Unravelling the Subsidiary Initiative Process: A Multilevel Approach

Abstract

Strategy‐making and entrepreneurial behaviour at the subsidiary level, in particular the phenomenon of subsidiary initiative, has received increasing research attention in recent years. In the fields of international business, strategy and entrepreneurship, several studies addressing aspects of this phenomenon have been conducted. They focused on different stages of the subsidiary initiative process, different theories and also different methodological levels. This puts subsidiary initiatives as a topic at the crossroads of several disciplines, so that theory‐building remains fragmented, and there is a lack of perspective capturing the complexity of the entire subsidiary initiative process. Based on a comprehensive literature review, this paper discusses theoretical concepts and streams of thinking that have contributed to our understanding of the subsidiary initiative process, and develops an organizing framework based on stages and levels of the subsidiary initiative process. In order to integrate theories across levels, the authors identify ‘aggregation’ theories that guide the emergence of initiatives from the individual up to the network level, and also acknowledge theories that link the micro–macro divide and may help in the development of a more holistic view of subsidiary initiatives.

Knowledge Spillovers from FDI: A Critical Review from the International Business Perspective

“…A review of the full text helped to exclude articles that lacked pertinence to the topic, either because the FDI‐KSE was not the core of the analysis or because the scope and meaning of the phenomenon were not well defined (e.g. Strutzenberger and Ambos ). This procedure yielded a total of 112 articles, of which 105 provided empirical analysis…”

The microfoundations of subsidiary initiatives: How subsidiary manager activities unlock entrepreneurship

“…This is particularly surprising, as subsidiary managers are middle managers within their organizations (Schotter, Mudambi, Doz, & Gaur, ) and act as “linking pins” (Likert, ) between headquarters and the subsidiary and between the subsidiary and its environment (Bartlett & Ghoshal, ). Despite the theoretical (Birkinshaw et al, ; Strutzenberger & Ambos, ), empirical (Schotter & Beamish, ), and anecdotal evidence of the contribution of such central individuals, they are “rounded out in the analysis” (Felin & Foss, , p. 443). Individual‐level explanation of variances in initiative realization are either overlooked in favor of collective explanations or theories for individual‐level agency are transposed to the organizational level (Ambos et al, ).…”

“…Individual‐level explanation of variances in initiative realization are either overlooked in favor of collective explanations or theories for individual‐level agency are transposed to the organizational level (Ambos et al, ). In sum, to understand the microfoundations of entrepreneurship in the MNC, there is a need to focus on how the activities of individual managers contribute to the successful realization of entrepreneurial outcomes (Schmid et al, ; Strutzenberger & Ambos, ).…”

Entrepreneurial Orientation and International New Entry: The Moderating Role of Autonomy and Structures in Subsidiaries

“…One such is that the measurement of international new entry through the construct of the subsidiary initiative was captured and assessed by the subsidiary rather than as a multilevel process. This is a common approach in the literature (Strutzenberger and Ambos ), but future research would benefit from testing our ideas when this measure is also assessed with input from the parent company. To extend the validation of the measure of subsidiary initiative we assessed the correlation of the objective indicator of whether the subsidiary has patents against the initiative measure (as provided by the Orbis database).…”