<<VOLVER
Entrevista
a la Dra. Tatiana Kostova
According
to a recent analysis of Essential Science Indicators , Dr. Tatiana
Kostova has been named a Rising Star in the field of Economics &
Business. Seven of her original articles published between January
1996 and December 2006 have been designated as Highly Cited Papers
in this field, with 243 total citations to date. Dr. Kostova is
an Associate Professor of International Business and a Moore Research
Fellow at the University of South Carolina’s Moore School
of Business. In the interview below, she talks with in-cites about
her highly cited work.
Would
you give us some background on your education and early research?
I
hold an M.S. degree in economic cybernetics from Kiev State University,
Ukraine, and a Ph.D. degree in business administration from the
University of Minnesota. I began my academic career studying new
product development and employing more quantitative mathematical
approaches and methods. My interests gradually shifted towards management
issues and theories, organization theory, organizational behavior,
and international management. This shift was the result of personal
experiences with multiple cultures and international organizations,
as well as an exposure to the broad management literature during
a year spent as a Fulbright Scholar at UCLA and during my doctoral
studies at the University of Minnesota.
What
do you consider the main focus of your research?
Broadly,
I study multinational corporations (MNCs). Since MNCs conduct operations
across borders, they are faced with tremendous complexity in their
external environments as well as their internal organization. Externally,
they are embedded in multiple institutional and cultural contexts,
which present different and possibly contradictory requirements
and business models. Internally, MNCs are characterized by similarly
complex organization structures, networks, and processes.
These conditions of complexity, unique to the MNC, challenge traditional
management theories, as many of their assumptions and boundary conditions
don’t hold in the case of the MNC. Studying MNCs therefore
presents opportunities to validate and expand existing management
theories and to develop completely new theoretical ideas borne out
of this context.
More specifically, I am interested in MNC legitimacy, knowledge
management, and social capital and I study these topics with interdisciplinary
and cross-level approaches. Theoretically, I draw primarily from
MNC theory, institutional theory, and social capital theory. My
research bridges the individual, subsidiary, and organizational
levels.
Your
most-cited paper is "Transnational transfer of strategic organizational
practices: a contextual perspective," (Academy of Management
Review 24[2]: 308-24, April 1999). Is there a reason this paper
has attracted so many citations? Would you please tell us a little
about this study and its findings?
This
study examined the contextual and intra-organizational factors that
facilitate or impede transfer of best practices from MNC corporate
headquarters to their foreign subsidiaries. I think there are four
main reasons why this paper appeals to a lot of scholars.
First, the task of transferring knowledge across MNC subunits is
critically important for MNCs. It provides an opportunity for MNCs
to leverage their competencies on a global scale and thus improve
their long-term competitiveness. Yet, transferring knowledge is
not an easy undertaking especially across national borders. Thus,
the study addressed a core research question in international management.
Second, as opposed to past research which had examined contextual
factors through culture, my study provided a novel conceptualization
of MNC context based on the institutional perspective. I introduced
the constructs of Country institutional profile and Institutional
distance, which capture the three "pillars" of national
institutional environments—regulatory, cognitive, and normative.
I studied the influence of pertinent regulations, social knowledge,
and social norms in the home and the host country, which is a more
comprehensive approach to capturing country environments than the
previously employed culture approach. Many international management
scholars adopted this view in their examination of various phenomena
such as entrepreneurship and foreign market entry.
Third, in addition to the external contextual factors, the study
also examined intra-organizational factors influencing the success
of transfer of management practices. In particular, I proposed that
the relational context that reflects the quality of the relationships
between the headquarters and the foreign subunit of the MNC is an
important determinant of transfer success. It was argued that the
commitment of a recipient subunit to the headquarters, its trust
in the headquarters, and the degree to which it identifies with
the headquarters, affect the motivation of the subunit to engage
in this process and also mediate the complex influences of the home
country institutional environment.
Fourth, I introduced a novel conceptualization of transfer success
as a two-dimensional construct including formal implementation of
the practice and internalization of the practice. The paper argued
that the combination of contextual and relational factors could
predict the pattern of adoption (i.e., the levels of implementation
and internalization) of the practice in the recipient unit. These
patterns range from formal ceremonial adoption to full and complete
internalization, where employees at the recipient unit are committed
to the practice, feel ownership over it, and appreciate its value
for their organization.
In summary, the paper addressed an important phenomenon for MNCs
and introduced novel concepts and ideas drawing on existing theories,
and at the same time, enriching these theories by leveraging the
theoretical distinctiveness of the MNC context.
Where
have you taken this research since the publication of the 1999 paper?
The
following research has been directly triggered or influenced by
the 1999 paper:
1. Kostova T & Roth K, "Adoption of an organizational practice
by the subsidiaries of the MNC: Institutional and relational effects,"
Academy of Management Journal 45: 215-233, 2002.
This paper provided the empirical testing of the model introduced
in the 1999 paper. The model, with some extensions, and modifications,
was confirmed with survey data from 109 foreign subunits of a US
MNC in 10 different countries.
2. Kostova T & Roth K, "Social capital in multinational
corporations and a micro-macro model of its formation," Academy
of Management Review 28: 297-317, 2003.
This conceptual paper was motivated by our findings about the importance
of the relational context in MNCs. The natural question arising
from these findings was "How do MNCs create such good relationships
between their headquarters and foreign subunits?" In this paper,
we conceptualize relational context through the concept of social
capital. Drawing from MNC theory and social capital theory, we propose
that social capital in organizations exists in a structural and
relational form, as well as in the form of private or public good.
After discussing the importance of the various forms of social capital
for MNCs, we develop a two-stage model of social capital formation.
We first propose a model that explains the formation of private
social capital of individual boundary spanners in MNCs. Then, we
offer a model explaining how the individual social capital of boundary
spanners could be transformed into unit-level "public"
social capital.
In addition, the 1999 paper and the follow-up empirical and theoretical
work described above served as a motivation and foundation for the
following two articles.
1. Roth K & Kostova T, "The use of the multinational corporation
as a research context," Journal of Management 9(6): 883-90,
2003.
Based on a review of MNC-focused studies in 10 leading management
journals, we conclude that the MNC context has been used in three
distinct ways for research purposes. First, scholars have used the
MNC for the sole purpose of studying MNC-related phenomena (e.g.,
international joint ventures and alliances, expatriate management,
foreign entry mode). In that, they have employed existing theories
without challenging their assumptions or boundary conditions and
without altering these theories in any significant way. Second,
the MNC context has been used for the validation of existing theories,
as it provides additional variance related to the external environment,
internal organizational environment, and at the individual level.
Third, the MNC has been used for significant modifications of existing
theories or the development of new theoretical ideas and perspectives.
We conclude that shifting from the first towards the third way of
using the MNC would increase the theoretical contribution of international
management research not only to its field but also to management
theory at large. Building on the conceptual distinctiveness of MNCs
as organizations allows for significant theoretical extensions of
existing theories as well as for novel theory building.
2. Kostova T, Roth K, & Dacin T, "Institutional theory
in the study of MNCs: A critique and new directions," Academy
of Management Review, 2007 Forthcoming.
This paper is an example of how the MNC context challenges traditional
management theories and at the same time presents opportunities
for novel theory building. It draws from the stream of research
that started with the 1999 article and applies the analysis to institutional
theory. In particular, we show how the main tenets of neo-institutionalism
(e.g., organization field, isomorphism, legitimacy) do not apply
to, or are significantly altered in, MNCs. Then we offer ideas of
how institutional theory can be extended with ideas that are highlighted
specifically in the MNC context including institutional duality
and multiplicity, role of agency, and others.
Tatiana
Kostova, Ph.D.
Moore School of Business
University of South Carolina
Columbia, SC, USA
|