Innovation-receiving subsidiaries and dual embeddedness: impact on business performance

Baltic Journal of Management

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 108-130

  Bresciani, Stefano ^a   Ferraris, Alberto ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TURIN   (Italy)

Author keywords

CEE subsidiaries; Dual embeddedness; Innovation; Innovation performance; Innovation receiving; Relational embeddedness

Indexed keywords

EID: 84951842604     PISSN: 17465265     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/BJM-11-2014-0200     Document Type: Article

References (103)

1. Achcaoucaou, F., Miravitlles, P. and León-Darder, F. (2014), “Knowledge sharing and subsidiary R & D mandate development: a matter of dual embeddedness”, International Business Review, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 76-90.
2. Aiken, L.S. and West, S.G. (1991), Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
3. Andersson, U., Forsgren, M. and Holm, U. (2002), “The strategic impact of external networks: subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23 No. 11, pp. 979-996.
4. Andersson, U., Forsgren, M. and Holm, U. (2007), “Balancing subsidiary influence in the federative MNC: a business network view”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 38 No. 6, pp. 802-818.
5. Andersson, U., Forsgren, M. and Pedersen, T. (2001), “Subsidiary performance in multinational corporations: the importance of technology embeddedness”, International Business Review, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 3-23.
6. Asakawa, K. (2001), “Organizational tension in international R & D management: the case of Japanese firms”, Research Policy, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 735-757.
7. Birkinshaw, J. and Hood, N. (1998), “Multinational subsidiary evolution: capability and charter change in foreign-owned subsidiary companies”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 773-795.
8. Birkinshaw, J., Hood, N. and Young, S. (2005), “Subsidiary entrepreneurship, internal and external competitive forces, and subsidiary performance”, International Business Review, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 227-248.
9. Bouquet, C. and Birkinshaw, J. (2008), “Weight versus voice: how foreign subsidiaries gain attention from corporate headquarters”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 577-601.
10. Bresciani, S. and Ferraris, A. (2012), Imprese multinazionali: innovazione e scelte localizzative, Maggioli Editore, Santarcangelo di Romagna.
11. Cantwell, J. and Mudambi, R. (2005), “MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandates”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 26 No. 12, pp. 1109-1128.
12. Capaldo, A. (2007), “Network structure and innovation: the leveraging of a dual network as a distinctive relational capability”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 585-608.
13. Ciabuschi, F., Dellestrand, H. and Martín Martín, O. (2011), “Internal embeddedness, headquarters involvement, and innovation importance in multinational enterprises”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 48 No. 7, pp. 1612-1639.
14. Ciabuschi, F., Holm, U. and Martín Martín, O. (2014), “Dual embeddedness, influence and performance of innovating subsidiaries in the multinational corporation”, International Business Review, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 897-909.
15. Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D.A. (1990), “Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 128-152.
16. Cook, K.S. and Emerson, R.M. (1978), “Power, equity and commitment in exchange networks”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 43 No. 5, pp. 721-739.
17. Dacin, M.T., Ventresca, M.J. and Beal, B.D. (1999), “The embeddedness of organizations: dialogue & directions”, Journal of Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 317-356.
18. Dellestrand, H. (2011), “Subsidiary embeddedness as a determinant of divisional headquarters involvement in innovation transfer processes”, Journal of International Management, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 229-242.
19. Dhanaraj, C., Lyles, M.A., Stensma, H.K. and Tihanyi, L. (2004), “Managing tacit and explicit knowledge transfer in IJVs: the role of relational embeddedness and impact on performance”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 428-442.
20. Dyer, J. and Nobeoka, K. (2000), “Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: the Toyota case”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 345-367.
21. Dyer, J.H. and Singh, H. (1998), “The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 660-679.
22. Echols, A. and Tsai, W. (2005), “Niche and performance: the moderating role of network embeddedness”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 219-238.
23. Ferraris, A. (2014), “Rethinking the literature on ‘multiple embeddedness’ and subsidiary-specific advantages”, Multinational Business Review, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 15-33.
24. Figueiredo, P. (2011), “The role of dual embeddedness in the innovative performance of MNC subsidiaries: evidence from Brazil”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 417-440.
25. Fjelstad, D. and Sasson, A. (2010), “Membership matters: on the value of being embedded in customer networks”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 47 No. 6, pp. 944-966.
26. Forsgren, M., Johanson, J. and Holm, U. (2005), Managing the Embedded Multinational: A Business Network View, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
27. Frost, A.S. (1998), “The geographic sources of innovation in the multinational enterprise: US subsidiaries and host country spillovers”, PhD thesis, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
28. Gammelgaard, J. and Pedersen, T. (2010), “Internal versus external knowledge sourcing of subsidiaries and the impact of headquarters control”, in Andersson, U. and Holm, U. (Eds), Managing the Contemporary Multinational: The Role of Headquarters, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp. 211-230.
29. Gammelgaard, J., McDonald, F., Stephan, A., Tüselmann, H. and Dörrenbächer, C. (2012), “The impact of increases in subsidiary autonomy and network relationships on performance”, International Business Review, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 1158-1172.
30. Garcia-Pont, C., Canales, I. and Noboa, F. (2009), “Subsidiary strategy: the embeddedness”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 182-214.
31. Geringer, M. and Hebert, L. (1991), “Measuring performance in joint ventures”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 249-263.
32. Ghoshal, S. and Bartlett, C.A. (1990), “The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 603-625.
33. Gnyawali, D., Singal, M. and Mu, S. (2009), “Knowledge ties among subsidiaries in MNCs: a-multi-level conceptual model”, Journal of International Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 387-400.
34. Granovetter, M. (1985), “Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 91 No. 3, pp. 481-510.
35. Gulati, R., Nohria, N. and Zaheer, A. (2000), “Strategic networks”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 203-215.
36. Hagedoorn, J. and Duysters, G. (2002), “Learning in dynamic inter-firm networks: the efficacy of multiple contracts”, Organization Studies, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 525-548.
37. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (2006), Multivariate data analysis, 6th ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
38. Hallin, C., Holm, U. and Sharma, D.D. (2011), “Embeddedness of innovation receivers in the multinational corporation: effects on business performance”, International Business Review, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 362-373.
39. Hansen, M.T. (1999), “The search-transfer problem: the role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 82-111.
40. Harman, H.H. (1967), Modern Factor Analysis, 3rd ed., University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
41. Helble, Y. and Chong, L.C. (2004), “The importance of internal and external R & D network linkages for R & D organisations: evidence from Singapore”, R&D Management, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 605-612.
42. Hillebrand, B. and Biemans, W.G. (2004), “Links between internal and external co-operations in product development: an exploratory study”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 110-122.
43. Hong, J.F.L., Snell, R.B. and Easterby-Smith, M. (2009), “Knowledge flow and boundary crossing at the periphery of a MNC”, International Business Review, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 539-554.
44. Inkpen, A.C. and Tsang, E.W.K. (2005), “Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 146-165.
45. Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1993), “Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 625-645.
46. Lane, P.J. and Lubatkin, M. (1998), “Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 461-477.
47. Larson, A. (1992), “Network dyads in entrepreneurial settings: a study of governance of exchange relationships”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 76-104.
48. McEvily, S.K., Eisenhardt, K.M. and Prescott, J.E. (2004), “The global acquisition, leverage, and protection of technological competencies”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 25 Nos 8-9, pp. 713-722.
49. Marquardt, D.W. (1970), “Generalized inverses, ridge regression, biased linear estimation and non-linear estimation”, Technometrics, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 591-612.
50. Meyer, K., Mudambi, R. and Narula, R. (2011), “Multinational enterprises and local contexts: the opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 235-252.
51. Monteiro, L.F., Arvidsson, N. and Birkinshaw, J. (2008), “Knowledge flows within multinational corporations: explaining subsidiary isolation and its performance implications”, Organization Science, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 90-107.
52. Moran, P. (2005), “Structural vs. relational embeddedness: social capital and managerial performance”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 26 No. 12, pp. 1129-1151.
53. Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. (1998), “Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 242-266.
54. Phene, A. and Almeida, P. (2008), “Innovation in multinational subsidiaries: the role of knowledge assimilation and subsidiary capabilities”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 901-919.
55. Pinch, S., Henry, N., Jenkins, M. and Tallman, S. (2003), “From industrial districts to ‘knowledge clusters’: a model of knowledge dissemination and competitive advantage in industrial agglomerations”, Journal of Economic Geography, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 373-388.
56. Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986), “Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 531-544.
57. Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
58. Polanyi, K. (1944), The Great Transformation, Beacon Press, Boston, MA.
59. Polanyi, K. (1957), “The economy as an instituted process”, in Polanyi, K., Conrad, M.A. and Pearson, H.W. (Eds), Trade and Market in the Early Empires, Free Press, New York, NY, pp. 243-270.
60. Rugman, A. and Verbeke, A. (2009), “Location, competitiveness, and the multinational enterprise”, in Rugman, A. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of International Business, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford.
61. Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2001), “Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 237-250.
62. Rugman, A.M., Verbeke, A. and Nguyen, Q.T.K. (2011), “Fifty years of international business and beyond”, Management International Review, Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 755-786.
63. Salancik, G.R. and Pfeffer, J. (1977), “An examination of need-satisfaction models of job attitudes”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 427-456.
64. Schulz, M. (2003), “Pathways of relevance: exploring inflows of knowledge into subunits of multinational corporations”, Organization Science, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 440-459.
65. Simsek, Z., Lubatkin, M. and Floyd, S.W. (2003), “Inter-firm networks and entrepreneurial behavior: a structural embeddedness perspective”, Journal of Management, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 427-442.
66. Studenmund, A.H. (1992), Using Economics. A Practical Guide, 2nd ed., Harper Collins, New York, NY.
67. Szulanski, G. (1996), “Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. S2, pp. 27-43.
68. Szulanski, G. and Jensen, R.J. (2004), “Overcoming stickiness: an empirical investigation of the role of template in replication of organizational routines”, Managerial and Decision Economics, Vol. 25 Nos 6-7, pp. 347-363.
69. Tardivo, G. (2008), “L’evoluzione degli studi sul knowledge management”, Sinergie, Vol. 76, pp. 21-42, available at: www.sinergiejournal.it/rivista/index.php/sinergie/article/view/244/267
70. Teece, D.J. (1977), “Technology transfer by multinational firms: the resource cost of transferring technological know-how”, The Economic Journal, Vol. 87 No. 346, pp. 242-261.
71. Tsai, W. (2001), “Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business innovation and performance”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 996-1004.
72. Uzzi, B. (1996), “The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: the network effect”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 61 No. 4, pp. 674-698.
73. Uzzi, B. (1997), “Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embeddedness”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 35-67.
74. Uzzi, B. and Lancaster, R. (2003), “Relational embeddedness and learning: the case of bank loan managers and their clients”, Management Science, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 383-399.
75. Verbeke, A. (2009), International Business Strategy, 1st ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
76. Vernaik, S., Midgley, D.F. and Devinney, T.M. (2005), “Dual paths to performance: the impact of global pressures on MNC subsidiary conduct and performance”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 36 No. 6, pp. 655-675.
77. Von Hippel, E. (1994), “Sticky information and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation”, Management Science, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 429-439.
78. Wang, J., Liu, X. and Li., X. (2009), “A dual-role typology of multinational subsidiaries”, International Business Review, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 578-591.
79. Wexley, K., Alexander, R., Greenawalt, J. and Couch, M. (1980), “Attitudinal congruence and similarity as related to interpersonal evaluation in manager-subordinate dyads”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 320-330.
80. Wolf, J. and Egelhoff, W.G. (2010), “Limitations of the network organization in MNCs”, in Pla-Barber, J. and Alegre, J. (Eds), Reshaping the Boundaries of the Firm in an Era of Global Interdependence, (Progress In International Business Research, Volume 5), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 143-172.
81. Yamin, M. (2005), “Subsidiary business networks and opportunity development in multinational enterprises: a comparison of the influence of internal and external business networks”, in Ghauri, P., Hadjikhani, A. and Johanson, J. (Eds), Managing Opportunity Development in Business Networks, Macmillan- Palgrave, London, pp. 91-109.
82. Yamin, M. and Andersson, U. (2011), “Subsidiary importance in the MNC: what role does internal embeddedness play?”, International Business Review, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 151-162.
83. Almeida, P. and Phene, A. (2004), “Subsidiaries and knowledge creation: the influence of the MNC and host country on innovation”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 25 Nos 8-9, pp. 847-864.
84. Andersson, U. and Forsgren, M. (2000), “In search of centres of excellence: network embeddedness and subsidiary roles in multinational corporations”, Management International Review, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 329-350.
85. Ariffin, N. and Bell, M. (1999), “Firms, politics and political economy: patterns of subsidiary-parent linkages and technological capability-building in electronics TNC subsidiaries in Malaysia”, in Jomo, K.S., Rasiah, R. and Felker, G. (Eds), Industrial Technology Development in Malaysia, Routledge, London, pp. 150-190.
86. Bartlett, C.A. and Ghoshal, S. (1989), Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
87. Birkinshaw, J.M. (1997), “Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: the characteristics of subsidiary initiatives”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 207-229.
88. Bresciani, S., Vrontis, D. and Thrassou, A. (2013), “Change through innovation in family businesses: evidence from an Italian sample”, World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 195-215.
89. Cantwell, J. (2009), “Location and the multinational enterprise”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 35-41.
90. Dorrenbacher, C. and Gammelgaard, J. (2010), “Multinational corporations, inter-organizational networks and subsidiary charter removals”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 206-216.
91. Forsgren, M. (1997), “The advantage paradox of the multinational corporation”, in Bjorkman, I. and Forsgren, M. (Eds), The Nature of the International Firm, Copenhagen Business School Press, Copenhagen, pp. 69-85.
92. Forsgren, M., Johanson, J. and Sharma, D. (2000), “Development of MNC centres of excellence”, in Holm, U. and Pedersen, T. (Eds), The Emergence and Impact of MNC Centres of Excellence, Macmillan Press, London, pp. 45-67.
93. Frenz, M. and Ietto-Gillies, G. (2009), “The impact on innovation performance of different sources of knowledge. Evidence from the UK community innovation survey”, Research Policy, Vol. 38 No. 7, pp. 1125-1135.
94. Gupta, A. and Govindarajan, V. (1994), “Organizing for knowledge flows within MNCs”, International Business Review, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 443-457.
95. Hennart, J.F. (2009), “Down with MNC centric theories! Market entry and expansion as the bundling of MNC and local assets”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 40 No. 9, pp. 1432-1454.
96. Holm, U. and Pedersen, T. (2000), The Emergence and Impact of MNC Centres of Excellence: A Subsidiary Perspective, Macmillan, Basingstoke.
97. Hung, S.C. (2002), “Mobilising networks to achieve strategic differences”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 591-613.
98. Jiménez-Jiménez, D. and Sanz-Valle, R. (2011), “Innovation, organizational learning, and performance”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 64 No. 4, pp. 408-417.
99. Kuemmerle, W. (1999), “Foreign direct investment in industrial research in the pharmaceutical and electronics industries – results from a survey of multinational firms”, Research Policy, Vol. 28 Nos 2-3, pp. 179-193.
100. Nell, P.C. and Andersson, U. (2012), “The complexity of the business network context and its effect on subsidiary relational (over-) embeddedness”, International Business Review, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 1087-1098.
101. Newbury, W. and Yakova, N. (2006), “Standardization preferences: a function of culture, work interdependence and local embeddedness”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 44-60.
102. Perlmutter, H.V. (1969), “The tortuous evolution of the multinational corporation”, Colombia Journal of World Business, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 9-18.
103. Podolny, J.M. (2001), “Networks as the pipes and prisms of the market”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 107 No. 1, pp. 33-60.