1、 外文翻译 原文 How do MNC headquarters add value Material Source: Management International Review Author: Bjrn Ambos and Volker Mahnke Introduction Research on multinational corporations (MNCs) has evolved along various trajectories. Not only have our conceptualizations of the MNC shifted but our understa
2、nding of their headquarters has changed as well. Departing from more general notions on corporate strategy and structure, early MNC research primarily took the whole firm as the unit of analysis. In most of these studies, headquarters simply acted as the locus of hierarchical decision making and con
3、trol, while little consideration was given to the resistance headquarters may face when implementing their decisions. The formulation of the integration-responsiveness framework marked a significant turning point in the ensuing debate on MNC headquarter functions. In explicating the dual pressures f
4、or local adaptation and global integration, researchers opened the door to a more thorough investigation of headquarters-subsidiary relationships. Similarly, the reconceptualization of MNCs as networks led scholars to take a more active interest in the role of individual subsidiaries as well as thei
5、r differences within the MNC. Resulting subsidiary typologies were instrumental in advancing research by providing contingencies for their management by headquarters. In a broader framework, these studies also helped to improve our understanding of the subtle notions of informal control and the non-
6、hierarchical aspects of multinational management. On the downside, however, the shift in research emphasis led to a decreasing interest in the role of headquarters. For some scholars, the advent of sophisticated subsidiary charters and network-like structures in the MNC marked the end of corporate h
7、eadquarters altogether. Such scholars proposed that headquarters would not differ significantly from any other unit in the network. However, regardless of whether such extreme positions are justified in theory, most contemporary MNCs have headquarters functions in practice. Irrespective of whether f
8、irms establish overseas centers of excellence, or foster subsidiary innovation and knowledge flows, most firms maintain a formal headquarters on their organizational charts and train managers for headquarters functions, which leads to a legitimate question: What do MNC headquarters actually do? This
9、 issue contributes to this debate by investigating how MNC headquarters add value. The question we raised in the autumn of 2007, when the call for papers for this issue appeared, proved to be quite timely. The financial crisis, inter alia, led many firms and industry observers to evaluate the value
10、added by corporate parents. Be it its inability to control its sub-units (e.g., Societ General, UBS), whether a specific subsidiary would be better off without the parent (e.g., in the case of Opel, General Motors German Subsidiary), or whether entrepreneurial talent or scale and scope are more impo
11、rtant attributes of a global parent (a question often raised in the endless discussions whether Porsche would be the better owner of Volkswagen, or other way around). It is against this backdrop that we developed the theme for this focused issue. The issue brings together some of the authors who hav
12、e most actively explored the concepts and themes that have risen to the forefront. In this introduction, we provide a short review of the literature on headquarters (e.g., corporate parents) and how they can add value. We then introduce the papers before presenting a discussion of how each paper add
13、resses the value-added question posed above. We also briefly analyze the similarities and differences across the studies. We conclude by providing a fresh outlook for research on MNC headquarters. How Do Headquarters Add Value On a very general level, the question of how headquarters add value to MN
14、Cs is closely linked to the concept of parenting advantage. In other words, to justify its position within the organization, an MNCs headquarters, like any other corporate parent, should add value to the operations of its local subsidiaries, value that would be hard to create otherwise. By building
15、on these general notions of how headquarters can add value to the firm, it is possible to carve out the specific functions and roles headquarters perform in fulfilling the value-added mission. For example, under the heading of “designing the strategic corporate context”, Bower (1971) summarizes the
16、tasks performed by headquarters as fulfilling legal requirements (e.g., preparing annual reports, submitting tax returns, and ensuring compliance with health, safety or environmental legislation), handling basic governance functions (e.g., establishing a structure for the company, appointing senior
17、management, raising capital, handling investor relations, implementing basic control processes, authorizing major decisions, guarding against risky or fraudulent decisions, and checking on delegated responsibilities), and, perhaps most importantly, undertaking the budgeting process. However, what ar
18、e probably the most prevailing insights into headquarters activities are gained from Alfred Chandlers work. According to Chandler(1962, 1991), headquarters fulfill two primary functions or charters: An integrative charter and an entrepreneurial charter. A headquarters integrative function consists o
19、f coordinating the MNCs activities across the individual markets, and further achieving synergies by pooling resources and centralizing value-added activities. Subsidiaries that are specialized and focused on their own business lack an overview of the business needs of other units. By overseeing sub
20、sidiaries and recognizing that investments made in one market might pay off in another, headquarters can increase the payoffs for the entire firm. Headquarters also contributes to the MNC by providing the appropriate organizational context for its subsidiaries operations. In other words, unless head
21、quarters provides the structure, process and incentives, subsidiaries have little reason to share their assets even if they understand and know which other subsidiaries could benefit from such sharing. Therefore, by establishing the appropriate organizational context, and by designing the appropriat
22、e cross-unit linkages and incentives that will unlock potential synergies across subsidiaries, headquarters add value to the MNC. This Issue The paper by Stephen Tallman and Mitchell Koza takes an evolutionary perspective to show how environments, strategies, structures and the roles taken on by hea
23、dquarters have changed over time. Building on their analysis, they propose a new form of thinking about contemporary MNCs, which they coin Global Multi-business Firm (GMBF). According to Tallman and Koza, this type of firm needs to grow through strategic assembly, lead by animation, manage and enabl
24、e emergent processes, and control via communication. Tallman and Koza also lay out the role of headquarters within this structure, which they view as crucial but limiteda position they characterize as “command without control”. Drawing on a sample of 283 subsidiaries, Tina Ambos and Julian Birkinsha
25、w investigate how attention from headquarters affects subsidiary performance. They show that performance is driven by the interplay between the attention devoted to a subsidiary and its strategic choice. More specifically, they find that subsidiary performance increases when headquarters devote atte
26、ntion to subsidiaries that have high levels of autonomy and sub-unit power, and start independent initiatives. Advancing Research on Value Added by MNC Headquarters The papers in this issue are an important first step in a more rigorous analysis of therole of headquarters in the modern MNC. All six
27、papers stress the extent to which headquarters can add value. The tasks identified by Egelhoff are consistent with the roles and value-added potential of parents proclaimed by Chandler (1991) and Campbell etal.(1995). The entrepreneurial and integrative function of headquarters also appears to be th
28、e underlying foundation in Tallman and Kozas assessment of headquarters role in the GMBF. Ambos and Birkinshaw suggest that headquarters attention is a scare resource that will create value for the firm when devoted to capable subsidiaries. Ciabuschietal. make a similar point in terms of headquarter
29、s involvement in the knowledge transfer process of knowledge-owning subsidiaries. Tran et al. show that the quality, quantity, and timing of headquarters knowledge have direct and objectively measurable bottom-line effects on subsidiaries sales performance. Finally, Piekkari et al. show that headqua
30、rters functions and organizational structure will change over time to accommodate the specific information processing needs of the MNC. Taken together, the papers reveal concrete processes (e.g., allocation of attention, knowledge-sharing, managing control without command, stimulating entrepreneursh
31、ip, and designing organizational architecture) through which MNC headquarters add value. Furthermore, they also contribute through specifying situational contingencies of MNC headquarter value added (e.g., timing of activities, tightly coupled activities, de-central knowledge and decision rights). F
32、inally, on a much broader level, research on the value of MNC headquarters may benefit from a more stringent application of management theories. The information processing perspective on organizational design, which served as the foundation for Egelhoffs and Piekkariet al.s papers, may be one promis
33、ing theory. Applying, for example, the information processing logic in an examination of locally distributed headquarters, as suggested above, could be one agenda for future empirical research. Another promising avenue would be to apply the resource-based view reasoning to the specific problem of he
34、adquarters and MNCs, e.g., one could argue that subsidiaries gain competitive advantage from their affiliation with headquarters to the extent that headquarters constitutes a valuable, rare, hard to imitate and difficult to substitute resource for the subsidiary in question. Following this logic, me
35、asuring and defining the value added by headquarters to subsidiaries is intimately linked with competitive advantage gained on the subsidiary level. Regardless of the route further scholars take, a more thorough grounding in theory will be necessary to fully understand how and when headquarters add
36、value to MNCs. In conclusions, the research in this focused issue shows that headquarters still play a very important role in modern MNCs. This issue also shows that more research on headquarters is desperately needed if we are to fully understand their role in the modern MNC. We hope that the paper
37、s presented in this issue, along with the suggestions made in this introduction, will spur further research in this important area. 译文 跨国公司总部如何增加价值 资料来源 :国际管理评论 作者： 比约恩 安博 、 沃克 曼可 一、研究现状 沿著不同演化轨迹研究跨国公司 。不仅我们 对于 跨国公司的概念 理解已经改变 ，而且我们对 跨国公司 的总部理解也在改变。 从 一般 企业战略和结构 的 概念出发， 我们 主要研究了早期跨国公司作为分析单位的整个公司。 在 大
38、部份的研究中 ,总部中心只是简单地按照分级 做 决策和 被 控制 ，而很少考虑 总部在执行它 们的决定 时 可能遇到的阻力。 该一体化反应性框架的制定，标志着 接下来 在辩论跨国公司总部功能时的一个重要转折点 。 本文在论 述适应 当地 和全球一体化的双重压力 下 ,研究人员打开门 ,更彻底的调查总部 与附属的 关系 。 同样，随着网络的跨国公司概念化导致学者参加了个别附属公司，以及他们的内部差异 使他们 更积极关注跨国公司的作用。由此产生的子公司类型学为他们提供了推进总部应急管理的研究工具 。在一个更广泛的框架 里 ， 这些研究也有助于 我们 提高对于非正式控制的微妙观念和无等级概念理解方面
39、的跨国经营。 然而 ,另一方面 ,研究重点的转变导致减少了对总部研究的兴趣。 对于一些学者认为， 优秀 的子公司在跨国公司章程和网络状结构的出现，标志着公司总部的彻底终结 。这些学者提 出 了总部将会在任何其他单位的网络中无明显差异。 然而 ,不管这种极端立场是否有充分的理由理论 ,最现代的跨国公司 却 在实践总部职能。无论企业是否建立 了 卓越 的 海外中心，或子公司创新和促进知识的流动，大多数企业维持其组织结构图和总部的职能，培训正式总部管理人员，这 导致 了 一个合理的问题：跨国公司总部实际上 是 什么呢？ 通过调查这个问题有助于这一讨论如何增加跨国公司总部的价值。这个问题我们是在 20
40、07 年秋季提出的 ，当出现征集这个问题的论文 时 ，被证明是非常及时的。 特别是金融危机，导致了许多企业和行业观察家评估总部企业的增加价值 。无论是它无力控制其下属单位（例如，兴业通用，瑞银）， 还是 有 些 具体的子公司将没有 总部会更好 （ 例如 通用汽车公司的德国子公司欧宝的情况），还是创业人才或规模和范围是一个全球性的 公司总部 更重要的属性（提出一个问题往往在无休止的讨论是否保时捷将是大众更好的拥有者，或其他方式围绕一个问题）。 正是在这种背景下 ,我们制定了主题集中的问题 。这个问题汇集了谁最有积极探索的概念和已经上升到了作者的一些前沿的主题 。 这个介绍里 ,我们提供了简短评论
41、 (例如 ,公司的总部 ),以及如何能使它们增值 。 接着我们介绍之前呈现出每篇文章讨论了如何 增值的问题，提出上述讨论的文件 。我们还简要分析了整个研究的异同和分歧。最后，我们的研究对跨国公司总部提供了新的前景。 二、 如何增加总部价值 在一个非常一般意义上 ,，如何增 加 跨国公司总部 价值 的问题是紧密相连的母合优势的概念。换言之， 为了 证明其在组织内的地位， 一个跨国公司总部 , 应该像其增加母公司价值一样去经营当地的子公司 ， 否则将很难创造价值。 通过建立对这些能够实现总部如何为公司增加价值的一般性概念，才有可能开拓出具体职能和总部角在执行实现增值的任务使命。例如，在标题为“企业
42、范围内的设计战略”，鲍尔（ 1971）总结了总部执行作为履行法律规定的任务（例如，编制年度报告，提交报税表，并确保与健康，安全或环境立法规定的任务），处理基本管理功能（例如，建立一个公司的架构，任命高级管理人员，筹集资金，处理投资者关系，实现基本控制流程，授权重大决策，对高风险或欺诈防范决策，并授权负责检查），或许最重要的是，进行预算编制的过程。然而，阿尔弗雷德钱德勒的工作情况可能是得出总部活动最普遍的见解。根据钱德勒（ 1962， 1991）总部实现的两个主要功能或宪章是：一个整合性的章程和一个企业家章程。 一个总部的协调整合功能包括通 过在个别市场汇集资源和集中增值的跨国公司的活动，进一步
43、实现协同效应。 子公司 ,在专业的基础上 ,重点阐述了自己的生意缺乏一个其他单位整体的业务需要，通过监督附属公司，并认识到在一个市场的投资可能会倾向另一方向，总部可以增加整个公司的收益。总部还有助于提供适当的跨国公司的子公司的业务组织环境。换句话说 ,除非总部提供结构、工艺和激励、子公司没有什么理由分享他们的资产即使他们了解并知道其他子公司能受益于这种共享。因此 ,通过建立相应的组织环 境、并通过设计相应的跨单位的联系和奖励办法，通过子公司解除潜在的协同作用，从而总部给跨国公司添加利润。 三、问题 本文由 Stephen Tallman 与 Mitchell Koza 以进化的角度来看，以展示
44、环境，战略，结构和采取的总部的角色随着时间改变。他们的分析的基础上，他们提出了一个关于当代跨国公司的思维，新形式，这些硬币全球多业务企业（胃粘膜血流量）。据 Tallman 与 Koza，这种类型的公司通过战略需要增长集会，以动画领导，管理和启用应急程序，并通过通信控制。 Tallman 与 Koza 还列举了在此结构 下的 总部的作用，他们认为至关重要，但有限的立场， 他们的位置的特点是“没有控制命令”。 在 283 个绘制子公司 的 样本 中 ， Tina Ambos 和 Julian Birkinshaw 探讨如何从总部关注子公司的性能影响 。 他们指出 , 关注性能为子公司和其战略选择
45、的相互作用 。更具体地说，他们发现，当总部注意力放在子公司 上， 子公司的性能 就能 提升， 并 拥有自主权 和 单位功率高的水平，并开始独立 工作 。 由 Yen Tran, Volker Mahnke 和 Bjrn Ambos 提出的 总部 在 知识转移过程中的作用也是本文的重点。然而 ，相对于 总部在转移过程中的作用来说， Tran等人则在大型的时装公司背景下采取直接寻找总部开创的知识流 。 作者发现 ,质量、数量和定时总部的知识会直接影响到子公司的销售业绩。 作为结果表明，知识共享并不总是有益的，尤其是当它涉及到传输的知识量。太多的知识，其实 当 知识共享在错误的时间 时 伤害的 是
46、性能。 四、 进一步深入研讨 增加跨国公司总部的价值 论文的第一步是在分析对一项更严谨的现代跨国公司总部的角色这个问题上 。所有文件强调总部在何种程度上可以增加价值。由 Egelhoff 所确定的任务与角色和增值潜力的家长一致宣布的钱德勒（ 1991）和坎贝尔埃塔尔（ 1995 年）。对总部企业和综合功能也似乎是在 Tallman 与古座的总部在胃粘膜血流量的作用评估的根本基础。 Ambos 和伯金肖建议，总部的注意力是一种吓唬人的资源，将会为公司价值时，能够用于子公司。 Ciabuschi 等人 作一个总部在以知识为拥有子公司的知识转移过程中的参与条件类似的观点移植等。表明，质量，数量，时间
47、和总部的知识有直接的和客观衡量的底线效应对子公司的销售业绩。最后， Piekkari 等。表明，总部职能和组织结构将随时间而改变，以适应特定的信息处理需求的跨国公司。两者合计，文件 透露具体的进展（例如，注意力分配，知识共享，管理无指挥控制，刺激创业精神，设计组织架构），通过该跨国公司总部增值。此外，他们还可以通过指定的跨国公司总部紧急情境有助于增加值（例如，时间安排活动，活动紧密结合，去中心知识和决策权）。 最后，在更广泛的层面上，对跨国公司总部的价值的研究可能会受益于一个更严格的管理理论的应用。 对于从 组织设计的信息处理的角度来看，关于组织设计，作为 Egelhoff 的和 Piekka
48、ri 等基础服务信息处理的角度来看的 研究论文， 可能是一个有前途的理论，例如，在一个局部分布的总部考试信息处 理逻辑，如上所述，可能是一个未来的实证研究议程。另一个有希望的途径是将应用资源基础观点理论在总部和跨国公司的具体问题，例如，人们可以说他们与总部的联系，子公司的范围内获得竞争优势，总部构成一个有价值的，稀有，难模仿，难以替代有问题的附属资源。按照这一逻辑，测量和定义的值添加到总部与竞争优势是密切相连的附属子公司上涨水平。无论采取的路线进一步学者，在理论上更深入的接地将有必要充分了解如何以及何时跨国公司总部增值。 在 研究结论 上 ，此重点问题的研究表明总部仍然在现代跨国公司 中 发挥非常重要的作用。 如果我们要充分理解 他们在现代跨国公司 中 的作用， 这个问题也表明迫切需要 研究 更多的 跨国 总部。我们希望在这个问题上， 随着这篇 论文的 介绍 、 建议的 提出，将促进在这一重要领域里作 出更 进一步的研究。
