Advertisement

Journal of International Business Studies

, Volume 42, Issue 6, pp 765–786 | Cite as

Selling, resistance and reconciliation: A critical discursive approach to subsidiary role evolution in MNEs

  • Julia BalogunEmail author
  • Paula Jarzabkowski
  • Eero Vaara
Article

Abstract

Studies of political dynamics between multinational enterprise (MNE) parents and subsidiaries during subsidiary role evolution have focused largely on control and resistance. This paper adopts a critical discursive approach to enable an exploration of subtle dynamics in the way that both headquarters and subsidiaries subjectively reconstruct their independent-interdependent relationships with each other during change. We draw from a real-time qualitative study of a revealing case of charter change in an important European subsidiary of an MNE attempting to build closer integration across European country operations. Our results illustrate the role of three discourses – selling, resistance and reconciliation – in the reconstruction of the subsidiary–parent relationship. From this analysis we develop a process framework that elucidates the important role of these three discourses in the reconstruction of subsidiary roles, showing how resistance is not simply subversive but an important part of integration. Our findings contribute to a better understanding of the micro-level political dynamics in subsidiary role evolution, and of how voice is exercised in MNEs. This study also provides a rare example of discourse-based analysis in an MNE context, advancing our knowledge of how discursive methods can help to advance international business research more generally.

Keywords

primary data source strategic change strategy processes discourse analysis case study MNE integration 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Tomi Laamanen for his thoughts on an early draft of this paper. We would like to thank the editor, Julian Birkinshaw, for his encouragement and insightful comments during the editorial process. We would also like to thank the three anonymous reviewers, whose comments helped greatly with the development of the paper. The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support in the preparation of this manuscript from the UK ESRC/EPSRC/Advanced Institute of Management (AIM) Research: RES-331-25-3014 (Balogun) and RES-331-25-3013 (Jarzabkowski). Also the UK ESRC: RES-000-22-2979 (Balogun).

References

  1. Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. 2000. Varieties of discourse: On the study of organizations through discourse analysis. Human Relations, 53 (9): 1125–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambos, B., & Schlegelmilch, B. B. 2007. Innovation and control in the multinational firm: A comparison of political and contingency approaches. Strategic Management Journal, 28 (5): 473–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. 2007. Balancing subsidiary influence in the federative MNC: A business network view. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (5): 802–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bakhtin, M. M. 1981. The dialogic imagination: Four essays, (transl. C. Emerson & M. Holquist). Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  5. Balogun, J., & Johnson, G. 2004. Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 47 (4): 523–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Balogun, J., Bartunek, J., & Do, B. 2010. Uncovering relationships and shared emotion beneath senior managers’ resistance to strategic change. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings.Google Scholar
  7. Bartlett, C. A. 2006. Philips versus Matsushita: A new century, a new round, Harvard Business Case 9-302-049.Google Scholar
  8. Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 1993. Beyond the M-form: Toward a managerial theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 14 (8): 23–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Belanger, J., Edwards, P., & Wright, M. 1999. Best HR practice and the multinational company. Human Resource Management Journal, 9 (3): 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Birkinshaw, J., & Hood, N. 1998a. Multinational subsidiary evolution: Capability and charter change in foreign-owned subsidiary companies. Academy of Management Review, 23 (4): 773–795.Google Scholar
  11. Birkinshaw, J., & Hood, N. 1998b. Multinational corporate evolution and subsidiary development. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Birkinshaw, J., & Pedersen, T. 2009. Strategy and management in MNE subsidiaries. In A. Rugman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of international business, (2nd ed): 380–402. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Birkinshaw, J., Young, S., & Hood, N. 2005. Subsidiary entrepreneurship, internal and external competitive forces and subsidiary performance. International Business Review, 14 (2): 227–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Boje, D. M. 2007. Globalization antenarratives. In A. Mills, J. C. Helms-Mills, & C. Forshaw (Eds), Organizational behavior in a global context: 505–549. Toronto: Garamond Press.Google Scholar
  15. Boje, D. M., Oswick, C., & Ford, J. D. 2004. Language and organization: The doing of discourse. Academy of Management Review, 29 (4): 571–577.Google Scholar
  16. Bouquet, C., & Birkinshaw, J. 2008a. Weight versus voice: How foreign subsidiaries gain attention from corporate headquarters. Academy of Management Journal, 51 (3): 577–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bouquet, C., & Birkinshaw, J. 2008b. Managing power in the multinational corporation: How low-power actors gain influence. Journal of Management, 34 (3): 477–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Boussebaa, M. 2009. Struggling to organize across national borders: The case of global resource management in professional service firms. Human Relations, 62 (6): 829–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Boussebaa, M., & Morgan, G. 2008. Managing talent across national borders: The challenges faced by an international retail group. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 4 (1): 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Brannen, M. Y. 2004. When Mickey loses face: Recontextualization, semantic fit, and the semiotics of foreignness. Academy of Management Review, 29 (4): 593–616.Google Scholar
  21. Clark, G., & Geppert, M. 2011. Subsidiary integration as identity construction and institution building: A political sensemaking approach. Journal of Management Studies, 48 (2): 395–416.Google Scholar
  22. Czarniawska, B. 2004. Narratives in social science research. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Davies, B., & Harré, R. 1990. Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 20 (1): 44–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dörrenbächer, C., & Gammelgaard, J. 2006. Subsidiary role development: The effect of micro-political headquarters–subsidiary negotiations on the product, market and value-added scope of foreign-owned subsidiaries. Journal of International Management, 12 (3): 266–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dörrenbächer, C., & Geppert, M. 2006. Micro-politics and conflicts in multinational corporations: Current debates, re-framing, and contributions of this special issue. Journal of International Management, 12 (3): 251–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Doz, Y., & Prahalad, C. K. 1993. Managing DMNCs: A search for a new paradigm. In S. Ghoshal & D. E. Westney (Eds), Organization theory and the multinational corporation: 24–50. Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Eisenhardt, K. E., & Graebner, M. E. 2007. Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1): 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fairclough, N. 2003. Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Fairclough, N. 2005. Discourse analysis in organization studies: The case for critical realism. Organization Studies, 26 (6): 915–939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Fairclough, N., & Thomas, P. 2004. The discourse of globalization and the globalization of discourse. In D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick, & L. Putman (Eds), The Sage handbook of organizational discourse: 379–396. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ferner, A., & Edwards, P. K. 1995. Power and the diffusion of organizational change within multinational enterprises. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 1 (2): 229–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fiss, P. C., & Hirsch, P. M. 2005. The discourse of globalization: Framing and sensemaking of an emerging concept. American Sociological Review, 70 (1): 29–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ford, J. D., Ford, L. W., & D’Amelio, A. 2008. Resistance to change: The rest of the story. Academy of Management Review, 33 (2): 362–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Frenkel, M. 2008. The multinational corporation as a third space: Rethinking international management discourse on knowledge transfer through Homi Bhabha. Academy of Management Review, 33 (4): 924–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Geppert, M. 2003. Sensemaking and politics in MNCs: A comparative analysis of vocabularies within the global manufacturing discourse in one industrial sector. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12 (4): 312–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Geppert, M., & Williams, K. 2006. Global, national and local practices in multinational corporations: Towards a sociopolitical framework. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17 (1): 49–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Grant, D., Hardy, C., Oswick, C., & Putnam, L. 2004. The Sage handbook of organizational discourse. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  38. Hardy, C., & Phillips, N. 2004. Discourse and power. In D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick, & L. Putnam (Eds), The Sage handbook of organizational discourse: 229–316. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Hardy, C., Palmer, I., & Phillips, N. 2000. Discourse as a strategic resource. Human Relations, 53 (9): 1227–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jarzabkowski, P., & Sillince, J. A. A. 2007. A rhetoric-in-context approach to shaping commitment to multiple strategic goals. Organization Studies, 28 (10): 1639–1665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J., & Seidl, D. 2007. Strategizing: The challenges of a practice perspective. Human Relations, 60 (1): 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Jick, T. D. 1979. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administration Science Quarterly, 24 (4): 602–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Langley, A. 1999. Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24 (4): 691–710.Google Scholar
  44. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  45. Maguire, S., & Hardy, C. 2006. The emergence of new global institutions: A discursive perspective. Organization Studies, 27 (1): 7–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Maguire, S., & Hardy, C. 2009. Discourse and deinstitutionalization: The decline of DDT. Academy of Management Journal, 52 (10): 148–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mantere, S., & Vaara, E. 2008. On the problem of participation in strategy: A critical discursive perspective. Organization Science, 19 (2): 341–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. 1994. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  49. Mudambi, R., & Navarra, P. 2004. Is knowledge power? Knowledge flows, subsidiary power and rent-seeking within MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (5): 385–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mumby, D. K. 2004. Discourse, power and ideology: Unpacking the critical approach. In D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick, N. Phillips, & L. Putnam (Eds), The Sage handbook of organizational discourse: 237–258. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mumby, D. K. 2005. Theorizing resistance in organization studies: A dialectical approach. Management Communication Quarterly, 19 (1): 19–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Nohria, N., & Ghoshal, S. 1997. The differentiated network. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  53. Pentland, B. T. 1999. Building process theory with narrative: From description to explanation. Academy of Management Review, 24 (4): 711–724.Google Scholar
  54. Pettigrew, A. M. 1992. The character and significance of strategy process research. Strategic Management Journal, 13 (S2): 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Phillips, N., & Hardy, C. 2002. Discourse analysis: Investigating processes of social construction. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Phillips, N., Sewell, G., & Jaynes, S. 2008. Applying critical discourse analysis in strategic management research. Organizational Research Methods, 11 (4): 770–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Piekkari, R., Welch, C., & Paavilainen, E. 2009. The case study as disciplinary convention: Evidence from international business journals. Organizational Research Methods, 12 (3): 567–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Søderberg, A.-M. 2006. Narrative interviewing and narrative analysis in a study of a cross-border merger. Management International Review, 46 (4): 397–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Søderberg, A.-M., & Holden, N. 2002. Rethinking cross cultural management in a globalizing business world. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 2 (1): 103–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Spee, A. P., & Jarzabkowski, P. 2010. Strategic planning as communicative process. Organization Studies, 31 (9–10): 1189–1207.Google Scholar
  61. Taplin, I. M. 2006. Strategic change and organizational restructuring: How managers negotiate change initiatives. Journal of International Management, 12 (3): 284–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tempel, A., Edwards, T., Ferner, A., Muller-Camen, M., & Wächter, H. 2006. Subsidiary responses to institutional duality: Collective representation practices of US multinationals in Britain and Germany. Human Relations, 59 (11): 1543–1570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Thomas, R., Sargent, L. D., & Hardy, C. 2011. Managing organizational change: Negotiating meaning and power-resistance relations. Organization Science, 22: 22–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Vaara, E., & Monin, P. 2010. A recursive perspective on discursive legitimation and organizational action in mergers and acquisitions. Organization Science, 21 (1): 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Vaara, E., & Tienari, J. 2004. Critical discourse analysis as methodology for critical international business studies. In R. Marschan-Piekkari & C. Welch (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business: 342–362. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  66. Vaara, E., & Tienari, J. 2008. A discursive perspective on legitimation strategies in MNCs. Academy of Management Review, 33 (4): 985–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vaara, E., & Tienari, J. 2011. On the narrative construction of multinational corporations: An antenarrative analysis of legitimation and resistance in a cross-border merger. Organization Science, 22 (2): 370–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Welch, C., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannak, E., & Paavilainen-Mäntymäki, E. 2010. Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, advance online publication, 30 November. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0593.Google Scholar
  69. Wodak, R. 2004. Critical discourse analysis. In C. Seale, J. F. Gobrium, & D. Sliverman (Eds), Qualitative research practice: 197–213. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  70. Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. 2002. Methods of critical discourse analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  71. Yin, R. K. 1994. Case study research: Design and methods, (2nd edn) London: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of International Business 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Lancaster University Management SchoolLancasterUK
  2. 2.Aston Business School, Aston UniversityBirminghamUK
  3. 3.Hanken School of Economics and EMLYONHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations