Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How important is regional vs. global scope? An examination of U.S. multinationals

  • Research Note
  • Published:
Journal of International Business Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Beginning with Rugman and Verbeke (J Int Bus Stud 35(1):3–18, 2004), several international business (IB) scholars have proposed that most large multinationals are not global but regional. This argument has recently been challenged for both its conceptualization and its implementation. We aim to contribute to this debate by revisiting the definitions of regional and global, by leveraging data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis that is new to this literature, and by analyzing multinationals’ scope in terms of both sales and production. We find that U.S. multinationals are significantly more global than has previously been acknowledged in the IB literature.

Résumé

En commençant par Rugman et Verbeke (2004), plusieurs spécialistes de l’international business (IB) ont proposé que la plupart des grandes multinationales ne sont pas mondiales mais régionales. Cet argument a récemment été remis en question tant pour sa conceptualisation que pour sa mise en œuvre. En nous appuyant sur les données du Bureau of Economic Analysis des États-Unis - qui sont nouvelles dans cette littérature - et en analysant la portée des multinationales en termes de ventes et de production, notre objectif est de contribuer à ce débat en réexaminant les définitions des termes régional et mondial. Nous constatons que les multinationales américaines sont beaucoup plus mondiales que ce qui a été reconnu dans la littérature de l’IB.

Resumen

Comenzando con Rugman y Verbeke (2004), varios académicos de negocios internacionales (IB por sus iniciales en inglés) han propuesto que la mayoría de las multinacionales no son globales sino regionales. Este argumento ha sido cuestionado recientemente tanto en su conceptualización como en su implementación. Nuestro objetivo es contribuir a este debate revisitando las definiciones de regional y global, apalancándonos en los datos de la Oficina de Análisis Económico de los Estados Unidos que son nuevos en esta literatura, y analizando el alcance de las multinacionales en términos de ventas y producción. Encontramos que las multinacionales estadounidenses son significativamente más globales de lo que se ha reconocido en la literatura de negocios internacionales.

Resumo

Começando com Rugman e Verbeke (2004), vários acadêmicos de negócios internacionais (IB) propuseram que a maioria das grandes multinacionais não é global, mas regional. Esse argumento foi recentemente contestado tanto por sua conceituação quanto por sua implementação. Nosso objetivo é contribuir para esse debate revisitando as definições de regional e global, e fazendo uso de dados do Bureau of Economic Analysis dos EUA que são novos nesta literatura e analisando o escopo de multinacionais em termos de vendas e produção. Constatamos que multinacionais dos EUA são significativamente mais globais do que se reconhecia anteriormente na literatura de IB.

Chinese

从Rugman和Verbeke(2004)开始, 数位国际商务(IB)学者就提出, 大多数的大型跨国公司不是全球性的, 而是地区性的。这一论点最近在其概念化和实施方面都受到了挑战。我们旨在通过重新审视区域和全球的定义, 利用来自美国经济分析署的最新文献资料, 以及通过分析跨国公司的销售和生产的范围, 为这场辩论做出贡献。我们发现, 美国跨国公司的全球性要比IB文献以前承认的要大得多。

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aharoni, Y. 2006. Book review: The regional multinationals MNEs and global strategic management. International Business Review, 15(4): 439–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. 2011. Generating research questions through problematization. Academy of Management Review, 36(2): 247–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, P. 2002. Is the international business research agenda running out of steam? Journal of International Business Studies, 33(2): 365–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, P. J., Doh, J. P., & Benischke, M. H. 2017. Towards a renaissance in international business research? Big questions, grand challenges, and the future of IB scholarship. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(9): 1045–1064.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, G. F. 2016. The vanishing American corporation: Navigating the hazards of a new economy. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, G. F. 2017. Post-corporate: The disappearing corporation in the new economy. Third Way. http://www.thirdway.org/report/post-corporate-the-disappearing-corporation-in-the-new-economy.

  • Doh, J., Rodrigues, S., Saka-Helmhout, A., & Makhija, M. 2017. International business responses to institutional voids. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(3): 293–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flores, R., Aguilera, R. V., Mahdian, A., & Vaaler, P. M. 2013. How well do supranational regional grouping schemes fit international business research models? Journal of International Business Studies, 44(5): 451–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghemawat, P. 2003. Semiglobalization and international business strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2): 138–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghemawat, P. 2005. Regional strategies for global leadership. Harvard Business Review, 83(12): 98–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghemawat, P. 2017. The laws of globalization and business applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Held, D., McGrew, A. G., Goldblatt, D., & Perraton, J. 1999. Global transformations: Politics, economics, and culture. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helfat, C. E. 2007. Stylized facts, empirical research and theory development in management. Strategic Organization, 5(2): 185–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J. U., & Aguilera, R. V. 2015. The world is spiky: An internationalization framework for a semi-globalized world. Global Strategy Journal, 5(2): 113–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudambi, R., Li, L., Ma, X., Makino, S., Qian, G., & Boschma, R. 2018. Zoom in, zoom out: geographic scale and multinational activity. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(8): 929–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudambi, R., & Puck, J. 2016. A global value chain analysis of the ‘regional strategy’ perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 53(6): 1076–1093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osegowitsch, T., & Sammartino, A. 2007. Exploring trends in regionalization. In A. M. Rugman (Ed.), Regional aspects of multinationality and performance. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osegowitsch, T., & Sammartino, A. 2008. Reassessing (home-)regionalization. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(2): 184–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. 1985. Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. 1986. Competition in global industries: A conceptual framework. In M. E. Porter (Ed.), Competition in global industries (pp. 15–60). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qian, G., Lee, L., & Rugman, A. M. 2013. Liability of country foreignness and liability of regional foreignness: Their effects on geographic diversification and firm performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(6): 635–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M. 2000. The end of globalization. London: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M. 2005. The regional multinationals: MNEs and ‘global’ strategic management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2008. A regional solution to the strategy and structure of multinationals. European Management Journal, 26(5): 305–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sammartino, A., & Osegowitsch, T. 2013. Dissecting home regionalization: How large does the region loom? Multinational Business Review, 21(1): 45–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, J. I., & Larson, B. Z. 2009. Labor market institutions and global strategic adaptation: Evidence from Lincoln Electric. Management Science, 55(9): 1527–1546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verbeke, A., & Asmussen, C. G. 2016. Global, local, or regional? The locus of MNE strategies. Journal of Management Studies, 53(6): 1051–1075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westney, D. E. 2006. Review of the regional multinationals: MNEs and ‘global’ strategic management, by Alan M. Rugman. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(3): 445–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Statistical analysis of firm-level data on U.S. multinational companies was conducted at the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce under arrangements that maintain legal confidentiality requirements. Views expressed in this paper do not reflect those of the BEA or of the U.S. Department of Commerce. We thank the editor and anonymous reviewers and the participants at the Academy of International Business annual meeting for helpful comments. All remaining errors are our own.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kogod School of Business, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20016, USA

    Yujin Jeong

  2. Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, 701 Tappan Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Jordan I. Siegel

Authors
  1. Yujin Jeong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jordan I. Siegel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yujin Jeong.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information accompanies this article on the Journal of International Business Studies website (www.palgrave.com/journals).

Accepted by Peter Liesch, Area Editor, 9 November 2019. This article has been with the authors for four revisions.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 22 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jeong, Y., Siegel, J.I. How important is regional vs. global scope? An examination of U.S. multinationals. J Int Bus Stud 51, 1142–1160 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-019-00298-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-019-00298-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation