Advertisement

Journal of International Business Studies

, Volume 40, Issue 1, pp 86–107 | Cite as

The regional dimension of MNEs' foreign subsidiary localization

  • Jean-Luc ArregleEmail author
  • Paul W Beamish
  • Louis Hébert
Article

Abstract

This paper examines the regional effect of MNEs' foreign subsidiary localization. We hypothesize that the number of subsequent foreign subsidiaries in a country is in part determined by a firm's prior foreign subsidiary activity at the regional level. We test our hypotheses using data on 1076 Japanese MNEs that created 3466 foreign subsidiaries (1837 wholly owned FDIs and 1629 joint ventures) over the period 1996–2001. We use a multilevel negative binomial approach with three levels of analysis: localization decisions in a country (49 countries), in a region (six regions) and at the headquarters level. In this way, we test the regional effects controlling for country and corporate dimensions. We also run separate models to differentiate wholly owned and joint venture localization decisions. Our results strongly support the semi-globalization perspective in that the regional-level effects are significant and different from the country-level effects for all foreign subsidiaries, for wholly owned subsidiaries and for jointly owned subsidiaries. Japanese MNEs adopt a regional perspective that complements their decisions at the country and firm levels. They seek regional agglomeration benefits and make arbitrage decisions between countries in the same region.

Keywords

semiglobalization regional strategy multilevel analysis evaluation of current theories localization of foreign subsidiaries 

Notes

References

  1. Aguilera, R. V., Flores, R. G., & Vaaler, P. M. 2007. Is it all a matter of grouping? Examining the regional effect in global strategy research. In S. Tallman (Ed.), International strategic management: A new generation: 209–228, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishers.Google Scholar
  2. Amburgey, T. L., & Miner, A. S. 1992. Strategic momentum: The effects of repetitive, positional and contextual momentum on merger activity. Strategic Management Journal, 13 (5): 335–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, E., & Gatignon, H. 1986. Modes of foreign entry: A transaction cost analysis and propositions. Journal of International Business Studies, 17 (3): 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arregle, J. L., Hébert, L., & Beamish, P. W. 2006. Mode of international entry: Advantages of multilevel methods. Management International Review, 46 (5): 557–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Audretsch, D. 2003. Managing knowledge spillovers: The role of geographic proximity. Advances in Strategic Management, 20: 23–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barcikowski, R. S. 1981. Statistical power with group mean as the unit of analysis. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6 (3): 267–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 1989. Managing across borders: The transnational solution. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bastos, P. V., & Greve, H. R. 2003. Interorganizational learning and the location of manufacturing subsidiaries: Is chain migration also a corporate behavior? Advances in Strategic Management, 20: 159–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Belderbos, R., & Zou, J. 2006. Foreign investment, divestment and relocation by Japanese electronics firms in East Asia. Asian Economic Journal, 20 (1): 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Benito, G. R. G. 1997. Divestment of foreign production operations. Applied Economics, 29 (10): 1365–1377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Benito, G. R. G. 2005. Divestment and international business strategy. Journal of Economic Geography, 5 (2): 235–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Benito, G. R. G., Grøgaard, B., & Narula, R. 2003. Environmental influences on MNE subsidiary roles: Economic integration and the Nordic countries. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (5): 443–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bliese, P. D., & Hanges, P. J. 2004. Being both too liberal and too conservative: The perils of treating grouped data as though they were independent. Organizational Research Methods, 7 (4): 400–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bowman, E. H., & Helfat, C. E. 2001. Does corporate strategy matter? Strategic Management Journal, 22 (1): 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brouthers, K. D. 2002. Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influences on entry mode choice and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (2): 203–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. C. 1998. Models of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 29 (1): 21–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Buckley, P. J., & Ghauri, P. N. 2004. Globalization, economic geography and the strategy of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (2): 81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Buckley, P. J., Clegg, J., Forsans, N., & Reilly, K. T. 2001. Increasing the size of the country: Regional economic integration and foreign direct investment in a globalised world economy. Management International Review, 41 (3): 251–274.Google Scholar
  19. Chan, C. M., Makino, S., & Isobe, T. 2006. Interdependent behavior in foreign direct investment: The multi-level effects of prior entry and prior exit on foreign market entry. Journal of International Business Studies, 37 (5): 642–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chang, S. J. 1995. International expansion strategy of Japanese firms: Capability building through sequential entry. Academy of Management Journal, 38 (2): 383–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Davis, P. S., Desai, A. B., & Francis, J. D. 2000. Mode of international entry: An isomorphism perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 31 (2): 239–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. 1999. Ownership strategy of Japanese firms: Transactional, institutional and experience influences. Strategic Management Journal, 20 (10): 915–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. 2005. Regional and global strategies of Japanese firms. Management International Review, 45 (1): 19–36.Google Scholar
  24. Delios, A., & Henisz, W. J. 2000. Japanese firms' investment strategies in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43 (3): 305–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Delios, A., & Henisz, W. J. 2003. Policy uncertainty and the sequence of entry by Japanese firms, 1980–1998. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (3): 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Doz, Y., Santos, J., & Williamson, P. 2001. From global to metanational: How companies win in the knowledge economy. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  27. Dunning, J. H. 1993. Multinational enterprises and the global corporation. New York: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  28. Dunning, J. H. 1995. Reappraising the eclectic paradigm in an age of alliance capitalism. Journal of International Business Studies, 26 (3): 461–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Dunning, J. H., Fujita, M., & Yakova, N. 2007. Some macro data on the regionalisation/globalisation debate: A comment on the Rugman/Verbeke analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (1): 177–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Enright, M. J. 2005a. Regional management centers in the Asia-Pacific. Management International Review, 45 (1): 59–82.Google Scholar
  31. Enright, M. J. 2005b. The role of regional management centers. Management International Review, 45 (1): 83–102.Google Scholar
  32. Flores, R., & Aguilera, R. 2007. Globalization and location choice: An analysis of US multinational firms in 1980 and 2000. Working Paper series, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  33. Ghemawat, P. 2003. Semiglobalization and international business strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (2): 138–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Goerzen, A. 2007. Alliance networks and firm performance: The impact of repeated partnerships. Strategic Management Journal, 28 (5): 487–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Guillén, M. F. 2002. Structural inertia, imitation, and foreign expansion: South Korean firms and business groups in China, 1987–95. Academy of Management Journal, 45 (3): 509–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Guillén, M. F. 2003. Experience, imitation, and the sequence of foreign entry: Wholly owned and joint-venture manufacturing by South Korean firms and business groups in China, 1987–1995. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (2): 185–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Head, K., Ries, J., & Swenson, D. 1995. Agglomeration benefits and location choice: Evidence from Japanese manufacturing investments in the United States. Journal of International Economics, 38 (3–4): 223–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hedeker, D., & Gibbons, R. D. 2007. SuperMix 1.1. Chicago: Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
  39. Hedstrom, P. 1994. Contagious collectivities: On the spatial diffusion of Swedish trade unions, 1890–1940. American Journal of Sociology, 99 (5): 1157–1179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Henisz, W. J. 2000. The institutional environment for multinational investment. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 16 (1): 334–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Henisz, W. J., & Delios, A. 2001. Uncertainty, imitation, and plant location: Japanese multinational corporations, 1990–1996. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46 (3): 443–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hennart, J.-F. 1988. A transaction costs theory of equity joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 9 (4): 361–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hitt, M. A., Beamish, P. W., Jackson, S. E., & Mathieu, J. E. 2007. Building theoretical and empirical bridges across levels: Multilevel research in management. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (6): 1385–1399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  45. Hox, J. 1997. Multilevel modeling: When and why. In I. Balderjahn, R. Mathar, & M. Schrader (Eds), Classification, data analysis and data highway: 147–154. New York: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  46. Khanna, T., Kogan, J., & Palepu, K. 2006. Globalization and similarities in corporate governance: A cross-country analysis. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88 (1): 69–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kogut, B. 1983. Foreign direct investment as a sequential process. In C. P. Kindelberger & D. Audretsch (Eds), The multinational corporations in the 1980s: 35–56. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  48. Kogut, B., & Kulatilaka, N. 1994. Operating flexibility, global manufacturing, and the option value of a multinational network. Management Science, 40 (1): 123–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kostova, T., & Zaheer, S. 1999. Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 24 (1): 64–81.Google Scholar
  50. Lu, J. W. 2002. Intra- and inter-organizational imitative behavior: Institutional influences on Japanese firms' entry mode choice. Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (1): 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Maitland, E., Rose, E. L., & Nicholas, S. 2005. How firms grow: Clustering as a dynamic model of internationalization. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (4): 435–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Makino, S., & Beamish, P. W. 1998. Performance and survival of joint ventures with non-conventional ownership structures. Journal of International Business Studies, 29 (4): 797–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Makino, S., Isobe, T., & Chan, C. M. 2004. Does country matter? Strategic Management Journal, 25 (10): 1027–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. March, J. G. 1988. Variable risk preferences and adaptative aspirations. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 9 (1): 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2 (1): 71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. McNamara, G., & Vaaler, P. 2000. The influence of competitive positioning and rivalry on emerging market risk assessment. Journal of International Business Studies, 31 (2): 337–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Nachum, L., & Wymbs, C. 2005. Product differentiation, external economies and MNE location choices: M&As in global cities. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (4): 415–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Oxelheim, L., & Ghauri, P. N. (Eds). 2003. European Union and the race for inward FDI in Europe. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  59. Porter, M. E. 1986. Competition in global industries. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  60. Prahalad, C. K., & Doz, Y. 1987. The multinational mission. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  61. Raudenbush, S., & Bryk, A. 2002. Hierarchical linear models (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  62. Ricart, J. E., Enright, M. J., Ghemawat, P., Hart, S. L., & Khanna, T. 2004. New frontiers in international strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (3): 175–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Ronen, S., & Shenkar, O. 1985. Clustering countries on attitudinal dimensions: A review and synthesis. Academy of Management Review, 10 (3): 435–454.Google Scholar
  64. Rosenkopf, L., & Almeida, P. 2003. Overcoming local search through alliances and mobility. Management Science, 49 (6): 751–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2001. Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 22 (3): 237–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2004. A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (1): 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2005. Towards a theory of regional multinationals: A transaction cost economics approach. Management International Review, 45 (1): 5–17.Google Scholar
  68. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2007. Liabilities of regional foreignness and the use of firm-level versus country-level data: A response to Dunning et al. (2007). Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (1): 200–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Snijders, T., & Bosker, R. 1999. Multilevel analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  70. Sorenson, O., & Baum, J. A. C. 2003. Geography and strategy: The strategic management of space and place. Advances in Strategic Management, 20: 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Stevens, M. J., & Bird, A. 2004. On the myth of believing that globalization is a myth: Or the effects of misdirected responses on obsolescing an emergent substantive discourse. Journal of International Management, 10 (4): 501–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Strang, D. 2003. The diffusion of TQM within a global bank. Advances in Strategic Management, 20: 293–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. UNCTAD. 2005. World investment report: Transnational corporations and the internationalization of R&D. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  74. Vermeulen, F., & Barkema, H. 2002. Pace, rhythm, and scope: Process dependence in building a profitable multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 23 (7): 637–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Yip, G. S. 1995. Total global strategy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  76. Yiu, D., & Makino, S. 2002. The choice between joint venture and wholly owned subsidiary: An institutional perspective. Organization Science, 13 (6): 667–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Zaheer, S., & Manrakhan, S. 2001. Concentration and dispersion in global industries: Remote electronic access and the location of economic activities. Journal of International Business Studies, 32 (4): 667–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zhou, C., Delios, A., & Yang, J. G. 2002. Locational determinants of Japanese foreign direct investment in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19 (1): 63–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of International Business 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean-Luc Arregle
    • 1
    Email author
  • Paul W Beamish
    • 2
  • Louis Hébert
    • 3
  1. 1.Edhec Business SchoolNiceFrance
  2. 2.Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  3. 3.HEC MontrealQuebecCanada

Personalised recommendations