Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The globalization of Swedish MNEs: Empirical evidence and theoretical explanations

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of International Business Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We define globalization as the geographical dispersion of multinational enterprises (MNEs)’ value chain, in combination with increased inter-regional coordination, and use detailed firm-level data to show that 12 of Sweden’s 17 largest manufacturing companies indeed are global. By developing a Globalization Process Model we theoretically argue, in contrast to much of the existing literature, that globalization may evolve to a more general phenomenon. The globalization process is tortuous as MNEs have to develop dynamic capabilities which make them gradually more competitive and able to cope with varying institutional contexts. Empirical testing on globalization of MNEs originating from other home countries is suggested.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aggarwal, R., Berrill, J., Hutson, E., & Kearney, C. 2011. What is a multinational corporation? Classifying the degree of firm-level multinationality. International Business Review, 20 (5): 557–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, U., Holm, D. B., & Johanson, M. 2005. Opportunities, relational embeddedness and network structure. In P. Ghauri, A. Hadjikhani, & J. Johanson (Eds), Managing opportunity development in business networks: 27–48. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Banalieva, E. R., & Athanassiou, N. 2010. Regional and global alliance network structures of triad multinational enterprises. Multinational Business Review, 18 (1): 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 1 (17): 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 1990. The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network. Academy of Management Review, 15 (4): 603–626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J. 1997. Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: The characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 18 (3): 207–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Booz and Company. 2006. Smart spenders: The Global Innovation 1000. Strategy+Business, 45(Winter): http://www.strategy-business.com/article/06405?pg=all.

  • Buckley, P. J., & Ghauri, P. 2004. Globalisation, economic geography and strategy of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (2): 81–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J. A. 2009. Location and the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 40 (1): 35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J. A., Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. 2010. An evolutionary approach to understanding international business activity: The co-evolution of MNEs and the institutional environment. Journal of International Business Studies, 41 (4): 567–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavusgil, S. T., Yeniyurt, S., & Townsend, J. D. 2004. The framework of a global company: A conceptualization and preliminary validation. Industrial Marketing Management, 33 (8): 711–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cyert, R. D., & March, J. G. 1963. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Business Administration. 1970. Survey to Swedish multinational enterprises. Uppsala: Uppsala University.

  • Dicken, P. 2011. Global shift – Mapping the changing contours of the world economy, 6th edn. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., & Marengo, M. 2007. On the evolutionary and behavioral theories of organizations: A tentative roadmap. Organization Science, 18 (3): 491–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., Faillo, M., & Marengo, L. 2008. Organizational capabilities, patterns of knowledge accumulation and governance structure sin business firms: An introduction. Organization Studies, 29 (8–9): 1165–1185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H. 2009. Location and the multinational enterprise: A neglected factor? Journal of International Business Studies, 40 (1): 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. 2008. Multinational enterprises and the global economy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H., Fujita, M., & Yakova, N. 2007. Some macro-data on the regionalisation/globalisation debate: A comment on the Rugman/Verbeke analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (1): 177–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, M. R. 1962. Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27 (1): 31–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, K., Johanson, J., Majkgård, A., & Sharma, D. D. 1997. Experiential knowledge and costs in the internationalization process. Journal of International Business Studies, 28 (2): 337–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Management Journal. 2009. Special issue on: Is international business strategy global or regional? European Management Journal, 27 (5): 293–376.

  • Flores, R. G., & Aguilera, R. V. 2007. Globalization and locational choice: An analysis of US multinational firms in 1980 and 2000. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (7): 1187–1210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes. 2012. The world's most innovative companies. http://www.forbes.com/special-features/innovative-companies.html.

  • Forsgren, M. 2002. The concept of learning in the Uppsala internationalization process model: A critical review. International Business Review, 11 (3): 257–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghemawat, P. 2003. Semiglobalization and international business strategy. Journal of International Business Strategy, 34 (2): 138–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. A. 1990. The multinational corporation as a network: Perspectives from inter-organizational theory. Academy of Management Journal, 15 (4): 603–625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, F., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M. A., Singh, H., Teece, D. J., & Winter, S. G. 2007. Dynamic Capabilities – Understanding strategic change in organizations. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hörnell, E., & Vahlne, J.-E. 1986. Multinationals: The Swedish case. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hout, T., Porter, M. E., & Rudden, E. 1982. How global companies win out. Harvard Business Review, 60 (5): 98–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hult, G.T.M., Cavusgil, S. T., Deligonul, S., Kiyak, T., & Lagerström, K. 2007. What drives performance in globally focused marketing organizations? A three-country study. Journal of International Marketing, 15 (2): 58–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutzschenreuter, T., Voll, J. C., & Verbeke, A. 2011. The impact of added cultural distance and cultural diversity on international expansion patterns: A Penrosean perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 48 (2): 305–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J.-E. 1977. The internationalization process of the firm – A model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8 (1): 23–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J.-E. 2009. The internationalization process model revisited: From liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership. Journal of International Business Studies, 40 (9): 1411–1433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, J. K., & Yip, G. S. 1994. Exploiting globalization potential: US and Japanese strategies. Strategic Management Journal, 15 (8): 579–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katkalo, V. S., Pitelis, C. N., & Teece, D. J. 2010. Introduction: On the nature and scope of dynamic capabilities. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19 (4): 1175–1186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K., Park, J.-H., & Prescott, J. E. 2003. The global integration of business functions: A study of multinational businesses in integrated global industries. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (4): 327–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobrin, S. J. 1991. An empirical analysis of the determinants of global integration. Strategic Management Journal, 12 (1): 17–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez, J. I., & Jarillo, J. C. 1989. The evolution of research on coordination mechanisms in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 20 (3): 489–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K. E., Mudambi, R., & Narula, R. 2011. Multinational enterprises and local contexts: The opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness. Journal of Management Studies, 48 (2): 235–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. 1994. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58 (3): 20–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, A. J. 1990. Strategies in global industries: How US businesses compete. West Point, CT: Quorum Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Multinational Business Review. 2010. Special issue. Multinational Business Review, 18 (1): 1–112.

  • Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23 (2): 242–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. 2011. Main science and technology indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.

  • Penrose, E. T. 1956. The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlmutter, H. V. 1969. The tortuous evolution of the multinational corporation. Columbia Journal of World Business, 4 (1): 9–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitelis, C. N., & Teece, D. J. 2010. Cross-border market co-creation, dynamic capabilities and the entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19 (4): 1247–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. 1986. Competition in global industries: A conceptual framework. In M. E. Porter (Ed), Competition in global industries. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. 1990. The competitive advantage of nations. New York: The Free Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M. 2003. Regional strategy and the demise of globalization. Journal of International Management, 9 (4): 409–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2007. Liabilities of regional foreignness and the use of firm-level versus country-level data: A response to Dunning et al. (2007). Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (1): 200–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SCB. 2009. Research and experimental development in the business enterprise sector, UF 14 SM 1101. Stockholm: Statistics Sweden.

  • Teece, D. J. 2007. Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28 (13): 1319–1350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., Pierce, J. L., & Boerner, C. S. 2002. Dynamic capabilities, competence and the behavioral theory of the firm. In M. Augier, & J. G. March (Eds), The economics of change, choice, and structure: Essays in the memory of R.M. Cyert. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Schuen, A. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18 (7): 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson Reuters. 2005. Thomson Reuters top 100 global innovators. http://thomsonreuters.com.

  • Thomson Reuters. 2011. Thomson Reuters top 100 global innovators. http://thomsonreuters.com.

  • Thomson Reuters. 2012. Thomson Reuters top 100 global innovators. http://thomsonreuters.com.

  • UNCTAD. 2004. World investment report: The shift towards services. New York: United Nations.

  • UNCTAD. 2011. World investment report: Non-equity modes of international production and development. New York: United Nations.

  • Vahlne, J.-E., & Johanson, J. 2002. New technology, new environments and new internationalization processes? In V. Havila, M. Forsgren, & H. Håkansson (Eds), Critical perspectives on internationalization: 209–228. London: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vahlne, J.-E., & Johanson, J. 2013. The Uppsala model on evolution of the multinational business enterprise – From internalization to coordination of networks. International Marketing Review, 30 (3): 189–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vahlne, J.-E., Ivarsson, I., & Johanson, J. 2011. The tortuous road to globalization for Volvo’s heavy truck business: Extending the scope of the Uppsala Model. International Business Review, 20 (1): 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vahlne, J.-E., Schweizer, R., & Johanson, J. 2012. Overcoming the liability of outsidership – The challenge of HQ of the global firm. Journal of International Management, 18 (3): 224–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welch, L. S., & Loustarinen, R. K. 1988. Internationalization: Evolution of a concept. Journal of General Management, 14 (2): 34–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westney, D. E. 2006. Review of the regional multinationals: MNEs and ‘Global’ strategic management. Journal of International Business Studies, 37 (3): 445–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeniyurt, S., Cavusgil, S. T., & Hult, G.T.M. 2005. A global market advantage framework: The role of global market knowledge competencies. International Business Review, 14 (1): 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, S., & Cavusgil, S. T. 2002. The GMS: A broad conceptualization of global marketing strategy and its effect on firm performance. Journal of Marketing, 66 (4): 40–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the Editor, John Cantwell, and two anonymous reviewers, who have been more than usually patient and provided excellent advice that improved the paper. We also want to thank the executives in the 17 companies that provided the information constituting the base for this paper. Research funds were provided by the Swedish Research Council.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Economics, Business and Law, Centre for International Business Studies, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Jan-Erik Vahlne & Inge Ivarsson

Authors
  1. Jan-Erik Vahlne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Inge Ivarsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Inge Ivarsson.

Additional information

Accepted by John Cantwell, Editor-in-Chief, and Paul Almeida, Area Editor, 13 September 2013. This paper has been with the authors for three revisions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vahlne, JE., Ivarsson, I. The globalization of Swedish MNEs: Empirical evidence and theoretical explanations. J Int Bus Stud 45, 227–247 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2013.60

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2013.60

Keywords

Search

Navigation