Search

The paper identifies similarities and differences in the emphases and patterns that U.S. and Japanese managers attribute to a set of 22 generic competitive methods. It highlights the different ways that Japanese and American managers combine these methods to form general business strategies. Using factor analyses and smallest space analyses, the study shows differences in business strategy patterns between managers in Japan and the U.S. Such differences reflect the organizing principles underlying the strategy approaches in U.S. and Japanese firms. The organizing principle underlying U.S. responses is the desire to find way to differentiate a firm from its competitors. In contrast, the organizing principle underlying Japanese responses is a desire to establish a comprehensive, stable and defensible position. The paper discusses the implications of these results for strategic management and suggests directions for future U.S. and Japanese comparative strategy research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the unique functions of corporate headquarters in diversified firms and reports on a survey of the structure and staffing of more than 600 headquarters in Europe, the United States, Japan, and Chile. It explores the extent to which corporate headquarters are contingent on size of the company, corporate strategy (corporate portfolio and corporate structure and policies), and governance system (ownership and regulation, and country of origin). The results confirm that factors in each of these areas are important determinants of the size and structure of headquarters. Performance data suggest that these findings are not merely descriptive but that corporate headquarters should be designed to fit the corporate strategy. Although the results are capable of alternative interpretations, analysis provides no support for the view that ‘lean and mean’ headquarters lead to better performance. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We propose a conceptual and analytical framework for assessing metric equivalence in cross-national strategy research. We illustrate this framework by testing the equivalence of measurement models for a set of strategy constructs across the United States and Japan. Results of a two-group LISREL analysis conducted on a data set of 447 interorganizational relationships reveal that some constructs have strong cross-national equivalence, while others need content respecification or reconceptualization. We discuss implications and offer suggestions about how to conduct empirical strategy research in cross-national settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]