The new eclectic paradigm and international business strategy

Handbook of Research on International Strategic Management

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 64-76

  Lundan, Sarianna M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BREMEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84881957826     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4337/9781781009147.00009     Document Type: Chapter

References (73)

1. Andersson, U., Forsgren, M. and Holm, U. (2007), ‘Balancing subsidiary influence in the federative MNC: a business network view’, Journal of International Business Studies, 38(5): 802-18.
2. Augier, M. and Teece, D.J. (2007), ‘Dynamic capabilities and multinational enterprise: Penrosean insights and omissions’, Management International Review, 47(2): 175-92.
3. Barney, J.B. (1991), ‘Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage’, Journal of Management, 17(1):99-120.
4. Brouthers, K.D., Brouthers, L.E. and Werner, S. (1996), ‘Dunning’s eclectic theory and the smaller firm: the impact of ownership and locational advantages on the choice of entry- modes in the computer software industry’, International Business Review, 5(4): 377-95.
5. Buckley, P.J. and Casson, M.C. (1976), The Future of the Multinational Enterprise, London: Macmillan.
6. Cantwell, J., Dunning, J.H. and 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): 567-86.
7. Chandler, A.D. (1990), Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism, Cambridge, MA: Harvard/Belknap.
8. Chen, S.-F.S. (2005), ‘Extending internalization theory: a new perspective on international technology transfer and its generalization’, Journal of International Business Studies, 36(2): 231-45.
9. Chen, S.-F.S. (2010), ‘A general TCE model of international business institutions: market failure and reciprocity’, Journal of International Business Studies, 41(6): 935-59.
10. Chesbrough, H. (2006), Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
11. Chesbrough, H.W. and Teece, D.J. (2002), ‘Organizing for innovation: when is virtual virtuous?', Harvard Business Review, 80(8): 127-35.
12. Coase, R.H. (1937), ‘The nature of the firm’, Economica, 1(Nov.): 386-405.
13. Contractor, F.J., Kumar, V., Kundu, S.K. and Pedersen, T. (2010), ‘Reconceptualizing the firm in a world of outsourcing and offshoring: the organizational and geographical relocation of high- value company functions’, Journal of Management Studies, 47(8): 1417-33.
14. Coriat, B. and Dosi, G. (1998), ‘Learning how to govern and learning how to solve problems: on the coevolution of competences, conflicts, and organizational routines’, in A.D. Chandler, Jr, P. Hagström and Ö. Sölvell (eds), The Dynamic Firm: The Role of Technology, Strategy, Organization, and Regions, Oxford:Oxford University Press, pp. 103-33.
15. Day, R.H. (1998), ‘Bounded rationality and firm performance in the experimental economy’, in G. Eliasson, C. Green and C. McCann (eds), Microfoundations of Economic Growth: A Schumpeterian Perspective, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, pp. 119-30.
16. Dunning, J.H. (1977), ‘Trade, location of economic activity and the MNE: a search for an eclectic approach’, in B. Ohlin, P.O. Hesselborn and P.M. Wijkman (eds), The International Allocation of Economic Activity: Proceedings of a Nobel Symposium Held at Stockholm, London: Macmillan, pp. 395-418.
17. Dunning, J.H. (1979), ‘Explaining changing patterns of international production: in defense of the eclectic theory’, Oxford Bulletin of Economics & Statistics, 41(4): 269-95.
18. Dunning, J.H. (1980), ‘Toward an eclectic theory of international production: some empirical tests’, Journal of International Business Studies, 11(1): 9-31.
19. Dunning, J.H. (1988), ‘The eclectic paradigm of international production: a restatement and some possible extensions’, Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1): 1-31.
20. Dunning, J.H. (1995), ‘Reappraising the eclectic paradigm in the age of alliance capitalism’, Journal of International Business Studies, 26(3): 461-91.
21. Dunning, J.H. (1998), ‘Location and the multinational enterprise: a neglected factor?', Journal of International Business Studies, 29(1): 45-66.
22. Dunning, J.H. (2000a), ‘The eclectic paradigm as an envelope for economic and business theories of MNE activity’, International Business Review, 9: 163-90.
23. Dunning, J.H. (2000b), ‘The eclectic paradigm of international production: a personal perspective’, in Christos N. Pitelis and Roger Sugden (eds), The Nature of the Transnational Firm, 2nd edn, London and New York:Routledge, pp. 119-39.
24. Dunning, J.H. (2001), ‘The eclectic (OLI) paradigm of international production: past, present and future’, International Journal of the Economics of Business, 8(2): 173-90.
25. Dunning, J.H. (2003), ‘The contribution of Edith Penrose to international business scholarship’, Management International Review, 43(1): 3-19.
26. Dunning, J.H. (2004), ‘An evolving paradigm of the economic determinants of international business activity’, in Joseph L.C. Cheng and Michael A. Hitt (eds), Managing Multinationals in a Knowledge Economy:Economics, Culture, and Human Resources, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 3-27.
27. Dunning, J.H. and Lundan, S.M. (2008a), ‘Institutions and the OLI paradigm of the multinational enterprise’, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(4): 573-93.
28. Dunning, J.H. and Lundan, S.M. (2008b), Multinational Enterprises and the Global Economy, 2nd edn, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.
29. Dunning, J.H. and Lundan, S.M. (2009), ‘The internationalization of corporate R&D: a review of the evidence and some policy implications’, Review of Policy Research, 26(1-2): 13-33.
30. Dunning, J.H. and Lundan, S.M. (2010), ‘The institutional origins of dynamic capabilities in multinational enterprises’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(4): 1225-46.
31. Dunning, J.H. and Pitelis, C. (2008), ‘Stephen Hymer’s contribution to international business scholarship: an assessment and extension’, Journal of International Business Studies, 39(1): 167-76.
32. Eliasson, G. (1991), ‘Modeling the experimentally organized economy’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 16(1-2): 153-82.
33. Foss, N.J. (2003), ‘Selective intervention and internal hybrids: interpreting and learning from the rise and decline of the Oticon Spaghetti Organization’, Organization Science, 14(3): 331-49.
34. Gabrielsson, M. and Kirpalani, V.H.M. (2004), ‘Born globals: how to reach new business space rapidly’, International Business Review, 13(5): 555-71.
35. Guillén, M.F. (2000), ‘Business groups in emerging economies: a resource- based view’, Academy of Management Journal, 43(3): 362-80.
36. Henderson, R.M. and Clark, K.B. (1990), ‘Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1): 9-30.
37. Hoskisson, R.E., Eden, L., Lau, C.M. and Wright, M. (2000), ‘Strategy in emerging economies’, Academy of Management Journal, 43(3): 249-67.
38. Kaplan, S. and Henderson, R. (2005), ‘Inertia and incentives: bridging organizational economics and organizational theory’, Organization Science, 16(5): 509-21.
39. Kipping, M. and Bjarnar, O. (eds) (1998), The Americanisation of European Business: The Marshall Plan and the Transfer of US Management Models, London: Routledge.
40. Kogut, B. and Parkinson, D. (1998), ‘Adoption of the multidivisional structure: analyzing history from the start’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 7(2): 249-73.
41. Kogut, B., Walker, G. and Anand, J. (2002), ‘Agency and institutions: national divergences in diversification behavior’, Organization Science, 13(2): 162-78.
42. Kostova, T., Roth, K. and Dacin, M.T. (2008), ‘Institutional theory in the study of MNCs: a critique and new directions’, Academy of Management Review, 33(4): 994-1006.
43. Kristensen, P.H. and Zeitlin, J. (2005), Local Players in Global Games: The Strategic Constitution of a Multinational Corporation, New York: Oxford University Press.
44. Leiponen, A. (2006), ‘National styles in the setting of global standards: the relationship between firms’ standardization strategies and national origin’, in John Zysman and Abraham Newman (eds), How Revolutionary was the Digital Revolution? National Responses, Market Transitions, and Global Technology, Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press, pp. 338-58.
45. Meyer, K.E. (2004), ‘Perspectives on multinational enterprises in emerging economies’, Journal of International Business Studies, 35(4): 259-76.
46. Morgan, G. (2005), ‘Introduction: changing capitalisms? Internationalization, institutional change, and systems of economic organization’, in Glenn Morgan, Richard Whitley and Eli Moen (eds), Changing Capitalisms? Internationalization, Institutional Change, and Systems of Economic Organization, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 1-18.
47. Morgan, G. and Kristensen, P.H. (2006), ‘The contested space of multinationals: varieties of institutionalism, varieties of capitalism’, Human Relations, 59(11): 1467-90.
48. Morgan, G. and Quack, S. (2005), ‘Institutional legacies and firm dynamics: the growth and internationalization of UK and German law firms’, Organization Studies, 26(12): 1765-85.
49. Mudambi, R. (1999), ‘MNE internal capital markets and subsidiary strategic independence’, International Business Review, 8(2): 197-212.
50. Mudambi, R. and Navarra, P. (2004), ‘Is knowledge power? Knowledge flows, subsidiary power and rentseeking within MNCs’, Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5): 385-406.
51. Narula, R. (2010), ‘Keeping the eclectic paradigm simple’, Multinational Business Review, 18(2): 35-49.
52. North, D.C. (1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53. North, D.C. (2005), Understanding the Process of Economic Change, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
54. Oxelheim, L., Randøy, T. and Stonehill, A. (2001), ‘On the treatment of finance- specific factors within the OLI paradigm’, International Business Review, 10(4): 381-98.
55. Peng, M.W. (2001), ‘The resource- based view and international business’, Journal of Management, 27(6):803-29.
56. Peng, M.W., Wang, D.Y.L. and Jiang, Y. (2008), ‘An institution- based view of international business strategy:a focus on emerging economies’, Journal of International Business Studies, 39(5): 920-36.
57. Penrose, E.T. (1959), The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
58. Peteraf, M.A. (1993), ‘The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource based view’, Strategic Management Journal, 14(3): 179-91.
59. Pitelis, C.N. (2007), ‘A behavioral resource- based view of the firm: the synergy of Cyert and March (1963) and Penrose (1959)', Organization Science, 18(3): 478-90.
60. Pitelis, C.N. and Teece, D.J. (2010), ‘Cross- border market co- creation, dynamic capabilities and the entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise’, Industrial & Corporate Change, 19(4): 1247-70.
61. Rodriguez, P., Uhlenbruck, K. and Eden, L. (2005), ‘Government corruption and the entry strategies of multinationals’, Academy of Management Review, 30(2): 383-96.
62. Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2004), ‘A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises’, Journal of International Business Studies, 35(1): 3-18.
63. Scherer, A.G. and Palazzo, G. (2011), ‘The new political role of business in a globalized world: a review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy’, Journal of Management Studies, 48(4): 899-931.
64. Singh, N. and Kundu, S. (2002), ‘Explaining the growth of e- commerce corporations (ECCs): an extension and application of the eclectic paradigm’, Journal of International Business Studies, 33(4): 679-97.
65. Szulanski, G. (1996), ‘Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm’, Strategic Management Journal, 17: 27-43.
66. Teece, D.J. (2006), ‘Reflections on the Hymer thesis and the multinational enterprise’, International Business Review, 15(2): 124-39.
67. Teece, D.J. (2007), ‘Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance’, Strategic Management Journal, 28(13): 1319-50.
68. Teece, D.J. and Pisano, G. (1994), ‘The dynamic capabilities of firms: an introduction’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 3(3): 537-56.
69. Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997), ‘Dynamic capabilities and strategic management’, Strategic Management Journal, 18(7): 509-33.
70. Teegen, H., Doh, J.P. and Vachani, S. (2004), ‘The importance of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in global governance and value creation: an international business research agenda’, Journal of International Business Studies, 35(6): 463-83.
71. Verbeke, A. and Kenworthy, T.P. (2008), ‘Multidivisional vs metanational governance of the multinational enterprise’, Journal of International Business Studies, 39(6): 940-56.
72. Westney, D.E. (2001), ‘Japan’, in Alan M. Rugman and Tom Brewer (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Business, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 623-51.
73. Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E. and Sapienza, H.J. (2001), ‘Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology- based firms’, Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7): 587-613.