Sign up

From Stopford and Wells's model to Bartlett and Ghoshal's typology: new empirical evidence. (1).
Subject:
Business enterprises (International aspects)
International business enterprises (Planning)
Business planning (International aspects)
Author:
Pla-Barber, Jose
Pub Date:
04/01/2002
Publication:
Name: Management International Review Publisher: Gabler Verlag Audience: Trade Format: Magazine/Journal Subject: Business; Business, international Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2002 Gabler Verlag ISSN: 0938-8249
Issue:
Date: April, 2002 Source Volume: 42 Source Issue: 2
Product:
Product Code: 9920000 Multinational Corporations
Geographic:
Geographic Scope: Spain Geographic Code: 4EUSP Spain

Accession Number:
90309628
Full Text:
Abstract

* The aim of this paper is to test whether the theoretical models concerning international structures and strategic approaches explain the behaviour of the internationalisation of firms from a newly liberalised Economy.

Key Results

* Using a sample of 117 Spanish MNC, a high correlation between the theoretical models and the development of the international strategy in the sampled firms has been validated.

Introduction

When a company establishes a foreign subsidiary new relationships will appear, forcing that company to adapt its organisational structures. In general, there is no one way to adapt to these new conditions, but there are some patterns of behaviour that have been observed in some cases. The diversification of products is related to product divisions, the diversification of markets is related to area divisions and both types of diversification are associated with matrix or mixed structures. However, it will be insufficient just to change the structure; a set of strategic variables has to be considered. These variables shape the organisational processes that flow along the structures (Bartlett 1986, Bartlett/Ghoshal 1989). Therefore, the research of organisational processes which allow the co-ordination and control of international activities has turned into one of the crucial aspects to be considered in multinational companies (Ghoshal/Nohria 1993, Nohria/Ghoshal 1994). Both the strategic approach and the organisational structure of the company have a decisive influence in these processes.

These initial models were established in the last two decades but recently a new interest in these two fields of study has developed (Egelhoff 1997, Hedlund/ Ridderstrale 1997, Hedlund 1999, Harzing 2000). Following this stream of research, the purpose of this paper is to analyse these "classical" organisational theories in the context of a newly liberalised economy.

The paper attempts to answer the following question: Are existing theories about international structures and international strategic approaches valid for the strategies of foreign investors from a newly integrated/liberalised country like Spain? The paper supports the argument that the basic underlying international strategy-structure fit seems to apply. Therefore, this research: 1) attempts to reconcile some differences in existing theory, and 2) investigates how applicable existing theory is to emerging Spanish MNCs. Moreover, the paper shows the interaction between the formal structures and the Bartlett and Ghoshal's research. This fact also contributes to overcome the problem of the relative lack of empirical work verifying the extent of such models (Harzing 2000).

The article is structured as follows. Section two reviews the main characteristics of the international structures and strategic focuses. It also establishes the hypotheses that test the relationships between those structures, the growth strategy and the strategic focuses adopted by companies. The next section discuses the methodology applied in the research and the operationalisation of the variables whereas section four presents the statistical analysis and a discussion of the results. Finally, the last section reveals the main conclusions.

Literature Review and Hypotheses

International Structures

Companies may adopt a variety of structural forms when they implement an international strategy. These structures have been identified and described in a great number of works (Stopford/Wells 1972, Robock/Simmonds 1973, Franko 1976, Galbraith/Nathanson 1978, Egelhoff 1982, Dunning 1993). In the initial stage of the international expansion, foreign sales are an extension of domestic sales. As long as the firm increases its international presence by creating some sales subsidiary, a mother-daughter structure can be adopted (Franko 1974). A high level of independence from the corporate strategy and the transfer of expatriates, that implies a control strategy based on socialisation, characterise that structure (Edstrom/Galbraith 1977). The corporate headquarters is in charge of each and every foreign unit that serves its own market and has a fairly free hand in the operation of the day-to-day business (Dunning 1993).

A second stage follows after the -already described--initial phase in which companies tend to create an international division. In this structure, all foreign subsidiaries report directly to that single international division that is organisational-wise separated from the domestic operations (Brooke/Remmers 1970). This division covers all foreign activities and becomes the company's first source of international expertise (Stopford/Wells 1972). This structure facilitates information processing between the headquarters and the foreign subsidiaries but hinders information processing at the parent level between the domestic operations and the international division (Egelhoff 1982).

As the international division grows and the head office recognises the necessity of a global perspective in which there should not be any difference between domestic and foreign activities, two new types of international structures appear: the world-wide product division and the area division.

A world-wide product division structure extends the responsibilities of the domestic product divisions to cover their product lines on a world-wide base. (Egelhoff 1982). Two structural changes appear: authority shifts from subsidiaries and regional managers to headquarters, and headquarters' responsibility shifts from a single line of authority to multiple lines (Davidson/Haspeslagh 1982).

Area divisions divide the world into regions, each of which is headed by a top executive at the corporate level. Each regional headquarter is responsible for all of the company's products and business within the corresponding geographical area (Egelhoff 1982).

Finally, global matrix or mixed structures appear as the most developed and complex international structures. In a matrix structure, there is a dual line of authority. For example, in an area division by product division matrix structure, a subsidiary manager reports to both the world-wide product division HQ and the geographical area HQ. Both HQ managers will be at the same level and their responsibilities will overlap (Dunning 1993). In a mixed structure, different substructures work simultaneously within the organisation (Egelhoff 1988, Habib/Victor 1991).

The optimal, or perceived optimal, organisational structure of any particular MNE may change over time as, for example, it widens or reduces its product range or increases its degree of multinationality (Dunning 1993). Indeed, some authors (Egelhoff 1988, Franko 1976, Galbraith/Nathanson 1978, Habib/Victor 1991 Stopford/Wells 1972) have shown a pattern of behaviour according to the growth strategy of the firm. From this perspective, MNC structure follows strategy.

The first major study by Stopford and Wells (1972) found that, as product diversity increases, companies moved from the simplest structures to world-wide product division structure. On the other hand, when foreign market involvement--measured by the percentage of foreign sales--increased, firms tended to adopt worldwide area division structure. Finally, when both--product diversity and foreign sales--were high, an MNE would follow a matrix/mixed structure. In a parallel study, Egelhoff (1988) re-examined the Stopford and Wells's model introducing a new element of strategy: the relative size of foreign manufacturing. This work found that both world-wide area divisions and world-wide product divisions had relatively high foreign sales. The crucial factor to discern both structures was the level of foreign manufacturing. Egelhoff (1988) suggested that both, high levels of foreign sales and foreign manufacturing, were essential for adopting world-wide area divisions.

From the previous literature, the following hypotheses tested by Stopford and Wells (1972), Egelhoff (1988) and Habib and Victor (1991) are proposed in the Spanish context:

Hypothesis 1. Low levels of product diversification and foreign market involvement will be associated with the simplest structures: mother-daughter structure or international division.

Hypothesis 2. High levels of product diversification will be associated with product divisions.

Hypothesis 3. High levels of foreign market involvement will be associated with area divisions.

Hypothesis 4. High levels of both product diversification and foreign market involvement will be associated with matrix/mixed structures.

Strategic Focuses

The formal structures described in the previous section are only a partial representation of a world-wide organisation. A new paradigm based on the physiology (core management processes) and psychology (the "mind-set" of managers) of the organisations has emerged (Bartlett 1986). Two variables appear to be decisive of this new model. On the one hand, there is a "pressure for global integration", including growing homogenisation of markets and homogenisation of technology. On the other hand, there is a "pressure for national differentiation", including state intervention, distinctive tastes and preferences and distinctive marketing and distribution systems (Ghoshal/Westney 1993). From this double dimension, researchers (Bartlett/Ghoshal 1989, 1992, Hedlund 1986, 1993, Perlmutter 1969, Porter 1986, Prahalad/Doz 1987, White/Poynter 1990) have categorised the strategic focuses of the MNC into three basic models: global, multinational and transnational.

A global strategy is based upon the centralisation of the main assets, resources and responsibilities in the head office. These companies think in terms of creating products for a world market and manufacturing them on a global scale in a few highly efficient plants, often at the corporate centre. This approach requires central co-ordination and control (Perlmutter 1969, Bartlett/Ghoshal 1989, Harzing 1998). On the other hand, a multinational strategy emphasises the differences between national markets. The subsidiaries become more independent and their managers become more host-country oriented. Products or services are differentiated to meet different local demands, and policies are differentiated to conform to different governmental and market demands (Bartlett/Ghoshal 1989, Porter 1986). Finally, a transnational strategy recognises that the necessity to be responsive to local demands and the pressure to develop competitive efficiency on a global scale are simultaneous. The resources and responsibilities are dispersed but specialised. There is a reciprocal interdependence between HQ and subsidiaries. New ideas may come up in many different countries and later be exploited on a global scale. In some way, a transnational strategy combines characteristics of both global and multinational strategy (Bartlett/Ghoshal 1989, Hedlund 1986).

If we think about the relationship between the different international structures and strategic focuses, some types of structure are better suited to exploit a special category of strategic purpose than others (Egelhoff 1982, Jones 1995, Pelmutter 1969, White/Poynter 1990).

International divisions or world-wide product divisions are able to exploit globally base advantages. Both structures centralise world-wide responsibility in the hands of a few product or business managers and locate centres of innovation at the parent company (Davidson/Haspeslagh 1982).

On the other hand, the multinational strategic focus is typically associated with mother-daughter structure or area divisions. In the first case, the independence of managers from the HQ allows them to act as entrepreneurial local managers. In the second case, all decisions are centralised in a few managers, each of whom is responsible for a particular geographical area. This specialised market knowledge facilitates the adoption of a more flexible approach by modifying their products and strategies country by country (White/Poynter 1990, Jones 1995).

Finally, the multidimensionality of organisation principles implies that a matrix/mixed structure would probably be the most appropriate formal structure to balance worldwide product and local market concerns (Bartlett/Ghoshal 1992) (2). Therefore, we suggest the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 5. Most of the companies with a multinational strategic focus will adopt a mother-daughter or area division structure

Hypothesis 6. Most of the companies with a global strategic focus will adopt a international division or product division structure.

Hypothesis 7. Most of the companies with a transnational strategic focus will adopt a matrix/mixed structure.

Methodology

Sample Description and Data Collection

The population to be studied consists of Spanish companies currently active in international markets. Dun & Bradstreet provided an international database in order to select Spanish companies with subsidiaries outside Spain in 1996. This amounted to 498 multinational companies. These firms represent the Spanish enterprises with the highest degree of involvement in the international arena.

A preliminary questionnaire was discussed with five academics. Based on their comments, some of the questionnaire items were modified. The revised questionnaire was pre-tested with twelve randomly selected firms from different industries. The purpose of this test was to confirm that the items were understandable and unambiguous.

Questionnaires were mailed to CEOs of these Spanish companies conducting FDI. After three months, we received 74 answers. A follow-up questionnaire was distributed in order to improve the response. The process was concluded with a total of 117 responses.

The sample was spread across the following industry groups which represents every kind of commercial activity in accordance with the structure of the Spanish Economy: construction and contracting (5), food and kindred products (10), textile mill products, apparel and other textile products (8), lumber, wood products, furniture and fixtures (11), publishing (4), chemicals (10), rubber and plastic products (5), leather (3), stone and glass products (8), metal products (6), industrial machinery (15), electronic equipment (12), transportation equipment (3), instruments (1), communication and public utilities (2), retailing (6), finance, insurance and real estate (5) and other services (5).

A description of the main variables in the sample is shown in the next table.

Measurement of Variables

International Structures

The main characteristics of the formal structures were introduced in the questionnaire. Respondents classified their enterprises according to these characteristics. It should be noted that "pure structures", the way they have been classified here and in previous research, are difficult to find. However, the pre-assigned classification at the top management level was found to be useful (Habib/Victor 1991). Table 2 shows the results.

Foreign Market Involvement

Three variables were used to measure the degree of foreign market involvement: the percentage of foreign sales (Stopford/Wells 1972), the percentage of foreign manufacturing (Egelhoff 1988), and the number of countries in which the products of the company are sold. The last variable was not included in previous models.

Foreign Product Diversity

The number of product lines was selected as a significant variable defining the company's product strategy. Following Egelhoff (1988) eight categories of foreign product diversity were introduced, where the final category was "eight or more" product lines.

Strategic Focuses

From Leong and Tan (1993), two sets of attributes associated with a particular strategic dimension were introduced. Respondents had to choose one of these attributes in each set. Table 3 reflects those attributes.

Data Analysis

Two phases of analysis were conducted. In the first phase, the contrast of hypotheses 1 to 4 was developed using the Mann-Whitney test and a Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (3). Both analyses determine the statistical significance of the differences between each group (as defined by the international structures presented in Table 2), in both product diversity and foreign market involvement. The chi-square value resulting from the Kruskal-Wallis Anova reveals whether there is an overall difference between the structures while the Mann-Whitney test summarises which of the pairs are different.

In the second phase, cluster analysis was used to identify the discrete categories or groups of strategic focuses. After the clusters were established, a crosstabulation and the chi-square test were conducted among the two sets of classificatory variables (structures and strategic focuses). This analysis tests the relationships between structures and strategic focuses expressed by the Hypotheses 5 to 7.

Results and Discussion

Phase 1

Tables 4 and 5 show the results of the analysis of variance and the Mann-Whitney test. These results tend to support the concept of strategy-structure fit proposed by Stopford and Wells (1972) and Egelhoff (1988). Hypothesis 1 stated that MNCs with mother-daughter or international division structures will tend to have the lowest levels of product diversity and foreign involvement. This hypothesis is fully supported for international division structures, whereas the mother-daughter structure shows a high level of foreign manufacturing.

Hypothesis 2 stated that MNCs with product division structure would tend to have high levels of product diversification. This hypothesis is fully supported. Product division structure shows the highest level of product diversity while international divisions and mother-daughter structure show the lowest values in this variable.

Hypothesis 3 is fully supported when foreign involvement is measured by percentage of foreign sales or number of countries. With an increase in foreign involvement, Spanish MNCs choose area division structure. If the percentage of foreign manufacturing is introduced, the study also supports the conclusions of Egelhoff (1988). Area divisions and matrix structures seem to be the structures associated with a high level of foreign manufacturing. Strategies which have a high level of foreign manufacturing cause high interdependencies between foreign subsidiaries within a region. The area division and matrix/mixed structures fit this kind of interdependencies providing a high level of co-ordination and information exchange. This result helps to resolve again the differences between the models of Stopford and Wells (1972) and Egelhoff (1988).

Finally, Hypothesis 4 is also fully supported. When both product diversity and foreign involvement, become relatively high, MNCs employ the most complex structures such as matrix or mixed structures. This result is also an important finding of this study. Until now theoretical arguments have been forwarded for matrix/mixed structures, but empirical support was inadequate (Habib/Victor 1991). This study empirically contributes to the theoretical reasoning and thus positively adds to the previous recommendations of Stopford and Wells (1972) and Egelhoff (1988).

However, two differences from those previous models have been found. First, the relevance of mother-daughter structure. Like other studies in the European context (Franko 1974, 1976), the subsidiaries of some European firms in the initial stages of internationalisation have almost complete autonomy and share with one another only ties of ownership to a common parent firm. The importance of this type of structure in the sample (25) reveals the classification of Spain as a late investor (Dunning/Narula 1996).

Second, we have found in our analysis that the variable "number of countries" is also a good predictor of foreign market involvement. In fact, we think that this variable fits in samples of European firms better than the variable "percentage of foreign sales". European managers still tend not to view Europe as a single market and they tend to respect and distinguish between the national differences more than US firms. This fact could have some influence concerning the organisational decisions and, for instance, it could be more relevant to the geographical dispersion rather than the level of total foreign sales.

The following figure shows the previous results in graphical form.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Phase 2

This phase of the study tested the relationships between strategic focuses and structures. From data in Table 3, cluster analysis was used to classify companies according to their strategic focuses. A three-cluster solution was chosen to facilitate the comparison with the theoretical model (Table 6). An examination was also made for two cluster solutions. For this examination an aggregation of the multinational and transnational groups was made.

The centre of clusters and means suggest that one group (Cluster 1) confronts predominantly local responsiveness pressures. Subsidiaries are more independent and innovations are developed in overseas units. Another group (Cluster 2) confronts global integration pressures. In this case, subsidiaries are totally dependent on the head office and innovations are developed and retained in the parent company. Finally, Cluster 3 confronts both pressures. Subsidiaries cooperate with the head office and depend upon each other and R&D activities are conducted jointly by parent company and subsidiaries.

The following crosstabulation shows the relationships between the previous Clusters and the international structure groups established in Table 2.

The chi-square test (p < 0.001) is statistically significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis can be rejected and consequently, there is some relationship of dependence between the two categorical variables.

Hypothesis 5 suggested a relationship between mother-daughter and area division structures with the multinational strategic approach. This hypothesis is partially supported by the research. The highest percentages in the multinational focus can be observed (44% and 58.3% respectively) in mother-daughter and area division structures. Nevertheless, these two structures are also used under other strategic approaches. In the case of area division, the standardised residual is greater than 1, which means that the probability of using a multinational focus is higher than in the case of independence between this particular structure and strategic approach.

Hypotheses 6 stated that firms with international division or product division structures would tend to adopt a global approach. This hypothesis is fully supported. There is a high association between international division and global focus (stdresid 1.5). No case of product division with a transnational focus is observed.

Finally, Hypothesis 7 stated that most of the firms with a mixed/matrix structure will adopt a transnational strategic focus. This hypothesis is fully supported. There is a strong association between matrix structure and transnational strategic focus (38.9% and stdresid 3.3).

In summary, the strongest associations found were area division structure with multinational focus, international division structure with a global focus and matrix structure with transnational focus. According to these relations, we can show that the model of Stopford and Wells is still valid for explaining the evolution of MNC in terms of the typology of Bartlett and Ghoshal.

Conclusions

The purpose of this paper was to test whether the theoretical models concerning the international structures and strategic approaches explain the internationalisation behaviour of companies from a newly liberalised economy such as Spain. The analysis of data suggests a high correlation between the theoretical models and the internationalisation of Spanish companies.

Basically, the models of fit proposed by Stopford and Wells (1972) and Egelhoff (1988) between the growth strategy of the company and its international structure have been validated. Nevertheless, some differences with those models have been shown: a) the relevance of the mother-daughter structure and b) the convenience of introducing the variable "number of countries" in the model. Here, we have argued that such differences are due to the specific characteristics of the internationalisation of European firms. Also, empirical support for matrix/mixed structures has been added.

On the other hand, the existence of three basic models of strategic approaches has been supported again by the empirical analysis. In addition, some new evidence of the interdependency between international structures and strategic focuses has been found. The hypothesised proper structure-strategic focus match was observed. These results contribute to a) add some empirical work verifying the extent of such models in large-scale research and b) insert the Stopford and Wells model inside the typology of Bartlett and Ghoshal.

From our point of view, the increasingly international environments are producing convergent models of MNE organisation. After these results, we have shown that the organisational variables in the internationalisation of firms from a late investor like Spain (Dunning/Narula 1996) follow the same pattern as firms from other nationalities more active in the international arena. Moreover, managers could use these results and classification schemes as a starting point for thinking about the core attributes of their organisational needs.

One last contribution of this study is to improve the understanding of the internationalisation of Spanish companies. This is a new phenomenon in the international field that has grown extremely rapidly in recent years (specially in Latin America) and there is still no empirical evidence on how Spanish companies, once they have developed some physical presence abroad, organise their international activities.

Finally, the author recognises that some of the issues analysed are too complex to be studied only through questionnaires. A second limitation is the absence of some important environmental, contextual and market variables (e.g. technology, market concentration, etc.) which may have some impact on the strategy-structure fit. Moreover, our results are based on the opinions of a single respondent in each firm. A final limitation of the paper is that it does not relate "theoretical fit" to performance. However, despite these limitations, the study provides an extension of the research done in other contexts. By revising and extending the previous models in the context of a newly liberalised country, the present study has sought to advance our knowledge of critical relationships between structure and strategy in MNCs.

Table 3. Strategic Attributes

SET A

1. The most vital and strategic skills and resources of my organisation tend to be located in the parent company.

2. The skills and resources of my organisation are located around the world, but each overseas unit conducts its own operations.

3. My organisation locates specialised skills and resources around the world, but our overseas units often cooperate with and depend upon each other.

SET B

1. Research and development activities are conducted, and the results retained, at parent company headquarters with little dissemination to our overseas units.

2. The new knowledge developed in our overseas units tends not to be transferred to other locations in which my organisation operates.

3. Research and development activities are typically conducted jointly by parent company and overseas units with the knowledge gained shared world-wide in my organisation.

Source: adapted from Leong and Tan (1993)

Manuscript received February 2000, revised July 2000, revised November 2000.

Notes

(1) The author wishes to express thanks to Mark Casson, Juan J. Renau, J. M. Campa, Esteban Garcia-Canal and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. Financial support from Generalitat Valenciana is gratefully acknowledged (project GV-3196/95).

(2) Further studies added some aspects such as lateral decision processes, shared decision premises or horizontal networks to improve the development of mixed/matrix structures (Hedlund, 1986, 1993; White and Poynter, 1990).

(3) These analyses are non-parametric tests. They are used when the distribution is not normal.

References

Bartlett, C. A., Building and Managing the Transnational: The New Organizational Challenge, in Porter, M. (ed.) Competition in Global Industries, Boston: Harvard Business School Press 1986.

Bartlett, C. A./Ghoshal, S., Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution, Boston: Harvard Business School Press 1989.

Bartlett, C. A./Ghoshal, S., Transnational Management. Text, Cases and Readings in Cross-Border Managemen, London: Irwin 1992.

Brooke, M. Z./Remmers, H., The Strategy of Multinational Enterprise: Organisation and Finance, London: MacMillan 1970.

Davidson, W. H./Haspeslagh, P., Shaping a Global Product Organization, Harvard Business Review, 60, 4, 1982, pp. 125-132.

Daniels, J. D./Pitts, R. A./Tretter, M. J., Organizing for Dual Strategies of Product Diversity and International Expansion, Strategic Management Journal, 6, 1985, pp. 223-237.

Dunning, J. H., Multinational Enterprises and The Global Economy, Wokingham: Addison-Wesley 1993.

Dunning. J. H./Narula, R., Foreign Direct Investment and Governments (eds.), London and New York: Routledge 1996.

Dun & Bradstreet, Duns 250.000 Principales Empresas Espanolas, 1996.

Edstrom, A./Galbraith, J. R., Transfers of Managers as a Coordination and Control Strategy in Multinational Organizations, Administrative Science Quaterly, 22, 1977, pp. 248-263.

Egelhoff, W. G., Strategy and Structure in Multinational Corporations: An Information Processing Approach, Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 1982, pp. 435-458.

Egelhoff, W. G., Strategy and Structure in Multinational Corporations: A Revision of the Stopford and Wells Model, Strategic Management Journal, 9 1, 1988, pp. 1-14.

Egelhoff, W. G., The implications of Information Technology for Coordination and Communication in Multinational Corporations, in Toyne, B./Nigh, D. (eds) International Business: An emerging vision, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press 1997.

Egelhoff, W. G., Introduction, in Egelhoff, W. G. (ed.), Transforming International Organizations, Cheltemham: Edward Elgar 1998.

Franko, L. G., The move toward a Multidivisional Structure in European Organizations, Administrative Science Quarterly, December, 1974 pp. 493- 506.

Franko, L. G., The European Multinationals, New York: Harper 1976.

Galbraith, J. R./Nathanson, D. A., Strategy Implementation: the role of Structure and Process, New York: West Publising Company 1978.

Ghoshal, S., Of Cakes, Clothes, Emperors, and Obituaries, in Toyne, B./Nigh, D. (eds) International Business. An Emerging Vision, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press 1997.

Ghoshal, S./Nohria, N., Horses for Courses: Organisational Forms for Multinational Corporations, Sloan Management Review, 34, 1993, pp 23-35.

Ghoshal, S./Westney, E., Introduction and overview in Ghoshal, S./Westney, E. (ed.), Organization Theory and the Multinational Corporation, New York: St. Martin's Press 1993.

Habib, M./Victor, B., Strategy, Structure, and Performance of US Manufacturing and Service MNCs: A Comparative Analysis, Strategic Management Journal, 12, 1991, pp. 589-606.

Harzing, A. W., Configuration Analysis in International Management: The way forward?, Conference Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the UK Chapter of the Academy of International Business, London, 1998.

Harzing, A. W., An Empirical Analysis and extension of the Bartlett and Ghoshal Typology of Multinational Companies, Journal of International Business Studies, 31, 2000, pp. 101-120.

Hedlund, G., The Hypermodern MNC- A heterarchy?, Human Resource Management, 25 1, 1986, pp. 9-35.

Hedlund, G., Assumptions of Hierarchy and Heterarchy, with Applications to the Management of the Multinational Corporation, in Ghosal, S./Westney, E. (ed.), Organization Theory and the Multinational Corporation, New York: St. Martin's Press 1993.

Hedlund, G., The Intensity and Extensity of Knowledge and The Multinational Corporation as a Nearly Recomponsable System, Management International Review, 39, Special Issue 1/1999, pp. 45-54.

Hedlund, G./Ridderstrale, J., Toward a Theory of the Selfrenewing MNC, in Toyne, B/Nigh, D. (eds), International Business, An Emerging Vision, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press 1997.

Hitt, M. A., The Evolution of Multinational Corporations: Integration of International Diversification and Strategic Management, in Toyne, B./Nigh, D. (eds), International Business: An Emerging Vision, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press 1997.

Jones, G. R., Organisational Theory, Text and Cases, Reading: Addison Wesley 1995.

Leong, S. M./Tang, C. T., Managing Across Borders: An Empirical Test of the Bartlett and Ghoshal (1989) Organizational Typology, Journal of International Business Studies, third quarter, 1993, pp. 449-464.

Martinez, J./Jarillo, J. C., The Evolution on Research on Coordination Mechanism in Multinational Corporations, Journal of International Business Studies, Fall 1989, pp. 489-514.

Nohria, N./Ghoshal, S., Differentiated Fit and Shared Values: Alternatives for Managing Headquarters-subdsidiary Relations, Strategic Management Review, 15, 1994, pp. 491-502.

Porter, M. E., Competition in Global Industries: A Conceptual Framework, in Porter, M. E. (ed.), Competition in Global Industries, Boston: Harward Business School Press 1986.

Perlmutter, H., The Tortuous Evolution of The Multinational Company, Columbia Journal of World Business, 4, 1, 1969, pp. 9-18.

Prahalad, C. K./Doz, Y., The Multinational Mission, New York: The Free Press 1987.

Robock, S. H./Simmonds, K., International Business and Multinational Enterprises, Homewood. Illinois: Richard D. Irwin 1973.

Stopford, J. M./Wells, L., Managing the Multinational Enterprise. Organization of the Firm and Ownership of the Subsidiaries, New York: Basic Books 1972.

White, R./Poynter, T. A., Organizing for a World-Wide Advantage, in Doz, Y./Bartlett, C. A./Hedlund, G. (eds.), Managing the Global Corporation, London: Routledge 1990.

Author

Jose Pla-Barber, Associate Professor of International Business, Faculty of Economics, University of Valencia, Spain.
Table 1. Sample Description

Variables                      N    %     Mean    Median   Standard
                                                     deviation

Number of employees
1-50                           25   21.4
50-250                         40   34.2
250-500                        12   10.3
> 500                          37   31.6   2468    163      9830

Age (years since foundation)
1-10                            8    6.8
11-20                          25   21.4
21-30                          22   18.8
31-40                          17   14.5
>40                            43   36.8   44       36        36

Number of products lines
1                              13   13.2
2-3                            35   35.7
4-5                            25   25.5
6-7                            11   11.2
>8                             14   14.2    5.25     3.50      7.30

Foreign manufacturing (%)
0                              55   56.7
1                               1    1
2-9                            10   10.3
10-30                          19   19.5
>30                            12   12.3    6.92     0        15.21

Foreign sales (%)
<25                            27   23.1
26-50                          30   25.6
51-75                          35   29.9
>75                            25   21.4   50.68    51.08     25.33

Number of countries
1-3                            13   11.1
3-15                           36   30.8
15-30                          27   23.1
>30                            38   32.5   28.97    20        28.9
Table 2. Structures

Structure                  N      %

International divisions    52   44.4
Mother-daughter            25   21.3
Product divisions          10    8.5
Area divisions             12   10.2
Matrix/mixed               18   15.3

                          117


Table 4. Kruskal-Wallis Anova

Internation Structures   Foreign       Foreign           Number of
                         sales (%)     manufacturing     product lines
                         (mean rank)   (%) (mean rank)   (mean rank)

International division   52.5          50.8              47.2
Mother-daughter          52.7          70.7              53.3
Product division         46.4          55.8              64.5
Area division            72.8          65.2              42.7
Matrix                   55.5          63.8              54.21

Chi-square                4.24          9.82 **           4.06

Internation Structures   Number of
                         countries
                         (mean rank)

International division   55.0
Mother-daughter          48.9
Product division         61.5
Area division            72.1
Matrix                   64.4

Chi-square                5.25 *

* P < 0.1

** P < 0.05
Table 5. Mann-Whitney Test

                   %                            Number of
Internation        foreign      % foreign       product      Number of
Structures         sales        manufacturing   lines        countries

International
  division (ID)                 ID < MD **
                                                ID < DP *
                   ID < AD **   ID < AD **                   ID < AD *
                                ID < M **

Mother-daughter
  (MD)                                          MD < PD *
                   MD < AD *                                 MD < AD **
                                                             MD < M *

Product division
  (PD)                          PD < MD *
                   PD < AD **   PD < AD *

Area division
  (AD)                                          AD < PD **
Matrix (M)         M < AD **

* P < 0,1

** P <0,05
Table 6. Analysis of Clusters

                            Cluster 1       Cluster 2   Cluster 3
                            Multinational   Global      Transnational
                            42              60          12

Centre of clusters:
* Dependence (SET A)         2              1            3
* Location of innovations
  (SET B)                    3              1            3

Means of variables:
* Dependence                 1.52           1.27         3
* Location of innovation     2.90           1.05         3

Source: own data base
Table 7. Relationship Structure-strategic Focus

                                   Clusters
                   Multinational   Global     Transnational   Total

International
division
N                  14              35          3              52
%                  26.9            67.3        5.8            100
Stdresid.          -1.1             1.5       -1.3

Mother-daughter
N                  11              10          4              25
%                  44              40         16              100
Stdresid.           0.7            -0.8        0.6

Product division
N                   3               7          0              10
%                  30              70          0              100
Stdresid.          -0.3             0.8       -1.1

Area division
N                   7               5          0              12
%                  58.3            41.7        0              100
Stdresid.           1.3            -0.5       -1.2

Matrix/mixed
N                   7               4          7              18
%                  38.9            22.2       38.9            100
Stdresid.           0.2            -1.8        3.3

Chi-square 25.94
p < 0.001
Gale Copyright:
Copyright 2002 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.