Global Cities, Connectivity, and the Location Choice of MNC Regional Headquarters

Abstract

One of the manifestations of the increasing diversity in multinational corporation (MNC) operations is the growing importance of regional headquarters (RHQs). RHQs assume an intermediary, bridging role between the corporate headquarters and local affiliates and other actors in their respective regions. They can have a coordination and control (i.e., administrative) mandate as well as an opportunity seeking (i.e., entrepreneurial) mandate. Since these mandates require RHQs to interact with various internal and external entities and exchange knowledge across distant locations, MNCs tend to locate their RHQs in highly connected "global cities" because these places allow the firm to economize on spatial transaction costs. In this paper, we explore the interplay between geographic distance, RHQ roles, and connectivity by analyzing which global city is selected by an MNC when establishing an RHQ. We argue that there is substantial heterogeneity among MNCs in the importance they attach to city connectivitywhich we conceptualize as encompassing the effects of the international flows of people, knowledge, and services-because the connectivity needs of an RHQ varies in relation to its corporate mandate as well as to the geographic configuration of the MNC's activities. Our mixed logit analysis of the location choices for 1,031 newly established RHQs in 48 global cities between 2003 and 2012 provides qualified support for the notion that the relationship between city connectivity and location choice is more pronounced for RHQs with an entrepreneurial role. Although the geographic distance of a city to the MNC's regional affiliates discourages the establishment of RHQs with administrative roles, distance effects disappear when the city is highly connected. Moreover, well connected cities are able to attract MNCs' RHQs from distant countries-of-origin.

Relational Cities Disrupted: Reflections on the Particular Geographies of COVID‐19 For Small But Global Urbanisation in Dublin, Ireland, and Luxembourg City, Luxembourg

“…Inner Dublin’s daytime working population only broke through the 500,000 mark in 2016; those employees able to work from home during the pandemic who are not public sector workers are employed to a large degree in advanced service, tech and finance firms (Dublin is in the ‘top 3’ of RHQ‐hosting cities in Europe; Belderbos et al . 2017)), whose presence in Dublin is predicated upon otherwise smooth relational flows (transatlantic, Anglo‐Irish and with major financial centres in Europe and the Gulf) of people, capital and information (Sokol et al . 2008).…”

Reconceptualising Hierarchies: The Disaggregation and Dispersion of Headquarters in Multinational Corporations

“…Relatedly, one could ask where different headquarters activities should be located in order to optimize the cohesion of the overall system while minimizing internal coordination and transaction costs. The paper by Belderbos et al () highlights how principles of organizational transaction costs can be applied to the study of location choices for some elements of the headquarters system (in their case, regional headquarters).…”

“…Finally, Belderbos et al () address in their paper entitled ‘ Global Cities, Connectivity, and the Location Choice of MNC Regional Headquarters ’, the choice of location for regional headquarters on the city level. Specifically, the authors investigate whether a regional headquarters location is driven by the characteristics of the city (its connectivity) and by its distance from the corporate headquarters and regional affiliates.…”

Explaining autonomy variations across value‐chain activities in foreign‐owned subsidiaries

“…Global cities are special places for MNEs because of the cosmopolitan workforce, advanced producer services, and global interconnectedness, which provides MNEs with potentially lower transaction costs due to their arms‐length nature of transaction in such places (Goerzen, Asmussen, & Nielsen, ; McCann & Mudambi, ; Rossi, Beaverstock, & Taylor, ). Belderbos, Du, and Goerzen () showed subsidiaries located in global cities gain from being located closer to global knowledge pipelines that provide them with easier access to such knowledge assets. Rossi et al () showed that global city location also plays a role in the allocation of value‐chain activities across the MNE, although their study neglects the hinterland location options.…”