Subsidiary Initiative Taking in Multinational Corporations: The Relationship between Power and Issue Selling

Organization Studies

Volumn 37, Issue 9, 2016, Pages 1249-1270

  Dörrenbächer, Christoph ^a   Gammelgaard, Jens ^b  

^a BERLIN SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND LAW   (Germany)

^b Copenhagen Business School ^*  (Denmark)

Author keywords

issue selling tactic; multinational corporation; organizational politics; subsidiary initiative; subsidiary power

Indexed keywords

EID: 84983294311     PISSN: 01708406     EISSN: 17413044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0170840616634130     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. T.C.AmbosJ.Birkinshaw (2010). Headquarters’ attention and its effect on subsidiary performance. Management International Review, 50, 449–469.
2. T.C.AmbosU.AnderssonJ.Birkinshaw (2010). What are the consequences of initiative-taking in multinational subsidiaries?Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 1–20.
3. U.AnderssonU.Holm (2010). Managing the contemporary multinational: The role of headquarters. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
4. U.AnderssonM.ForsgrenU.Holm (2002). The strategic impact of external networks: Subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 979–996.
5. U.AnderssonM.ForsgrenU.Holm (2007). Balancing subsidiary influence in the federative MNC: A business network view. Journal of International Business Studies, 38, 802–818.
6. W.G.AstleyP.S.Sachdeva (1984). Structural sources of intraorganizational power: A theoretical synthesis. Academy of Management Review, 9, 104–113.
7. W.G.AstleyE.J.Zajac (1991). Intraorganizational power and organizational design: Reconciling rational and coalitional models of organization. Organization Science, 2, 399–411.
8. P.BachrachM.S.Baratz (1963). Decisions and nondecision: An analytical framework. American Political Science Review, 57, 641–651.
9. F.Becker-RitterspachC.Dörrenbächer (2011). An organizational politics perspective on intra-firm competition in multinational corporations. Management International Review, 51, 533–559.
10. G.R.G.Benito (2005). Divestment and international business strategy. Journal of Economic Geography, 5, 235–251.
11. J.BirkinshawA.J.Morrison (1995). Configurations of strategy and structure in subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 26, 729–753.
12. J.BirkinshawJ.Ridderstråle (1999). Fighting the corporate immune system: A process study of subsidiary initiatives in multinational corporations. International Business Review, 8, 149–180.
13. J.BirkinshawC.BouquetT.Ambos (2006). Attention HQ. Business Strategy Review, 4–9.
14. J.BirkinshawM.Y.BrannenR.L.Tung (2011). 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, 573–581.
15. K.BishopS.S.WebberR.O’Neill (2011). Preparation and prior experience in issue-selling success. Journal of Managerial Issues, 23, 323–340.
16. C.BouquetJ.M.Birkinshaw (2008). Managing power in the multinational corporation: How low-power actors gain influence. Journal of Management, 34,: 477–508.
17. J.A.CantwellR.Mudambi (2005). MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandates. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 1109–1128.
18. F.CiabuschiH.DellestrandU.Holm (2012). The role of headquarters in the contemporary MNC. Journal of International Management, 18, 213–223.
19. E.ClarkM.Geppert (2011). Subsidiary integration as identity construction and institution building: A political sensemaking approach. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 395–416.
20. S.R.CleggD.CourpassonN.Phillips (2006). Power and organizations. London: SAGE Publications.
21. D.Cowan (1991). The effect of decision-making styles and contextual experience in executives’ descriptions of organization problem formulation. Journal of Management Studies, 28, 462–484.
22. A.Crane (2000). Corporate greening as amoralization. Organization Studies, 21, 673–696.
23. R.Dahl (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral Science, 2, 201–215.
24. E.Delany (2000). Strategic development of multinational subsidiaries through subsidiary initiative taking. Long Range Planning, 33, 220–244.
25. N.K.Denzin (1978). The research act: a theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
26. T.DiefenbachJ.A.A.Sillince (2011). Formal and informal hierarchy in different types of organization. Organization Studies, 32, 1515–1537.
27. C.DörrenbächerJ.Gammelgaard (2010). Multinational corporations, inter-organizational networks and subsidiary charter removals. Journal of World Business, 45206–216.
28. C.DörrenbächerJ.Gammelgaard (2011). Subsidiary power in the multinational corporation: On the subtle role of micro-political bargaining power. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 7, 30–47.
29. J.E.DuttonS.Ashford (1993). Selling issues to top management. Academy of Management Review, 18, 397–428.
30. J.E.DuttonS.J.AshfordR.M.O’NeillK.A.Lawrence (2001). Moves that matter: Issue selling and organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 716–736.
31. K.M.Eisenhardt (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550.
32. N.ErkamaE.Vaara (2010). Struggles over legitimacy in global organizational restructuring: A rhetorical perspective on legitimation strategies and dynamics in a shutdown case. Organization Studies, 31, 813–839.
33. A.FernerP.AlmondI.ClarkT.CollingT.EdwardsL.HoldenM.Muller-Carmen (2004). The dynamics of central control and subsidiary autonomy in the management of human resources: Case-study evidence from US MNCs in the UK. Organization Studies, 25, 363–391.
34. A.FernerT.EdwardsA.Tempel (2012). Power, institutions and the cross-national transfer of employment practices in multinationals. Human Relations, 65, 163–187.
35. M.FletcherE.Plakoyiannaki (2011). Case selection in international business: Key issues and common misconceptions. In (Eds.), Rethinking the case study in international business and management research (pp. 171–191). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
36. M.ForsgrenU.HolmJ.Johanson (2005). Managing the embedded multinational: A business network view. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
37. M.Foucault (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings. New York: Pantheon.
38. J.R.P.FrenchJr.B.Raven (1959). The bases of social power. In (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
39. M.FritzB.Karlsson (2006). SKF – a global story. Stockholm: Informationsförlaget. http://investors.skf.com/skf-a-global-story/
40. J.Gammelgaard (2009). Issue selling and bargaining power in intrafirm competition: The differentiating impact of the subsidiary management composition. Competition & Change, 13, 214–228.
41. J.GammelgaardF.McDonaldA.StephanH.TüselmannC.Dörrenbächer (2012). Characteristics of low-autonomy foreign subsidiaries: Value chains, staffing, and intra-organizational relationships. Journal of International Business and Economy, 13, 65–95.
42. C.Hardy (1996). Understanding power: Bringing about strategic change. British Journal of Management, 7, 3–16.
43. S.L.HartS.Sharma (2004). Engaging fringe stakeholders for competitive imagination. Academy of Management Executive, 18, 7–18.
44. A.W.HarzingA.M.Sorge (2003). The relative impact of country-of-origin and universal contingencies on internationalization strategies and corporate control in multinational enterprises: World-wide and European perspectives. Organization Studies, 24, 187–214.
45. G.Hedlund (1986). The hypermodern MNC – a heterarchy?Human Resource Management, 25, 9–35.
46. A.Hossak (1982). Making a summary. London: Methuen.
47. Y.LingD.C.BaldridgeS.W.Floyd (2005). Toward a model of issue-selling by subsidiary managers in multinational organizations. Journal of International Business Studies, 36, 637–654.
48. S.Lukes (2005). Power: A radical view. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
49. M.MacleanC.HarveyG.Kling (2014). Pathways to power: Class, hyper-agency and the French corporate elite. Organization Studies, 35, 825–855.
50. R.Marschan-PiekkariC.WelchH.PenttinenM.Tahvanainen (2004). Interviewing in the multinational corporation: Challenges of the organisational context. In (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business (pp. 244–263). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
51. J.MattesS.Späth (2013). Upgrading foreign subsidiaries in the case of a German multinational company: Bargaining processes and strategic and operative levels. Competition and Change, 17, 129–155.
52. D.Mechanic (1962). Sources of power of lower participants in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 7, 349–364.
53. R.MirD.R.Sharpe (2009). The multinational firm as an instrument of exploitation and domination. In (Eds.), Images of the multinational firm (pp. 247–266). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
54. G.MorganP.H.Kristensen (2009). Multinational firms as societies. In (Eds.), Images of the multinational firm (pp. 167–191). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
55. R.Mudambi (2011). Hierarchy, coordination, and innovation in the multinational enterprise. Global Strategy Journal, 1, 317–323.
56. R.MudambiP.Navarra (2004). Is knowledge power? Knowledge flows, subsidiary power and rent-seeking within MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 35, 385–406.
57. R.MudambiT.PedersenU.Andersson (2014). How subsidiaries gain power in multinational corporations. Journal of World Business, 49, 101–113.
58. N.NohriaS.Ghoshal (1997). The differentiated network: Organizing multinational corporations for value creation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
59. J.PfefferG.R.Salancik (1978). The external controls of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
60. M.E.PorterK.SchwabX.Sala-i-MartinA.Lopez-Claros (2004). The global competitiveness report 2003–2004. New York: Oxford University Press.
61. B.Raven (1993). The bases of power: Origins and recent developments. Journal of Social Issues, 49, 227–251.
62. N.J.Saam (2007). Asymmetry in information versus asymmetry in power: Implicit assumptions of agency theory?Journal of Socio-Economics, 36, 825–840.
63. J.SargentL.Matthews (2006). The drivers of evolution/upgrading in Mexico’s maquiladoras: How important is subsidiary initiative?Journal of World Business, 41, 233–246.
64. M.Schulz (2003). Pathways of relevance: Exploring inflows of knowledge into subunits of multinational corporations. Organization Science, 14, 440–459.
65. D.SperberD.Wilson (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
66. A.TempelT.EdwardsA.FernerM.Muller-CarmenH.Wächter (2006). Subsidiary responses to institutional duality: Collective representation in US multinationals in Britain and Germany. Human Relations, 59, 1542–1570.
67. T.E.Wartenberg (1990). The forms of power: From domination to transformation. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
68. C.WelchR.PiekkariE.PlakoyiannakiE.Paavilainen (2011). Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralistic future for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 42, 740–762.
69. K.WilliamsM.Geppert (2011). Bargained globalization: Employment relations providing robust “tool kits” for socio-political strategizing in MNCs in Germany. In (Eds.), Politics and power in the multinational corporation: The role of institutions, interests and identities (pp. 72–100). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
70. Q.YangR.MudambiK.E.Meyer (2008). Conventional and reverse knowledge flows in multinational corporations. Journal of Management, 34, 882–902.
71. G.YuklJ.B.Tracey (1992). Consequences of influence tactics used with subordinates, peers, and the boss. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 525–535.
72. S.ZahraR.DharwadkarG.George (2000). Entrepreneurship in multinational subsidiaries: The effects of corporate and local environmental contexts. Available at: http://www.ciber.gatech.edu/workingpaper/99_00-27.pdf.