Paper Example on International Strategic Management

Introduction

Beyond diversification, international firms should embrace policies that consider they manufacture, employ and market to and in regions characterized by different believes and varying socio-economic development levels to their country of origin. Such awareness sensitizes the management to avoid the pitfall of relying on the firm-specific characteristics and instead embrace the multi-domestic strategy. Its pursuit mandates sacrificing reliance on the firm-specific characteristics to emphasize responsiveness to opportunities unfolding from the local requirements rather than force their offering to the target audience (Jansson & Soderman, 2015). Consequently, undertaking minor modifications and cultural awareness appears the course for firms to attain responsiveness to the local requirements and counter hyper-competition posed by national and regional players alongside multinational corporations. Blending responsiveness to local requirements with global identity mandates a transnational strategy nurtured through the structured cooperative approach towards target markets.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The pursuit of structured cooperative strategies mandates formulating agreements with local entrepreneurial firms capable of furthering its global identity through their responsiveness to the domestic requirements. In doing so, the firm should orient its global focus on buyer-supplier alliances that harbors research, development and marketing course beyond matching the single-transaction (Haase, 2015). However, the prevalence of global economies makes cross-border cooperation a necessity to understand the unfolding opportunities and the critical success mechanism deployed by the host-nation entrepreneurs. The success of such cooperation obligates wrestling the systematic differences in its staff's attitudes towards the influence of partner entrepreneur's societal contexts (Gollnhofer & Turkina, 2015). Such explains likely reason why firms overlook cooperative arrangements. The prevalence of hypercompetitive contexts makes wholly owned greenfields realize temporary competitive advantage (Tipuric, Podrug, & Darabos, 2016). In fact, intense competition deserves rapid moves to nurture strengths quickly to neutralize competitors' advantages.

The formulation of countermeasures to address hyper-competition should prioritize cross-border partnerships that acknowledge speed as the unavoidable priority. Besides, the cross-border partnerships should illuminate that firms have less time to react and time lag would limit their competitiveness. The delay in new product appearance accelerates the opportunity for imitations to erode intended competitiveness (Steensma, Marino, & Weaver, 2000). The general trend convinces for shorter product lifecycles. The inability of the firm to initiate quick response through first move surprises makes it difficult to wrestle competitors' advantages (Kogut & Singh, 1988). The circumstances compel the firm to find the indirect alternative to counter the hyper-competition. It appears possible through cooperation with others better attained through the structured arrangement.

Formulating successful structured cooperative arrangement target awareness of underlying societal context for its influence on entrepreneurial maturity. Knowing their underlying influence boosts understanding cooperation attitudes considered essential to formulate successful transnational strategies (Akerman, 2014). Beyond knowledge of common values and belief, it makes the case to seek awareness of entrepreneurial acceptance in cooperative overtures. According to Steensma, Marino and Weaver (2000) different societal context exhibit different alignment levels that influence cooperative strategies. In particular, forbearance and trust are essential for cooperative arrangements. For that reason, understanding the influence of societal values lends insight on how such could triggers competitive advantages through a multi-domestic strategy.

Having successful cooperation arrangements involves high-level trust nurtured by the alliance partners. Its attainment should allow the partners overcome fears of opportunism capable of eroding bonds that stabilize the relationship. The complexity of transnational trust compels formulation of contractual safeguards upon which the partners should pursue cooperation (Kogut & Singh, 1988). Still, the contractual safeguards fail to protect the parties from opportunism when such does not reflect in their governance structure. Again, the complexity faced by firms in pursuit of multiple geographical markets renders centralized management model ineffective (Ogutu & Samuel, 2012). Still, firms need to protect and restore their competitive vitality. It compels them to seek cooperative arrangements that best guarantee them quick response yet invisible since surprise and first moves influence success in contemporary hypercompetitive environments.

Threats posed by hyper-competition makes cooperative alliances among and between firms a popular course. Their pursuit necessitates caution to embrace cooperative structures that both enhances existing competitive strategies and become the source to wrestle strategies adopted by rivals effectively (Haase, 2015). It involves devising an integrative model founded on the contingency theory perspective to enable the firm to realize its global vision and responsiveness to local requirements. The integrative model should assure high competitiveness and first move in the rapidly changing business environment. It makes it vary the cooperative arrangement among cross-licensing, joint development programs, co-production and joint ventures (Kuswanto, Hoen, & Holzhacker, 2017). However, the strategic alliances, such as joint ventures, should deliver beyond gaining access to the target market instead should draw surprise competitiveness through revenue-enhancing functions.

The adoption of joint venture arrangement should seek beyond countering hyper-competition to restore competitiveness vitality. Nevertheless, its high record in failure makes wanes their popularity thus compelling understanding of underlying societal values of target partners. In doing so, it should provide the cooperating partner's opportunity to establish linkage of competitive contribution, hence strengthening the venture (Ogutu & Samuel, 2012). From the analysis above, pays for the strategic partners establishing the joint ventures avoid interest conflicts and instead nurture linkage that optimizes the mutual benefits. Increasing the mutual benefits stimulate more partner cooperation possible through systematically understanding sources of challenges (Jing & Mo, 2012). It welcomes the application of conflict-resolution strategy proven viable in energized cultural similarity. Accordingly, cooperative management of international joint ventures mandates infusing dynamic learning capability founded on strong-form trust. Additionally, the joint venture should visualize partner commonality to eliminate fear associated with opportunistic behavior (Kuswanto, Hoen, & Holzhacker, 2017). Accomplishing partner commonality involves understanding the socialized contexts and resulting influences as the basis of formalizing governance safeguards built upon higher conflict resolution strategy.

Conclusion

In conclusion, attaining partner commonality involves awareness of underlying societal values that guide behavioral patterns of target entrepreneurs. It makes it possible to eliminate differences that hinder the pursuit of joint goals. The formulation of the integrative model should prioritize strong-form trust to bridge the cultural influences whose occurrence may weaken the cooperation alliance. The analysis above demonstrates self-interest values and individualism likely trigger fault lines that expose the alliance to hyper-competition. Instead, the pursuit of cooperation alliances should establish win-win condition viably when one nurtures collective societal values founded on cohesive in-groups.

Prioritizing the collective identity when establishing joint ventures makes semi-strong trust founded on contractual safeguards short-lived. It contributes towards self-fulfilling prophecies whose occurrence enhances opportunism. Such circumstances arise in masculine, uncertainty-tolerance and individualistic societies, explaining their lesser tendency towards the pursuit of cooperative strategies. Consequently, firms seeking global success in their partnerships' network should prioritize awareness of cultural influences. The understanding becomes critical for firms seeking collaborative agreements since entrepreneurial firms founded on collective and uncertainty-avoiding cultures willingly accept cooperative strategies. They should form target in the pursuit of international joint ventures and enrich surprise responsiveness to local requirements and hyper-competition.

References

Akerman, N. (2014). An international learning typology: strategies and outcomes for internationalizing firms. Baltic Journal of Management, 9(4), 382-402.

Gollnhofer, J. F., & Turkina, E. (2015). Cultural distance and entry modes: implications for global expansion strategy. Cross Cultural Management, 22(1), 21-41.

Haase, H. a. (2015). When small businesses go international: alliances as a key to entry. Journal of Business Strategy, 36(3), 37-45.

Jansson, H., & Soderman, S. (2015). International strategic management hybrids in China. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 10(2), 209-223.

Jing, S., & Mo, C. (2012). Studies on the New Trends of Multinational Corporation Strategic Alliance and Influence to China. Cross-Cultural Communication, 8(3), 32-36.

Kogut, B., & Singh, H. (1988). The Effect Of National Culture On The Choice Of Entry Mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 411-434.

Kuswanto, K., Hoen, H. W., & Holzhacker, R. L. (2017). Bargaining between local governments and multinational corporations in a decentralised system of governance: the cases of Ogan Komering Ilir and Banyuwangi districts in Indonesia. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, 39(3), 189-201.

Ogutu, M., & Samuel, C. M. (2012). Strategies Adopted By Multinational Corporations to Cope With Competition in Kenya. DBA Africa Management Review, 2(3), 69-82.

Steensma, H. K., Marino, L., & Weaver, K. M. (2000). Attitudes toward cooperative strategies: A cross-cultural analysis of entrepreneurs. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(4), 591-609.

Tipuric, D., Podrug, N., & Darabos, M. (2016). Strategic Direction of Multinational Corporations in Hypercompetitive Environment. Management & Organization, 583-595.