Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Dynamic Capabilities-Based Entrepreneurial Theory of the Multinational Enterprise

  • Chapter
The Eclectic Paradigm

  • 1369 Accesses

Abstract

This paper develops a dynamic capabilities-based theory of the multinational enterprise (MNE). It first reviews scholarship on the MNE, with a focus on what has come to be known as “internalization” theory. One prong of this theory develops contractual/transaction cost-informed governance perspectives; and another develops technology transfer and capabilities perspectives. In this paper, it is suggested that the latter has been somewhat neglected. However, if fully integrated as part of a more complete approach, it can buttress transaction cost/governance issues and expand the range of phenomena that can be explained. In this more integrated framework, dynamic capabilities coupled with good strategy are seen as necessary to sustain superior enterprise performance, especially in fast-moving global environments. Entrepreneurial management and transformational leadership are incorporated into a capabilities theory of the MNE. The framework is then used to explain how strategy and dynamic capabilities together determine firm-level sustained competitive advantage in global environments. It is sug-gested that this framework complements contract-based perspectives on the MNE and can help integrate international management and international business perspectives.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • AFP. 2013. Apple reiterates its ability to “create magic”. Taipei Times, 14 February. http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2013/02/14/2003554839, accessed 15 February 2013.

  • Argote, L., & Ingram, P. 2000. Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1): 150–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arregle, J. -L., Miller, T. L., Hitt, M. A., & Beamish, P. W. 2013. Do regions matter? An integrated institutional and semiglobaliza-tion perspective on the internationalization of MNEs. Strategic Management Journal, 34(8): 910–934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Augier, M., & Teece, D. J. 2007. Dynamic capabilities and multinational enterprise: Penrosean insights and omissions. Management International Review, 47(2): 175–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Augier, M., & Teece, D. J. 2008. Strategy as evolution with design: The foundations of dynamic capabilities and the role of the managers in the economic system. Organizational Studies, 29(8–9): 1187–1208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnard, C. I. 1938. The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B. 1986. Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage? Academy of Management Review, 11(3): 656–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1): 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barreto, I. 2010. Dynamic capabilities: A review of past research and an agenda for the future. Journal of Management, 36(1): 256–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 1989. Managing across borders: The transnational solution. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 2002. Managing across borders: The transnational solution, 2nd edn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Busi ness School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J. 1997. Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: The characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 18(3): 207–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J. 2000. Entrepreneurship in the global firm. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., & Hood, N. 1998. Multinational subsidiary evolu tion: Capability and charter change in foreign-owned subsidi ary companies. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 773–795.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., Hood, N., & Young, S. 2005. Subsidiary entrepre-neurship, internal and external competitive forces, and subsidiary performance. International Business Review, 14(2): 227–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., & Pedersen, T. 2008. Strategy and management in MNE subsidiaries. In A. M. Rugman (Ed), Oxford handbook of international business, 2nd edn: 367–388. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, N., & Van Reenen, J. 2010. Why do management practices differ across firms and countries? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(1): 203–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, N., Genakos, C., Sadun, R., & Van Reenen, J. 2012. Management practices across firms and countries. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(1): 12–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouthers, K. 2013. A retrospective on: Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influences on entry mode choice and perfor mance. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(1): 14–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, P. J. 2007. The strategy of multinational enterprises in the light of the rise of China. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 23(2): 107–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, P. J. 2009. Internalisation thinking: From the multina tional enterprise to the global factory. International Business Review, 18(3): 224–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, P. J. Forthcoming. Buckley and Casson. In M. Augier, & D. J. Teece (Eds), Encyclopedia of strategic management. Basing-stoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. C. 1976. The future of the multinational enterprise. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. C. 1998. Analyzing foreign market entry strategies: Extending the internalization approach. Jour nal of International Business Studies, 29(3): 539–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. 1961. The management of innovation. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J. A. 1989. Technological innovation and multinational corporations. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J. A. 1995. The globalization of technology: What remains of the product cycle model? Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1): 155–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J. A. 1999. From the early internalization of corporate technology to global technology sourcing. Transnational Cor porations, 8(2): 71–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J. A. 2009. Location and the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(1): 35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J., Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. 2010. An evolutionary approach to understanding international business activity: The co-evolution of MNEs and the institutional environment. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(4): 567–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J. A., & Kosmopoulou, E. 2002. What determines the internationalization of corporate technology? In V. Havila, M. Forsgren, & H. Hakanson (Eds), Critical perspectives on internationalization: 305–334. Oxford: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J. A., & Mudambi, R. 2005. MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandates. Strategic Management Journal, 26(12): 1109–1128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J., & Narula, R. 2003. Revisiting the eclectic paradigm. In J. Cantwell, & R. Narula (Eds), International business and the eclectic paradigm: 1–20. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capron, L., & Mitchell, W. 2009. Selection capability: How capability gaps and internal social frictions affect internal and external strategic renewal. Organization Science, 20(2): 294–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casson, M. C. 1979. Alternatives to the multinational enterprise. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Casson, M. C. 1982. The entrepreneur: An economic theory. Oxford: Martin Robertson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casson, M. C. 1986a. Contractual arrangements for technology transfer: New evidence from business history. Business History, 28(4): 5–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casson, M. C. 1986b. General theories of the multinational enterprise: Their relevance to business history. In P. Hertner, & G. Jones (Eds), Multinationals: Theory and history: 42–68. Aldershot: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casson, M. C. 1997. Information and organization: A new perspec tive on the theory of the firm. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casson, M. C. 2000. Enterprise and leadership: Studies on firms, networks and institutions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Casson, M. C. 2005. Entrepreneurship and the theory of the firm. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, 58(2): 327–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, A. 1977. The visible hand. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, A., & Salsbury, S. 1971. Pierre S. Du Pont and the making of the modern corporation. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. 2003. Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H., & Teece, D. J. 1996. When is virtual virtuous? Organizing for innovation. Harvard Business Review, 74(1): 65–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. 1937. The nature of the firm. Economica, 4(16): 386–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. 1991. The nature of the firm: Influence. In O. Williamson, & S. Winter (Eds), The nature of the firm: Origins, evolution and development: 61–74. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. 1989. Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science, 35(12): 1504–1511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doz, Y., & Kosonen, M. 2008. The dynamics of strategic agility: Nokia’s rollercoaster experience. California Management Review, 50(3): 95–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doz, Y., & Kosonen, M. 2010. Embedding strategic agility: A leadership agenda for accelerating business model renewal. Long Range Planning, 43(2): 370–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drnevich, P. L., & Kriauciunas, A. P. 2011. Clarifying the conditions and limits of the contributions of ordinary and dynamic capabilities to relative firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 32(3): 254–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H. 1981. Alternative channels and modes of interna tional resource transmission. In R. W. Moxon, & H. V. Perlmutter (Eds), Controlling international technology transfer: Issues, per spectives and implications: 3–27. New York: Pergamon Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H. 1995. Reappraising the eclectic paradigm in the age of alliance capitalism. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(3): 461–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H. 2001. The eclectic (OLI) paradigm of international production: Past, present and future. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 8(2): 173–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. 2008. Multinational enterprises and the global economy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. 2010. The institutional origins of dynamic capabilities in multinational enterprises. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(4): 1225–1246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J., & Pitelis, C. N. 2008. Stephen Hymer’s contribution to international business scholarship: An assessment and exten sion. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(1): 167–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K., & Martin, J. 2000. Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11): 1105–1121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, D., & Guerrieri, P. 1998. International production networks and changing trade patterns in East Asia: The case of the electronics industry. Oxford Development Studies, 26(2): 191–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gans, J., & Stern, S. 2010. Is there a market for ideas? Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(3): 805–837.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J., & Sturgeon, T. 2005. The governance of global value chains. Review of International Political Economy, 12(1): 78–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, V. P. 2008. Lawyers asleep at the wheel? The GM-Fisher Body contract. Industrial and Corporate Change, 17(5): 1071–1084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gratton, L, & Ghoshal, S. 2005. Beyond best practice. MIT Sloan Management Review, 46(3): 49–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiner, L. E. 1998. Evolution and revolution as organizations grow, 1972. Harvard Business Review, 76(3): 55–60, 62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, O. 1989. An economist’s perspective on the theory of the firm. Columbia Law Review, 89(7): 1757–1774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, O. 2011. Thinking about the firm: A review of Daniel Spulber’s “The Theory of the Firm”. Journal of Economic Litera ture, 49(1): 101–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helfat, C. E., & Lieberman, M. B. 2002. The birth of capabilities: Market entry and the importance of pre-history. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(4): 725–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helfat, C. E., & Winter, S. G. 2011. Untangling dynamic and operational capabilities: Strategy for the (n)ever-changing world. Strategic Management Journal, 32(11): 1243–1250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helper, S., & Sako, M. 2012. Management innovation in supply chain: Appreciating Chandler in the twenty-first century. In W. Lazonick, & D. Teece (Eds), Management innovation: Essays in the spirit of Alfred D. Chandler, Jr.: 147–178. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hennart, J. F. 1977. A theory of multinational enterprise. PhD dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennart, J. F. 1982. A theory of multinational enterprise. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennart, J. F. 2009. Down with MNE-centric theories! Market entry and expansion as the bundling of MNE and local assets. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(9): 1432–1454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennart, J. F. 2010. Transaction cost theory and international business. Journal of Retailing, 86(3): 257–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hymer, S. H. 1968. La grande “corporation” multinationale: Analyse de certaines raisons qui poussent à l’intégration inter national des affaires. Revue Economique, 14(6): 949–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hymer, S. H. 1976. The international operations of national firms: A study of direct foreign investment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G. 2005. Multinationals and global capitalism: From the nineteenth to the twenty-first century. New York: Oxford Uni versity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G., & Wadhwani, R. D. 2007. Entrepreneurial theory and the history of globalization. Business and Economic History, 5. http://www.h-net.org/~business/bhcweb/publications/BEHon-line/2007/joneswadhwani.pdf, accessed 1 August 2012.

  • Kesmodel, D. 2011. Boeing examines supply chain for weak links. WSJ.com, 30 December. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204058404577111091095438300.html, accessed 30 December 2011.

  • Kirkpatrick, D. 1998. The second coming of Apple: Through a magical fusion of man — Steve Jobs — and company, Apple is becoming itself again: the little anticompany that could, Fortune, 9 November. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1998/11/09/250834/index.htm, accessed 8 August 2012.

  • Knight, F. 1921. Risk, uncertainty and profit. New York: Augustus Kelley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knott, A. 2003. The organizational routines factor market paradox. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10): 929–943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1992. Knowledge of the firm: Combination, capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organizational Sciences, 3(3): 383–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1995. Knowledge, market failure and the multinational enterprise: A reply. Journal of International Busi ness Studies, 26(2): 417–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koopmans, T. C. 1957. Three essays on the state of economic science. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langlois, R. N. 2007. The entrepreneurial theory of the firm and the theory of the entrepreneurial firm. Journal of Management Studies, 44(7): 1107–1124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinthal, D. A. 1997. Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Man agement Science, 43(7): 934–950.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lippman, S. A., & Rumelt, R. P. 1982. Uncertain imitability: An analysis of inter-firm differences in efficiency under competition. Bell Journal of Economics, 13(2): 418–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutz, B. 2011. Life lessons from the car guy. WSJ.com, 11 June. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304259304576375790237203556.html, accessed 15 June 2011.

  • Madhok, A. 1997. Cost, value and foreign market entry mode: The transaction and the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 18(1): 39–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madhok, A., & Osegowitsch, T. 2000. The international biotech nology industry: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(2): 325–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E., Romeo, A., & Teece, D. 1979. Overseas research and development by US-based firms. Economica, 46(182): 187–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mell, P., & Grance, T. 2011. The NIST definition of cloud computing. NIST Special Publication 800–145. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800–145/SP800–145.pdf, accessed 10 November 2012.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. 1978. Organizational strategy, structure, and process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monteverde, K., & Teece, D. J. 1982. Supplier switching costs and vertical integration in the automobile industry. The Bell Journal of Economics, 13(1): 206–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R. (Ed) 1993. National systems of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C. A., Harreld, J. B., & Tushman, M. L. 2009. Organiza tional ambidexterity: IBM and emerging business opportunities. California Management Review, 51(4): 75–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P. P. 1994. Toward a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1): 45–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, E. T. 1959. The theory of the growth of the firm. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlmutter, H. V. 1969. The tortuous evolution of the multinational corporation. Columbia Journal of World Business, 4(1): 9–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phene, A., & Almeida, P. 2008. Innovation in multinational subsidiaries: The role of knowledge assimilation and subsidiary capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(5): 901–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitelis, C. N. 2004. Edith Penrose and the resource-based view of (international) business strategy. International Business Review, 13(4): 523–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitelis, C. N. 2007. Edith Penrose and a learning-based perspec tive on the MNE and OLI. Management International Review, 47 (2): 207–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitelis, C. N., & Teece, D. J. 2010. Cross-border market co-creation, dynamic capabilities and the entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(4): 1247–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M. 1958. Personal knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. 1980. Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Doz, Y. L. 1981. An approach to strategic control in MNCs. Sloan Management Review, 22(4): 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rennie, M. W. 1993. Global competitiveness: Born global. McKinsey Quarterly, 1993(4): 45–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M. 1981. Inside the multinationals: The economics of internal markets. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & Bennett, J. 1982. Technology transfer and world product mandating in Canada. Columbia Journal of World Business, 17(4): 58–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & D’Cruz, J. 2000. Multinationals as flagships firms: Regional business networks. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 1993. Foreign subsidiaries and multinational strategic management: An extension and correc tion of Porter’s single diamond framework. Management Inter national Review, 33(Special Issue 2): 71–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2001. Subsidiary-specific advan tages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Jour nal, 22(3): 237–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2002. Location, competitiveness and the multinational enterprise. In A. M. Rugman, & T. L. Brewer (Eds), The Oxford handbook of international business: 150–180. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2003. Extending the theory of the multinational enterprise: Internalization and strategic manage ment perspectives. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2): 125–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumelt, R. 2011. Good strategy/bad strategy: The difference and why it matters. New York: Crown Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. 1969. The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starvish, M. 2011. KFC’s explosive growth in China. HBS Working Knowledge. http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6704.html, accessed 5 August 2012.

  • Szulanski, G. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Manage ment Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue): 27–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tallman, S. 2003. The significance of Bruce Kogut’s and Undo Zander’s article, “Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational enterprise”. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(6): 495–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 1975. The multinational corporation and the resource cost of international technology transfer. Philadelphia: Economics Department, University of Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D.J. 1976. The multinational corporation and the resource cost of international technology transfer. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 1977a. Technology transfer by multinational firms: The resource cost of transferring technological know-how. The Economic Journal, 87(346): 242–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 1977b. Time–cost tradeoffs: Elasticity estimates and determinants for international technology transfer projects. Management Science, 23(8): 830–837.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 1980. Economies of scope and the scope of the enterprise. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1(3): 223–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 1981a. The multinational enterprise: Market failure and market power considerations. Sloan Management Review, 22(3): 3–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 1981b. The market for know-how and the efficient international transfer of technology. Annals of the Academy of Political and Social Science, 458(1): 81–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 1982. Towards an economic theory of the multi-product firm. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3(1): 39–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 1985. Multinational enterprise, internal governance, and industrial organization. American Economic Review, 75(2): 233–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 1986a. Transaction cost economics and the multi national enterprise: An assessment. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 7(1): 21–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 1986b. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6): 285–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 2000. Managing intellectual capital: Organizational, strategic, and policy dimensions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 2006a. Reflections on the Hymer thesis and the multinational enterprise. International Business Review, 15(2): 124–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 2006b. Reflections on “Profiting from innovation”. Research Policy, 35(8): 1131–1146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 2007. Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfounda-tions of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13): 1319–1350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D.J. 2009. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management: Organizing for innovation and growth. New York: Oxford Uni versity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. 2012. Next-generation competition: New concepts for understanding how innovation shapes competition and policy in the digital economy. Journal of Law, Economics, and Policy, 9(1): 97–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D.J. forthcoming. Ordinary capabilities, dynamic capabil ities, and competitive advantage: Synthesizing capabilities and the concept of strategy. Academy of Management Perspectives.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7): 537–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vahlne, J. -E., & Johanson, J. 2013. The Uppsala model on evolution of the multinational business enterprise — From internalization to coordination of networks. International Mar keting Review, 30(3): 189–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Mieghem, J. A. 2008. Operations strategy: Principles and practices. Belmont, MA: Dynamic Ideas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, P. 2009. The (non)theory of the knowledge firm. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 57(1): 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B. 1984. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2): 171–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. 1975. Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. 1981. The modern corporation: Origins, evolution, attributes. Journal of Economic Literature, 19(4): 1537–1568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. 1985. The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. 1991. Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(2): 269–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. 1999. Strategy research: Governance and competence perspectives. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12): 1087–1108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, K., & Doz, Y. 2011. Agile innovation: a footprint balan cing distance and immersion. California Management Review, 53(2): 6–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter, S. G. 2003. Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10): 991–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaheer, S. 1995. Overcoming the liability of foreignness. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2): 341–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hitt, M. A. 2000. International expansion by new venture firms: International diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5): 925–950.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. David J. Teece
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Rutgers University, USA

    John Cantwell

Copyright information

© 2015 Academy of International Business

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Teece, D.J. (2015). A Dynamic Capabilities-Based Entrepreneurial Theory of the Multinational Enterprise. In: Cantwell, J. (eds) The Eclectic Paradigm. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-54471-1_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation