When Transnational Management was first published in 1992, the world was a different place.
"The global economy was radically restructuring in the wake of an era of accelerating globalization in the 1980s," says Harvard Business School professor emeritus Christopher A. Bartlett, who coauthored the textbook and its updates with the late Sumantra Ghoshal (HBS DBA '86) and Paul W. Beamish of the University of Western Ontario. "The Japanese juggernaut had just come driving through the United States, challenging the international strategy of so many companies."
“Having eyes and ears around the world is critical”
Nearly 20 years later and in its sixth edition, Bartlett's case-filled textbook (which he describes as a "continuing passion") offers the opportunity to reexamine the ever-changing nature of multinational corporations (MNCs) and cross-border management while confirming and further exploring some basic challenges that have, more or less, remained the same.
"There are three core strategies that any MNC has to pursue to build layers of competitive advantage," Bartlett says. "The first is to use worldwide operations to build global scale efficiency. If you're Ford or Toyota, for example, you have to compete in the world market to capture the minimum efficient scale."
The second requirement, often in conflict with the first, is a sensitivity and responsiveness to national differences. "It's a closeness to the market that enables you to adapt and modify, not just produce one single, standardized product. The simplest example might be the need for a right-hand drive Toyota Corolla in the UK," Bartlett says.
The third imperative is to leverage the world for information, knowledge, and expertise. "The latest consumer trend or technological development may be emerging in Germany or Japan, not your home market," Bartlett says. "Having eyes and ears around the world is critical, as is having the response capabilities to tap into the best and brightest, wherever they may be. Companies can no longer assume that all the smart people in the world are born within a 20-mile radius of their headquarters."
This last factor—of being able to develop and diffuse innovation rapidly around the world—has emerged to become much more important as companies constantly renew their product line or service business, Bartlett says. "That's a big change that's taken place."
The World's Communication Pipeline
Another seismic shift is the broader context in which companies now operate, forgotten all too easily in today's hyper-connected world. "Back in 1992, the Internet was a very narrowly used technology," Bartlett says. "It is now the communication pipeline of the world."
The organizational capability of a company to rapidly develop and diffuse innovation is incredibly important but difficult to cultivate, he continues.
"Back when the book was first published, it required a huge amount of travel, with communications mailed and faxed around the world. Things are obviously different now, with the Internet, satellite phone connections, and video conference calls on Skype."
Those communications channels are of critical importance, Bartlett adds, when it comes to resolving the inherent tensions between headquarters—where the focus might be on standardizing products to drive down cost—and subsidiaries lobbying to adapt products to meet the specific needs of a local market.
Making The Global Manager
What are the requisite characteristics of a "global manager," if there is such a thing anymore?
"Today, I would argue that you don't put that qualifying adjective in front of manager—we all simply operate in a global environment," Bartlett says. "It used to be that you would make a career choice to be in the 'international division.' "
And in the 1960s and '70s, a foreign assignment could be far from a promotion: "It was sometimes the failed domestic managers who were sent abroad."
“Companies can no longer assume that all the smart people in the world are born within a 20-mile radius of their headquarters”
In today's world, however, a shortage of human capital, not financial capital, is the bigger constraint. "Companies look for bright, capable managers all over the world; there's much more fluidity across the organization in that sense." (A case in point is Carlos Ghosn, a Brazilian-Lebanese who serves as chairman and CEO of the Japanese and French automakers Nissan and Renault.)
Managers operating in a global environment obviously need a broad perspective and the ability to relate to other people and cultures in an open, engaged way. Beyond that, Bartlett points to the need for the mental flexibility that enables a manager to negotiate, adapt, and modify the layers of competitive advantage and various strategic imperatives that are part of any multinational company.
"We talk about building a matrix into the organization's structure that enables people to be responsible for the global product line, the geographic area, the functional expertise of R&D or marketing," says Bartlett. "That's still necessary, but much more important is to build a matrix in the manager's mind so that he or she sees the world in terms of the tensions, conflicts, and trade-offs that are part of operating in today's world."
Envisioning The Future
Bartlett describes Transnational Management as being in a constant state of evolution. The most recently added chapter, "The Future of the Transnational," includes a case study on the pharmaceutical company Genzyme and its efforts to establish Humanitarian Assistance for Neglected Diseases (HAND), a corporate social responsibility program focused on treatments for diseases that typically affect too small a population to warrant the attention of drug development companies.
"As the organizational model of the transnational has evolved, it's become a critical player in the development of the global political and social economy," Bartlett says. "With that enormous power comes an increased responsibility; this most recent chapter highlights the role that the transnational company has in bringing about change to the world."
As the Genzyme case shows, that responsibility is accompanied by considerable complexities and trade-offs. The company's initial focus on developing a treatment for Gaucher disease extends to malaria, TB, and Chagas disease, with various global partnerships and constituencies cropping up along the way. The crux of the case becomes apparent soon enough: Can Genzyme's HAND program manage all of these initiatives successfully without stretching itself too thin? Given its priorities, what should its partnering strategy look like?
"This is really the next frontier for the transnational company," Bartlett says. "How does it move beyond its role as an economic entity and recognize itself as a key player in the sociopolitical environment in which it has responsibility as well as power?"
Given the scope and influence of today's global corporations, the answer to that question promises to shape the world as we know it for years to come.
I agree that all managers are now global managers, but I think there grades of globalisation because there are more than three dimensions that these managers need to wrestle with. My own list has nine. I agree with Bartlett's first two - economies of scale and local market requirements. I then break down his third - leverage the world for information, knowledge, and expertise - into four: sourcing talent, utilizing scarce expertise, learning from leading environments, leveraging peripheral innovation.
Beyond these six, there are four more: brand offer consistency, local government/community positioning, low cost locations, and legal protection from peripheral problems.
All 10 dimensions have consequences for how you organize and manage. For example, some companies have locally autonomous subsidiaries not just to help tailor products to local market tastes, but because local laws require local investors or because a local positioning helps government/community relations or because a separate subsidiary provides some protection against liability if things go wrong.
This makes the "matrix in the mind" ten rather than three dimensional. Hence, global managers capable of retaining a balance across this many dimensions are still rare.
es their economic ends. Nor do business schools help much as they emphasize the economic at the expense of the social - as the financial crisis demonstrates (look at the role of top MBAs in this) and as Rakesh Khurana of Harvard explains so eloquently in his recent book on business schools. I wish I could agree with Chris's conclusion but the evidence for it is somewhat underwhelming. As Joe Steele says in his post, exceptions are a bad basis for claiming rules!
I would like to add that the shortage of qualified global managers can be resolved through developing a long term human resources strategy within the organization to build its local managers with global vision & experiences.
This strategy has to be in line with the organization's globalization strategy.
Thanks to all .
The "global" interaction, or interconnectability, is decided in how those remote locations (countries), perform within regions (continents), and what global effect that has on performance by the Global Manager. Every manager trying to be "global" can result in managers serving their own agendas, in contradiction to the agenda of the company. We have all heard the phrase "going native"? The Global Manager cracks the whip that prevents this from happening, good organizations are compartmentalized. Global decisions for an organization should only be made at it's top level, and the company's level and frequency of interaction controlled by that very same Global Manager.
It is only that the flow of information has become faster then the yesteryears. The quantum of information is also much detailed for an easy analysis.
But when it comes to Managing Globally, there are extreme challenges, where the manager gets to know, only when he first starts handling the business in that particular country. The first taste of human Bias, racism, values, religious beliefs, social systems , deep rooted corruption, obstructive bureaucracy , corrupt judiciary , corrupt tax regimes, political influence, mafia, terror, hatred for west and so on and so forth. And usually it is in these very conditions, one has to then bring semblance of order and returns for the shareholders.
Being Globally informed is not the same as Being a Global Manager. The Global Manager is still a very relevant person. Managing in India and China is not the same as Managing in Thailand and Indonesia. Managing in Europe is not the same as Managing in Asia. There are vast horizontal and vertical differences and only a Global Manager who has fought his way through the systems and delivered knows the intricacies of the Job.
But is that peculating at all level of the organization is a key too.
The problems are not for those that are outside earning the "bread" , the problems related to the newcomers, those that need to be taught, that we live in a global world
Just a reminder this exercise would not have been possible without "the global village" of facebook, twitter, google, yahoo, etc.
I recently visited Honduras and you begin to see celulars all over and companies nobody ever heard of interested as China, so they said is "becoming to expensive" Honduras is not the same today as it was 5 years ago and nobody seem to understand that among those newcomers or the old timers.
We are global amigos, with local indenpendent subsidiaries, or global compnaies with global processes.What is coming is a global village. What China does affects Costa Rica, the US problems are my problems-
The global wars of the future will be more terrifying because they will be economic wars, please we need multicultural, mutilingual and multimanegement managers and we are not educating them.
Education in business needs to be look at, The question of How relevant we are for the world market business needs we need to face,today.
Prof please excuse the second comment, but I could not help it. Saludos.
Let's understand the psyche of others and imbibe whatever their positives are.
allow me to say so- the Universal Manager. And in those scheme of things culture should never be a barrier but should become an intelligent strength.
(Comments mentioned herein above are personal. Not attributable to the organization to which the author belongs.)