CAPÍTULO 6 INOVAÇÃO E APRENDIZAGEM À ESCALA INTERNACIONAL

CAPÍTULO 6.1. A RELEVÂNCIA DO CONHECIMENTO E DA APRENDIZAGEM

THE MULTINATIONAL FIRM AS GLOBAL-LOCAL NETWORK The MNE as a key actor in the globalisation process MNE affiliates embedded in national systems of innovation

THE CORE QUESTIONS 1.Fostering Intra-Firm Cross-Border communication of specific knowledge 2.Promoting external communication to absorb others knowledge while preventing the leakage of firms specific knowledge 3.How to avoid knowledge accumulation paths leading to deadlocks

THE MNE AS A REPOSITORY OF KNOWLEDGE 1)Existence of Specific Advantages (knowledge or knowledge-based rights) 2)International Exploitation (across borders, within firms boundaries)

THE ROLE OF SUBSIDIARIES A Double Activity Local Emdeddedness enables knowledge acquisiton through interaction and Contribution towards MNE network Inter-action as a non-Symmetrical Process –Different combinative Capabilities –Different Complementary Assets –Non-Additivity of Knowledge

Bartlett & Ghoshal

A. K. Gupta & K. Govindarajan Critério Básico Participação nos Processos de Partilha de Conhecimento na EMN (Emissão/ Recepção de Conhecimento) 4 TIPOS Integrated Player (A/A) Global Innovator (A/B) Implementer (B/A) Local Innovator (B/B)

Main forms of internationalisation of industrial R&D Establishment of R&D activities in the host country by foreign- controlled affiliates (inward investment) Setting up R&D laboratories abroad by investing countries (outward investment) Creation of joint ventures Co-operation agreements or technological alliances International R&D subcontrating Fonte: Thomas Hatzichronoglou (2006), Recent Trends in the internationalisationof R&D in the enterprise sectot,OCDE

NOVOS MODOS DE ORGANIZAÇÃO Mandatos Globais Plataformas de Produção Centros de Excelência

PAPEL DOS CENTROS DE EXCELÊNCIA DESENVOLVIMENTO CONHECIMENTOS INTEGRAÇÃO DE CONHECIMENTOS INSERÇÃO NA REDE

R&D EXPENDITURES OF FOREIGN AFFILIATES AS A % OF TOTAL R&D EXPENDITURES Fonte: R. Narula (2005), The Globalisation of Innovation,

Trends of R&D activities by multinationals Fonte: Thomas Hatzichronoglou (2006), Recent Trends in the internationalisationof R&D in the enterprise sectot,OCDE

Fonte: UNCTAD, WIR (2005)

AS EMN E OS SNI

EMPRESAS MULTINACIONAIS E SISTEMAS NACIONAIS DE INOVAÇÃO Uma inter-relação cada vez mais intensa A concorrência internacional para atracção IDE intensivo em conhecimento......mas grande selectividade nas escolhas A actividade de I&D como algo de adquirido e não como dado (mas há excepções) A crescente importância do cruzamento de saberes e de bases de conhecimento (conjugando global e local)

EMPRESAS MULTINACIONAIS E SNI EM PAÍSES MENOS AVANÇADOS Qual o papel desempenhado pelas filiais de EMN? Abafando a dinâmica inovadora local? (por aquisições, p. exº.) ou Filiais como tutoras e mobilizadoras de redes? A internacionalização das ligações locais: papel das filiais na internacionalização das empresas nacionais Relacionamento e exigência de novos patamares

CAPÍTULO 6.2. PROCESSOS DE INOVAÇÃO À ESCALA INTERNACIONAL

INNOVATION PROCESS CENTRALLOCAL LOCALLY LEVERAGED GLOBALLY LINKED Fonte: Adaptado de Bartlett & Ghoshall (1989)

INOVAÇÃO CENTRAL Vantagens –Controlo da Tecnologia (Garantias de Apropriabilidade) –Relacionamento Inter-Departamental (Inter-acção, desenvolvimento, Produção, comercialização) –Rapidez de Desenvolvimento e Lançamento de Novos Produtos Riscos –Conflitos Casa Mãe / Subsidiária –Insensibilidade às Necessidades Diversificadas dos Mercados

INOVAÇÃO LOCAL Vantagens –Adaptação às Condições Locais –Aproveitamento e Estímulo das Competências das Filiais Riscos –Duplicação de Esforços (Multiplicidade de Reinvenções da Roda)

LOCALLY LEVERAGED Vantagens –Estímulo da Criatividade das Filiais em Proveito de Toda a Empresa Riscos –Dificuldade de Transferência devida às Especificidades Nacionais –Reacções Negativas devidas ao Síndroma NIH

GLOBALLY LINKED Vantagens –Estimular e Aproveitar de forma Integrada as Capacidades das Filiais –Obter Economias de Gama à escala Mundial –Resposta Comum a Estímulos (eventualmente) Localizados –Potenciar Aprendizagem à escala Mundial Riscos –Elevados Custos de Coordenação –Ambiguidade, Falta de Integração e Excessiva Difusão da Autoridade

CAPÍTULO 6.3. VIABILIZANDO PROCESSOS DE INOVAÇÃO TRANSNACIONAL

GESTÃO DAS INOVAÇÕES CENTRAIS Estabelecimento de ligações múltiplas com as Filiais, para estimular e obter as suas contribuições Criação de mecanismos internos de mercado, para seleccionar projectos e garantir sensibilidade às condições da procura Estabelecimento de sistemas adequados de partilha de conhecimentos: a circulação das pessoas

GESTÃO DAS INOVAÇÕES LOCAIS Conferir margem de manobra aos gestores locais para testarem e aplicarem novas soluções Estabelecer mecanismos de ligação com os processos centrais de decisão Integrar capacidades técnicas e de marketing na Filial Coordenação Inter-funcional Evitar os problemas dos Buracos Negros

GESTÃO DAS INOVAÇÕES TRANS-NACIONAIS Inter-dependência de recursos e de responsabilidades Mecanismos de integração inter-unidades ( Recurso a sistemas de articulação operacional) Competências nacionais, mas perspectiva mundial

TRANSNATIONAL PROCESSES 1.From Symmetry to Differentiation: Integrating and Exploiting capabilities, knowledge bases and linkages 2. From Dependence or Independence to Interdependence: Dispersed and specialized configuration of resources: the integrated network Inter-unit integration mechanisms to promote synergies Movement of personnel as a tool for promoting inter-dependence 3. From Unidimentional Control to Differentiated Coordination: Reccourse to different mechanisms to coordinate flows of goods, resources and information 4. Linking National Competences to achieve Worldwide Learning and Competitiveness

INTERDEPENDENT CAPABILITIES AND DIFFERENTIATED ROLES Dynamic perspective of local adaptation Promoting interdependencies, transfer of knowledge and sharing of perspectives Profiting from the involvement of national units in upgrading technology, developing products and sharing marketing strategy for the whole organization Different subsidiary roles (against the U.N. Syndrome) Different levels of integration in the network, due to different environmental conditions Dynamic perspective of subsidiaries resources and contributions

EMPRESAS MULTINACIONAIS E SISTEMA DE INOVAÇÃO EM PORTUGAL: O CASO DOS CENTROS DE EXCELÊNCIA

DEFINITION OF CoE A CoE is an area of expertise for which the subsidiary is recognized by the corporation, and which other parts of the corporation draw on (Birkinshaw, 1998: 291) 3 MAIN FEATURES Competences Use of such competences by other units Recognition

SUBSIDIARY DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES AND GAINING CoE MANDATES EVOLUTIONARY, TIME-CONSUMING PROCESS (FORSGREN, JOHANSON AND SHARMA, 2000) DOES IT STILL HOLD FOR ACQUISITIONS? (FRATOCCHI AND LORENZONI, 2000)

SUBSIDIARY DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES AND GAINING CoE MANDATES EVOLUTIONARY, TIME-CONSUMING PROCESS (FORSGREN, JOHANSON AND SHARMA, 2000) DOES IT STILL HOLD FOR ACQUISITIONS? (FRATOCCHI AND LORENZONI, 2000)

CoE Mandate Earned TappedGiven

AUTONOMY VERSUS INTEGRATION Autonomy is Needed for the Subsidiary to Create, Develop and Strengthen its Capabilities Integration is Needed to have Influence over other Units of the MNE Network Too much autonomy makes the subsidiary mandate potentially vulnerable to divestment (as a spin-off company) or decline (because of a lack of corporate investment) (Birkinshaw, 1996: 488) How to Balance Knowledge Development with Knowledge Sharing?

THE ROLE OF ACQUISITIONS Is an historical process of competence development and interrelationships with other MNE units needed? (Acquired Subsidiaries cannot become CoEs Overnight, Fratocchi & Holm, 1998) Or can CoE rapidly stem from acquisitions (picking up potential leaders)?

3 CASE STUDIES ABB PORTUGAL ALCATEL PORTUGAL VULCANO (R. Bosch Group) 1 2 3

ABB PORTUGAL 1990: SENETE JOINT VENTURE BETWEEN ABB (40%), MAGUE AND IPE (SOREFAME)) SOREFAME HISTORY: –CREATED IN 1943 –HYDROELECTRICAL POWER INVESTMENTS –POWER AGREEMENT: SPECIALIZATION 1992: HIDRO-SOREFAME SOLE PRODUCER OF HYDROMECHANIC EQUIPMENT WITHIN ABB 1994: ABB CONTROLS 70% OF SENETE 1995: HIDRO-SOREFAME CHANGED INTO ABB HIDRO 1997: FULL CONTROL OF SENETE BY ABB ABB HIDRO BECOMESLEAD CENTRE 1999: POWER BUSINESS INCLUDED IN A JV WITH FRENCH PARTNER 2000: EQUITY STAKE SOLD TO FRENCH PARTNER (THE PORTUGUESE COMPANY STILL A CoE) 1

ALCATEL PORTUGAL 1987: DEAL ALCATEL/ITT ON TELECOMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT PORTUGUESE SUBSIDIARY INHERITED 1988: PORTUGUESE SUBSIDIARY ACTIVITY CHANGED FROM SEMICONDUCTORS AND CONSUMER GOODS TO TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 1989: LOCAL SOFTWARE CENTRE ESTABLISHED 2000: 5 CoEs IN ALCATEL PORTUGAL –COILS AND TRANSFORMERS –CALL CENTRES (FOR SOUTHERN EUROPE) –NETWORK MANAGEMENT –COMMUNICATIONS FOR RAILWAY –APPLICATIONS –GSM NETWORKS PLANNING AND –OPTIMIZATION 2

NETWORK MANAGEMENT COMPETENCE CENTRE Original Opportunity (1991): Services for Portuguese GSM Operator –Capability Development –Reference MNE Network Involvement: Participation in Development of Products for France Telecom and Deutche Telekom Capability Demonstration (1996): Development of a New Traffic Management System for the Whole Ggroup CoE Recognition (1997): Network Management Competence Centre

VULCANO Born as a Licensee of Robert Bosch Gmbh (1977) Own Brand Lauching – Vulcano (1983) 50% of Portuguese Market; 8TH Largest European Water Boller Manufacturer (1988) Licensing Agreements about to Eexprire: A) Stand alone OptionsB) Renew C) Strengthen Relationship Majority Equity share Acquired by R. Bosch Market Leader in Europe (1992) Group Competence Centre in Water Boller Internationalization Drive –Licensing: Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt and Brazil –Direct Investments: China, Chile and Australia 3

ACQUISITIONS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE 123 PRE-EXISTING LINKS 2 YEARS PRE-EXISTING LINKS 10 YEARS4 YEARS THINGS TAKE TIME… …BUT NOT TOO MUCH!

IMPORTANCE OF LOCAL ENVIRONMENT 123 Market opportunities Market performance Government Policy Technology/ Knowledge Linkages

CONCLUSIONS 1)ACQUISITION DRIVEN CoEs ARE DIFFERENT 2)HEADQUARTERS RECOGNITION (AND PICKING UP) IS OFTEN FASTER THAN PEER RECOGNITION 3)LOCAL ENVIRONMENT RELATIONSHIPS MATTER 4)TO LEVERAGE THOSE RELATIONSHIPS AT GROUP LEVEL, STRATEGIC INTENT AND MANAGERIAL INITIATIVE ARE RELEVANT INGREDIENTS

APLICAÇÃO À INDÚSTRIA FARMACÊUTICA TENDÊNCIAS DE GESTÃO E ORGANIZAÇÃO DAS ACTIVIDADES INTERNACIONAIS DE I&D

ADVERTÊNCIA # Todos os slides apresentados a seguir foram retirados da comunicação do Prof. Rajneesh Narula no ICEI/ Universidade Complutense de Madrid em 29 de Novembro de 2007 # Esta comunicação baseou-se no artigo de Paola Criscuolo e Rajneesh Narula, intitulado Using multi-hub structures for International R&D: Organisational inertia and the challenges of implementation, publicado na Management International Review,Vol. 47 nº5, 2007 # O docente Vitor Corado Simões agradece a R. Narula a autorização para apresentar estes slides. São da responsabilidade do primeiro a selecção e ordenação bem como pequenas alterações introduzidas.

Drug discovery process

Centralised hub to multi-hubs From the centralized hub structure to the multi- hub integrated network global integration and responsiveness to local conditions But… –Firms have to find a balance between dispersion and centralization (must be a critical mass of resources in each location) –Dispersion requires extensive coordination to promote efficient knowledge flows within the MNE. Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

The centralised hub R&D structure Core activities at home Ethnocentric Knowledge flows were largely uni-directional internal knowledge flows to and from the centre to the periphery. Dyadic relationships Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

Dyadic relationships Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

The integrated R&D network structure New technologies are not created at centre Each R&D unit assumes leading role, depending on strength of competences Centre of Excellence adopt a more systemic coordination mechanism in order to promote intensive communication flows, both within networks internal to the firm, and between external and internal networks. Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

However, there is organizational inertia… firms show a persistent organizational resistance to architectural change structures evolve to achieve a certain amount of reliability and accountability, and to do so, institutionalisation of routines and standardisation of processes is required. Provides stability but also causes inertia, and it is greater where complexity is higher, because complex sets of formal and informal institutions need to be redesigned and developed. Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

Barriers to knowledge flows inter-unit technological distance –Absorptive capacity–common set of prior knowledge levels of technological uncertainty and specialisation –R different from D, differences in AC organisational distance –inter-unit rivalry (also from M&A) geographical distance –Particularly when knowledge is tacit in nature – close physical proximity improves such transfers Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

Methodology In depth interviews with R&D managers and researchers with international assignments experience. Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

Integrated network structure in drug discovery Novartis, Roche, AstraZeneca, Schering… More of a natural evolution from centralised hub structure… We prefer to have a project in one site within the domain of the project from synthesis, to analytics and screening. All these functions are more easily and efficiently done in one site. Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

Old centralized hub structure Things were worked almost exclusively in each site. Each location was self- contained, they had all the resources to carry out all the function that a project required. There were no cross- national teams. Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

Integrated network structure, GSK, Aventis using CoE In development, economies of scale is one the biggest benefits. But in research, size does not seem to help. You want small group agile not tied up with bureaucracy, thinking innovatively, making use of the cultural differences. In research smaller is better Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

Organizational inertia Units are more flexible, small and autonomous. However, they compete for resources, and there is considerable inter-unit rivalry, which leads to inefficiency in terms of inter- unit communications and cross-fertilization Although there is an effort to use resources globally, scientists build their innovative efforts using pre-existing routines which have been developed in the old organizational structure. Organizational distance Although we have an electronic archive with the list of expertises and contacts, I rely on my personal contacts. You can store as much information as you want, but it only becomes knowledge if you know the other person especially in the way researchers carry out their daily routines. Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

The CEDDs are more geographically located and among them there is a minimum level of communication, mostly based on personal relationships. Most of the people in Upper Marion do not know the people in North Carolina because they used to belong to different companies. Biotech mind set to promote strategic rivalry to boost productivity thas created barriers to knowledge diffusion (absence of arrows) Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

Creating mechanisms to promote flows Creating platforms Cross-disciplinary project proposal review boards But still, geography is important: The one-location team is the preferable model because it is the more efficient, but the reality of our organisation is that most of our teams have members based in at least two countries and some of them three. My personal view is that if you can have one location team you are going to be better off, if you can have all sitting in one corridor is going to work better. But this is [now] the exception to the rule. Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

Creating mechanisms to promote flows (2) socialization mechanisms Temporary assignments Long-term assignments Used to hand over from research to development The way we approach the hand over from research to development is that the people will work very closely with the discovery people up to one year before the compound is finally identified. We use secondments and short-term assignments (from three to six months) we have people who travel a lot in terms of maintaining relationships Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)

Conclusions undoubted benefits of multi-hub structures, but also new costs Greater investment in human, managerial and financial resources to promote knowledge integration within a geographically and technologically dispersed R&D structure. Efficiencies of cross-border integration less obvious for more complex activities compared with manufacturing, etc. Organizational distance and intra-firm competition limits flow of knowledge and cross-fertilisation of ideas, although it may save money HQ function needed to be honest broker Fonte: Rajneesh Narula (2007)