Regional Management Centers in the Asia-Pacific

Zusammenfassung

---

Despite their importance, the regional strategies, organizations, and management centers of multinational firms have received relatively little attention in the literature. Analysis of survey responses of 1,100 MNC managers in the Asia-Pacific shows that there are four types of MNC regional management centers. The types of centers of firm has depends on firm and location-specific attributes. The paper confirms the importance of regional strategies and region management centers to multinational companies, shows that firm-specific and location-specific factors influence the roles the centers play, and provides guidelines for managers on regional management centers. Among the major challenges facing multinational companies are those associated with managing far-flung operations. Many firms are turning to regional structures to achieve the right mix of local responsiveness and global integration. Regional structures usually involve regional management centers of some kind.

Siehe den Gesamtinhalt dieses Dokumentes

Auszug

---

Regional Management Centers in the Asia-Pacific

Introduction

The organization of international activities is a major focal point of international business research. According to Rugman and Verbeke (2001), the prevailing paradigm has involved global headquarters and national subsidiaries (Bartlett 1986, Hedlund 1986, Otterback 1981, Rugman/Bennett 1982, Stopford/Wells 1972, White/Poynter 1984). Within tiiis paradigm, some authors have addressed the tradeoffs between the potential efficiency and clarity of a globally integrated strategy versus the local responsiveness of a country-focused strategy (Doz/Prahalad 1984, Gates/Egelhoff 1986, Martinez/Jarillo 1989, 1991, Buckley/Casson 1998), while others have focused on the roles of national subsidiaries (Birkinshaw 1997, Birkinshaw/Hood 1998, Taggart 1998). The dominance of the global headquarters-national subsidiary paradigm can be seen in the fact that even the characterization of multinational firms tends to be taken to be "global" or "multidomestic" (Porter 1986); "international", "global", or "transnational" (Bartlett/ Ghoshal 1989); "globally integrated", "locally responsive", or "multifocal" (Prahalad/Doz 1987); or "hierarchical" or "heterarchical" (Hedlund 1986) based on the interaction between global headquarters and national subsidiaries.

The overwhelming tendency to take the global headquarters and the national subsidiaries as units of analysis has caused international business researchers to virtually ignore the rise of (cross-national) regional economies, strategies, and organizations. Increasingly, much of the world economy can be divided into three regions centered on the Americas, Europe, and East Asia (Ohmae 1985, Rugman/Verbeke 1990, Levy 1995, Lehrer/Asakawa 1999, Rugman 2000). Regional trade blocs, such as the European Union, the North American Free Trade Area, and the ASEAN Free Trade Area, have caused increasing integration of national economies into regional economies by reducing the transaction costs for cross-border activities within regions and allowing firms to achieve economies of scale and other organizational efficiencies on a regional rather than national basis. At the same time, advances in information and management systems have allowed firms to manage some activities at a greater distance than before, again facilitating the emergence of regional organizations and strategies (Enright 2002).

This regional dimension, however, has...

Siehe den Gesamtinhalt dieses Dokumentes

---