{"title":"The source of MNE superiority from within or from outside? – A response to “the importance of being transnational”","authors":"M. Forsgren, M. Yamin","doi":"10.1108/cpoib-03-2023-0019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this paper is to respond to the comments by professor Ietto-Gillies on the paper on “The MNE as the Crown of Creation?”\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe authors argue that the key points made in the commentary are broadly complementary to the arguments set out in the “Crown of Creation?”\n\n\nFindings\nThe authors agree with the commentary that sources of advantages of multinationality lie “outside the MNE” – through its interactions with national governments and organised labour. However, the authors would caution that the achievement of such advantages may encounter constraints.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe original paper (“The MNE as the Crown of Creation?”) was a critique of mainstream theories of the MNE regarding the assumed superiority of the MNE. The response to the paper makes the argument that any superiority associated with MNE must be sought in its interactions with other actors.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe argument suggests that MNE managers seeking to exploit the advantage of multinationality through production shifting must be aware of the system-wide consequences of such actions.\n\n\nSocial implications\nGiven the conceptual nature of the argument and the level of abstraction, solid social implications can only be drawn tentatively.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe key novelty in the response paper is the possible negative effect – for MNEs – of unconstrained exercise of production shifting.\n","PeriodicalId":46124,"journal":{"name":"Critical Perspectives on International Business","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Perspectives on International Business","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/cpoib-03-2023-0019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to respond to the comments by professor Ietto-Gillies on the paper on “The MNE as the Crown of Creation?”
Design/methodology/approach
The authors argue that the key points made in the commentary are broadly complementary to the arguments set out in the “Crown of Creation?”
Findings
The authors agree with the commentary that sources of advantages of multinationality lie “outside the MNE” – through its interactions with national governments and organised labour. However, the authors would caution that the achievement of such advantages may encounter constraints.
Research limitations/implications
The original paper (“The MNE as the Crown of Creation?”) was a critique of mainstream theories of the MNE regarding the assumed superiority of the MNE. The response to the paper makes the argument that any superiority associated with MNE must be sought in its interactions with other actors.
Practical implications
The argument suggests that MNE managers seeking to exploit the advantage of multinationality through production shifting must be aware of the system-wide consequences of such actions.
Social implications
Given the conceptual nature of the argument and the level of abstraction, solid social implications can only be drawn tentatively.
Originality/value
The key novelty in the response paper is the possible negative effect – for MNEs – of unconstrained exercise of production shifting.
期刊介绍:
In recent years, the business practices and management philosophies of global enterprises have been subject to increasingly close scrutiny by commentators in the fields of journalism and academia. Such scrutiny has been motivated by a growing desire to examine the nature of globalisation, its impact on specific communities and its benefits for society as a whole. Coverage includes, but is not restricted to, issues of: ■Globalization ■Production and consumption ■Economic change ■Societal change ■Politics and power of organizations and governments ■Environmental impact