Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T07:30:42.365Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diversification and Internationalization in the European Single Market: The British Exception

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 June 2017

Michael Mayer ,
Julia Hautz ,
Christian Stadler  and
Richard Whittington
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines the long-run impact of the 1992 completion of the European Single Market on the diversification and internationalization of European business. It does so at a particular moment of crisis: the exit of the United Kingdom from the European Union (“Brexit”). The article finds that completion of the European Single Market is indeed associated with significant and widespread changes in the strategies of European businesses between 1993 and 2010. European business has converged on more focused diversification strategies and followed similar patterns of internationalization. The most significant exception is the consistently low level of British business's commitment to European markets. The distinctiveness of British internationalization is, in a sense, Brexit foretold.

Type
Research Article
Information
Business History Review , Volume 91 , Issue 2 , Summer 2017 , pp. 279 - 299
Copyright
Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 On the significance and context of the creation of the European Single Market, see, for example, Sandholtz, Wayne and Zysman, John, “1992: Recasting the European Bargain,” World Politics 42, no. 1 (1989): 95–128 Google Scholar; and Bruce, Leigh, “Europe's Locomotive,” Foreign Policy, Spring 1990, 68–90 Google Scholar. For a history of the negotiations leading to the formation of the Single Market, see Moravcsik, Andrew, “Negotiating the Single European Act: National Interests and Conventional Statecraft in the European Community,” International Organization 45, no. 1 (1991): 19–56 Google Scholar.

2 For a discussion of the wider historical context, see, for example, Schröter, Harm G., “The German Question, the Unification of Europe, and the European Market Strategies of Germany's Chemical and Electrical Industries, 1900–1992,” Business History Review 67, no. 3 (1993): 369–405 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Fligstein, Neil and Mara-Drita, Iona, “How to Make a Market: Reflections on the Attempt to Create a Single Market in the European Union,” American Journal of Sociology 102, no. 1 (1996): 1–33 Google Scholar.

3 Winters, L. Alan, “The Welfare and Policy Implications of the International Trade Consequences of ‘1992,’” American Economic Review 82, no. 2 (1992): 104–8Google Scholar.

4 Rosamond, Ben, “Imagining the European Economy: ‘Competitiveness’ and the Social Construction of ‘Europe’ as an Economic Space,” New Political Economy 7, no. 2 (2002): 169Google Scholar; Commission of the European Communities, Growth, Competitiveness, Employment: The Challenges and Ways Forward into the 21st Century White Paper, Parts A and B, Com (93), 700 final, Bulletin of the European Communities, Supplement 6/93 (Dec. 1993).

5 Moravcsik, “Negotiating the Single European Act,” 19–56; Neven, Damien J., “Regulatory Reform in the European Union,” American Economic Review 82, no. 2 (1992): 98–103 Google Scholar. For an early economic analysis that linked economic liberalization and economic integration in Europe, see Haberler, Gottfried, “Economic Aspects of a European Union,” World Politics 1, no. 4 (1949): 431–41Google Scholar.

6 See Bouwens, Bram and Dankers, Joost, “The Invisible Handshake: Cartelization in the Netherlands, 1930–2000,” Business History Review 84, no. 4 (2010): 751–71Google Scholar; and Bottasso, Anna and Sembenelli, Alessandro, “Market Power, Productivity and the EU Single Market Program: Evidence from a Panel of Italian Firms,” European Economic Review 45, no. 1 (2001): 167–86Google Scholar. See also Commission of the European Communities, Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee: The Competitiveness of European Enterprises in the face of Globalisation—How It Can be Encouraged Com (98), 718 final, https://ec.europa.eu/research/pdf/com98-718en.pdf.

7 Derek F. Channon, “The Strategy and Structure of British Enterprise” (doctoral thesis, Harvard Business School, 1971); Dyas, Gareth P. and Thanheiser, Heinz T., The Emerging European Enterprise (Boulder, 1976)Google Scholar; Gareth P. Dyas, “The Strategy and Structure of French Industrial Enterprise” (doctoral thesis, Harvard Business School, 1972).

8 Schreiber, Jean-Jacques Servan, The American Challenge (New York, 1969)Google Scholar; Djelic, Marie-Laure, Exporting the American Model: The Post-War Transformation of European Business (Oxford, 1998)Google Scholar.

9 Binda, Veronica, “Strategy and Structure in Large Italian and Spanish firms, 1950–2002,” Business History Review 86, no. 3 (2012): 503–25Google Scholar; Heinrich, Thomas, “Product Diversification in the U.S. Pulp and Paper Industry: The Case of International Paper, 1898–1941,” Business History Review 75, no. 3 (2001): 467–505 Google Scholar; Davis, Gerald F., Diekmann, Kristina A., and Tinsley, Catherine H., “The Decline and Fall of the Conglomerate Firm in the 1980s: The Deinstitutionalization of an Organizational Form,” American Sociological Review 59, no. 4 (1994): 548Google Scholar.

10 Whittington, Richard and Mayer, Michael, The European Corporation (Oxford, 2000)Google Scholar; Binda, “Large Italian and Spanish Firms.”

11 For conceptual articles, see Verbeke, Alain and Kano, Liena, “The New Internalization Theory and Multinational Enterprises from Emerging Economies: A Business History Perspective,” Business History Review 89, no. 3 (2015): 415–45Google Scholar; and Jones, Geoffrey and Khanna, Tarun, “Bringing History (Back) into International Business,” Journal of International Business Studies 37, no. 4 (2006): 453–68Google Scholar. Illustrative empirical papers include Chandler, Alfred D. Jr., “The Growth of the Transnational Industrial Firm in the United States and the United Kingdom: A Comparative Analysis,” Economic History Review 33, no. 3 (1980): 396–410 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Donzé, Pierre-Yves, “Siemens and the Construction of Hospitals in Latin America, 1949–1964,” Business History Review 89, no. 3 (2015): 475–502 Google Scholar; Keneley, Monica, “Does Organizational Heritage Matter in the Development of Offshore Markets? The Case of Australian Life Insurers,” Business History Review 87, no. 2 (2013): 255–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Ryggvik, Helge, “A Short History of the Norwegian Oil Industry: From Protected National Champions to Internationally Competitive Multinationals,” Business History Review 89, no. 1 (2015): 3–41 Google Scholar. For an overview of historical considerations of the multinational enterprise, particularly in Business History Review, see Wilkins, Mira, “The History of Multinationals: A 2015 View,” Business History Review 89, no. 3 (2015): 405–14Google Scholar.

12 Winters, “International Trade Consequences.”

13 Amdam, Rolv Petter and Bjarnar, Ove, “Globalization and the Development of Industrial Clusters: Comparing Two Norwegian Clusters, 1900–2010,” Business History Review 89, no. 4 (2015): 693–716 Google Scholar.

14 Binda, “Large Italian and Spanish Firms.”

15 Fligstein, Neil and Merand, Frederic, “Globalization or Europeanization? Evidence on the European Economy since 1980,” Acta Sociologica 45, no. 1 (2002): 7–22 Google Scholar.

16 See, for example, Binda, “Large Italian and Spanish Firms.”

17 Whittington, Richard, “Alfred Chandler, Founder of Strategy: Lost Tradition and Renewed Inspiration,” Business History Review 82, no. 2 (2008): 267–77Google Scholar; Pitelis, Christos N., “Globalization, Development, and History in the Work of Edith Penrose,” Business History Review 85, no. 1 (2011): 65–84 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Ghemawat, Pankaj, “Competition and Business Strategy in Historical Perspective,” Business History Review 76, no. 1 (2002): 37–74 Google Scholar; Zuckerman, Ezra W., “Focusing the Corporate Product: Securities Analysts and De-diversification,” Administrative Science Quarterly 45, no. 3 (2000): 591–619 Google Scholar; Chandler, Alfred D. Jr., Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism (Cambridge, Mass., 1990)Google Scholar; Heinrich, “U.S. Pulp and Paper Industry”; Hoskisson, Robert E., Johnson, Richard A., Tihanyi, Laszlo, and White, Robert E., “Diversified Business Groups and Corporate Refocusing in Emerging Economies,” Journal of Management 31, no. 6 (2005): 941–65Google Scholar; Jones and Khanna, “Bringing History (Back).”

19 Penrose, Edith, The Theory of the Growth of the Firm (London, 1959)Google Scholar; Colli, Andrea, “Multinationals and Economic Development in Italy during the Twentieth Century,” Business History Review 88, no. 2 (2014): 303–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Pitelis, “The Work of Edith Penrose,” 68; Hautz, Julia, Mayer, Michael C. J., and Stadler, Christian, “Ownership Identity and Concentration: A Study of Their Joint Impact on Corporate Diversification,” British Journal of Management 24, no. 1 (2013): 102–6Google Scholar; Lynskey, Michael J., “The Locus of Corporate Entrepreneurship: Kirin Brewery's Diversification into Biopharmaceuticals,” Business History Review 80, no. 4 (2006): 689–723 Google Scholar.

21 Pierre, Jon, “Varieties of Capitalism and Varieties of Globalization: Comparing Patterns of Market Deregulation,” Journal of European Public Policy 22, no. 7 (2015): 908–26Google Scholar; Fligstein and Merand, “Globalization or Europeanization?”; Thatcher, Mark, “European Commission Merger Control: Combining Competition and the Creation of Larger European Firms,” European Journal of Political Research 53, no. 3 (2014): 443–64Google Scholar.

22 Winters, “International Trade Consequences,” 104; Meyer, Klaus E., “Globalfocusing: From Domestic Conglomerates to Global Specialists,” Journal of Management Studies 43, no. 5 (2006): 1109–44Google Scholar; Adriaan Dierx, Fabienne Ilzkovitz, and Khalid Sekkat, “European Integration and the Functioning of Product Markets: Selected Issues,” European Commission, Special Report Number 2, in European Integration and the Functioning of Product Markets, ed. Dierx, Adriaan, Ilzkovitz, Fabienne, and Sekkat, Khalid (Brussels, 2002), 9–32 Google Scholar; Ilzkovitz, Fabienne, Dierx, Adriaan, Kovacs, Viktoria, and Sousa, Nuno, “Steps toward a Deeper Economic Integration: The Internal Market in the 21st Century—A Contribution to the Single Market Review” in Economic Papers, no. 271 (Brussels, 2007)Google Scholar.

23 Fligstein and Merand, “Globalization or Europeanization?”

24 Wilkins, Mira, “Chandler and Global Business History,” Business History Review 82, no. 2 (2008): 251–66Google Scholar; Hautz, Julia, Mayer, Michael, and Stadler, Christian, “Advance and Retreat: How Economics and Institutions Shaped the Fate of the Diversified Industrial Firm in Europe,” International Studies of Management and Organization 45, no. 4 (2015): 319–41Google Scholar.

25 Jong, Abe de, Röell, Ailsa, and Westerhuis, Gerarda, “Changing National Business Systems: Corporate Governance and Financing in the Netherlands, 1945–2005,” Business History Review 84, no. 4 (2010): 773–98Google Scholar; Verbeke and Kano, “New Internalization Theory,” 427.

26 Berghoff, Hartmut, “The End of Family Business? The Mittelstand and German Capitalism in Transition, 1949–2000,” Business History Review 80, no. 2 (2006): 263–95Google Scholar.

27 Jones, Geoffrey, Multinationals and Global Capitalism (New York, 2005)Google Scholar, cited in Verbeke and Kano, “New Internalization Theory,” 426. A similar case has been made for the importance of the colonial past; see da Silva Lopes, Teresa, “Competing with Multinationals: Strategies of the Portuguese Alcohol Industry,” Business History Review 79, no. 3 (2005): 559–85Google Scholar.

28 Wellings, Ben and Baxendale, Helen, “Euroscepticism and the Anglosphere: Traditional Dilemmas in Contemporary English Nationalism,” Journal of Common Market Studies 53, no. 1 (2015): 123–39Google Scholar.

29 Jacquemin, Alexis P. and Berry, Charles H., “Entropy Measure of Diversification and Corporate Growth,” Journal of Industrial Economics 27, no. 4 (1979): 359–69Google Scholar; Palepu, Krishna, “Diversification Strategy, Profit Performance and the Entropy Measure,” Strategic Management Journal 6, no. 3 (1985): 239–55Google Scholar.

30 See, for example, Bowen, Harry P. and Wiersema, Margaret F., “Foreign-Based Competition and Corporate Diversification Strategy,” Strategic Management Journal 26, no. 12 (2005): 1153–71Google Scholar; Hitt, Michael A., Hoskisson, Robert E., and Kim, Hicheon, “International Diversification: Effects on Innovation and Firm Performance in Product-Diversified Firms,” Academy of Management Journal 40, no. 4 (1997): 767–98Google Scholar; Chakrabarti, Abhirup, Singh, Kulwant, and Mahmood, Ishtiaq, “Diversification and Performance: Evidence from East Asian Firms,” Strategic Management Journal 28, no. 2 (2007): 101–20Google Scholar; and Hoskisson, Robert E., Hitt, Michael A., Johnson, Robert, and Moesel, Douglas D., “Construct Validity of an Objective (Entropy) Categorical Measure of Diversification Strategy,” Strategic Management Journal 14, no. 3 (1993): 215–35Google Scholar.

31 Channon, “British Enterprise”; Dyas and Thanheiser, Emerging European Enterprise; Dyas, “French Industrial Enterprise”; Binda, “Large Italian and Spanish Firms”; Whittington and Mayer, European Corporation.

32 Cassis, Youssef, Big Business: The European Experience in the Twentieth Century (Oxford, 1997)Google Scholar.

33 Channon, “British Enterprise”; Dyas and Thanheiser, Emerging European Enterprise; Dyas, “French Industrial Enterprise”; Binda, “Large Italian and Spanish Firms”; Whittington and Mayer, European Corporation.

34 Channon, “British Enterprise”; Dyas and Thanheiser, Emerging European Enterprise; Dyas, “French Industrial Enterprise”; Binda, “Large Italian and Spanish Firms.”

35 Although our data is based on a quantitative diversification measure and therefore differs from the qualitative measures of the Harvard Studies tradition, we can offer some indicative comparison due to the convergent validity of the measures; see Hoskisson et al., “Construct Validity.” Previous studies have shown that for France, the proportion of firms adopting a diversified strategy increased from 36 percent in 1950 to 59 percent in 1993. In Germany the proportion of diversified firms increased from 40 percent in 1950 to 77 percent in 1993, whereas in the U.K. the figure increased from 27 percent in the 1950's to 82 percent in 1993. See Channon, “British Enterprise”; Dyas and Thanheiser, Emerging European Enterprise; Dyas, “French Industrial Enterprise”; and Whittington and Mayer, European Corporation.

36 Marseille, Jacques, Alcatel-Alsthom: Histoire de la Compagnie générale d’électricité (Paris, 1992)Google Scholar.

37 Berghoff, Hartmut, “Varieties of Financialization? Evidence from German Industry in the 1990s,” Business History Review 90, no. 1 (2016): 81–108 Google Scholar.

38 For an overview of RWE's history, see “RWE AG History,” Funding Universe, accessed, May 2017, http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/rwe-ag-history/; Pohl, Hans, Vom Stadtwerk zum Elektrizitätsgroßunternehmen: Gründung, Aufbau und Ausbau der “Rheinisch-Westfälischen Elektrizitätswerke AG” (RWE) 1898–1918 (Stuttgart, 1998)Google Scholar; Maier, Helmut, ed., Elektrizitätswirtschaft zwischen Umwelt, Technik und Politik: Aspekte aus 100 Jahren RWE-Geschichte 1898–1998 (Freiberg, 1999)Google Scholar; Mez, Lutz and Osnowski, Rainer, RWE—Ein Riese mit Ausstrahlung (Cologne, 1996)Google Scholar; and RWE, , 2010 Annual Report (Essen, 2011), 55Google Scholar.

39 On the interaction of global, European, and national-level factors in the defense industry, see Fligstein, Neil, “Sense Making and the Emergence of a New Form of Market Governance: The Case of the European Defense Industry,” American Behavioral Scientist 49, no. 7 (2006): 949–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Jones, Adam, “Europe Cries Foul as New BAe Emerges,” Times (London), 20 Jan. 1999 Google Scholar.

41 Peter Spiegel, “Oil or Missiles, the Constant Is Power,” Financial Times, 7 Dec. 2004.

42 Matthias Loke, “Expansion in den Wachstumsregionen USA und Asien geplant Siemens will sein Industriegeschäft weltweit an die Spitze führen,” Berliner Zeitung, 3 Sept. 1997.

43 Gerhard Hegmann and Andre Tauber, “Siemens verabschiedet sich aus unserem Alltag,” Die Welt, 22 Sept. 2014.

44 “Siemens übernimmt Kraftwerkssparte,” Die Welt, 15 Nov. 1997.

45 See Legrand, Timothy, “The Merry Mandarins of Windsor: Policy Transfer and Transgovernmental Networks in the Anglosphere,” Policy Studies 33, no. 6 (2012): 523–40Google Scholar; and Willetts, David, “England and Britain, Europe and the Anglosphere,” Political Quarterly 78, no. S1 (2007): 54–61 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 Wilkins, Mira, Thelen, Kathleen, Whitley, Richard, Miller, Rory M., Martin, Cathie Jo, Berghahn, Volker, Iversen, Martin Jes, Herrigel, Gary, and Zeitlin, Jonathan, “‘Varieties of Capitalism’ Roundtable,” Business History Review 84, no. 4 (2010): 637–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

47 Jones, Multinationals and Global Capitalism; Verbeke and Kano, “New Internalization Theory”; Lopes, “Competing with Multinationals”; Binda, “Large Italian and Spanish Firms.”