Kim, Young-Soo
Description
Between the late 1980s and the early 1990s, the international competitiveness of the
Korean electronics end-product industry declined markedly. This occurred during a
period of transition when there was a shift from export to international production. Major
Korean electronics firms, newly established as MNCs, were under challenge. The new
MNCs had to build technological capability to compete with established MNCs. New
MNCs were under challenge in both domestic and global markets and they...[Show more] were
confronted by increasing globalisation of production and research and development
activities. No new Korean MNC felt the challenge more keenly than Samsung
Electronics.
This study uses a case study approach to pose questions about which strategies were
relevant to success in the international operations of new MNCs. Of particular interest is
the way in which the subsidiaries of Samsung Electronics in the ASEAN region and
China maintained their international competitive advantage, and whether their
competitiveness can be sustained in the long run. A longitudinal case study approach is
used to assess the strategic management, organisational and technology acquisition
questions that arise in the establishment and expansion of international operations of new
MNC in the electronics industry.
The first part of the study provides description of the relationship between the learning
and development of Samsung' s technological capabilities and the nature of its foreign
direct investment and competitive advantage during the 1970s, 80s and 90s. During the
1970s and 80s, Samsung mostly emphasised the development of 'easy-to-imitate
capabilities' such as mass production capability, rather than 'difficult-to-imitate
capabilities' such as design and product development and international management. Its
mass production capability was the main motivation for foreign direct investment, but this
is a temporary ownership advantage. The second part of the analysis assesses how
Samsung' s subsidiaries in the ASEAN region and China established their competitiveness
and it can be maintained. The capability to mass produce standardised components,
achieving economies of scale, was the source of Samsung's early competitive edge. It
had weaknesses in the field of product change, strategic marketing and international
management.
v
The global competitive environment has shifted from cost-based competition to
product change capability-based competition. In this environment, international
competitiveness depends on the improvement and transfer of technological capabilities
between headquarters and subsidiaries.
Several factors determine success or failure in international production: the faster the
production capability in a specific foreign location is earned, the better is the growth
performance of a foreign subsidiary; an end-product subsidiary that quickly establishes
with local component suppliers outperforms one that does not; the more proficient the
international management capability gained through interactions in a similar foreign
location, the better the performance of subsidiaries; and foreign subsidiaries with superior
product-change capability outperform those with inferior capability.
Weakness in product change and international management capability is a major handicap
in the maintenance of international competitiveness. This is in part attributable to home
country policy. Restrictive policies on inward foreign direct investment discouraged
wholly-owned foreign subsidiaries from operating in Korea. This prevented Korean firms,
like Samsung, from learning difficult-to-imitate technological capabilities including design
and product development skills. Korea's regulation of outward foreign direct investment
policy also discouraged firms from investing overseas, and ultimately inhibited domestic
firms from gaining international production experience. This carries an important policy
lesson for developing countries. A restrictive FDI policy, whether on inward or outward
foreign direct investment, deprives domestic firms of the chance to learn difficult-to-imitate
capabilities and inhibits the timely exploitation of short-lived advantages in
international production - and is an inappropriate policy, unfavourable to
sustaining the global competitive advantage of firms and nations.
Items in Open Research are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.