About This Journal

korean management review - Vol. 49 , No. 4
[Paper List] [Go to Volume List]

[ Article ]
korean management review - Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 1033-1058
Abbreviation: kmr
ISSN: 1226-1874 (Print)
Print publication date 31 Aug 2020
Received 04 May 2020 Revised 22 May 2020 Accepted 30 May 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17287/kmr.2020.49.4.1033

Internal Embeddedness within Multinational Corporations and Exploitative and Exploratory Innovations of Overseas Subsidiaries
Chuyue Jin* ; Jaeyong Song**
*Visiting Professor, Graduate School of Technology Management, Kyung Hee University, First Author
**Professor, Graduate School of Business, Seoul National University, Corresponding Author

다국적 기업 내부 배태성과 해외 자회사의 활용적 및 탐험적 혁신
김초월* ; 송재용**
*(주저자) 경희대학교 테크노경영대학원 객원교수 (trudykim@snu.ac.kr)
**(교신저자) 서울대학교 경영대학 교수 (jsong@snu.ac.kr)
Funding Information ▼
Abstract

This paper investigates the effect of internal embeddedness within multinational corporations (MNCs) on overseas subsidiaries’ innovation. We examine the extent to which two types of internal embeddedness -vertical and horizontal- facilitate or inhibit a subsidiary’s exploitative and exploratory innovations respectively. We tested our hypotheses using patent data of 240 overseas subsidiaries of 15 global semiconductor companies from 1989 to 2008. The results suggest that overseas subsidiaries are more likely to generate exploitative innovations when vertical internal embeddedness is high, while they are more likely to generate exploratory innovations when horizontal internal embeddedness is high. We also find that the effects of vertical and horizontal embeddedness on exploratory innovation vary by different levels of subsidiary capability. Specifically, both vertical and horizontal internal embeddedness showed positive impacts on exploratory innovation for more capable subsidiaries, while vertical internal embeddedness showed a negative effect for less capable subsidiaries. These findings imply that MNCs need to adjust the level of vertical and horizontal internal embeddedness to promote subsidiary innovation according to innovation types and subsidiary capabilities.

초록

본 연구는 다국적 기업의 내부 배태성이 해외 자회사의 혁신에 미치는 영향을 탐색하였다. 내부 배태성을 본사와의 수직적 배태성과 다른 자회사들과의 수평적 배태성으로 구분하고 자회사의 혁신을 두 가지 유형인 활용적 혁신과 탐험적 혁신으로 나누어 분석하였다. 가설 검증을 위해 15개 글로벌 반도체 기업의 240개 해외 자회사가 미국특허청에 1989년부터 2008년까지 출원한 특허 데이터를 분석하였다. 실증분석 결과, 해외 자회사의 활용적 혁신 창출에 있어서 내부 수직적 배태성이 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났고 반대로 해외 자회사의 탐험적 혁신에 있어서는 수평적 배태성이 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 자회사의 탐험적 혁신에 대한 추가적인 분석을 통해 기술역량이 높은 자회사의 경우 수직적 및 수평적 배태성이 자회사의 탐험적 혁신 창출에 모두 긍정적인 영향을 미치지만 기술역량이 낮은 자회사인 경우에는 수직적 배태성이 부정적인 영향을 미친다는 결론도 도출하였다. 이러한 결과들은 다국적 기업이 해외 자회사의 혁신 창출을 촉진하기 위해서는 혁신 유형 및 자회사의 기술 역량에 따라 수직적 또는 수평적 배태성을 시의 적절하게 조절할 필요성이 있다는 점을 시사한다.

Keywords: Internal embeddedness, Subsidiary innovation, Exploitative innovation, Exploratory innovation
키워드: 내부 배태성, 자회사 혁신, 활용적 혁신, 탐험적 혁신
Acknowledgments

이 논문은 2016년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임 (NRF-2016S1A5A2A01026323). 또한 서울대학교 국제경영연구센터의 연구비 지원도 받았음.

References
1. 김초월ㆍ임나정ㆍ송재용(2020), “다국적 기업 해외 R&D 자회사의 본사로부터의 지식 소싱,” 국제경영연구, 31(1), pp.32-59.
2. 송재용(2016), “기업의 글로벌 네트워크 상에서의 지식 소싱과 혁신 모드의 진화,” 경영학연구, 45(4), pp. 1069-1088.
3. Achcaoucaou, F., P. Miravitlles, and F. León-Darder (2014), “Knowledge Sharing and Subsidiary R&D Mandate Development: A Matter of Dual Embeddedness,” International Business Review, 23(1), pp.76-90.
4. Ahuja, G., and R. Katila (2004), “Where Do Resources Come From? The Role of Idiosyncratic Situations,” Strategic Management Journal, 25(8-9), pp.887-907.
5. Almeida, P. (1996), “Knowledge Sourcing by Foreign Multinationals: Patent Citation Analysis in the US Semiconductor Industry,” Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), pp.155-165.
6. Almeida, P., and A. Phene (2004), “Subsidiaries and Knowledge Creation: The Influence of the MNC and Host Country on Innovation,” Strategic Management Journal, 25(8-9), pp.847-864.
7. Andersson, U., I. Björkman, and M. Forsgren (2005), “Managing Subsidiary Knowledge Creation: The Effect of Control Mechanisms on Subsidiary Local Embeddedness,” International Business Review, 14(5), pp.521-538.
8. Andersson, U., M. Forsgren, and U. Holm (2002), “The Strategic Impact of External Networks: Subsidiary Performance and Competence Development in the Multinational Corporation,” Strategic Management Journal, 23(11), pp. 979-996.
9. Asakawa, K. (2001), “Organizational Tension in International R&D Management: The Case of Japanese Firms,” Research Policy, 30(5), pp.735-757.
10. Asakawa, K., Y. Park, J. Song, and S. Kim (2018), “Internal Embeddedness, Geographic Distance, and Global Knowledge Sourcing by Overseas Subsidiaries,” Journal of International Business Studies, 49(6), pp.743-752.
11. Bartlett, C. A., and S. Ghoshal (1989), Managing Across Boarders, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
12. Benner, M. J., and M. Tushman (2002), “Process Management and Technological Innovation: A Longitudinal Study of the Photography and Paint Industries,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(4), pp.676-707.
13. Berry, H. (2014), “Global Integration and Innovation: Multicountry Knowledge Generation within MNCs,” Strategic Management Journal, 35 (6), pp.869-890.
14. Birkinshaw, J., and N. Hood (1998), “Multinational Subsidiary Evolution: Capability and Charter Change in Foreign-Owned Subsidiary Companies,” Academy of Management Review, 23(4), pp.773-795.
15. Blomkvist, K., P. Kappen, and I. Zander (2010), “Quo Vadis? The Entry into New Technologies in Advanced Foreign Subsidiaries of the Multinational Enterprise,” Journal of International Business Studies, 41(9), pp.1525-1549.
16. Cameron, A. C., and P. K. Trivedi (2005), Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications, Cambridge University Press.
17. Cantwell, J. (1989), Technological Innovation and Multinational Corporations, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
18. Cantwell, J., and R. Mudambi (2005), “MNE Competence-creating Subsidiary Mandates,” Strategic Management Journal, 26(12), pp. 1109-1128.
19. Ciabuschi, F., U. Holm, and O. M. Martín (2014), “Dual Embeddedness, Influence and Performance of Innovating Subsidiaries in the Multinational Corporation,” International Business Review, 23(5), pp.897-909.
20. Dellestrand, H., and P. Kappen (2011), “Headquarters Allocation of Resources to Innovation Transfer Projects within the Multinational Enterprise,” Journal of International Management, 17(4), pp.263-277.
21. Erkelens, R., B. van den Hooff, M. Huysman, and P. Vlaar (2015), “Learning from Locally Embedded Knowledge: Facilitating Organizational Learning in Geographically Dispersed Settings,” Global Strategy Journal, 5(2), pp.177-197.
22. Figueiredo, P. N. (2011), “The Role of Dual Embeddedness in the Innovative Performance of MNE Subsidiaries: Evidence from Brazil,” Journal of Management Studies, 48(2), pp. 417-440.
23. Frost, T. S. (2001), “The Geographic Sources of Foreign Subsidiaries' Innovations,” Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), pp.101-123.
24. Frost, T. S., and C. Zhou (2005), “R&D Co-practice and ‘Reverse’ Knowledge Integration in Multinational Firms,” Journal of International Business Studies, 36(6), pp.676-687.
25. Frost, T. S., J. M. Birkinshaw, and P. C. Ensign (2002), “Centers of Excellence in Multinational Corporations,” Strategic Management Journal, 23(11), pp.997-1018.
26. Gammelgaard, J., and T. Pedersen (2010), “Internal versus External Knowledge Sourcing of Subsidiaries and the Impact of Headquarters Control,” in U. Andersson and U. Holm (Eds.), Managing the Contemporary Multinational: The Role of Headquarters, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UKㆍNorthhampton, MA, USA, pp.211-231.
27. Ghoshal, S., H. Korine, and G. Szulanski (1994), “Interunit Communication in Multinational Corporations,” Management Science, 40(1), pp.96-110.
28. Guan, J., and N. Liu (2016), “Exploitative and Exploratory Innovations in Knowledge Network and Collaboration Network: A Patent Analysis in the Technological Field of Nano-energy,” Research Policy, 45(1), pp.97-112.
29. Gupta, A. K., and V. Govindarajan (2000), “Knowledge Flows within Multinational Corporations,” Strategic Management Journal, 21(4), pp. 473-496.
30. Hall, B. H., A. B. Jaffe, and M. Trajtenberg (2000), Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look, National Bureau of Economic Research.
31. Hansen, M. T. (1999), “The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge Across Organization Subunits,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), pp.82-111.
32. Hansen, M. T., and B. Løvås (2004), “How Do Multinational Companies Leverage Technological Competencies? Moving from Single to Interdependent Explanations,” Strategic Management Journal, 25(8-9), pp.801-822.
33. Hausman, J. A., B. H. Hall, and Z. Griliches (1984), “Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship,” Econometrica, 52(4), pp.909-938.
34. He, Z. L., and P. K. Wong (2004), “Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis,” Organization Science, 15(4), pp.481-494.
35. Henderson, R. M., and K. B. Clark (1990), “Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms,” Administrative Science Quarterly, pp.9-30.
36. Kim, C. J. Song, and A. Nerkar (2012), “Learning and Innovation: Exploitation and Exploration Trade-offs,” Journal of Business Research, 65 (8). pp.1189-1194.
37. Kogut, B., and H. Singh (1988), “The Effect of National Culture on the Choice of Entry Mode,” Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), pp.411-432.
38. Kogut, B., and U. Zander (1993), “Knowledge of the Firm and the Evolutionary Theory of the Multinational Corporation,” Journal of International Business Studies, 24(4), pp. 625-645.
39. Kuemmerle, W. (1999), “Foreign Direct Investment in Industrial Research in the Pharmaceutical and Electronics Industries—Results from a Survey of Multinational Firms,” Research Policy, 28, pp.179-193.
40. Lavie, D., J, Kang, and L. Rosenkopf (2011), “Balance Within and Across Domains: The Performance Implications of Exploration and Exploitation in Alliances,” Organization Science, 22(6), pp.1517-1538.
41. Lavie, D., U. Stettner, and M. L. Tushman (2010), “Exploration and Exploitation Within and Across organizations,” The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), pp.109-155.
42. March, J. G. (1991), “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning,” Organization Science, 2(1), pp.71-87.
43. Neter, J., W. Wasserman, and M. H. Kutner (1990), Applied Linear Statistical Models, Irwin, Homewood, IL.
44. Noorderhaven, N., and A. W. Harzing (2009), “Knowledge-sharing and Social Interaction within MNEs,” Journal of International Business Studies, 40(5), pp.719-741.
45. Perri, A., and U. Andersson (2014), “Knowledge Outflows from Foreign Subsidiaries and the Tension between Knowledge Creation and Knowledge Protection: Evidence from the Semiconductor Industry,” International Business Review, 23(1), pp.63-75.
46. Phene, A., and P. Almeida (2008), “Innovation in Multinational Subsidiaries: The Role of Knowledge Assimilation and Subsidiary Capabilities,” Journal of International Business Studies, 39(5), pp.901-919.
47. Reagans, R., and B. McEvily (2003), “Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), pp.240-267.
48. Rosenkopf, L., and A. Nerkar (2001), “Beyond Local Search: Boundary-spanning, Exploration, and Impact in the Optical Disk Industry,” Strategic Management Journal, 22(4), pp. 287-306.
49. Rosenkopf, L., and P. Almeida (2003), “Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility,” Management Science, 49(6), pp.751-766.
50. Schumpeter, J. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
51. Song, J., and J. Shin (2008), “The Paradox of Technological Capabilities: A Study of Knowledge Sourcing from Host Countries of Overseas R&D Operations,” Journal of International Business Studies, 39(2), pp. 291-303.
52. Song, J., K. Asakawa, and Y. Chu (2011), “What Determines Knowledge Sourcing from Host Locations of Overseas R&D Operations?: A study of Global R&D Activities of Japanese Multinationals,” Research Policy, 40(3), pp. 380-390.
53. Szulanski, G. (1996), “Exploring Internal Stickiness: Impediments to the Transfer of Best Practice within the Firm,” Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), pp.27-43.
54. Uzzi, B. (1996), “The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect,” American Sociological Review, 61(4), pp. 674-698.
55. Uzzi, B. (1999), “Embeddedness in the Making of Financial Capital: How Social Relations and Networks Benefit Firms Seeking Financing,” American Sociological Review, pp.481-505.
56. Yamin, M., and J. Otto (2004), “Patterns of Knowledge Flows and MNE Innovative Performance,” Journal of International Management, 10 (2), pp.239-258.
57. Yoneyama, S. (2013), “Internal Embeddedness and Innovation Performance of Overseas R&D Base: An Empirical Study,” International Journal of Innovation Management, 17(6), pp.1-18.
58. Zander, I. (2002), “The Formation of International Innovation Networks in the Multinational Corporation: An Evolutionary Perspective,” Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(2), pp.327-353.
59. Zhang, F., G. Jiang, and J. A. Cantwell (2015), “Subsidiary Exploration and The Innovative Performance of Large Multinational Corporations,” International Business Review, 24(2), pp.224-234.

• 저자 김초월은 현재 경희대학교 테크노경영대학원 객원교수로 재직 중이다. 북경대학교 경제학과를 졸업하였으며 서울대학교 경영대학원 전략/국제경영학과에서 경영학석사 및 박사학위를 취득하였다.

• 저자 송재용은 서울대 경영대 석학교수이며 전미경영학회 (AOM) 국제경영분과 회장으로 Columbia대 교수를 역임했다.

 
Mail : editor_kmr@daum.net
COPYRIGHT ⓒ 2011 Korean Academic Society Of Business Administration. All rights reserved