Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

MNE institutional advantage: How subunits shape, transpose and evade host country institutions

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

Abstract

Scholars increasingly emphasize the impact of institutions on multinational enterprises (MNEs), but the opposite relationship has attracted less research – that is, MNE agency in relation to institutions. Based on a comparative case study of six MNEs from the United States and Sweden, this paper remedies this. It explores and explicates MNE subunits’ strategic responses to host country institutional constraints and opportunities in five different regions. A new-institutional approach is adopted, which allows for an investigation of MNE subunit agency in relation to normative and cognitive institutions, as well as regulative ones. This fine-grained analysis reveals not only what kinds of responses MNE subunits invoke, but why and how they are able to respond. We identify four strategic responses by which subunits shape, transpose and evade institutions in the pursuit of competitive advantage: Innovation, Arbitrage, Circumvention and Adaptation. These responses are driven by three key enablers: multinationality, foreignness and institutional ambiguity – that serve to enhance and heighten three mechanisms: reflexivity, role expectations and resources. By linking the enablers and the mechanisms to specific types of strategic responses in a framework and typology, the paper not only contributes to emerging research on the interplay between MNEs, institutions and strategy, but to strategy practice.

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

  • Adcock, R., & Collier, D. 2001. Measurement validity: A shared standard for qualitative and quantitative research. The American Political Science Review, 95 (3): 529–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almeida, P., & Phene, A. 2004. Subsidiaries and knowledge creation: The influence of the MNC and host country on innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 25 (8–9): 847–864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. 2002. The strategic impact of external networks: Subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 23 (11): 979–996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barley, S. R., & Tolbert, P. S. 1997. Institutionalization and structuration: Studying the links between action and institution. Organization Studies, 18 (1): 93–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 1989. Managing across borders. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., & D’Aunno, T. 2009. Institutional work and the paradox of embedded agency. In T. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, & B. Leca (Eds), Institutional work: Actors and agency in institutional studies of organization, 31–58. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., Leca, B., & Boxenbaum, E. 2009. How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. The Academy of Management Annals, 3 (1): 65–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckert, J. 1999. Agency, entrepreneurs, and institutional change: The role of strategic choice and institutionalized practices in organizations. Organization Studies, 20 (5): 777–799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behrman, J. N., & Grosse, R. E. 1990. International business and governments: Issues and institutions. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binder, A. 2007. For love and money: Organizations’ creative responses to multiple environmental logics. Theory and Society, 36 (6): 547–571.

    Article  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., & Morrison, A. J. 1996. Configurations of strategy and structure in subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 26 (4): 729–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., Brannen, M. Y., & Tung, R. L. 2011. Introduction to the Special Issue: From a distance and generalizable to up-close and grounded: Reclaiming a place for qualitative methods in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 42 (5): 573–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boubakri, N., Mansi, S. A., & Saffar, W. 2013. Political institutions, connectedness, and corporate risk-taking. Journal of International Business Studies, 44 (3): 195–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. 1977. Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. 1990. The logic of practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockman, P., Rui, O. M., & Zou, H. 2013. Institutions and the performance of politically connected M&As. Journal of International Business Studies, 44 (8): 833–852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bromiley, P., & Papenhausen, C. 2003. Assumptions of rationality and equilibrium in strategy research: The limits of traditional economic analysis. Strategic Organization, 1 (4): 413–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouthers, K. D., & Brouthers, L. E. 2000. Acquisition or greenfield start-up? Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influences. Strategic Management Journal, 21 (1): 89–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J., & Brannen, M. Y. 2011. Positioning JIBS as an interdisciplinary journal. Journal of International Business Studies, 42 (1): 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chacar, A. S., Newburry, W., & Vissa, B. 2010. Bringing institutions into performance persistence research: Exploring the impact of product, financial, and labor market institutions. Journal of International Business Studies, 41 (7): 1119–1140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, C., & Makino, S. 2007. Legitimacy and multi-level institutional environments: Implications for foreign subsidiary ownership structure. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (4): 621–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, C. C., & Beamish, P. W. 2005. The impact of institutional reforms on characteristics and survival of foreign subsidiaries in emerging economies. Journal of Management Studies, 42 (1): 35–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, E., & 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 

  • Coeurderoy, R. G., & Gordon, M. 2008. Regulatory environments and the location decision: Evidence from the early foreign market entries of new-technology-based firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (4): 670–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, D., & Mahon, J. E. 1993. Conceptual “stretching” revisited: Adapting categories in comparative analysis. American Political Science Review, 87 (4): 845–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creed, W. E. D., DeJordy, R., & Lok, J. 2010. Being the change: Resolving institutional contradition through identity work. Academy of Management Journal, 53 (6): 1336–1364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Aunno, T., Sutton, R. I., & Price, R. H. 1991. Isomorphism and external support in conflicting institutional environments: A study of drug abuse treatment units. Academy of Management Journal, 34 (3): 636–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vaus, D. A. 2001. Research design in social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J. 1988. Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. G. Zucker (Ed), Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment, 3–21. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48 (2): 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djelic, M.-L., & Quack, S. 2003. Globalization and institutions: Redefining the rules of the economic game. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Doz, Y., Santos, J., & Williamson, P. 2001. From global to metanational. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubois, A., & Gadde, L.-E. 2002. Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research, 55 (7): 553–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, L., & Miller, S. R. 2004. Distance matters: Liability of foreignness, institutional distance and ownership strategy. In M. A. Hitt, & J. L. C. Cheng (Eds), Advances in international management: The evolving theory of the multinational firm. Vol. 16 Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edman, J. 2009. The paradox of foreignness: Norm-breaking MNEs in the Japanese banking industry. PhD Dissertation, Institute of International Business, Stockholm School of Economics.

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14 (4): 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. 1998. What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103 (4): 962–1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferner, A., Almond, P., & Colling, T. 2005. Institutional theory and the cross-national transfer of employment policy: The case of ‘workforce diversity’ in US multinationals. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (3): 304–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernö. 1994. Conversation with Ove Fernö. Addiction, 89 (10): 1215–1226.

  • Fligstein, N. 1997. Social skill and institutional theory. American Behavioral Scientist, 40 (4): 397–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerring, J. 2004. What is a case study and what is it good for? The American Political Science Review, 98 (2): 341–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S. 1988. Environmental scanning in Korean firms: Organizational isomorphism in action. Journal of International Business Studies, 19 (1): 65–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. A. 1990. The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network. Academy of Management Review, 15 (4): 603–626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., & Nohria, N. 1989. Internal differentiation within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 10 (4): 323–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. 1976. New rules of sociological method. London, UK: Hutchinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gooderham, P., Nordhaug, O., & Ringdal, K. 1998. When in Rome, do they do as the Romans? HRM practices of US subsidiaries in Europe. MIR: Management International Review, 38 (1): 47–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. 1987. Multinationality and performance among British manufacturing companies. Journal of International Business Studies, 18 (3): 79–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., & Suddaby, R. 2006. Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (1): 27–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Suddaby, R., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. 2008. The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism. London, UK: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., Diaz, A. M., Li, S. X., & Lorente, J. C. 2010. The multiplicity of institutional logics and the heterogeneity of organizational responses. Organization Science, 21 (2): 521–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A., & Govindarajan, V. 1994. Organizing for knowledge flows within MNCs. International Business Review, 3 (4): 443–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henisz, W. J., & Delios, A. 2001. Uncertainty, imitation and plant location: Japanese multinational corporations, 1990–1996. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46 (3): 443–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henisz, W. J., & Delios, A. 2002. Learning about the institutional environment. In P. Ingram, & B. S. Silverman (Eds), The new institutionalism in strategic management (Advances in strategic management, volume 19), 399–372. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henisz, W., & Swaminathan, A. 2008. Institutions and international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (4): 537–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, G., & Deeg, R. 2008. Comparing capitalisms: Understanding institutional diversity and its implications for international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (4): 540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson, S., & Regnér, P. 2009. Normative barriers to imitation: Social complexity of core competences in a mutual fund industry. Strategic Management Journal, 30 (5): 517–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1993. Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24 (4): 625–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostova, T. 1997. Country institutional profiles: Concept and measurement. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Proceedings.

  • Kostova, T., & Roth, K. 2002. Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: Institutional and relational effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45 (1): 215–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Kostova, T., Roth, K., & Dacin, M. T. 2008. Institutional theory in the study of multinational corporations: A critique and new directions. Academy of Management Review, 33 (4): 994–1006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostova, T., Roth, K., & Dacin, M. T. 2009. Theorizing on MNCs: A promise for institutional theory. Academy of Management Review, 34 (1): 171–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraatz, M. S., & Block, S. 2008. Organizational implications of institutional pluralism. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin-Andersson (Eds), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, 243–275. London, UK: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A. 1999. Strategies for theorizing from process data. The Academy of Management Review, 24 (4): 691–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, T. B. 1999. Institutional strategy. Journal of Management, 25 (2): 161–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. 2006. Institutions and institutional work. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. B. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord (Eds), The sage handbook of organizational studies, 215–252. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, T. B., Suddaby, R., & Leca, B. 2009. Introduction: Theorizing and studying institutional work. In T. B. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, & B. Leca (Eds), Institutional work: Actors and agency in institutional studies of organizations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leblebici, H., Salancik, G. R., Copay, A., & King, T. 1991. Institutional change and the transformation of interorganizational fields: An organizational history of the US radio broadcasting industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36 (3): 333–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lounsbury, M., & Crumley, E. T. 2007. New practice creation: An institutional perspective on innovation. Organization Studies, 28 (7): 993–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, J. 2002. Intra- and inter-organizational imitative behavior: Institutional influences on Japanese firms’ entry mode choice. Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (1): 19–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, Y., Shenkar, O., & Nyaw, M.-K. 2002. Mitigating liabilities of foreignness: Defensive versus offensive approaches. Journal of International Management, 8 (3): 283–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maguire, S., Hardy, C., & Lawrence, T. B. 2004. Institutional entrepreneurship in emerging fields: HIV/AIDS treatment advocacy in Canada. Academy of Management Journal,, 47 (5): 657–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marschan-Piekkari, R., & Welch, C. 2004. Handbook of qualitative methods for international business. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. 1977. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology, 83 (2): 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K. E. 2001. Institutions, transaction costs, and entry mode choice in Eastern Europe. Journal of International Business Studies, 32 (2): 357–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K. E., & Nguyen, H. V. 2005. Foreign investment strategies and sub-national institutions in emerging markets: Evidence from Vietnam. Journal of Management Studies, 42 (1): 63–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K. E., Estrin, S., Bhaumik, S., & Peng, M. 2009. Institutions, resources, and entry strategies in emerging economies. Strategic Management Journal, 30 (1): 61–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K. E., Mudambi, R., & Narula, R. 2011. Multinational enterprises and local contexts: The opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness. Journal of Management Studies, 48 (2): 235–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mezias, J. M. 2002. Identifying liabilities of foreignness and strategies to minimize their effects: The case of labor lawsuit judgments in the United States. Strategic Management Journal, 23 (3): 229–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. A. 1994. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molina, C. 2012. Understanding institutional plurality in multinational enterprises: The roles of institutional logic and social identification. In L. Tihanyi, T. M. Devinney, & T. Pedersen (Eds), Institutional theory in international business and management. Advances in International Management, Vol. 25. 399–423. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G., Kristensen, P. H., & Whitley, R. 2001. The multinational firm: Organizing across institutional and national divides. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mudambi, R., & Navarra, P. 2002. Institutions and internation business: A theoretical overview. International Business Review, 11 (6): 635–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. 1990. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. 2005. Understanding the process of economic change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, C. 1991. Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16 (1): 145–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, C. 1997. Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and resource-based views. Strategic Management Journal, 18 (9): 697–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orr, R. J., & Scott, W. R. 2008. Institutional exceptions on global projects: A process model. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (4): 562–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M., Wang, D. Y. L., & Jiang, Y. 2008. An institution-based view of international business strategy: A focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (5): 920–936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, B., & Pedersen, T. 2002. Coping with liability of foreignness: Different learning engagements of entrant firms. Journal of International Management, 8 (3): 339–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, N., & Tracey, P. 2009. Institutional theory and the MNC. The Academy of Management Review, 34 (1): 169–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, N., Tracey, P., & Karra, N. 2009. Rethinking institutional distance: Strengthening the tie between new institutional theory and international management. Strategic Organization, 7 (3): 339–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., & Colyvas, J. 2008. Microfoundations of institutional theory. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin-Andersson (Eds), The Sage handbook of organizational Institutionalism, 78–98. London, UK: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, H., Monin, P., & Durand, R. 2003. Institutional change in Touque Ville: Nouvelle cuisine as an identity movement in French gastronomy. American Journal of Sociology, 108 (4): 795–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regnér, P. 2001. Complexity and multiple rationalities in strategy processes. In H. W. Volberda, & T. Elfring (Eds), Rethinking strategy, 43–56. London, UK: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regnér, P. 2003. Strategy making in the periphery: Inductive versus deductive strategy making. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (1): 57–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regnér, P. 2008. Strategy-as-practice and dynamic capabilities – Steps towards a dynamic view of strategy. Human Relations, 61 (4): 565–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regnér, P. 2010. Strategy process research and the RBV: Social barriers to imitation. In F.W. Kellermanns, & P. Mazzola (Eds), Handbook of research on strategy process, 90–108. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regnér, P. 2012. Strategy as practice – Untangling the emergence of competitive positions. In G. B. Dagnino (Ed), Handbook of research on competitive strategy, 182–200. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regnér, P., & Zander, U. 2011. Knowledge and strategy creation in multinational companies. Management International Review, 51 (6): 821–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig, P. M., & Nohria, N. 1994. Influences on human resource management practices in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 25 (2): 229–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig, P. M., & Singh, J. V. 1991. Organizational environments and the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 16 (2): 340–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, K., & Kostova, T. 2003. The use of the multinational corporation as a research context. Journal of Management, 29 (6): 883–902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, K., & Morrison, A. J. 1992. Implementing global strategy: Characteristics of global subsidiary mandates. Journal of International Business Studies, 23 (4): 715–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saka-Helmhout, A., & Geppert, M. 2011. Different forms of agency and institutional influences within multinational enterprises. Management International Review, 51 (5): 567–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos, F. M., & Eisenhardt, K. M. 2009. Constructing markets and shaping boundaries: Entrepreneurial power in nascent fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52 (4): 643–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauder, M. 2008. Interlopers and field change: The entry of US News into the field of legal education. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53 (2): 209–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scher, M. J. 1998. Japanese interfirm networks and their main banks. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneiberg, M., & Clemens, E. S. 2006. The typical tools for the job: Research strategies in institutional analysis. Sociological Theory, 24 (3): 195–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoemaker, P. J. H. 1990. Strategy, complexity and economic rent. Management Science, 36 (10): 1178–1192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, R. W. 2008. Institutions and organizations: Ideas and interests, 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seo, M.-G., & Creed, W. E. D. 2002. Institutional contradictions, praxis and institutional change: A dialectical perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 27 (2): 222–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sewell, W. H. J. 1992. A theory of structure: Duality, agency and transformation. The American Journal of Sociology, 98 (1): 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi, W., & Hoskisson, R. E. 2012. Advantages of foreignness: Benefits of creative institutional deviance. Advances in International Management, 25: 99–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiggle, S. 1994. Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data in consumer research. The Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (3): 491–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E. 1994. Case studies. In N. Denizen, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research, 236–247. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vernon, R. 1979. The product cycle hypothesis in a new international environment. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 41 (4): 255–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wan, W. P. 2005. Country resource environments, firm capabilities, and corporate diversification strategies. Journal of Management Studies, 42 (1): 161–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welch, C., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Paavilainen-Mantymaki, E. 2011. Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research. Journal of International Business, 42 (5): 740–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westney, D. E. 1993. Institutionalization theory and the multinational corporation. In S. Ghoshal, & D. E. Westney (Eds), Organization theory and the multinational corporation. London: Macmillan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittington, R. 2006. Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies, 27 (5): 613–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, D., & Shenkar, O. 2002. Institutional distance and the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 27 (4): 608–618.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. E. 1994. Case study research: Design & methods, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman, E. W. 1999. The categorical imperative: securities analysts and the illegitimacy discount. American Journal of Sociology, 104 (5): 1398–1438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing and Strategy, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden

    Patrick Regnér

  2. Graduate School of International Corporate Strategy, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, Japan

    Jesper Edman

Authors
  1. Patrick Regnér
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jesper Edman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Regnér.

Additional information

Accepted by Ulf Andersson and Ishtiaq Mahmood, 22 October 2013. This paper has been with the authors for four revisions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Regnér, P., Edman, J. MNE institutional advantage: How subunits shape, transpose and evade host country institutions. J Int Bus Stud 45, 275–302 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2013.66

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2013.66

Keywords

Search

Navigation