Explore the vast range of titles available.

Internalization theory has provided a resilient analytical framework that explicitly or implicitly underlines much of International Business scholarship. Internalization theory is not a monolithic body of knowledge; instead, it has devolved into several ‘streams’, each of which focuses on the interests of particular epistemic communities, while also acting as a more generic organizing framework for those more broadly interested in its application to real-world challenges. Following a review of the various streams, we trace the frontiers of current research of the broader internalization framework and identify emerging themes raised by the papers in the special issue. These include transaction cost considerations in the bundling and recombination of assets across diverse contexts, the growing relevance of quasi-internalization, the theoretical challenges of (bounded) rationality for internalization theory, and the increasing disconnect between ownership, control and responsibility. These developments point to new research frontiers for scholars looking to apply or advance internalization theory.

In this paper, we suggest that internalization theory might be extended by incorporating complementary insights from GVC theory. More specifically, we argue that internalization theory can explain why lead firms might wish to externalize selected activities, but that it is largely silent on the mechanisms by which those lead firms might exercise control over the resultant externalized relationships with their GVC partners. We advance an explanation linking the choice of control mechanism to two factors: power asymmetries between the lead firms and their GVC partners, and the degree of codifiability of the information to be exchanged in the relationship.

We study the internationalization of digital service multinational enterprises (SMNCs), focusing on how digitalization alters internalization theory’s assumptions about the nature of firm-specific assets (FSAs) and the theory’s predictions about governance choices in cross-border transactions. We invoke Simon’s (Proc Am Philos Soc 106(6):467–482, 1962) near-decomposability concept to explain how digitalization enables two distinct types of FSAs – technology and human capital. Applying the ideas of modularity and skill complexity, we further distinguish between core versus peripheral technology FSAs and between generic versus advanced human capital FSAs. Building on the transferability and appropriability of these strategic assets, we theorize on the FSAs’ internalization propensity in the digital age. We propose that with rising digitalization, the network plays a dual role–as a governance mode and as a strategic resource. Integrating insights from network economics, particularly increasing returns to scale, we propose that network advantages (On) emerge as a distinct strategic resource that merits separate investigation from the traditional asset-based (Oₐ) and transaction-based (Ot) advantages.

Global value chain (GVC) governance is an established field within international business research, yet the relational aspects of GVCs have, to date, garnered less scholarly attention than have efficiency considerations. This conceptual study’s objective is to explore the relational dynamics of GVC governance using an internalization theory perspective, and by linking GVC research with insights from the business network literature. GVCs are argued to be a distinct form of asymmetrical networks, associated with economizing and capability creation features, as well as costs. The orchestrating firm can thus enhance efficiency outcomes of the GVC using social mechanisms similar to those adopted by core actors in a business network. In the study, six such mechanisms were identified: (1) selectivity, (2) inclusion of non-business intermediaries, (3) joint strategizing, (4) relational capital, (5) multilateral feedback, and (6) rules for equitable value distribution. While safeguarding the GVC’s efficiency, the above social mechanisms are associated with challenges and limitations, and therefore do not guarantee international competitive success. However, deployed in an integrative fashion, these social mechanisms facilitate coordination (thus economizing on bounded rationality), reduce the hazards of imperfect effort by partners (thus economizing on bounded reliability), and foster innovation and new capability development.

The growing platform economy has revived the debate on the applicability of internalization theory in contemporary contexts. In moving this debate forward, we draw on insights from hybrids research and property rights theory to complement the internalization school. Our core contribution lies in a reconceptualization of platforms as a hybrid organizational form enabling the exchange of property rights between platform owners and complementors. Using social platforms as an example, we propose that improvement in a host country’s intellectual property protection will increase the multinational platform’s (MNP) level of internalization, and that the platform firm’s governance capabilities may weaken the effect of institutions on its operation mode. Our theoretical analysis yields new insights beyond the received view of internationalization that builds on the assumption of internalized proprietary resources. We conclude that internalization theory, as an overarching paradigm in IB, remains adaptable to new organizational forms in the digital economy.

The emerging digital context for international business along with rising deglobalization forces have accentuated multinational enterprises’ organizing challenges, particularly with regard to managing relationships with global platform and ecosystem partners. We propose that the loose coupling perspective, which suggests the coexistence of coupling (linkages) to maintain responsiveness and looseness (separateness) to retain distinctiveness, can provide valuable insights on addressing such external governance-related challenges in the context of global platforms and ecosystems. We draw on and integrate ideas from loose coupling theory and digitalization to inform on the key contingencies and mechanisms of MNEs’ external organizing. We show how these insights can be further integrated with other perspectives such as new internalization theory to inform combined internal and external governance in digital globalization.

Petricevich and Teece’s (2019) article on the reshaping of globalization raises profound issues on the theory and empirics of international business. The fracture in the world economy between the USA and China is the result of Government policy, but its relationship to rising VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity) elements in globalization is more complex than simple policy changes. This paper suggests that a reappraisal of theory is required, not least because of the eruption of Covid-19, but that internalization theory is the best source of theoretical restructuring in the face of the new empirical realities facing the global economy.

The purpose of this paper is to encourage and to extend research on natural disasters and international business (IB). More specifically, we review the characteristics of natural disasters and the unique challenges they pose to the business environment and examine how they differ from other types of disasters/crises often researched in the IB literature. Next, we investigate the applicability and challenges of core IB theories to the study of natural disasters. By extending new internalization theory (NIT) to overcome challenges of bounded rationality and reliability, we identify effective strategies for managing the threat of natural disasters through establishing multi-sector partnerships and alternative supply chains. Integrating research on the characteristics of natural disasters and the insights from NIT, we propose natural disaster management strategies for multinational enterprises (MNEs) based on varying degrees of geographic scope of natural disasters and MNEs. This paper concludes with proposing new research opportunities for IB scholars in disaster preparedness, cross-organizational collaborations, and supply chain management.

The 2013 collapse of the Rana Plaza building in Dhaka, Bangladesh, led external stakeholders to insist on higher labor standards in apparel global value chains (GVCs). Stakeholders now expect MNEs to take ‘full-chain’ responsibility. However, the increased monitoring and enforcement costs of a large network of suppliers have been non-trivial. MNEs instead implement a ‘cascading compliance’ approach, coupled with a partial re-internalization. Elevated costs are further exacerbated in developing countries where the informal and formal sectors are linked, and cost competitiveness greatly depends on this duality. Monitoring actors in the informal sector is difficult, and few informal actors can achieve compliance. GVCs have therefore reduced informal sector engagement by excluding non-compliant actors and investing in greater automation. By seeking to strictly enforce compliance, MNEs are attenuating some of the positive effects of MNE investment, particularly the prospects for employment creation (especially among women), and enterprise growth in the informal sector. I discuss how these observations might inform other cross-disciplinary work in development, ethics, and sociology. Finally, I note implications for IB theory from the disparities between the ownership, control, and responsibility boundaries of the firm.

The original Uppsala model that was published in 1977 explains the internationalization process of firms. We have further developed the model several times in the intervening years. The present article is our latest effort: a general model of the evolution of the multinational business enterprise (MBE), from early steps abroad to being a global firm. The updated, augmented model explains MBE evolution in general, not only characteristics of the internationalization process in a narrow sense. We believe that the newest iteration, anchored in process ontology, will be useful in conducting longitudinal empirical studies.