Abstract
Jones(2002)critiqued Sassen for producing the simplistic image that corporate power and control is located in MNEs headquarters. From his perspective control is spreading through a decentralized network of social actors across transnational firm networks. However, geographers do not much know about the work and life of those actors. Not only labor, as mentioned by Peck, but also putting executive managers into its place is intrinsically geographic, especially when expatriated abroad. The analytical approach introduced here is an actor-centered approach using quantitative analysis on individual and managerial performance. Based on the described model of the interrelationship of managerial behavior, activity space and location decision making, a questionnaire survey was build. It was send to foreign executive managers of foreign firms listed in the German Chamber of Commerce member directory. The questionnaire was answered by 81 executive managers, a reply rate of 57. Discriminant analyses were applied to distinguish the important elements of a) foreign executive managers' individual performance and b) different business environments. I distinguished a) between Expatriate and Hybrid managers; and b)between two business environments affected differently by globalization. To measure difference between 1) normal Expat-manager and Hybrid-manager; and 2) Tokyo-Yokohama and Osaka-Kobe discriminant analyses were conducted with predictors giving information about managerial behavior.
1) Distinguishing Characteristics of Manager Types
The discriminant analysis showed that 1) language proficiency, 2) a supportive Japanese partner and 3) involvement in decision processes were most important in distinguishing between Hybrid and Expatriate managers. Although, they showed modesty with their self-assessment, it became obvious that language is very important management element when doing business in Japan. Second, in the acculturation process the support of a Japanese partner is important since instant feedback can only be expected from a very close person within Japanese culture. Third, the manager can be distinguished from the normal expatriate manager by frequent involvement in the decision making process.
2) Distinguishing Characteristics of Regions
The discriminant analysis showed that 1) corporate growth aims 2) experiences and 3) corporate decisions were most important in distinguishing between Tokyo-Yokohama and Osaka-Kobe.In Osaka-Kobe the Hybrid manager takes the lead: his acculturation process is advanced. Therefore, cultural experiences are paramount and he can look back on a longer stay than his counterpart in Tokyo-Yohohama. Decisions with a focus on success in the local market vary by location. In Osaka-Kobe the foreign manager promotes decisions for expansion, products, service and market creation. In Tokyo-Yokohama normal manager is likely to propose growth aims targeting the local market.
We assume that the hybrid manager's cultural knowledge and sensitivity towards local customs and values achieved by language proficiency and through a supportive partner in private life, and the strong will to get involved in the decision making of the local subsidiary, leads to a better performance in the intercultural workplace. The empowerment of the Hybrid-manager derives more from his local workplace performance and less from headquarters relations. To conclude, the analysis of the questionnaire showed that foremost acculturation is vital for distinguishing the Hybrid manager from the normal Expat-manager. The results led us assume that strategic intent differs by location. We can assume that the strategic intent of the foreign executive manager based in the first tier global city correlates with globalizing efforts. On the other hand, the strategic intent of a manager based in a second tier global city, such as Osaka-Kobe, is characterized by localizing activities.
