Search results

This paper analyses the domestic performance of UK multinational firms from two perspectives: (i) their productivity relative to foreign multinationals, domestic exporters and non-exporters, and (ii) their ability to benefit newly acquired affiliates. Nonparametric analysis shows that the productivity distribution of UK multinationals is dominated by their foreign counterparts (especially US firms), and quantile regressions reveal that the performance disadvantage of UK multinationals is more pronounced at the higher end of the productivity distribution. Using a difference-in-differences methodology, it is found that, unlike foreign acquisitions, take-overs of domestic non-exporting firms by UK multinationals do not appear to lead to any productivity improvements.

PurposeThe main purpose of this study is to empirically investigate the impact of intellectual capital efficiency on US multinational software companies' performance from 2012 to 2016 by applying data envelopment analysis (DEA).Design/methodology/approachIt adopts a new slacks-based measure (SBM) to obtain a more accurate performance estimation and rank between companies. Regression analysis is used to test the overall IC and each of its elements (Human Capital, Innovation Capital, Process Capital and Customer Capital).FindingsThe univariate result shows that multinational companies are more efficient than non-multinational companies. However, the regression result shows that multinationality can hardly explain the firm efficiency of software firms. Another interesting finding is that intellectual capital has a positive and significant impact on software firm performance in the US human capital influences firm efficiency directly. However, when human capital is combined with the other elements of IC, the contribution of human capital becomes less significant. This is because people may think that innovation capital, process capital and customer capital can replace human capital, but it is not. In short, human capital may affect firm efficiency through other elements of IC (innovation capital, process capital and customer capital) as it is the base of other elements.Research limitations/implicationsThe results show that multinational companies have higher efficiency scores than non-multinational companies. In addition, Intellectual capital has a positive and significant impact on software firm performance in the US human capital influences firm efficiency directly. However, when human capital is combined with the other elements of IC, the contribution of human capital becomes less significant. This is because people may think that innovation capital, process capital and customer capital can replace human capital, but it is not. In short, human capital may affect firm efficiency through other elements of IC (innovation capital, process capital and customer capital) as it is the base of other elements.Practical implicationsOverall, the study highlights the needs of having intellectual capital and its elements (Human Capital, Innovation Capital, Process Capital and Customer Capital) to increase firm efficiency.Originality/valueFirst, the authors use a more comprehensive elements of IC, which are human capital, innovation capital, process capital and customer capital for a better IC measurement. Second, this study makes the first attempt using the DSBM model via DEA to examine the operating efficiency of US multinational software firms.

AbstractThis paper explores how urban bias in the host country affects the movement of multinational capital owned by multinational firms in the source country and the production in the invested sector. If the degree of urban bias in one of the urban sectors in the host country increases, then the amount of multinational capital flowing into the host country will increase, but the production in the invested sector will have different changes in different situations.

The article argues that the state plays, and has always played, a key role in the internationalization of firms and that theoretical explanations of MNE should take that role into account. The first part of the paper deals with the place of the state in the theories of multinational firms ; most theories can be classified into three currents : those arguing the decline of the Nation-State as a consequence of the growth of MNE, those seeing the territorial expansion of the state as a natural consequence of multinationalism and those arguing the direct but weak thrust of the State in favour of MNE. The second section of the paper analyses the main types of government intervention pushing national firms into foreign operations. The third section studies the most evident case of government intervention on multinationalisation : the case of multinational state enterprises. The article concludes that the state should be included - an increasingly so - as a major purveyor of advantages to national firms seeking to initiate or pursue foreign activities.

Depending on one's point of view, multinational enterprises are either the heroes or the villains of the globalized economy. Governments compete fiercely for foreign direct investment by such companies, but complain when firms go global and move their activities elsewhere. Multinationals are seen by some as threats to national identities and wealth and are accused of riding roughshod over national laws and of exploiting cheap labor. However, the debate on these companies and foreign direct investment is rarely grounded on sound economic arguments. This book brings clarity to the debate. With the contribution of other leading experts, Giorgio Barba Navaretti and Anthony Venables assess the determinants of multinationals' actions, investigating why their activity has expanded so rapidly, and why some countries have seen more such activity than others. They analyze their effects on countries that are recipients of inward investments, and on those countries that see multinational firms moving jobs abroad. The arguments are made using modern advances in economic analysis, a case study, and by drawing on the extensive empirical literature that assesses the determinants and consequences of activity by multinationals. The treatment is rigorous, yet accessible to all readers with a background in economics, whether students or professionals. Drawing out policy implications, the authors conclude that multinational enterprises are generally a force for the promotion of prosperity in the world economy