MNE subsidiary evolution from sales to innovation: Looking inside the black box

Lim, Chaisung; Hemmert, Martin; Kim, Seunghoi

doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.06.002

Cited by 19 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In summary, the results indicate that it is essential to understand the use(fulness) of different external partners depending on the desired innovation outcome. As such, the results also inform subsidiary managers what they could do to try to take subsidiary initiative in terms of their innovation outcome and perhaps change their subsidiary mandate (Dörrenbächer & Gammelgaard, 2016;Lim et al, 2017;Schmid, Dzedek, & Lehrer, 2014;Strutzenberger & Ambos, 2014).…”

Section: Conclusion and Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…In theory, a wider and more diverse search strategy will provide access to new opportunities and enable the firm to build new organizational competences based on the integration of complementary knowledge sets from external agents. For subsidiaries to become competence creating, it has indeed been shown that they must become more closely embedded in local networks in their own immediate environment (Achcaoucaou, Miravitlles, & León-Darder, 2014;Cantwell & Mudambi, 2005;Lim, Hemmert, & Kim, 2017). Hence, competencecreating efforts in MNC subsidiaries entail that they create new knowledge in areas that are not among the traditional strengths of their own MNC group as these activities extend the range of the competencies of the corporate group of which they are part.…”

Section: Technology Creating Subsidiariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sources of open innovation in foreign subsidiaries: An enriched typology

Beule

Beveren

2019

International Business Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyzes the drivers of multinational affiliates' innovation, using a dataset based on the Community Innovation Survey for Belgium. Specifically, we investigate the role of external knowledge sources on foreign affiliates' research efforts and innovation. We thereby develop an enriched typology by taking both the MNC and the host country perspective into consideration and distinguish between different types of subsidiaries, in order to disentangle differences in the use of knowledge sources between technology exploiting, seeking and creating subsidiaries. Our findings show that technology-creating foreign affiliates are able to tap into a combination of industry-based value chain partners and science-based partners. In particular, a combination of clients and universities have a powerful impetus on the research effort of technology creating firms. Our results also indicate that technology-seeking subsidiaries make more use of collaboration with competitors. Technology exploiting subsidiaries make significantly less use of external knowledge sources and have a lower R&D intensity.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion and Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Technology Creating Subsidiariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sources of open innovation in foreign subsidiaries: An enriched typology

Beule

Beveren

2019

International Business Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The creation and development of capabilities is a resource-intensive process, enabling, for example, movement from ad hoc problem-solving to patterned behavior (Barreto, 2010;Sirmon et al, 2007), or movement away from trial-and-error activities (Churchill and Lewis, 1983;Greiner, 1972;Lim et al, 2017).…”

Section: Entities Abilities and Capacity Are Building Blocks For Capabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It should be noted that such a focus on substantive capabilities does not exclude the importance of managerial capabilities. Recent studies on subsidiary evolution have indicated that managerial capabilities cannot be assumed to be unrestricted (Dederichs, 2010;Lim et al, 2017). In other words, all types of managerial capabilities cannot be assumed to exist from the initiation of a subsidiary.…”

Section: An Initial Order Of Organic Capability Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Refining a subsidiary evolution framework: clarifying key concepts

Jakobsson¹,

Lagerström

Schweizer

2021

RIBS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose While the evolution of subsidiaries has received considerable research attention, the framework for understanding it has not evolved much since the late 1990s. The purpose of this paper is to add both clarity and depth to the work on the foundations for – as well as the processes of – capability creation and development as a subsidiary evolves. Design/methodology/approach This conceptual paper takes as its point of departure the micro-foundation literature, with a specific emphasis on the capability development literature. To describe capability creation and development, both the resource-based view and the resource management perspective are used here. Findings The paper adds a conceptual layer to the drivers of subsidiary evolution. To add further clarity regarding how capabilities are actually formed, the resources for capability creation and development are specified herein as entities, abilities and capacity. Arguments are also presented for why capabilities ought to be viewed as patterned behavior to decrease the terminological ambiguity surrounding the concept of capabilities. The process of capability creation and development with an emphasis on learning is brought forward. Further, capability typologies, in terms of substantive, managerial and dynamic capabilities, are presented to add specificity to the kinds of capabilities that are created and developed within a subsidiary. Originality/value Clarifying the concept of capability and how capabilities are formed by using advancements in the literature is important to add precision to the literature on the evolution of subsidiaries.

show abstract

“…Ambos et al, 2006;Yamin, Andersson, 2011;Rabbiosi, Santangelo, 2013;Mudambi et al, 2014;Najafi-Tawani et al, 2014]. Reverse knowledge flows result, at least partially, from the increasing internationalization of R&D by knowledge-seeking MNEs [Michailova, Zhan, 2015;Zhang et al, 2015;Lim et al, 2017].…”

Section: Subsidiaries' Internal Relationships and Innovation-related mentioning

confidence: 99%

Subsidiaries’ dual embeddedness and innovation-related competitive advantage

Gołębiowski¹,

Lewandowska²,

Rószkiewicz³

2019

Gospodarka Narodowa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The foreign subsidiaries of multinational enterprises are involved in two types of networks: an internal (corporate) network within the company including the headquarters and sister subsidiaries, and an external (inter-organizational) network of cooperating partners. Based on the concept of "dual embeddedness," this paper proposes a model explaining the role of internal and external relationships in developing innovation-related competitive advantages. A path analysis was conducted based on data from the Community Innovation Survey's 2010-2012 sample of enterprises-members of capital groups from 10 EU member states, mostly CEE (post-transition countries). The results show the positive influence of dual embeddedness on subsidiaries' innovation, leading to competitive advantages based on cost and on differentiation. A mediating role for external knowledge in the link of internal integration and competitive advantage is posited. External and internal relationships are not mutually exclusive; on the contrary, together they reinforce each other's impact on innovation performance. Internal integration plays a decisive role in building innovation-related competitive advantages based on cost, whereas external

show abstract

MNE subsidiary evolution from sales to innovation: Looking inside the black box

Cited by 19 publications

References 39 publications

Sources of open innovation in foreign subsidiaries: An enriched typology

Sources of open innovation in foreign subsidiaries: An enriched typology

Refining a subsidiary evolution framework: clarifying key concepts

Subsidiaries’ dual embeddedness and innovation-related competitive advantage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About