Summary:

Author makes a summary of globalization of companies from four aspects. He explains that
there are countless differences between multinational companies, which may be caused by
the differences of political and economy backgrounds around the globe. He defines the
connection of globalization and difference between countries.

Multinational companies or globalized firms is a national fortune. In this article the author
argues, that multinational corporations are still greatly influenced by the individualities of
their home country. It emphases on differences in corporate governance and research and
development, and it finds that multinational companies are generally not gaining access to a
global technology base. Many people now admit the point of view that globalization is a
tendency for most companies around the world. It also means the improvement of
international cooperation. The globalization may be unlike among counties, because
countries in the world are developed in diverse ways. The author discusses companies of the
USA, Japan and German to demonstrate. Governance, ownership patterns, the theme on
which each country developed or what the author called “national system of innovation” may
lead to the differences between companies of different countries. And that could cause the
differences among globalization of countries. German and Japan are industrialized after the
USA, so these companies would depend more on banks. In result of that, U.S companies would
be able to profit from globalization without altering their foundations. The author also
mentions the issue of Research and Development, he positions that the difference of
Research and Development of different areas may lead to the difference between what kind
of work will take place in home country or other host countries. Author states that
institutional differences and national regulation on labor would also stimulus globalization,
because it would have some impact on corporate strategies.

Author approves that these and other national differences remain a steep difficulty in the way
of generating a corporate strategy, but he says they do not infer that national differences are
actually undermining the global competitiveness of multinational companies. As freely people
move across borders, companies are increasingly capable to compete on an international
basis without straying distant from headquarters. And when countries open up to
international trade and investment, the theory of comparative advantage indicates that their
companies tend to specialize in whatever the country of operation does best. This
specialization can actually strengthen national differences, not weaken them. In this new
environment, managers and other leaders face a difficult trade-off. They must encounter the
demands for global convergence in economic institutions while backing up the national
policies that undergird a nation's distinctive competitiveness.