2013
DOI: 10.1057/jibs.2013.63
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

From M–P to MA–P: Multinationality alignment and performance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
42
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(47 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
3
42
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The highly problematic multinationality construct can be refined by teasing out the experience-knowledge-strategic decision relationship, based on multiple task-, as much as country or context-, based experience dimensions (Hennart, 2011;Kirca et al, 2012;Verbeke & Brugman, 2009). Powell's (2014) claim that this relationship can only be understood by using firm-level definitions of multinationality that capture firm-specific investments in knowledge supports our contention. Greater care is needed in defining this and other key IB constructs and relationships.…”
Section: Implications For Key Ib Constructssupporting
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The highly problematic multinationality construct can be refined by teasing out the experience-knowledge-strategic decision relationship, based on multiple task-, as much as country or context-, based experience dimensions (Hennart, 2011;Kirca et al, 2012;Verbeke & Brugman, 2009). Powell's (2014) claim that this relationship can only be understood by using firm-level definitions of multinationality that capture firm-specific investments in knowledge supports our contention. Greater care is needed in defining this and other key IB constructs and relationships.…”
Section: Implications For Key Ib Constructssupporting
confidence: 78%
“…Drawing on this research, we argue that in the three leading internationalization models -(1) internalization, (2) the internationalization process (IP) school and (3) institutional theory -the MNE decision-maker is underspecified. This contributes to IB's difficulties in delineating internationalization performance effects and the divergence between predicted and revealed internationalization choices (Brouthers & Hennart, 2007;Hennart, 2009;Pedersen & Shaver, 2011;Powell, 2014;Verbeke & Forootan, 2012). We contend these difficulties stem from the specification of knowledge and experience as firm-level drivers of heterogeneity in internationalization and performance, without explicit modeling of their microfoundations in individual-level cognition.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Contrary to this prevalent problem-focused view of diversity in the international expansion literature, which highlights potential constraints based on country differences, greater diversity within a country portfolio may also be viewed as an opportunity and an asset for firms (e.g., Ely and Thomas 2001;Stevens et al 2008). Experience is a prime source of learning in organizations (Penrose 1959), and learning is fostered by diversity in experience (Barkema and Vermeulen 1998;Powell 2014a;Zellmer-Bruhn and Gibson 2006). The ability to learn from experience obtained in diverse countries may be the most important advantage of multinationality (Powell and Rhee 2013).…”
Section: Distance and Diversity Of International Expansion And Their mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The I-R framework was first developed by Fayerweather (1960), distinguishing between "unification" (integration) and "fragmentation" (responsiveness) [2]. It was given analytical content by Prahalad (1975) and Doz (1976), subsequently published as Prahalad and Doz (1987).…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%