The Eclectic Paradigm

Reconciling internalization theory and the eclectic paradigm

  

            
         !    ∀ # ∃ %&∋∋())%∗∃∗+ ∀    ,−−      .−/−

&  
∀    # .

0

   

1∀

  0  


 

0   

,! &

0&

  !    ∋  2 3 ∀

 

 4  3  

&      #       #4   
&    

             5 
  0   0      0 
   6
3    



###
CentAUR 4  
  1

   .− ∀    3 ∀    

 0  

Reconciling Internalization Theory and the Eclectic Paradigm
Alan M. Rugman
Abstract: The eclectic paradigm of Dunning (1980) (with its OLI and four motives for FDI framework) can be reconciled with the firm and country matrix of Rugman (1981). However, the fit is not perfect. The main reason for misalignment is that Dunning is focused upon outward FDI into host economies, whereas Rugman’s matrix is for firm-level strategy covering MNE activity in both home and host countries. Keywords: internalization theory, Dunning’s eclectic paradigm, firm-specific advantages, country specific advantages, multinational enterprises.

INTRODUCTION
The field of international business has largely been developed over the last forty years through the insight and leadership of John Dunning. At the University of Reading he built upon the theory of internalization developed by his colleagues, Peter Buckley and Mark Casson (Buckley and Casson 1976), to develop what has become known as the eclectic paradigm (Dunning 1980, 1981, 1988). Together, internalization theory and the eclectic paradigm provide the cornerstones for the current theory of the multinational enterprise (MNE) (Verbeke 2009). They also provide the