International Research Journal of Commerce , Arts and Science

 ( Online- ISSN 2319 - 9202 )     New DOI : 10.32804/CASIRJ

Impact Factor* - 6.2311


**Need Help in Content editing, Data Analysis.

Research Gateway

Adv For Editing Content

   No of Download : 21    Submit Your Rating     Cite This   Download        Certificate

RECONCILIATION OF TRADITIONAL AND MODERN THEORIES OF MNES

    2 Author(s):  EKTA KHARBANDA, PRIYANKA BEDI

Vol -  5, Issue- 5 ,         Page(s) : 17 - 28  (2014 ) DOI : https://doi.org/10.32804/CASIRJ

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to make a short review of the two important propositions of the multinational enterprise which includes traditional theories and modern theories. These theories are being tested with a view to replace existing theories of MNE and incorporating new theories of MNE. This paper seeks to address the fundamental question of how the traditional theories need to be modified and maintain parity with the modern theories of the multinational enterprise. Therefore, the objective lies in pinpointing the pitfalls of traditional theories and makes efforts in revisiting new theories that will show assistance in reconciling

  1. Beamish, Paul W and John C, Banks (1987). “Equity Joint Ventures and the Theory of the Multinational Enterprise”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 18(2), pp. 1-16.
  2. Buckley, Peter J (1988).  “The Limits of Explanation: Testing the Internalization Theory of the Multinational Enterprise”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 19(2), pp. 181-193.
  3. Cheung, Fanny S.L and Wing-Fai, Leung (2007). “International expansion of transnational advertising agencies in China: An assessment of the stages theory approach”, International Business Review, Vol. 16, pp. 251-268.
  4. Dunning, John H and Sarianna M, Lundan (2008). “Institutions and the OLI paradigm of the multinational enterprise”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 25, pp. 573-593.
  5. Egelhoff, William G (1991). “Information-Processing Theory and the Multinational Enterprise”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 22(3), pp. 341-368.
  6. Itaki, Masahiko (1991). “A Critical Assessment of the Eclectic Theory of the Multinational Enterprise”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 22(3), pp. 445-460.
  7. Kay, Neil M (2005). “Penrose and the Growth of Multinational Firms”, Managerial and Decision Economics, Vol. 26(2), pp. 99-112.
  8. Kogut, Bruce and Udo, Zander (1993). “Knowledge of the firm and the Evolutionary Theory of the Multinational Corporation”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 24(4), pp. 625-645.
  9. Li, Peter Ping (2007). “Toward an integrated theory of multinational evolution: The evidence of Chinese multinational enterprises ad latecomers”, Journal of International Management, Vol. 13, pp. 296-318.
  10. Rugman, Alan M and Alain, Verbeke (1992). “A Note on the Transnational Solution and the Transaction Cost Theory of Multinational Strategic Management”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 23(4), pp. 761-771.
  11. Slangen, Arjen and Jean-Francois, Hennart (2007). “Greenfield or acquisition entry: A review of the empirical foreign establishment mode literature”, Journal of International Management, Vol. 13, pp. 403-429. 

*Contents are provided by Authors of articles. Please contact us if you having any query.






Bank Details