IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/mtk/fechap/28-09.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

The autonomy of managers by business functions in the foreign subsidiaries from transition countries

In: Entrepreneurship in Estonia: policies, practices, education and research

Author

Listed:
  • Urmas Varblane

    (University of Tartu)

  • Katrin Männik

    (University of Tartu)

  • Helena Hannula

    (University of Tartu)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Urmas Varblane & Katrin Männik & Helena Hannula, 2006. "The autonomy of managers by business functions in the foreign subsidiaries from transition countries," University of Tartu - Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, in: Tõnis Mets & Janita Andrijevskaja & Urve Venesaar & Ene Kolbre (ed.), Entrepreneurship in Estonia: policies, practices, education and research, edition 1, volume 28, chapter 9, pages 172-193, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu (Estonia).
    • Handle: RePEc:mtk:fechap:28-09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mtk.ut.ee/sites/default/files/mtk/RePEc/mtk/febpdf/febook28-09.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julian Birkinshaw, 1996. "How Multinational Subsidiary Mandates are Gained and Lost," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 27(3), pages 467-495, September.
    2. Young, Stephen & Tavares, Ana Teresa, 2004. "Centralization and autonomy: back to the future," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 215-237, April.
    3. Taggart, James & Hood, Neil, 1999. "Determinants of autonomy in multinational corporation subsidiaries," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 226-236, April.
    4. Jon I Martinez & J Carlos Jarillo, 1991. "Coordination Demands of International Strategies," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 22(3), pages 429-444, September.
    5. Ron Edwards & Adlina Ahmad & Simon Moss, 2002. "Subsidiary Autonomy: The Case of Multinational Subsidiaries in Malaysia," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 33(1), pages 183-191, March.
    6. Paterson, S. L. & Brock, D. M., 2002. "The development of subsidiary-management research: review and theoretical analysis," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 139-163, April.
    7. James H Taggart, 1997. "Autonomy and Procedural Justice: A Framework for Evaluating Subsidiary Strategy," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 28(1), pages 51-76, March.
    8. Andersson, Ulf & Forsgren, Mats, 1996. "Subsidiary embeddedness and control in the multinational corporation," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 5(5), pages 487-508, October.
    9. Andersson, Ulf, 2003. "Managing the transfer of capabilities within multinational corporations:: the dual role of the subsidiary," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 425-442, December.
    10. Julian Birkinshaw & Neil Hood, 2000. "Characteristics of Foreign Subsidiaries in Industry Clusters," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 31(1), pages 141-154, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Urmas Varblane & Katrin M??nnik & Helena Hannula, 2005. "Autonomy and Performance of Foreign Subsidiaries in five Transition Countries," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series wp780, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    2. Urmas Varblane & Katrin Männik & Helena Hannula, 2005. "Autonomy And Performance Of Foreign Subsidiaries In Transition Countries," University of Tartu - Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Working Paper Series 38, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu (Estonia).
    3. Young, Stephen & Tavares, Ana Teresa, 2004. "Centralization and autonomy: back to the future," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 215-237, April.
    4. Chiao, Yu-Ching & Ying, Kung-Pao, 2013. "Network effect and subsidiary autonomy in multinational corporations: An investigation of Taiwanese subsidiaries," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 652-662.
    5. de Jong, Gjalt & van Dut, Vo & Jindra, Björn & Marek, Philipp, 2015. "Does country context distance determine subsidiary decision-making autonomy? Theory and evidence from European transition economies," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 874-889.
    6. Rajneesh Narula & John Dunning, 2010. "Multinational Enterprises, Development and Globalization: Some Clarifications and a Research Agenda," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(3), pages 263-287.
    7. Jens Gammelgaard & Frank McDonald & Heinz Tüselmann & Christoph Dörrenbächer & Andreas Stephan, 2009. "Subsidiary Role and Skilled Labour Effects in Small Developed Countries," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 27-42, February.
    8. Michael J. Enright & Venkat Subramanian, 2007. "An organizing framework for MNC subsidiary typologies," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 895-924, December.
    9. Jonas Puck & Markus K. Hödl & Igor Filatotchev & Hans-Georg Wolff & Benjamin Bader, 2016. "Ownership mode, cultural distance, and the extent of parent firms’ strategic control over subsidiaries in the PRC," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 1075-1105, December.
    10. Igor Gurkov, 2014. "Corporate Parenting Style In The Global Economy," HSE Working papers WP BRP 20/MAN/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    11. Carlos Garcia‐Pont & J. Ignacio Canales & Fabrizio Noboa, 2009. "Subsidiary Strategy: The Embeddedness Component," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 182-214, March.
    12. Rabbiosi, Larissa, 2011. "Subsidiary roles and reverse knowledge transfer: An investigation of the effects of coordination mechanisms," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 97-113, June.
    13. Nell, Phillip C. & Ambos, Bjérn & Schlegelmilch, Bodo B., 2011. "The MNC as an externally embedded organization: An investigation of embeddedness overlap in local subsidiary networks," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 497-505, October.
    14. Galli Geleilate, Jose-Mauricio & Andrews, Daniel S. & Fainshmidt, Stav, 2020. "Subsidiary autonomy and subsidiary performance: A meta-analysis," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(4).
    15. Luciano Barin Cruz & Dirk Boehe, 2010. "How do Leading Retail MNCs Leverage CSR Globally? Insights from Brazil," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 91(2), pages 243-263, February.
    16. Cavanagh, Andrew & Freeman, Susan & Kalfadellis, Paul & Herbert, Kendall, 2017. "Assigned versus assumed: Towards a contemporary, detailed understanding of subsidiary autonomy," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1168-1183.
    17. Xiaoying Li & Xiaming Liu & Howard Thomas, 2013. "Market Orientation, Embeddedness and the Autonomy and Performance of Multinational Subsidiaries in an Emerging Economy," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 53(6), pages 869-897, December.
    18. Birkinshaw, Julian & Hood, Neil & Young, Stephen, 2005. "Subsidiary entrepreneurship, internal and external competitive forces, and subsidiary performance," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 227-248, April.
    19. Grøgaard, Birgitte, 2012. "Alignment of strategy and structure in international firms: An empirical examination," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 397-407.
    20. Achcaoucaou, Fariza & Miravitlles, Paloma & León-Darder, Fidel, 2014. "Knowledge sharing and subsidiary R&D mandate development: A matter of dual embeddedness," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 76-90.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mtk:fechap:28-09. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Liis Roosaar (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/febutee.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.