Antecedents and evolution of the Bartlett and Ghoshal transnational typology

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to systematically describe the evolution of Bartlett and Ghoshal's transnational typology within an appropriate historical context, and to additionally review key antecedent works of other authors who contributed to its evolutionary nature.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper presents a comprehensive review of the literature by combining an evolutionary perspective with a Chandlerian business history approach.

Findings

The paper shows how Bartlett and Ghoshal's transnational solution concept was developed in light of the global economic changes of the 1970s and 1980s, as well as the managerial and strategic challenges faced by US MNCs. It shows how the transnational solution concept should not be seen as a single work, but rather the outcome of an academic discourse which lasted over a decade. The review of Bartlett and Ghoshal's stream of work since the mid 1980s also shows how the transnational solution concept developed gradually into its present form and through the integration of several antecedent concepts.

Originality/value

This paper describes not just the actual evolution of Bartlett and Ghoshal's transnational typology, but also systematically identifies and analyzes key antecedent works by other authors. This analysis has been overlooked and is at the same time key to the understanding of their typology. The employed evolutionary and business history perspectives within this paper are new to the international management literature. They should be especially valuable for graduate students and scholars who employ Bartlett and Ghoshal's typology, or anyone who wishes to understand the Zeitgeist of the time articulated by this seminal work, which will soon celebrate its 25th anniversary.

Citation

Rašković, M., Makovec Brenčič, M. and Jaklič, M. (2013), "Antecedents and evolution of the Bartlett and Ghoshal transnational typology", Multinational Business Review, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 148-173. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBR-01-2013-0004