Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Global Strategies and MNC 2007
Global Strategies and MNC 2007
Global Strategies and MNC 2007
14
Global Strategies and
the Multinational
Corporation
Globalization has changed us into a company that searches the world, not just
to sell or to source, but to find intellectual capital – the world’s best talent and
greatest ideas.
—JACK WELCH, FORMER CHAIRMAN, GENERAL ELECTRIC
OUTLINE
361
CSAC14 1/13/07 9:26 Page 362
By the time you have completed this chapter, you will be able to:
INTERNATIONAL GLOBAL
High INDUSTRIES INDUSTRIES
l aerospace l automobiles
l military hardware l oil
l diamond mining l semiconductors
International Trade
SHELTERED MULTIDOMESTIC
INDUSTRIES INDUSTRLES
l railroads l packaged groceries
l laundries/dry cleaning l investment banking
l hairdressing l hotels
l milk l consulting
Low
Low High
Foreign Direct Investment
Chrysler with 84% of the market. By 2006 there were 11 companies with auto plants
within the US; the former “Big Three” accounted for just 46% of auto sales; and the
industry was suffering from excess capacity, intense price competition, and massive
losses.
The impact of internationalization on competition and industry profitability can be
analyzed within the context of Porter’s five forces of competition framework. For the
purposes of our analysis, let us take our unit of analysis as national markets where the
relevant “industry” comprises the firms supplying that national market.
internationalization for our basic strategy model in terms of the impact both on
industry conditions and firms’ access to resources and capabilities.
Note: Revealed comparative advantage for each product group is measured as: (Exports less
Imports)/Domestic Production.
CSAC14 1/13/07 9:26 Page 368
FACTOR CONDITIONS
RELATED AND
DEMAND
SUPPORTING
CONDITIONS
INDUSTRIES
STRATEGY, STRUCTURE,
AND RIVALRY
A large home market facilitates the development and exploitation of capital, tech-
nology, and infrastructure. Hence, in most capital- and technology-intensive industries,
large countries (such as the US) are at an advantage over small countries.6 A similar
logic motivates the creation of free trade areas such as the European Union, Mercosur,
and NAFTA.
Notes:
1 Fiber production includes both natural and synthetic fibers.
2 Revealed comparative advantage is measured as (Exports − Imports) / (Exports + Imports).
CSAC14 1/13/07 9:26 Page 372
rate changes and wage inflation. Moreover, noncost aspects of operational perform-
ance may ultimately be more important:
[ W]estern companies are finding that offshoring locations such as China and India
offer access to world-class skills. For example, Jim Breyer, managing partner of
Accel Partners, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, observed: “Taiwan and China
have some of the world’s best designers of wireless chips and wireless software.”
In certain types of precision manufacturing, including the processes that produce
magnesium alloy casing for notebook computers, companies such as Waffer in
Taiwan offer some of the most sophisticated technology in the world.
Most of the leading Indian IT outsourcing companies operate at level 5 –
the highest level of expertise – of the Capability Maturity Model (CMM), an
international measure of technical skill, while most internal IT departments in
western companies operate at level 2 or 3. Call centres, such as those operated by
eTelecare – a Manila-based outsourcing provider – offer better average handling
times and customer satisfaction relative to leading companies in the US.13
In the highly fragmented value chains of most electronic products, technology,
know-how, and speed are as important as cost in determining where different activit-
ies are located (see Table 14.4).
TABLE 14.4 Global Production: The Hewlett Packard Pavilion 8000 Laptop
Computer
What internal
WHERE TO LOCATE resources and capabilities does the firm
ACTIVITY X? possess in particular locations?
The benefits from fragmenting the value chain must be traded off against the added
costs of coordinating globally dispersed activities. Transportation costs are one con-
sideration. Another is increased inventory cost. Increased time can be the most costly
consequence of dispersed activities. Just-in-time scheduling often necessitates that
production activities are carried out in close proximity to one another. Although the
labor cost of building an automobile in Mexico is only 20% of the labor cost in the
US, this cost advantage of Mexican production is almost entirely offset by higher costs
of components. The tradeoff between cost and time depends on the strategy of the
company. Companies that compete on speed and reliability of delivery (e.g. Zara and
Dell Computer) typically forsake the cost advantages of a globally dispersed value
chain in favor of integrated operations with fast access to the final market.
Figure 14.4 summarizes the relevant criteria in location decisions.
between market entry by means of transactions and market entry by means of direct
investment. Figure 14.5 shows a spectrum of market entry options arranged accord-
ing to the degree of commitment by the firm. Thus, at one extreme there is exporting
through individual spot-market transactions; at the other, there is the establishment
of a fully owned subsidiary that undertakes a full range of functions.
How does a firm weigh the merits of different market entry modes? Five key issues
are relevant.
2. Is the product tradable and what are the barriers to trade? If the
product is not tradable because of transportation constraints or import restrictions,
then accessing that market requires entry either by investing in overseas production
facilities or by licensing the use of key resources to local companies within the over-
seas market.
3. Does the firm possess the full range of resources and capabilities for
establishing a competitive advantage in the overseas market? Compet-
ing in an overseas market is likely to require that the firm acquires additional resources
and capabilities, particularly those related to marketing and distributing in an un-
familiar market. Accessing such country-specific resources is most easily achieved by
establishing a relationship with firms in the overseas market. The form of relationship
depends, in part, on the resources and capabilities required. If a firm needs market-
ing and distribution, it might appoint a distributor or agent with exclusive territorial
CSAC14 1/13/07 9:26 Page 375
rights. If a wide range of manufacturing and marketing capabilities is needed, the firm
might license its product and/or its technology to a local manufacturer. In technology-
based industries, licensing technology to local companies is common. In marketing-
intensive industries, firms with strong brands can license their trademarks to local
companies. Alternatively, a joint venture might be sought with a local manufacturing
company. US companies entered the Japanese market by joint ventures with local com-
panies (e.g., Fuji–Xerox, Caterpillar–Mitsubishi). These combined the technology and
brand names of the US partner with the market knowledge and manufacturing and
distribution facilities of the Japanese firm.
5. What transaction costs are involved? A key issue that arises in the licens-
ing of a firm’s trademarks or technology concerns the transaction costs of negotiat-
ing, monitoring, and enforcing the terms of such agreements as compared with
internationalization through a fully owned subsidiary. In expanding overseas, Star-
bucks owns and operates its coffee houses while McDonald’s franchises its burger
restaurants. McDonald’s competitive advantage depends primarily upon the franch-
isee faithfully replicating the McDonald’s system. This can be enforced effectively by
means of franchise contracts. Starbucks believes that its success is achieved through
creating the “Starbucks experience” which is as much about ambiance as it is about
coffee. It is difficult to articulate the ingredients of this experience, let alone write it
into a contract.
Issues of transaction costs are fundamental to the choices between alternative
market entry modes. Barriers to exporting in the form of transport costs and tariffs
are forms of transaction costs; other costs include exchange rate risk and information
costs. Transaction cost analysis has been central to theories of the existence of multi-
national corporations. In the absence of transaction costs in the markets either for
goods or for resources, companies exploit overseas markets either by exporting their
goods and services or by selling the use of their resources to local firms in the over-
seas markets.15 Thus, multinationals tend to predominate in industries where:
; y
Ru –5) log
ssi
a ( 2 000 echno
nJ t
Vt ned on
op 50% % ow tion ts
rod a
20 abor one n
uce owned l p
car col com
0% o s a nd
wn e d
; co-p 20% owned;
roduc joint produc
tion tion
JV
n t op
duc tio 60% rod
co-pro uce
9 % owned; owned
car
4 s in
50 od
Ch
pr
.9 uct
50%
ow n c
owned
ne oll
d; ab
(M
te ora
ch ti
ni on
ca
la
nd
50% owned
( )
CSAC14 1/13/07 9:27 Page 377
Cost Benefits: Scale and Replication Levitt concentrated on the scale advant-
ages of global operation. In most global industries, the most important source of scale
economy is product development.
However, for most internationalizing firms, the major cost advantage from multi-
national operation derives from economies in the replication of knowledge-based
assets – including organizational capabilities.26 When a company has created a
knowledge-based asset or product – whether a recipe, or a piece of software, or an
organizational system – creating the original knowledge was costly but, once created,
subsequent replication is typically cheap. Thus, once Disney has built Disneyland,
Anaheim and Walt Disney World in Florida, a Disneyland theme park in Paris or Hong
Kong can be built at a fraction of the cost. Similarly with McDonald’s: its business
system was built in the US over several decades. Once created, the incremental cost
of replicating the system in another country is comparatively small.
CSAC14 1/13/07 9:27 Page 379
position themselves in all three of the world’s major industrial centers: North America,
Europe, and Japan. Thus, in automobiles Daimler-Benz acquired Chrysler in the US
and Mitsubishi in Japan. Ford and GM augmented their strong positions in the US and
Europe with equity stakes in Japanese companies. McKinsey’s Kenichi Ohmae, argues
the case for triad power – that the need to access technology, develop customer prefer-
ences, and scale economies requires global players to become true insiders within all
of the world’s big three: the US, Europe, and Japan.33
product launches allow firms to learn from experiences in the lead market and
exploit that learning in subsequent country launches.
l National cultures. Underlying differences between countries in customer
preferences and business methods are typically the result of differences in
national cultures. Culture comprises assumptions, values, traditions, and
behavioral norms. At its most general, culture may be described as a shared
system of meaning within a group or society. Many of the problems of
international expansion encountered by companies – from Wal-Mart in
Germany and Korea, Disney with EuroDisneyland, and Marks & Spencer in
Europe and North America – can be linked to problems of cultural
adjustment. The need to adapt to local cultures may influence the mode of
internationalization chosen. Franchising is an attractive international
expansion strategy for service businesses because it utilizes the knowledge
and cultural identity of local partners. In outsourcing production, customer
support and administrative functions to Asia, most western companies have
relied on contracts with local firms rather than face the cultural challenges of
establishing their own overseas units. Strategy Capsule 14.1 examines
differences in national cultures.
Benefits of
global
integration
Industries where scale economies are huge and customer preferences homogeneous
call for a global strategy (e.g. jet engines). Industries where national preferences are
pronounced and where customization is not prohibitively expensive favor a “multi-
domestic” strategy (e.g. retail banking). Indeed, if there are no significant benefits
from global integration, then we may see these industries supplied almost entirely by
locally specialized firms (as in funeral services and hairdressing). However, some
industries may be low on most dimensions – cement and car repair services are fairly
homogeneous worldwide, but also lack significant scale economies or other major
benefits from global presence. Conversely, other industries offer substantial benefits
CSAC14 1/13/07 9:27 Page 383
to identify McDonald’s with fun and family life initiatives with regard to sandwiches, salads
wherever it does business. Community involve- and information labeling as a basis for global
ment and the Ronald McDonald children’s learning.
charity are also worldwide. Corporate trade- Whether or not McDonald’s has the balance
marks and brands are mostly globally uniform right between global standardization and local
– including the golden arches logo and “I’m adaptation is open to debate. Simon Anholt, a
lovin’ it” tag line. The business system itself – British marketing expert, argues: “By putting
the franchising, the training of managers and local food on the menu, all you are doing is
franchisees through Hamburger University, removing the logic of the brand, because this
restaurant operations, and supplier relations – is an American brand. If McDonald’s serves
is also highly standardized. what you think is a poor imitation of your
Traditionally, McDonald’s international strat- local cuisine, it’s going to be an insult.” But
egy was about adapting its US model to local according to McDonald’s CEO Jim Skinner:
conditions. Increasingly McDonald’s is using “We don’t run our business from Oak Brook.
local differentiation as a basis for worldwide We are a local business with a local face in each
adaptation and innovation through transfer- country we operate in.” His chief marketing
ring new menu items and business concepts manager, Mary Dillon adds: “McDonald’s is
from one country to another. For example, much more about local relevance than a global
the McCafe gourmet coffeehouses within archetype. Globally we think of ourselves as the
McDonald’s restaurants were first developed custodian of the brand, but it’s all about local
in Australia. By 2003, McCafes had become relevance.”
established in 30 countries, including the US.
In responding to the growing tide of concern
Sources: www.mcdonalds.com; McDonald’s Localization
over nutrition and obesity in the developed Strategy: Brand Unification, Menu Diversification? ICFAI
world, McDonald’s has drawn upon country Case Study 306-316-1 (2006).
parent–subsidiaries relations
SOURCE: C. A. BARTLETT AND S. GHOSHAL, MANAGING ACROSS BORDERS: THE
Heavy flows of
Tight complex controls technology, finances,
and coordination and people, and materials
a shared strategic between interdependent
decision process units
CSAC14 1/13/07 9:27 Page 388
products were developed in Japan (using technology from Kao) then introduced into
other markets. Where local units possess unique capabilities, they can be identified as
centers of excellence as a means of assigning them specific responsibilities and signal-
ing this leadership to the rest of the organization.43
Summary
Moving from a national to an international busi- market by exporting, licensing, or direct invest-
ness environment represents a quantum leap ment? If the latter, should we set up a wholly
in complexity. In an international environment, owned subsidiary or a joint venture? Once the
a firm’s potential for competitive advantage is strategy has been established, then a suitable
determined not just by its own resources and cap- organizational structure needs to be designed.
abilities but also by the conditions of the national The fact that so many companies that have
environment in which it operates, including input been outstandingly successful in their home
prices, exchange rates, and a host of other factors. market have failed so miserably in their overseas
The extent to which a firm is positioned in a expansion demonstrates the complexity of inter-
single market or multiple national markets also national management. In some cases, the com-
influences its competitive position. panies have failed to recognize that the resources
Our approach in this chapter is to simplify the and capabilities that underpinned their com-
complexities of international strategy by applying petitive advantages in their home market could
the same basic tools of strategy analysis that not be readily transferred or replicated in overseas
we developed in earlier chapters. For example, markets. In others, the problems were in design-
in analyzing international expansion, the critical ing the structures and systems that could effec-
issue in determining whether a firm should enter tively implement the international strategy.
an overseas market is an analysis of the profit As the lessons of success and failure from
implications of such an entry. This requires an international business become recognized and
analysis of (a) the attractiveness of the overseas distilled into better theories and analytical frame-
market using the familiar tools of industry analy- works, so we advance our understanding of how
sis, and (b) the potential of the firm to establish to design and implement strategies for competing
competitive advantage in that overseas market, globally. We are at the stage where we recognize
which requires consideration of whether the firm the issues and the key determinants of competitive
can transfer its resources and capabilities from its advantage in an international environment. How-
home base to that overseas market, and whether ever, there is much that we do not fully understand.
these resources and capabilities can yield a com- Designing strategies and organizational structures
petitive advantage in the same way as they did at that can reconcile critical tradeoffs between
home. global scale economies versus local differenti-
However, establishing the potential for a firm ation, decentralized learning and innovation versus
to create value from internationalization is only a worldwide diffusion and replication, and localized
beginning. Subsequent analysis needs to design flexibilities versus international standardization
an international strategy: Do we enter an overseas remain key challenges for senior managers.
CSAC14 1/13/07 9:27 Page 390
Self-Study Questions
1 With reference to Figure 14.1, identify a “sheltered industry” (i.e. one that has been subject
to little penetration either by imports or foreign direct investment). Explain why the industry
has escaped internationalization. Explore whether there are opportunities for profitable
internationalization within the industry and, if so, the strategy that would offer the best
chance of success.
2 With reference to Table 14.1, what characteristics of national resources explain the different
patterns of comparative advantage for the US and Japan?
4 When Porsche decided to enter the SUV market with its luxury Cayenne model, it surprised
the auto industry by locating its new assembly plant in Leipzig in eastern Germany. Many
observers believed that Porsche should have located the plant either in central or eastern
Europe where labor costs were very low, or (like Mercedes and BMW) in the US where it
would be close to its major market. Using the criteria outlined in Figure 14.4, can you explain
Porsche’s decision?
5 British expatriates living in the US frequently ask friends and relatives visiting from the UK to
bring with them bars of Cadbury’s chocolate on the basis that the Cadbury’s chocolate
available in the US (manufactured under license by Hershey’s) is inferior to “the real thing.’
Should Cadbury-Schweppes PLC maintain its licensing agreement with Hershey or should it
seek to supply the US market itself, either by export form the UK or by establishing
manufacturing facilities in the US?
6 Has McDonald’s got the balance right between global standardization and national
differentiation (see Strategy Capsule 14.2)? Should it offer its franchisees in overseas
countries greater initiative in introducing products that meet national preferences? Should it
also allow greater flexibility for its overseas franchisees to adapt store layout, operating
practices, and marketing? What aspects of the McDonald’s system should McDonald’s top
management insist on keeping globally standardized?
CSAC14 1/13/07 9:27 Page 391
Notes
1 US Statistical Abstract (www.census.gov). 16 D. von Emloh and Y. Wang, “Competing for China’s
2 This process was proposed by J. Johanson and Credit Cord Market,” McKinsey Quarterly (November
J.-E. Vahlne, “The Internationalization Process of the 2005) www.mckinseyquarterly.com.
Firm,” Journal of International Business Studies 8 17 J. P. Killing, “How to Make a Global Joint Venture
(1977): 23–32. See also L. Melin, “Internationalization Work,” Harvard Business Review (May–June 1982):
as a Strategy Process,” Strategic Management Journal 13 120–7.
(1992 Special Issue): 99–118. 18 G. Hamel, “Competition for Competence and
3 P. Ghemawat and F. Ghadar, “Global Integration ≠ Inter-partner Learning Within International Strategic
Global Concentration,” Industrial and Corporate Change Alliances,” Strategic Management Journal 12 (1991):
15 (2006): 595– 624. 83–103.
4 A key finding was that human capital (knowledge and 19 See R. Reich and E. Mankin, “Joint Ventures with Japan
skills) was more important than physical capital in Give Away our Future,” Harvard Business Review
explaining the pattern of US trade – the so-called (March–April 1986).
Leontief Paradox. See W. W. Leontief, “Domestic 20 Xerox and Fuji Xerox, Case No. 9-391-156 (Boston:
Production and Foreign Trade,” in R. Caves and Harvard Business School, 1992).
H. Johnson (eds), Readings in International Economics 21 G. Hamel, Y. Doz, and C. K. Prahalad, “Collaborate
(Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1968). with Your Competitors – and Win,” Harvard Business
5 L. C. Thurow, Building Wealth: The New Rules for Review ( January–February 1989): 133–9.
Individuals, Companies and Nations (New York: 22 Ibid.
HarperCollins, 1999). 23 J. Bamford and D. Ernst, “Managing an Alliance
6 P. Krugman, “Increasing Returns, Monopolistic Portfolio,” McKinsey Quarterly (2002, no. 3):
Competition, and International Trade,” Journal of 20–30.
International Economics 9 (November 1979): 469–79. 24 T. Levitt, “The Globalization of Markets,” Harvard
7 M. E. Porter, The Competitive Advantage of Nations Business Review (May–June 1983): 92–102.
(New York: Free Press, 1990). 25 G. S. Yip, Total Global Strategy II (Upper Saddle River,
8 For a review of the Porter analysis, see R. M. Grant, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2003); C. Baden-Fuller and
“Porter’s Competitive Advantage of Nations: An J. Stopford, “Globalization Frustrated,” Strategic
Assessment,” Strategic Management Journal 12 (1991): Management Journal 12 (1991): 493–507; “Rough and
535–48. Tumble Industry,” Financial Times ( July 2, 1997): 13.
9 M. Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of 26 S. G. Winter and G. Szulanski, “Replication as Strategy,”
Capitalism (London: Unwin University Books, 1930). Organization Science 12 (2001): 730–43.
10 P. Almeida, “Knowledge Sourcing by Foreign 27 P. Almeida, “Knowledge Sourcing by Foreign
Multinationals: Patent Citation Analysis in the US Multinationals: Patent Citation Analysis in the US
Semiconductor Industry,” Strategic Management Journal Semiconductor Industry,” Strategic Management Journal
17 (December 1996): 155– 65. 17, Winter Special Issue (1996): 155–65. See the
11 The linking of value-added chains to national McDonald’s individual country websites, e.g.,
comparative advantages is explained in B. Kogut, www.mcdonalds.com (US), www.mcdonalds.co.uk
“Designing Global Strategies and Competitive (UK), www.mcdonalds.fr (France).
Value-Added Chains,” Sloan Management Review 28 A. K. Gupta and P. Govindarajan, “Knowledge Flows
(Summer 1985): 15–38. within Multinational Corporations,” Strategic
12 Nike: International Context, HBS Case Services Case Management Journal 21 (April 2000): 473–96;
No. 9-385-328 (Boston: Harvard Business School, P. Almeida, J. Song, and R. M. Grant, “Are Firms
1985); and Nike in China, HBS Case Services Case No. Superior to Alliances and Markets? An Empirical Test
9-386-037 (Boston: Harvard Business School, 1985). of Cross-Border Knowledge Building,” Organization
13 J. Hagel and J. S. Brown, “Thinking Global, Acting Science 13 (March–April 2002): 147–61.
Local,” Financial Times (August 9, 2005). 29 G. Hamel and C. K. Prahalad, “Do You Really Have a
14 The role of firm-specific assets in explaining the Global Strategy?,” Harvard Business Review
multinational expansion is analyzed in R. Caves, ( July–August 1985): 139–48.
“International Corporations: The Industrial Economics 30 H. Simon and Y. Eriguchi, “Pricing Challenges for
of Foreign Investment,” Economica 38 (1971): 1–27. Japanese Companies in the 21st Century,” Journal of
15 The role of transactions cost is explained in D. J. Teece, Professional Pricing 14, no. 4 (2005)
“Transactions Cost Economics and Multinational www.pricingsociety.com; B. Y. Aw, G. Batra, and
Enterprise,” Journal of Economic Behavior and M. J. Roberts, “Firm Heterogeneity and Export –
Organization 7 (1986): 21– 45. See also “Creatures of Domestic Price Differentials: A Study of Taiwanese
Imperfection,” in “Multinationals: A Survey,” Economist Electrical Products,” Journal of International
(March 27, 1993): 8–10. Economics 54 (2001): 149–69.
CSAC14 1/13/07 9:27 Page 392
31 I. C. MacMillan, A. van Ritten, and R. G. McGrath, 37 C. A. Bartlett and S. Ghoshal, Managing Across Borders:
“Global Gamesmanship,” Harvard Business Review The Transnational Solution, 2nd edn (Boston: Harvard
(May 2003): 62–71. Business School Press, 1998).
32 R. C. Christopher, Second to None: American 38 C. Bartlett, “Building and Managing the Transnational:
Companies in Japan (New York: Crown, The New Organizational Challenge,” in Michael E.
1986). Porter (ed.), Competition in Global Industries (Boston:
33 K. Ohmae, Triad Power: The Coming Shape of Global Harvard Business School Press, 1986): 377.
Competition (New York: Free Press, 1985). 39 Ibid.: 388.
34 The Ford Mondeo/Contour is a classic example of a 40 “The Country Prince Comes of Age,” Financial Times
global product that failed to appeal strongly to any (August 9, 2005).
national market. See M. J. Moi, “Ford Mondeo: A 41 J. Birkinshaw, P. Braunerhjelm, U. Holm, and S. Terjesen,
Model T World Car?” Idea Group (2001); C. Chandler, “Why do some Multinational Corporations Relocate
“Globalization: The Automotive Industry’s Quest for a their Headquarters Overseas?” Strategic Management
World Car,” (http://globaledge.msu.edu/ Journal 27 (2006): 681–700.
KnowledgeRoom/FeaturedInsights/0018.pdf). 42 J. Birkinshaw, N. Hood, and S. Jonsson, “Building
35 C. Baden-Fuller and J. Stopford, “Globalization Firm-specific Advantages in Multinational Corporations:
Frustrated,” Strategic Management Journal 12 (1991): The Role of Subsidiary Initiative,” Strategic Management
493–507. Journal 19 (1998): 221– 42.
36 A. Morita, “Global Localization,” in Genryn (Tokyo: 43 T. S. Frost, J. M. Birkinshaw, and P. C. Ensign, “Centers
Sony, 1996): Chapter 8. of Excellence in Multinational Corporations,” Strategic
Management Journal 23 (2002): 997–1018.