How Do MNC Headquarters Add Value?

This focused issue examines the role of headquarters in modern multinational corporations (MNCs). We examine how headquarters add value, which roles they play and how existing theory needs to be modified in light of recent developments.We argue that headquarters still play an important role in the MNC. Furthermore, we highlight the possibility that the conceptualization of headquarters as a distinct organizational entity may need to be modified. We also suggest that further studies may benefit from focusing on problems of “dual agency” and how subsidiary managers deal with multiple parents.

[1]  Stephen Tallman,et al.  Keeping the Global in Mind , 2010 .

[2]  J. Jarillo,et al.  DIFFERENT ROLES FOR SUBSIDIARIES: THE CASE OF MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS IN SPAIN , 1990 .

[3]  Kazuhiro Asakawa,et al.  Organizational tension in international R&D management : The case of Japanese firms , 2001 .

[4]  Anil K. Gupta,et al.  Knowledge Flows and the Structure of Control Within Multinational Corporations , 1991 .

[5]  Y. Doz,et al.  The Multinational Mission: Balancing Local Demands and Global Vision , 1999 .

[6]  Björn Ambos,et al.  The Effect of Quantity, Quality and Timing of Headquarters-initiated Knowledge Flows on Subsidiary Performance , 2010 .

[7]  Julian Birkinshaw,et al.  WHY DO SOME MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS RELOCATE THEIR HEADQUARTERS OVERSEAS , 2006 .

[8]  Michael L. Tushman,et al.  Information Processing as an Integrating Concept in Organizational Design. , 1978 .

[9]  Volker Mahnke,et al.  Governing Entrepreneurial Opportunity Recognition in MNEs: Aligning Interests and Cognition Under Uncertainty , 2007 .

[10]  David M. Brock,et al.  The development of subsidiary-management research: review and theoretical analysis , 2002 .

[11]  William G. Egelhoff,et al.  Centralization in Headquarters–Subsidiary Relationships , 1986 .

[12]  William G. Egelhoff.  Information-Processing Theory and the Multinational Enterprise , 1991 .

[13]  Alfred D. Chandler.  The functions of the HQ unit in the multibusiness firm , 1991 .

[14]  C. Hill,et al.  Are institutional investors myopic? A time‐series study of four technology‐driven industries , 1991 .

[15]  Julian Birkinshaw,et al.  Consequences of perception gaps in the headquarters-subsidiary relationship , 2000 .

[16]  Bodo B. Schlegelmilch,et al.  The New Role of Regional Management , 2009 .

[17]  G. Verlag,et al.  From "Starworks" to Networks and Heterarchies? Theoretical Rationale and Empirical Evidence of HRM Organization in Large Multinational Corporations , 1997 .

[18]  D. Schendel.  Editor's comments on the winter special issue , 1991 .

[19]  G. Hedlund.  A model of knowledge management and the N‐form corporation , 2007 .

[20]  J. L. Bower.  Managing the resource allocation process: A study of corporate planning and investment , 1970 .

[21]  J. Birkinshaw.  Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations : The characteristics of subsidiary initiatives , 1997 .

[22]  Alfred D. Chandler.  Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the Industrial Enterprise , 1962 .

[23]  Björn Ambos,et al.  The Headquarters-Subsidiary Trench: Tracing Perception Gaps within the Multinational Corporation , 2005 .

[24]  Jay R. Galbraith.  Designing Complex Organizations , 1973 .

[25]  A. Campbell,et al.  Corporate strategy: The quest for parenting advantage , 1995 .

[26]  William G. Egelhoff.  Strategy and Structure in Multinational Corporations: An Information- Processing Approach , 1982 .

[27]  Francesco Ciabuschi,et al.  Headquarters’ Influence on Knowledge Transfer Performance , 2010 .

[28]  M. Porter.  From Competitive Advantage to Corporate Strategy , 1989 .

[29]  William G. Egelhoff.  How the Parent Headquarters Adds Value to an MNC , 2010 .

[30]  Tina C. Ambos,et al.  Headquarters’ Attention and Its Effect on Subsidiary Performance , 2010 .