Motivating proactive subsidiary innovation: Agent-based theory and socialization models in global R&D
An integration of agency theory and socialization models is developed and used to explain the types of governance and organizational structures associated with self-initiated subsidiary innovation. This theorizing suggests that: 1) The hub structure is the greatest user of behavior-based contracting and engenders the fewest self-initiated innovations; 2) The federation structure is the greatest user of outcome-based contracting and engenders the most self-initiated innovations, but these are primarily oriented to business level strategy rather than corporate; and, 3) The network structure is the greatest user of goal internalization and is the strongest generator of self-initiated innovations which are oriented to corporate-level strategy. The empirical evidence from extant studies of other researchers in the field is consistent with these propositions. Implications for management practice, research and theory are discussed in the paper.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 13 (2007)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/601266/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/601266/bibliographic|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Julian Birkinshaw, 1996. "How Multinational Subsidiary Mandates are Gained and Lost," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 27(3), pages 467-495, September.
- Anne-Wil Harzing, 2000. "An Empirical Analysis and Extension of the Bartlett and Ghoshal Typology of Multinational Companies," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 31(1), pages 101-120, March.
- Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
- Neil Hood & James Taggart, 1999. "Subsidiary Development in German and Japanese Manufacturing Subsidiaries in the British Isles," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(6), pages 513-528.
- Kendall Roth & David M Schweiger & Allen J Morrison, 1991. "Global Strategy Implementation at the Business Unit Level: Operational Capabilities and Administrative Mechanisms," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 22(3), pages 369-402, September.
- Siew Meng Leong & Chin Tiong Tan, 1993. "Managing Across Borders: An Empirical Test of the Bartlett and Ghoshal  Organizational Typology," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 24(3), pages 449-464, September.
- Wilbur Chung, 2001. "Identifying Technology Transfer in Foreign Direct Investment: Influence of Industry Conditions and Investing Firm Motives," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 32(2), pages 211-229, June.
- Sumantra Ghoshal & Christopher A Bartlett, 1988. "Creation, Adoption and Diffusion of Innovations by Subsidiaries of Multinational Corporations," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 19(3), pages 365-388, September.
- Kendall Roth & Allen J Morrison, 1990. "An Empirical Analysis of the Integration-Responsiveness Framework in Global Industries," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 21(4), pages 541-564, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intman:v:13:y:2007:i:4:p:472-487. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.