Journal of International Business Studies

, Volume 39, Issue 2, pp 215–230 | Cite as

The regional nature of Japanese multinational business

  • Simon Collinson
  • Alan M Rugman


In the world's largest 500 firms, there are 64 Japanese multinational enterprises (MNEs) with data on regional sales, but only three operate globally; whereas 57 of them average over 80% of their sales and foreign assets in their home region. Why is there such a strong intra-regional dimension to their activities? Using empirical data and a new framework for analysing both downstream (sales) assets and upstream (production) assets we analyse why most large Japanese firms appear to have firm-specific advantages (FSAs) that are based in their home region. A structural contingency approach is applied to two case studies to explain how home-region-bound FSAs constrained the ability of Japanese MNEs to implement internationalisation strategies.


Japan multinational enterprises firm-specific advantage regional strategy structural contingency approach internationalisation 



A previous version of this paper has been improved by helpful comments from Eleanor Westney and Tom Roehl. We have also been helped by comments and guidance from the Editor-in-Chief, Arie Y. Lewin, and several reviewers. Helpful comments were also made by participants at seminars at the University of Sydney, AGSM, Nanyang Technological University, AJBS and AIB at Quebec City, and the AOM in Hawaii. The authors would like to acknowledge support from the Advanced Institute of Management (AIM) and funding from the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).


  1. Abo, T. 1996. The Japanese production system: The process of adaptation to national settings. In R. Boyer and D. Drache (Eds), States against markets: The limits of globalization: 136–155. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Adler, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. I. 1999. Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Science, 10 (1): 43–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aoki, M. 1994. The Japanese firm as a system of attributes. In M. Aoki and R. Dore (Eds), The Japanese firm: 11–39. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. 1978. Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  5. Bhappu, A. 2000. The Japanese family: An institutional logic for Japanese corporate networks and Japanese management. Academy of Management Review, 25 (2): 409–415.Google Scholar
  6. Bartlett, C., & Ghoshal, S. 1989. Managing across borders: The transnational solution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  7. Beamish, P., Hitt, M., Jackson, S. & Mathieu, J. 2005. Call for papers: Special research forum – Building bridges across levels. Academy of Management Journal, 48 (2): 364–366.Google Scholar
  8. Beechler, S., & Yang, J. Z. 1994. The transfer of Japanese-style management to American subsidiaries: Contingencies, constraints and competencies. Journal of International Business Studies, 25 (3): 467–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beechler, S. L., & Bird, A. (Eds), 1999. Japanese multinationals abroad. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Belderbos, R. 2003. Entry mode, organizational learning, and R&D in foreign affiliates: Evidence from Japanese firms. Strategic Management Journal, 24 (3): 235–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bonner, J. M., & Walker Jr, O. C. 2004. Selecting influential business-to-business customers in new product development: Relational embeddedness and knowledge heterogeneity considerations. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21 (3): 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 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
  13. Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. 1961. The management of innovation. Chicago: Quadrangle Books.Google Scholar
  14. Calori, R. 1999. National administrative heritages in borderless organizations. In R. H. Rosenfeld and D. C. Wilson (Eds), Managing organizations: Text, readings and cases: 481–491. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  15. Clark, K. B., & Wheelwright, S. (Eds), 1995. The product development challenge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  16. Clegg, S., & Kono, T. 1998. Transformations of corporate culture: Experiences of Japanese enterprises. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  17. Collinson, S. 1999. Knowledge management capabilities for steel makers: A British–Japanese corporate alliance for organizational learning. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 11 (3): 337–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Collinson, S. 2001a. Knowledge management capabilities in R&D: A UK–Japan company comparison. R&D Management, 31 (3): 335–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Collinson, S. 2001b. Developing and deploying knowledge for innovation: British and Japanese corporations compared. International Journal of Innovation Management, 5 (1): 73–103.Google Scholar
  20. Collinson, S. C., & Wilson, D. C. 2006. Inertia in Japanese organizations: Knowledge management routines and failure to innovate. Organization Studies, 27 (9): 1359–1387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. 2001. Survival and profitability: The roles of experience and intangible assets in foreign subsidiary performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (5): 1028–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. 2004. Joint venture performance revisited: Japanese foreign subsidiaries worldwide. Management International Review, 44 (1): 69–92.Google Scholar
  23. Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. 2005. Regional and global strategies of Japanese firms. Management International Review, 45 (Special Issue 1): 19–36.Google Scholar
  24. 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
  25. Donaldson, L. 1987. Strategy and structural adjustment to regain fit and performance: In defence of the contingency theory. Journal of Management Studies, 24 (1): 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Donaldson, L. 2001. The contingency theory of organizations. Sage, CA: Thousand Oaks.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dore, R. 1973. British factory, Japanese factory. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  28. Doz, Y. L., & Prahalad, C. K. 2005. Managing MNCs: A search for a new paradigm. In S. Ghoshal and E. Westney (Eds), Organization theory and the multinational corporation, (2nd ed.): 20–45. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  29. Dyer, J. H. 1996a. Specialized supplier networks as a source of competitive advantage: Evidence from the auto industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (4): 271–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Dyer, J. H. 1996b. Does governance matter? Keiretsu alliances and asset specificity as sources of Japanese competitive advantage. Organization Science, 7 (6): 649–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ellis, S., Almor, T., & Shenkar, O. 2002. Structural contingency revisited: Toward a dynamic system model. Emergence, 4 (4): 51–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ethiraj, S. K., & Levinthal, D. 2004. Bounded rationality and the search for organizational architecture: An evolutionary perspective on the design of organizations and their evolvability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49 (3): 404–437.Google Scholar
  33. Fiol, M. C., & Lyles, M. A. 1985. Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 10 (4): 803–813.Google Scholar
  34. Fleck, J. 2000. Artefact-activity: The co-evolution of artefacts, knowledge and organization in technological innovation. In J. Ziman (Ed.) Technological innovation as an evolutionary process: 248–266. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Fruin, W. M. 1992. The Japanese enterprise system. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  36. Fuji Chimera Research Institute 2005. Worldwide electronics market 2004: A comprehensive study. Tokyo: Fuji Chimera Research Institute.Google Scholar
  37. Galbraith, J. R. 1973. Designing complex organizations. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  38. Gerlach, M. L. 1992. Alliance capitalism: The social organization of Japanese business. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  39. Ghemawat, P. 2001. Distance still matters: The hard reality of global expansion. Harvard Business Review, 79 (8): 137–147.Google Scholar
  40. Ghemawat, P. 2003. Semiglobalization and international business strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (2): 138–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. 1977. The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82 (5): 929–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Henisz, W. J. 2002. Politics and international investment. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  43. 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
  44. Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  45. Hymer, S. H. 1960. The international operations of national firms: A study of direct foreign investment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  46. Jameson, M., Sullivan, M., & Constand, R. L. 2000. Ownership structure and performance of Japanese firms: Horizontal keiretsu, vertical keiretsu, and independents. Review of Pacific Basin Financial Markets & Policies, 3 (4): 535–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association 2004. The Motor Industry of Japan. Tokyo: JAMA.
  48. JBIC 2004. Survey report on overseas business operations by Japanese manufacturing companies. Tokyo: JBIC Institute, Japan Bank for International Cooperation.
  49. JETRO 2004. White paper on international trade and foreign direct investment. Tokyo: Japan External Trade Organisation. Accessed 4 August 2006.
  50. Kojima, K. 2000. The “flying geese” model of Asian economic development: Origin, theoretical extensions, and regional policy implications. Journal of Asian Economics, 11 (4): 375–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kumon, H. 1994. International transferability of the Japanese production system: Japanese-affiliated auto plants in the USA, the UK and Taiwan. Journal of International Economic Studies, 8 (1): 59–78.Google Scholar
  52. Laage-Hellman, 1997. Business networks in Japan: Supplier–customer interaction in product development. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lam, A. 1997. Embedded firms, embedded knowledge: Problems of collaboration and knowledge transfer in global cooperative ventures. Organization Studies, 18 (6): 973–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lam, A. 2000. Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: An integrated framework. Organization Studies, 21 (3): 487–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Landes, D. S. 1998. The wealth and poverty of nations. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  56. Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. 1967. Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.Google Scholar
  57. Levitt, T. 1983. The globalization of markets. Harvard Business Review, 61 (3): 92–102.Google Scholar
  58. Liker, J. K., Fruin, W. M., & Adler, P. S. (Eds), 1999. Remade in America: Transplanting and transforming Japanese management systems. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  59. McCormick, K. 1995. Career paths, technological obsolescence and skill formation: R&D staff in Britain and Japan. R&D Management, 25 (2): 197–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. McGuire, J., & Dow, S. 2003. The persistence and implications of Japanese keiretsu organization. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (4): 374–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. METI 2004. Summary of the 2003 (35th) Survey of Trends in Business Activities of Foreign Affiliates. Tokyo: Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI).
  62. Miner, A. S., & Mezias, S. J. 1996. Ugly duckling no more: Pasts and futures of organizational learning research. Organization Science, 7 (1): 88–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Nachum, L. 2003. Liability of foreignness in global competition? Financial service affiliates in the City of London. Strategic Management Journal, 24 (12): 1187–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Nadler, D. A., & Tushman, M. L. 1997. Competing by design. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  66. Nippon Steel Corporation 2001. Annual Report. 8 June 2004.
  67. Nippon Steel Corporation 2004. Annual Report. 24 June 2005.
  68. Nishiguchi, T. (Ed.), 1996. Managing product development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Nonaka, I., & Yonekura, S. 1982. Innovation through group dynamics: Organisational learning in JK activity at Nippon Steel's kimitsu works, Discussion Paper No.124, Institute of Business Research, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo.Google Scholar
  70. Pennings, J. M. 1987. Structural contingency theory: A multivariate test. Organization Studies, 8 (3): 223–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. 1978. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  72. Porter, M. E. 1990. The competitive advantage of nations. New York: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Redding, G. 2005. The thick description and comparison of societal systems of capitalism. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (2): 123–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Rugman, A. M. 1981. Inside the multinationals: The economics of internal markets. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Rugman, A. M. 2005. The regional multinationals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Rugman, A., & Verbeke, A. 1992. A note on the transnational solution and the transaction cost theory of multinational strategic management. Journal of International Business Studies, 23 (4): 761–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Rugman, A., & Verbeke, A. 1998. Corporate strategies and environmental regulations: An organizing framework. Strategic Management Journal, 19 (4): 363–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Rugman, A., & Verbeke, A. 2001. Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 22 (3): 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Rugman, A., & Verbeke, A. 2002. Edith Penrose's contribution to the resource-based view of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 23 (8): 769–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Rugman, A., & Verbeke, A. 2004. A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (1): 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Sakakibara, K., & Westney, E. D. 1985. Comparative study of the training, careers, and organisation of engineers in the computer industry in the United States and Japan. Hitotsubashi Journal of Commerce and Management, 20 (1): 1–20.Google Scholar
  82. Sako, M. 1992. Prices, quality and trust: Inter-firm relations in Britain and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Sako, M. 1997. Japanese labour and management in transition: Diversity, flexibility and participation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  84. Schoonhoven, C. B. 1981. Problems with contingency theory: Testing assumptions hidden within the language of contingency “theory”. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26 (3): 349–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Shiba, T., & Shimotani, M. (Eds), 1997. Beyond the firm: Business groups in international and historical perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Simon, H. A. 1957. Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organization, (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  87. Sumitomo Chemical 2004. Annual Report: Becoming a Truly Global Chemical Company.
  88. Tallman, S. B., & Yip, G. S. 2001. Strategy and the multinational enterprise. In A. M. Rugman and T. Brewer (Eds), The Oxford handbook of international business: 317–348. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Tsurumi, Y. 1976. The Japanese are coming: A multinational interaction of firms and politics. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
  90. Tushman, M. L., & Romanelli, E. 1985. Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. In L. L. Cummings and B. M. Staw (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 7, 171–222. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  91. Westney, E. 1999. Changing perspectives on the organization of Japanese multinational companies. In S. L. Beechler and A. Bird (Eds), Japanese multinationals abroad: 11–29. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Westney, E. 2001. Japan. In A. M. Rugman and T. Brewer (Eds), The Oxford handbook of international business: 623–651. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., & Roos, D. 1990. The machine that changed the world. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  94. Yip, G. 2002. Total global strategy II. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  95. Yonekura, S. 1994. The Japanese iron and steel industry, 1850–1990. New York: St Martin's Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Yoshino, M. Y. 1968. Japan's managerial system: Tradition and innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  97. Zaheer, S. 1995. Overcoming the liability of foreignness. Academy of Management Journal, 38 (2): 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of International Business 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Warwick Business School, The University of WarwickCoventryUK
  2. 2.Kelley School of Business, Indiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations