Internationalization Theory and Its Impact on the Field of International Business

Topics: Multinational corporation, Strategic management, Globalization Pages: 22 (7504 words) Published: December 15, 2010
Internalization Theory and its Impact on the Field of International Business

Alan M. Rugman and Alain Verbeke

Abstract
Internalization theory explains the existence and functioning of the multinational enterprise. It contributes to understanding the boundaries of the MNE, its interface with the external environment and its internal organizational design. Much work in the international strategic-management sphere has unfortunately not taken on board internalization-theory thinking and lacks the insights provided by this comparative institutional approach. In this chapter we show hoe well-known international strategic management models could be enriched and their normative implications altered by adopting an internalizing-theory lens.

Introduction
In this chapter we examine several international strategic management models revisited through an internalization theory lens. Internalization theory explains the existence and functioning of the multinational enterprise (MNE), (Rugman 1981). It contributes to understanding the boundaries of the MNE, its interface with the external environment, and its internal organizational design.

Conventional internalization theory has focused primarily on explaining which parameters would stimulate firms to expand across borders, and on entry mode choice. More recent internalization theory extensions have focused on establishing linkages with strategic management perspectives on the MNE, and on describing differentiated network MNEs. The great strength of internalization theory is its comparative institutional approach to assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of MNE choices in the realm of choosing firm boundaries, establishing linkages with the external environment and selecting a specific organizational form.

Much work in the international strategic management sphere has unfortunately not taken on board internalization theory thinking, and lacks the insights provided by this comparative institutional approach. In this chapter, after a brief review of the history of internalization theory, we will show how four well-known international strategic management models could be enriched, and their normative implications altered, by adopting an internalizing theory lens.

The four international strategy models revisited include the globalization model advocated by Levitt (1983) and Yip (2002); the transnational solution model developed by Bartlett and Ghoshal (1989); the evolutionary model of the MNE popularized by Kogut and Zander (1993), and the S-curve model of the multinationality-performance relationship hypothesized by Lu and Beamish (2004) and Contractor, Kundu and Hsu (2003). We will briefly describe the conceptual limitations of each international strategy model. We will also demonstrate that the managerial prescriptions resulting from each model are valid only in very specific contexts. In contrast, internalization theory is a general theory of the MNE; building upon a limited number of foundational principles, it can easily be augmented to explain a wide range of recent international business phenomena.

The History of Internalization Theory
Internalization theory was conceptualized by Buckley and Casson (1976). Their short book consisted of several working papers prepared at the University of Reading in the preceding two-year period. Chapter 2 of the book is titled ‘A Long Run Theory of the Multinational Enterprise’. Chapter 3 is called ‘Alternative Theories of the Multinational Enterprise’. These two chapters provide the first clear statements of internalization theory. Briefly, Buckley and Casson demonstrate that the MNE organizes bundles of activities internally such that it is able to develop and exploit firm-specific advantages (FSAs) in knowledge and other types of intermediate products. The proprietary ownership of such FSAs serves to overcome the externality of knowledge being a public good. Given the presence of market failure, internalization, i.e.,...

References: Bartlett, C. & Ghoshal, S. (1989). Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Buckley, P.J. & Casson, M. (1976). The Future of the Multinational Enterprise. London: Macmillan.
Buckley, P.J. & Casson, M. (1981). The optimal timing of a foreign direct investment. Economic Journal, 91: 75-87.
Caves, R.E. (1982). Multinational Enterprise and Economic Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press (republished 1996).
Coase, R. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4: 386-405.
Contractor, F.J., Kundu, S.K. & Hsu, C. (2003). A three-stage theory of international expansion: the link between multinationality and performance in the service sector. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(1): 5–18.
Doz, Y (1986). Strategic Management in Multinational Companies. Oxford: Permagon.
Dunning, J.H. (1981). International Production and the Multinational Enterprise. London: Allen and Unwin.
Dunning, J.H., Kogut, B. & Blomstrom, M. (1990). Globalization of Firms and the Competitiveness of Nations. Lund, Sweden: Lund University Press.
Dunning, J.H. & Rugman, A.M. (1985). The influence of Hymer’s dissertation on the theory of foreign direct investment. American Economic Review 75(2): 228-232.
Hennart, J-F. (1982). A Theory of Multinational Enterprise. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press.
Hymer, S.H. (1976). The International Operations of Foreign Firms: A Study of Direct Foreign Investment. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT. (originally, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, 1960).
Kindleberger, C.P. (1969). American Business Abroad: Six Lectures on Direct Investment. New Haven, Conn.and London: Yale University Press.
Kogut, B. & Zander, U. (1993). Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(4): 625–645.
Levitt, T. (1983). The globalization of markets. Harvard Business Review, 61(3): 92–102.
Lu, J.W. & Beamish, P.W. (2004). International diversification and firm performance: The S-curve hypothesis. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4): 598–609.
Oh, C.H. & Rugman, A.M. (2007). Multinationality and Regional Performance, 2001-2005. In A.M. Rugman (ed.) Regional Aspects of Multinationality and Performance. (Research in Global Strategic Management Vol. 13). Oxford: Elsevier.
Rugman, A.M. (1975). Motives for foreign investment: The market imperfections and risk diversification hypotheses. Journal of World Trade Law, 9(5): 567-573.
Rugman, A.M. (1976). Risk reduction by international diversification. Journal of International Business Studies, 7(2): 75-80.
Rugman, A.M. (1979). International Diversification and the Multinational Enterprise. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath.
Rugman, A.M. (1981). Inside the Multinationals: The Economics of Internal Markets. New York: Columbia University Press. (Reissued by Palgrave Macmillan, 2006).
Rugman, A.M. (1996). Multinational Enterprises and Trade Policy. Cheltenham, UK: Elgar.
Rugman, A.M. (2000). The End of Globalization. London: Random House Business Books, Paper Edition, 2001. Also published by McGraw Hill/ Amacom, 2001.
Rugman, A.M. (2005). The Regional Multinationals. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Rugman, A.M. (ed.) (2007). Regional Aspects of Multinationality and Performance. Oxford: Elsevier.
Rugman, A.M. & D’Cruz, J. (2001). Multinationals as Flagship Firms: Regional Business Networks. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Paper edition, 2002).
Rugman, A.M. & Verbeke, A. (1992). Multinational Enterprise and National Economic Policy in Peter J. Buckley and Mark Casson (eds.) Multinational Enterprises in the World Economy: Essays in Honour of John Dunning. Aldershot, U.K.: Edward Elgar: 194-211.
Rugman, A.M. & Verbeke, A. (1992). A note on the transnational solution and the transaction cost theory of multinational strategic management. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(4): 761-772.
Rugman, A.M. & Verbeke, A. (2002). Edith Penrose’s contribution to the resource-based view of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 23: 769-780.
Rugman, A.M. & Verbeke, A. (2003). Extending the theory of the multinational enterprise: Internalization and strategic management perspectives. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2): 125-137.
Rugman, A.M. & Verbeke, A. (2004). A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(1):3-18.
Rugman, A.M. & Verbeke, A. (2007). Liabilities of regional foreignness and the use of firm-level versus country-level data: a response to Dunning et al. (2007). Journal of International Business Studies, 38: 200-205.
Stopford, J.M. & Wells, L. (1972). Managing the Multinational Enterprise. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
Verbeke, A. (2003). The evolutionary view of the multinational enterprise and the future of internalization theory. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(6): 498-504.
Vernon, R. (1966). International investment and international trade in the product cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80: 190-207.
Williamson, O.E. (1975). Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. New York: Free Press; London: Collier Macmillan.
Yip, G. (2002). Total Global Strategy II. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Zaheer, S. (1995). Overcoming the liability of foreignness. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2): 341-363.Int
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • International business Research Paper
  • international business Essay
  • International Business Essay
  • International Business Essay
  • Culture and International Business Essay
  • International Business Essay
  • International Business Essay
  • INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free