Uniwersyteckie Czasopisma NaukowePoziom autonomii filii zagranicznych polskich przedsiębiorstw. Wyniki badń empirycznych
Słowa kluczowe:
poziom autonomii, filia, przedsiębiorstwo międzynarodowe, polskie przedsiębiorstwaAbstrakt
Celem artykułu jest przedstawienie wyników badania nad stopniem autonomii przedsiębiorstw bezpośredniego inwestowania powstałych w efekcie aktywności inwestycyjnej polskich przedsiębiorstw za granicą. Zaprezentowane badanie przeprowadzono w 2012 roku przy wykorzystaniu metody wywiadu bezpośredniego i ankiety pocztowej. Wyniki badania ujawniły, iż filie zagraniczne polskich przedsiębiorstw cechują się relatywnie wysokim stopniem autonomii. W większości poddanych analizie obszarów decyzyjnych zaobserwowano wysoki stopień niezależności filii. Jedynie decyzje w obszarze działalności finansowej pozostawały głównie pod kontrolą spółki macierzystej. Wyniki badania wskazały również, iż poziom autonomii filii różni się w odniesieniu do jej wieku - filie działające najdłużej na rynkach zagranicznych cechowały się najwyższym stopniem autonomii.
Downloads
Bibliografia
Ambos T.C., Ambos B., Schlegelmilch B.B., 2006, Learning from Foreign Subsidiaries: An Empirical Investigation of Headquarters’ Benefit from Reverse Knowledge Transfers, International Business Review, no. 3.
Andersso U., Björkman I., Forsgren M., 2005, Managing Subsidiary Knowledge Creation: The Effect of Control Mechanisms on Subsidiary Local Embeddedness, International Business Review, no. 5.
Bartlett C.A., Ghoshal S., 1989, Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Birkinshaw J., 1997, Entrepreneurship in Multinational Corporations: The Characteristics of Subsidiary Initiatives, Strategic Management Journal, no. 3.
Birkinshaw J., Hood N., 1998, Multinational Subsidiary Evolution: Capability and Charter Change in Foreign-Owned Subsidiary Companies, Academy of Management Review, no. 4.
Birkinshaw J., Hood N., Jonsson S., 1998, Building Firm Specific Advantages in Multinational Corporation: The Role of Subsidiary Initiative, Strategic Management Journal, no. 3.
Birkinshaw J., Morrison A., 1995, Configurations of Strategy and Structure in Subsidiaries of Multinational Corporations, Journal of International Business Studies, no. 4.
Birkinshaw J., Pedersen T., 2008, Strategy and Management in MNE Subsidiaries, [in:] Oxford Handbook of International Business, ed. A.M. Rugman, Oxford University Press, New York.
Bowman S., Duncan J., Weir Ch., 2000, Decision-Making Autonomy in Multinational Corporation Subsidiaries Operating in Scotland, European Business Review, no. 3.
Cantwell J., Mudambi R., 2005, MNE Competence-Creating Subsidiary Mandates, Strategic Management Journal, no. 12.
Chiao Y.-Ch., Ying K.-P., 2013, Network Effect and Subsidiary Autonomy in Multinational Corporations: An Investigation of Taiwanese Subsidiaries, International Business Review, no. 4.
De Jong G., Dut V. van, Jindra B., Marek P., 2015, Does Country Context Distance Determine Subsidiary Decision-Making Autonomy? Theory and Evidence from European Transition Economies, International Business Review, no. 24.
Edwards R., Ahmad A., Moss S., 2002, Subsidiary Autonomy: The Case of Multinational Subsidiaries in Malaysia, Journal of International Business Studies, no. 1.
Ghoshal S., Bartlett C.A., 1988, Creation, Adoption and Diffusion of Innovations by Subsidiaries of Multinational Corporations, Journal of International Business Studies, no. 3.
Hamermesh R., White R., 1984, Manage Beyond Portfolio Analysis, Harvard Business Review no. 1.
Harzing A., 1999, Managing the Multinationals: An International Study of Control Mechanisms, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Northampton.
Hedlund G., 1981, Autonomy of Subsidiaries and Formalization of Headquarters: Subsidiary Relationships in Swedish MNC’s, [in:] The Management of Headquarters-Subsidiary Relations in Multinational Corporations, ed. L. Otterbeck, Gower Publishing Co., Aldershot.
Homburg Ch., Prigge J-K., 2014, Exploring Subsidiary Desire for Autonomy: A Conceptual Framework and Empirical Findings, Journal of International Marketing, no. 4.
Johnston S., 2005, Subsidiary Task and Subsidiary Autonomy, [in:] Headquarters and Subsidiaries in Multinational Corporations: Strategies, Tasks and Coordination, Palgrave Macmillan, Hampshire – New York.
Korbin S.J., 2013, Strategic Integration in Fragmented Environment, [in:] Strategies in Global Competition, eds. N. Hood, J.-E. Vahlne, Routledge, London – New York.
O’Donnell S.H., 2000, Managing Foreign Subsidiaries: Agent of Headquarters, or an Interdependent Network?, Strategic Management Journal, no. 5.
Paterson S.L., Brock D.M., 2002, The Development of Subsidiary-Management Research: Review and Theoretical Analysis, International Business Review, no. 2.
Pisoni A., Fratocchi L., Onetti A., 2013, Subsidiary Autonomy in Transition Economies: Italian SMEs in Central and Eastern European Countries, Journal for East European Management Studies, no. 3.
Schüler-Zhou Y., Schüller M., 2013, An Empirical Study of Chinese Subsidiaries’ Decision-Making Autonomy in Germany, Asian Business & Management, no. 3.
Simoes V.C., Biscaya R., Nevado P., 2002, Subsidiary Decision-Making Autonomy: Competences, Integration and Local Responsiveness, [in:] Network Knowledge in International Business, ed. S.M. Lundan, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
Taggart J., Hood N., 1999, Determinants of Autonomy in Multinational Corporation Subsidiaries, European Management Journal, no. 2.
Van Den Bulcke D., Halsberghe E., 1984, Employment Decision-Making in MNEs: Survey Results from Belgium, Multinational Enterprises Programme, Working Paper no. 32, International Labour Office Geneva.
Young S., Hood N., Hamill J., 1985, Decision-Making in Foreign-Owned Multinational Subsidiaries in the United Kingdom, Multinational Enterprises Programme, Working Paper no. 35, International Labour Office Geneva.
Young S., Tavares A.T., 2004, Centralization and Autonomy: Back to the Future, International Business Review, no. 2.
