encompasses both service sector and manufacturing sector multinationals. This paper confirms the non-linear relationship between performance and multinationality that is reported elsewhere in the literature, but offers further analysis of this relationship. Specifically, by correcting for endogeneity in the investment decision, and for shocks in productivity across countries, the paper demonstrates that the returns to multinationality are greater than those that have been reported elsewhere, and persist to higher degrees of international diversification.


Multinationality Performance Productivity 

JEL Classifications

F23 D24 



The authors wish to acknowledge the support of the ESRC under award number RES-000-22-0468. We would also express our thanks to Davide Castellani and other participants at the UK AIB conference, as well as to Jim Love and Bruce Blonogen conference for comments on an earlier draft.


  1. Aghion P, Blundell RW, Griffith R, Howitt P, Prantl S (2006) The effects of entry on incumbent innovation and productivity. NBER working paper No. W12027Google Scholar
  2. Bartlett CA, Ghoshal S (1986) Tap your subsidiaries for global reach. Harv Bus Rev 64(6):87–94Google Scholar
  3. Belderbos R, Sleuwaegen L (2005) Competitive drivers and international plant configuration strategies: a product level test. Strateg Manage J (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  4. Benvignati AM (1987) Domestic profit advantages of multinational firms. J Bus 60:449–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braunerhjelm P (1996) The relation between firm-specific intangibles and exports. Econ Lett 53:213–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bodnar GM, Tang C, Weintro J (2000) Both sides of corporate diversification: the value impacts of geographic and industrial diversification. Working paper, John Hopkins University, Baltimore, MDGoogle Scholar
  7. Buchinski M (1998) Recent advances in quantile regression models. J Hum Resour 33:88–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cantwell JA, Piscitello L (2005) The recent location of foreign R&D activities by large MNCs in the European regions. The role of different sources of spillovers. Reg Stud 39(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Capar N, Kotabe (2003) The relationship between international diversification and performance in service firms. J Int Bus Stud 34:345–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Contractor FJ, Kundu SK, Hsu C-C (2003) A three stage theory of international expansion: the link between multinationality and performance in the service sector. J Int Bus Stud 34:5–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coughlin CC, Segev E (2000) Location determinants of new manufacturing plants. J Reg Sci 40:323–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Doukas JA, Lang LHP (2003) Foreign direct investment, diversification and firm performance. J Int Bus Stud 34(2):153–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Geringer J, Beamish P, da Costa R (1989) Diversification strategy and internationalization implications for MNC performance. Strateg Manage J 10(1):109–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Girma S, Greenaway D, Kneller R (2004) Entry to export markets and productivity: a microeconometric analysis of matched firms. Rev Int Econ 12:855–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grant RM (1987) Multinationality and performance among British manufacturing companies. J Int Bus Stud 18:79–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gomes L, Ramaswamy K (1999) An empirical examination of the form of the relationship between multinationality and performance. J Int Bus Stud 30:173–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hitt MA, Hoskisson RE, Kim H (1997) International diversification: effects on innovation and firm performance in product diversified firms. Acad Manage J 40:767–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hymer SH (1976) The international operations of national firms: a study of direct foreign investment. MIT press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  19. Kindleberger CP (1969). American business abroad: six lectures on direct investment. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  20. Kogut B (1985) Designing global strategies: profiting from operational flexibility. Sloan Manage Rev 26:27–38Google Scholar
  21. Kotabe M, Srinivasan SS, Aulakh PS (2002) Multinationality and firm performance: the moderating role of R&D and marketing capabilities. J Int Bus Stud 33:79–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Laafia I (2002) Employment in high tech and knowledge intensive sectors in the EU continued to Grow in 2001; EUROSTAT. Statist Focus: Sci Technol 9(4)Google Scholar
  23. Levinsohn J (1993) Testing the imports-as-market-discipline hypothesis. J Int Econ 35:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Levinsohn J, Petrin A (2003) Estimating production functions using inputs to control for unobservables. Rev Econ Stud 70(2):317–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mathur I, Singh M, Kinberly CG (2001) The evidence from Canadian firms on multinational diversification and performance. Q Rev Econ Finance 41:561–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nickell SJ (1996) Competition and corporation perforce. J Polit Econ 104(7):724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Olley GS, Pakes A (1996) The dynamics of productivity in the telecommunications equipment industry. Econometrica 64:1263–1297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Porter ME (1986) Changing patterns of international competition. Calif Manage Rev 28(2):9–40Google Scholar
  29. Rousseeuw PJ, Leroy AM (1987) Robust regression and outlier detection. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Smarzynska Javorcik B (2004) Does foreign direct investment increase the productivity of domestic firms? In search of spillovers through backward linkages. Am Econ Rev 94(3):605–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Economics and Strategy Group, Aston Business SchoolAston UniversityBirminghamUK
  2. 2.Nottingham University Business SchoolNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations