Capitalizing on the uniqueness of international business: Towards a theory of place, space, and organization.

The field of international business (IB) has been successful in developing a unique body of knowledge on the multinational corporation and on country-level contexts. A recurring debate concerns its claim to uniqueness, and to associated scholarly characteristics that distinguish IB from other fields of research. I discuss what makes IB research unique by looking at what IB theory can explain and predict. To that end, I leverage key theoretical arguments and empirical insights to advance an understanding of IB centered around a firm's ability to create added value in more than one location. I introduce a stylized model of the multi-locational firm embedded in multiple business systems characterized by equifinality. As a result of the qualitative disjunctures that separate one place from another, multi-locational firms are confronted with additional managerial and organizational challenges. These challenges are rooted in the process of "othering". Theorizing on the critical constructs of place, space, and organization, I argue that IB offers the most generalizable approach to understanding firms doing business in more than one location. IB's ultimate uniqueness lies in the potential of advancing a general theory of the firm in space.

Le domaine des affaires internationales (International Business - IB) a réussi à développer un corpus unique de connaissances sur l'entreprise multinationale et les contextes au niveau du pays. Un débat récurrent porte sur sa prétention à l'unicité et les caractéristiques scientifiques associées qui distinguent l'IB des autres domaines de recherche. Je discute de ce qui rend la recherche en IB unique en examinant ce que la théorie de l'IB peut expliquer et prévoir. Pour ce faire, je m'appuie sur des évidences empiriques et des arguments théoriques clés afin d'élaborer une meilleure compréhension de l'IB centrée sur la capacité d'une entreprise à créer de la valeur ajoutée dans plus d'une localisation. J'introduis un modèle stylisé de l'entreprise multi-localisée encastrée dans de multiples systèmes commerciaux caractérisés par l'équifinalité. En raison des disjonctions qualitatives qui séparent un lieu d'un autre, les entreprises multi-localisées sont confrontées à des défis organisationnels et managériaux supplémentaires. Ces défis sont ancrés dans le processus d'« altérisation ¼. M'appuyant sur les construits cardinaux de lieu, d'espace et d'organisation, j'argumente que l'IB apporte l'approche la plus généralisable pour comprendre les entreprises opérant dans plus d'une localisation. L'unicité suprême de l'IB réside dans son potentiel à faire progresser une théorie générale de l'entreprise dans l'espace.

El campo de negocios internacionales (IB por sus iniciales en inglés) ha venido desarrollando exitosamente un cuerpo de conocimientos único sobre la empresa multinacional y los contextos nacionales. Un debate recurrente se refiere a su pretensión de ser único y a las características académicas asociadas que distinguen a las empresas internacionales de otros campos de investigación. Discuto lo que hace que la investigación sobre negocios internacionales sea única examinando lo que la teoría de negocios internacionales puede explicar y predecir. Para esa finalidad, me apalanco en los principales argumentos teóricos y las ideas empíricas para avanzar en la comprensión de la IB centrada en la capacidad de una empresa para crear valor agregado en más de un lugar. Introduzco un modelo estilizado de empresa multilocalizada integrada en múltiples sistemas empresariales caracterizados por la equifinalidad. Como resultado de las disyuntivas cualitativas que separan un lugar de otro, las empresas multilocalizadas se enfrentan a retos adicionales de gestión y organización. Estos retos tienen su origen en el proceso de "otredad". Teorizando sobre los conceptos críticos de lugar, espacio y organización, sostengo que negocios internacionales ofrece el enfoque más generalizable para entender a las empresas que hacen negocios en más de un lugar. La particularidad fundamental de la negocios internacionales radica en el potencial de avance de una teoría general de la empresa en el espacio.

A área de negócios internacionais (IB) tem tido sucesso no desenvolvimento de um corpo único de conhecimento sobre a corporação multinacional e contextos em nível de país. Um debate recorrente diz respeito à sua reivindicação de singularidade e características acadêmicas associadas que distinguem IB de outros campos de pesquisa. Discuto o que torna a pesquisa em IB única ao observar o que a teoria em IB pode explicar e prever. Para esse fim, utilizo essenciais argumentos teóricos e insights empíricos para avançar na compreensão de IB centrado na capacidade de uma empresa de criar valor agregado em mais de um local. Apresento um modelo estilizado da empresa multilocalizada incorporada em vários sistemas de negócios caracterizados pela equifinalidade. Como resultado das disjunções qualitativas que separam um lugar do outro, as empresas multilocais são confrontadas com desafios administrativos e organizacionais adicionais. Esses desafios estão enraizados no processo de ostracismo. Teorizando sobre os construtos críticos de lugar, espaço e organização, argumento que IB oferece a abordagem mais generalizável para entender empresas que fazem negócios em mais de um local. A singularidade decisiva de IB está no potencial de avançar uma teoria geral da firma no espaço.

Cultural Distance and Firm Internationalization: A Meta-Analytical Review and Theoretical Implications.

This paper presents the most comprehensive review and meta-analysis of the literature on cultural distance and firm internationalization to date. We analyze the effects of cultural distance on key strategic decisions throughout the entire process of internationalization. For the preinvestment stage, we examine the decisions on where to invest (location choice), how much to invest (degree of ownership), and how to organize the foreign expansion (entry and establishment mode). For the postinvestment stage, we examine the decisions of how to integrate the foreign subsidiary into the organization (transfer of practices) as well as the performance effects of cultural distance at both the subsidiary and the firm level. We find that firms are less likely to expand to culturally distant locations but if they do, they prefer greenfield investments and integrate subsidiaries more through transfer of management practices. Cultural distance does not seem to affect how much capital firms invest and whether they enter through a joint venture or full ownership. Interestingly, cultural distance has a strong negative effect on subsidiary performance but no effect on the performance of the whole multinational company. In addition, we find that the effects of cultural distance are not sensitive to time, but they are sensitive to the cultural framework used (e.g., Hofstede vs. Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) and the home country of the company (developed vs. emerging market). Based on our study, we feel confident to offer some theoretical insights, recommendations for improving the validity and reliability of cultural-distance research, and ideas for future research.

Dimensions and Dynamics of National Culture: Synthesizing Hofstede With Inglehart.

Cross-national research on cultural differences across space and time intersects multiple disciplines but the prominence of concepts varies by academic fields. Hofstede's dimensional concept of culture, to begin with, dominates in cross-cultural psychology and international management. Inglehart's dynamic concept of culture, by contrast, prevails in sociology and political science. We argue that this disciplinary division is unfortunate because the two concepts are complementary, for which reason a synthesis rectifies their mutual weaknesses. Indeed, while Hofstede's dimensional concept neglects cultural dynamics, Inglehart's dynamic concept is dimensionally reductionist. We demonstrate empirically that combining these two concepts leads to an improved understanding of cultural differences. Inspired by Hofstede's cultural dimensions, we use data from the European Value Studies and World Values Surveys for 495,011 individuals born between 1900 and 1999 in 110 countries and then show that change on these dimensions proceeds as Inglehart and his collaborators suggest. Most notably, younger generations have become more individualistic and more joyous. But even though economic development and generational replacement drive this cultural change, roughly half of the variation in national cultural orientations is unique to each country, due to lasting intercept differences in developmental trajectories that trace back to remote historic drivers. We discuss the implications for cross-national cultural research.

The impact of national cultural distance on the number of foreign Web site visits by U.S. households.

We investigate how national cultural distance, defined as the extent to which the shared values and norms in one country differ from those in another, affect the number of Web site visits. Based on a sample of 2,654 U.S. households visiting Web sites in 38 countries over 25 different Web site categories, we find that cultural distance has a negative and significant effect on the number of taste-related foreign Web site visits. In the case of Web sites containing sexually explicit material, we obtain a significantly positive effect of cultural distance. Our findings suggest that cultural distance can be both a source of attraction and a source of repulsion in explaining the number of Web site visits depending on the nature of the Web site.