Abstract
This paper examines the co-evolution of MNE activities and institutions external and internal to the firm. We develop a theoretical framework for this analysis that draws on the more recent writings of Douglass North on institutions as a response to complex forms of uncertainty associated with the rise in global economic interconnectedness, and of Richard Nelson on the co-evolution of technology and institutions. We link historical changes in the character of MNE activities to changes in the institutional environment, and highlight the scope for firm-level creativity and institutional entrepreneurship that may lead to co-evolution with the environment. We argue that the main drivers for institutional entrepreneurship are now found in the increasing autonomy of MNE subsidiaries. Thus MNE agency derives from more decentralized forms of experimentation in international corporate networks, which competence-creating nodes of new initiatives can co-evolve with local institutions. Unlike most other streams of related literature, our approach connects patterns of institutional change in wider business systems with more micro processes of variety generation and experimentation within and across individual firms. This form of co-evolutionary analysis is increasingly important to understanding the interrelationships between MNE activities and public policy.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Although we might note that there is almost no evidence of explicit cross-fertilization between the two.
These correspond broadly to the three pillars introduced by Scott (2001), except that the informal institutions cover both the normative and the cultural-cognitive domains.
By the physical environment we mean the realm of the resources and markets exploited by profit-maximizing firms, where little attention is being paid to non-market actors and institutional differences. By contrast, the human environment is concerned more with the mindsets and motivation of the actors involved in resource allocation, where non-market actors and institutional differences figure prominently.
This is partly because organizations in North's (1990) analysis include not only firms but also political parties, educational organizations, and social and cultural organizations.
Another stream of the IB literature that has emphasized the need for MNEs to adopt more flexible (and experimental) strategies is that involving real options. This literature has been particularly concerned with the effects of irreversibility on investment, and how a piecemeal approach might allow the firm to realize additional option value from its investments (Buckley & Casson, 1998; Kogut & Kulatilaka, 1994). See also Hamel (2006) on management innovation and corporate resilience.
Recognizing of course that some best practices may be very difficult to imitate or transfer owing to causal ambiguity or social complexity, even within the firm, let alone by other firms (Kogut & Parkinson, 1998; Martin & Salomon, 2003; Szulanski, 1996).
In passing, we might note that the view of structural inertia in the literature on population ecology, such as Hannan and Freeman (1984), is not the same as the meaning of inertia in our sense here, or that in Freeman and Perez (1988). We are concerned here with impediments to institutional change in the environment largely beyond specific industries and the competitive interactions that may play out within industries. Yet these are impediments that may be overcome with varying degrees of success or failure across different firms and different countries. In contrast, Hannan and Freeman (1984) think of structural inertia as implying an inability of firms to adapt to their environments, so that the selection in or out of specific firms is largely unaffected by their strategic decisions or actions. In other words, in this alternative context of the evolution of populations of firms in an industry, firms need not co-evolve with their environment. However, the ideas of Freeman and Perez and of North on cross-country differences in institutional inertia, and hence in the ability of firms to adapt to or take advantage of changes in physical technology, can rightly be traced back to the much earlier contribution of Veblen (1899).
Historically, this was the case for example with US manufacturing investment in Europe in the 1920s and 1930s (Wilkins, 1974).
The work of Oliver (1991, 1997) is extremely instructive in outlining the range of different strategic responses of firms, albeit in a non-IB context.
Civil society groups have also found inventive ways to introduce new institutions, for example, by using the Alien Tort Claims Act to make MNEs accountable for human rights violations (Muchlinski, 2001).
Although the OLI factors are fundamentally interdependent, it is particularly in this kind of dynamic context that their interconnections are likely to be most evident.
However, not all such voids can be filled in by MNEs, and there is often no compelling reason for the inefficient parts of an institutional system to be replaced.
The distinction between linkage effects and spillovers, and the different channels for their dissemination, are discussed in Dunning and Lundan (2008b). See also Spencer (2008).
It is also reasonable to assume that initial imitation occurs for somewhat different reasons than later imitation, since initial imitation carries a high signaling value, whereas subsequent imitation may exhibit bandwagon effects.
The British Empire, which spanned the globe, provides a historical counter-example. In this case the comprehensive transfer of institutions, including systems of education, made it easier for firms to engage in cross-border activities within the Empire. This resulted in a pattern of sustained high levels of trade and investment within the Commonwealth (Lundan & Jones, 2001).
See for example the work by Jones on the evolution of trading companies, and on the historical prevalence of the group or network structures of MNEs (Jones, 2000; Jones & Khanna, 2006).
Ozawa (2005) has examined how US MNEs have contributed to the institutional transformation ongoing in Japan. In his words, “foreign multinationals which are now eagerly welcomed in Japan to revitalize its corporate business sector are serving as renovators that can remodel Japan's inner set of institutions more closely in accordance with the norms of the outer set”.
References
Aldrich, H. E., & Ruef, M. 2006. Organizations evolving. London: Sage.
Andersson, U., & Forsgren, M. 2000. In search of centre of excellence: Network embeddedness and subsidiary roles in multinational corporations. Management International Review, 40 (4): 329–350.
Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. 2007. Balancing subsidiary influence in the federative MNC: A business network view. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (5): 802–818.
Andriani, P., & McKelvey, B. 2007. Beyond Gaussian averages: Redirecting international business and management research toward extreme events and power laws. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (7): 1212–1230.
Baum, J. A. C., & Singh, J. V. (Eds) 1994. Evolutionary dynamics of organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Boddewyn, J. J. 2003. Understanding and advancing the concept of “nonmarket”. Business & Society, 42 (3): 297–327.
Boddewyn, J. J., & Brewer, T. L. 1994. International-business political behavior: New theoretical directions. Academy of Management Review, 19 (1): 119–143.
Brewer, T. L. 2005. Global warming and climate change: New issues for business strategy, government policy, and research on business-government relations. In R. Grosse (Ed.) International business and government relations in the 21st century: 147–170. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. C. 1998. Models of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 29 (1): 21–44.
Burt, R. S. 1992. Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cantwell, J. A. 1989. Technological innovation and multinational corporations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Cantwell, J. A. 2002. Innovation, profits and growth: Penrose and Schumpeter. In C. Pitelis (Ed.) The growth of the firm: The legacy of Edith Penrose: 215–248. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cantwell, J. A., & Mudambi, R. 2005. MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandates. Strategic Management Journal, 26 (12): 1109–1128.
Cantwell, J. A., & Piscitello, L. 2000. Accumulating technological competence: Its changing impact on corporate diversification and internationalization. Industrial and Corporate Change, 9 (1): 21–51.
Cantwell, J. A., & Vertova, G. 2004. Historical evolution of technological diversification. Research Policy, 33 (3): 511–529.
Casson, M. C., & Lundan, S. M. 1999. Explaining international differences in economic institutions: A critique of the “national business system” as an analytical tool. International Studies of Management & Organization, 29 (2): 25–42.
Chandler, A. D. 1990. Scale and scope: The dynamics of industrial capitalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard/Belknap.
Chang, S.-J., & Rosenzweig, P. M. 2001. The choice of entry mode in sequential foreign direct investment. Strategic Management Journal, 22 (8): 747–776.
Chesbrough, H. 2006. Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Christmann, P., & Taylor, G. 2001. Globalization and the environment: Determinants of firm self-regulation in China. Journal of International Business Studies, 32 (3): 439–458.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (1): 128–152.
Cooke, P. 2001. Regional innovation systems, clusters, and the knowledge economy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10 (4): 945–974.
Cuervo-Cazurra, A. 2006. Who cares about corruption? Journal of International Business Studies, 37 (6): 807–822.
Davis, P. S., Desai, A. B., & Francis, J. D. 2000. Mode of international entry: An isomorphism perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 31 (2): 239–258.
Day, R. H. 1998. Bounded rationality and firm performance in the experimental economy. In G. Eliasson, C. Green & C. McCann (Eds) Microfoundations of economic growth: A Schumpeterian perspective: 119–130. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Delios, A., & Henisz, W. J. 2003. Policy uncertainty and the sequence of entry by Japanese firms, 1980–1998. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (3): 227–241.
Dilling, O., Herberg, M., & Winter, G. (Eds) 2008. Responsible business: Self-governance and law in transnational economic transactions. Oxford: Hart.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48 (2): 147–160.
Doh, J. P., Teegen, H., & Mudambi, R. 2004. Balancing private and state ownership in emerging markets’ telecommunications infrastructure: Country, industry, and firm influences. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (3): 232–250.
Dosi, G. 1999. Some notes on national systems of innovation and production, and their implications for economic analysis. In D. Archibugi, J. Howells & J. Michie (Eds) Innovation policy in a global economy: 35–48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dunning, J. H. 1986. Japanese participation in British industry. London: Croom Helm.
Dunning, J. H. 2005. Institutional reform, foreign direct investment and European transition economies. In R. Grosse (Ed.) International business and government relations in the 21st century: 49–78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dunning, J. H. 2006. Towards a new paradigm of development: Implications for the determinants of international business activity. Transnational Corporations, 15 (1): 173–228.
Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. 2008a. Institutions and the OLI paradigm of the multinational enterprise. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25 (4): 573–593.
Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. 2008b. Multinational enterprises and the global economy, (2nd ed.). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. 2010. The institutional origins of dynamic capabilities in multinational enterprises. Industrial and Corporate Change, forthcoming.
Eden, L., Dacin, M. T., & Wan, W. P. 2001. Standards across borders: Crossborder diffusion of the arm's length standard in North America. Accounting, Organizations & Society, 26 (1): 1–23.
Eliasson, G. 1991. Modeling the experimentally organized economy. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 16 (1–2): 153–182.
Ferner, A., Almond, P., & Colling, T. 2005. Institutional theory and the cross-national transfer of employment policy: The case of “workforce diversity” in US multinationals. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (3): 304–321.
Freeman, C. 1995. The “national system of innovation” in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19 (1): 5–24.
Freeman, C. 2002. Continental, national and sub-national innovation systems: Complementarity and economic growth. Research Policy, 31 (2): 191–211.
Freeman, C., & Louçã, F. 2001. As time goes by: From the industrial revolutions to the information revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Freeman, C., & Perez, C. 1988. Structural crises of adjustment: Business cycles and investment behavior. In G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. R. Nelson, G. Silverberg & L. Soete (Eds) Technical change and economic theory: 38–66. London: Francis Pinter.
Garud, R., Jain, S., & Kumaraswamy, A. 2002. Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: The case of Sun Microsystems and Java. Academy of Management Journal, 45 (1): 196–214.
Globerman, S., & Shapiro, D. 2002. Global foreign direct investment flows: The role of governance infrastructure. World Development, 30 (11): 1899–1919.
Grosse, R. 2005. The bargaining view of business-government relations. In R. Grosse (Ed.) International business and government relations in the 21st century: 273–290. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Guillén, M. F. 2003. Experience, imitation, and the sequence of foreign entry: Wholly owned and joint-venture manufacturing by South Korean firms and business groups in China, 1987–1995. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (2): 185–198.
Guler, I., Guillén, M. F., & Macpherson, J. M. 2002. Global competition, institutions, and the diffusion of organizational practices: The international spread of ISO9000 quality certificates. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47 (2): 207–232.
Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. 2001. An introduction to varieties of capitalism. In P.A. Hall & D. Soskice (Eds) Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage: 1–70. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hamel, G. 2006. The why, what, and how of management innovation. Harvard Business Review, 84 (2): 72–84.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. 1984. Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49 (2): 149–164.
Heath, C., & Kamperman Sanders, A. (Eds) 2005. New frontiers of intellectual property law. Oxford: Hart.
Hirschman, A. O. 1970. Exit, voice and loyalty. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hollister, H. T. 2005. “Shock therapy” for Aktiengesellschaften: Can the Sarbanes-Oxley certification requirements transform German corporate culture, practice and prospects? Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, 25 (2): 453–484.
Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Lau, C. M., & Wright, M. 2000. Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43 (3): 249–267.
Hurrelmann, A., Leibfried, S., Martens, K., & Mayer, P. (Eds) 2007. Transforming the golden-age nation state. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Jackson, G., & Deeg, R. 2008. Comparing capitalisms: Understanding institutional diversity and its implications for international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (4): 540–561.
Jacobides, M. G. 2008. Playing football in a soccer field: Value chain structures, institutional modularity and success in foreign expansion. Managerial & Decision Economics, 29 (2/3): 257–276.
Jensen, N. M. 2006. Nation-states and the multinational corporation: A political economy of foreign direct investment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Jones, G. 2000. Merchants to multinationals: British trading companies in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jones, G., & Khanna, T. 2006. Bringing history (back) into international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 37 (4): 453–468.
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. 2007. The worldwide governance indicators project: Answering the critics, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4149, Washington, DC.
Khanna, T., Kogan, J., & Palepu, K. 2006. Globalization and similarities in corporate governance: A cross-country analysis. Review of Economics & Statistics, 88 (1): 69–90.
Kipping, M., & Bjarnar, O. (Eds) 1998. The Americanisation of European business: The Marshall Plan and the transfer of US management models. London: Routledge.
Knight, F. H. 1921. Risk, uncertainty and profit. Washington, DC: Beard Books.
Kogut, B. 2005. Learning, or the importance of being inert: Country imprinting and international competition. In S. Ghoshal & D.E. Westney (Eds) Organization theory and the multinational corporation, (2nd ed.): 106–122. London: Macmillan.
Kogut, B., & Kulatilaka, N. 1994. Operating flexibility, global manufacturing, and the option value of a multinational network. Management Science, 40 (1): 123–139.
Kogut, B., & Parkinson, D. 1998. Adoption of the multidivisional structure: Analyzing history from the start. Industrial and Corporate Change, 7 (2): 249–273.
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1993. Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24 (4): 625–645.
Kogut, B., Walker, G., & Anand, J. 2002. Agency and institutions: National divergences in diversification behavior. Organization Science, 13 (2): 162–178.
Kolk, A., & van Tulder, R. 2002. Child labor and multinational conduct: A comparison of international business and stakeholder codes. Journal of Business Ethics, 36 (3): 291–301.
Kostova, T. 1999. Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: A contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24 (2): 308–324.
Kostova, T., & Roth, K. 2002. Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: Institutional and relational effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45 (1): 215–233.
Kostova, T., & Zaheer, S. 1999. Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 24 (1): 64–81.
Kostova, T., Roth, K., & Dacin, T. 2008. Institutional theory in the study of MNCs: A critique and new directions. Academy of Management Review, 33 (4): 994–1006.
Langlois, R. N. 2003. The vanishing hand: The changing dynamics of industrial capitalism. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12 (2): 351–385.
Lewin, A. Y., & Volberda, H. W. 1999. Prolegomena on coevolution: A framework for research on strategy and new organizational forms. Organization Science, 10 (5): 519–534.
Lundan, S. M., & Jones, G. 2001. The “Commonwealth effect” and the process of internationalization. The World Economy, 24 (1): 99–118.
Malerba, F. (Ed.) 2004. Sectoral systems of innovation: Concepts, issues and analyses of six major sectors in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Martin, X., & Salomon, R. 2003. Knowledge transfer capacity and its implications for the theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (4): 356–373.
Mason, M. 1992. American multinationals and Japan: The political economy of Japanese capital controls, 1899–1980. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Meyer, K. E. 2001. Institutions, transaction costs, and entry mode choice in Eastern Europe. Journal of International Business Studies, 32 (2): 357–367.
Meyer, K. E. 2004. Perspectives on multinational enterprises in emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (4): 259–276.
Meyer, K. E., & Nguyen, H. V. 2005. Foreign investment strategies and sub-national institutions in emerging markets: Evidence from Vietnam. Journal of Management Studies, 42 (1): 63–93.
Meyer, K. E., & Peng, M. W. 2005. Probing theoretically into Central and Eastern Europe: Transactions, resources, and institutions. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (6): 600–621.
Mokyr, J. 2002. The gifts of Athena: Historical origins of the knowledge economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Morgan, G. 2005. Introduction: Changing capitalisms? Internationalization, institutional change, and systems of economic organization. In G. Morgan, R. Whitley & E. Moen (Eds) Changing capitalisms? Internationalization, institutional change, and systems of economic organization: 1–18. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Morgan, G., & Quack, S. 2005. Institutional legacies and firm dynamics: The growth and internationalization of UK and German law firms. Organization Studies, 26 (12): 1765–1785.
Muchlinski, P. T. 2001. Human rights and multinationals: Is there a problem? International Affairs, 77 (1): 31–61.
Mudambi, R., & Navarra, P. 2004. Is knowledge power? Knowledge flows, subsidiary power and rent-seeking within MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (5): 385–406.
Murmann, J. P. 2003. Knowledge and competitive advantage: The coevolution of firms, technology, and national institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nelson, R. R. 1991. Why do firms differ, and how does it matter? Strategic Management Journal, 12 (Special Issue): 61–74.
Nelson, R. R. 1994. What has been the matter with neoclassical growth theory? In G. Silverberg & L. L. G. Soete (Eds) The economics of growth and technical change: Technologies, nations, agents: 290–324. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Nelson, R. R. 2002. Bringing institutions into evolutionary growth theory. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12 (1/2): 17–28.
Nelson, R. R. 2003. On the uneven evolution of human know-how. Research Policy, 32 (6): 909–922.
Nelson, R. R. 2007. Universal Darwinism and evolutionary social science. Biology and Philosophy, 22 (1): 73–94.
Nelson, R. R. 2008. What enables rapid economic progress: What are the needed institutions? Research Policy, 37 (1): 1–11.
Nelson, R. R., & Nelson, K. 2002. Technology, institutions, and innovation systems. Research Policy, 31 (2): 265–272.
Nelson, R. R., & Sampat, B. N. 2001. Making sense of institutions as a factor shaping economic performance. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 44 (1): 31–54.
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Nohria, N., & Ghoshal, S. 1997. The differentiated network: Organizing multinational corporations for value creation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
North, D. C. 1990. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
North, D. C. 2005. Understanding the process of economic change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
North, D. C., & Wallis, J. J. 1994. Integrating institutional change and technical change in economic history: A transaction cost approach. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 150 (4): 609–624.
Oliver, C. 1991. Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16 (1): 145–179.
Oliver, C. 1997. Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and resource-based views. Strategic Management Journal, 18 (9): 697–713.
Oliver, N., & Wilkinson, B. 1988. The Japanization of British industry. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Orr, R. J., & Scott, W. R. 2008. Institutional exceptions on global projects: A process model. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (4): 562–588.
Oxelheim, L., & Randøy, T. 2003. The impact of foreign board membership on firm value. Journal of Banking & Finance, 27 (12): 2369–2392.
Ozawa, T. 2005. Institutions, industrial upgrading and economic performance in Japan. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Peng, M. W., Wang, D. Y. L., & Jiang, Y. 2008. An institution-based view of international business strategy: A focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (5): 920–936.
Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. 1996. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41 (1): 116–145.
Ramamurti, R. 2005. Global regulatory convergence: The case of intellectual property rights. In R. Grosse (Ed.) International Business and Government Relations in the 21st Century: 341–360. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ramamurti, R., & Doh, J. P. 2004. Rethinking foreign infrastructure investment in developing countries. Journal of World Business, 39 (2): 151–167.
Ramlogan, R., & Metcalfe, J. S. 2006. Restless capitalism: A complexity perspective on modern capitalist economies. In E. Garnsey & J. McGlade (Eds) Complexity and co-evolution: Continuity and change in socio-economic systems: 115–146. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Redding, G. 2005. The thick description and comparison of societal systems of capitalism. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (2): 123–155.
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.
Scott, W. R. 2001. Institutions and organizations, (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Shackle, G. L. S. 1958. Decision, order and time in human affairs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sørenson, J. 2004. Recruitment-based competition between industries: A community ecology. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13 (1): 149–170.
Spencer, J. W. 2008. The impact of multinational enterprise strategy on indigenous enterprises: Horizontal spillovers and crowding out in developing countries. Academy of Management Review, 33 (2): 341–361.
Sullivan, D. P., & Daniels, J. D. 2008. Innovation in international business research: A call for multiple paradigms. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (6): 1081–1090.
Szulanski, G. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (Winter Special Issue): 27–43.
Teece, D. J. 1977. Technology transfer by multinational firms: The resource cost of transferring technological knowhow. Economic Journal, 87 (346): 242–261.
Teegen, H., Doh, J. P., & Vachani, S. 2004. The importance of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in global governance and value creation: An international business research agenda. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (6): 463–483.
Uhlenbruck, K., Rodriguez, P., Doh, J., & Eden, L. 2006. The impact of corruption on entry strategy: Evidence from telecommunication projects in emerging economies. Organization Science, 17 (3): 402–414.
Vachani, S., & Smith, N. C. 2004. Socially responsible pricing: Lessons from the pricing of AIDS drugs in developing countries. California Management Review, 47 (1): 117–144.
van Tulder, R., & Kolk, A. 2001. Multinationality and corporate ethics: Codes of conduct in the sporting goods industry. Journal of International Business Studies, 32 (2): 267–284.
Veblen, T. 1899. The theory of the leisure class: An economic study of institutions. London: Macmillan.
Verbeke, A., & Kenworthy, T. P. 2008. Multidivisional vs metanational governance of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (6): 940–956.
Volberda, H. W., & Lewin, A. Y. 2003. Guest editors’ introduction: Co-evolutionary dynamics within and between firms: From evolution to co-evolution. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (8): 2111–2136.
Walker, G., Kogut, B., & Shan, W. 1997. Social capital, structural holes and the formation of an industry network. Organization Science, 8 (2): 109–125.
Westney, D. E. 2001. Japan. In A. M. Rugman & T. Brewer (Eds) The Oxford handbook of international business: 623–647. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Westney, D. E. 2009. The multinational firm as an evolutionary system. In S. Collinson & G. Morgan (Eds) Images of the multinational firm: 117–144. Chichester: John Wiley.
Whitley, R. 1999. Divergent capitalisms: The social structuring and change of business systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wilkins, M. 1974. The maturing of multinational enterprise: American business abroad from 1914 to 1970. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Winter, S. G. 2003. Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24 (10): 991–995.
Wu, C., Lawler, J. J., & Xiang, Y. 2008. Overt employment discrimination in MNC affiliates: Home-country cultural and institutional effects. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (5): 772–794.
Zeitlin, J., & Herrigel, G. (Eds) 2000. Americanization and its limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Acknowledgements
The origins of this paper lie in a conversation between John Cantwell and John Dunning in April 2007, in which we agreed to collaborate on a paper on an evolutionary theory of international business activity in a longer-term historical perspective. In October that same year Sarianna Lundan joined the conversation, and we decided that we needed to focus as our central theme on the co-evolution of MNE activity and the institutional environment. The three of us worked closely together on the paper, despite the diagnosis of John Dunning's illness in January 2008. John continued to be involved in all our discussions of the paper through to the sad event of his death in January 2009, which was during the second round stage of revision and resubmission. Thereafter, the two remaining authors completed the final version of this paper, and we take full responsibility for the form in which it finally appears. We are grateful for the helpful comments that we have received from the reviewers and participants at the AIB conference in San Diego, to the three anonymous referees of the journal, and to the editors of JIBS.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Accepted by Geoffrey Jones, Consulting Editor, 21 September 2009. This paper has been with the authors for three revisions.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cantwell, J., Dunning, J. & Lundan, S. An evolutionary approach to understanding international business activity: The co-evolution of MNEs and the institutional environment. J Int Bus Stud 41, 567–586 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.95
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.95