Dealing with headquarters in the multinational corporation: a subsidiary perspective on organizing costs

Randi Lunnan; Sverre Tomassen; Ulf Andersson; Gabriel R. G. Benito

doi:10.1186/s41469-019-0052-y

Journal of Organization Design

Table 2 Measurement of variables (all items measured on 1–7 scales, apart from distance)

From: Dealing with headquarters in the multinational corporation: a subsidiary perspective on organizing costs

Bargaining costs	1. We spend a lot of time in renegotiating agreements made with our headquarters.	Cronbach’s α = .76
	2. We spend a lot of time in coordinating activities with our headquarters.
	3. The coordination of the relation with our headquarters is too costly compared with the outcome of these interactions.
Information costs	1. Information from the headquarters is often incomplete and difficult to understand.	Cronbach’s α = .90
	2. Information from the headquarters is often too voluminous and therefore difficult to understand.
	3. Information from the headquarters is often poorly formulated and difficult to understand.
	4. Information from the headquarters seldom comes at the right time.
Atmosphere	1. Sometimes headquarters hide facts that can help us in doing a good job (reversed).	Cronbach’s α = .91
	2. The headquarters have not kept promises made when the relationship was established (reversed).
	3. Occasionally, people at the headquarters alter information in order to carry out things their own way (reversed).
	4. Sometimes people from headquarters promise to do things without actually doing them later (reversed).
	5. Sometimes the headquarters ignore company policies that were designed to increase our ability to reach and service customers (reversed).
	6. Whenever a conflict or difficulty arises, our headquarters always try to seek a solution that is in their own best interests, not considering our interests (reversed).
Social coordination	1. We have meetings where managers from different international locations meet.	Cronbach’s α = .83
	2. There is personal contact between managers from different international locations in our company.
	3. Committees meet regularly to plan and integrate activities internationally.
Formal coordination: communication systems	1. We have databases where we share information internationally.	Cronbach’s α = .79
	2. We have worldwide electronic communications systems, like emails.
	3. We have internationally interconnected computer systems, like server systems.
	4. We have internationally integrated software applications, like common use of applications.
	5. We have worldwide integrated information systems, like intranet.
Formal coordination: common rules	1. We have well-specified worldwide common rules and policies.	Cronbach’s α = .86
Formal coordination: common rules	2. We have well-specified worldwide standard operating procedures and common manuals.	Cronbach’s α = .86
Centralization	To what extent is there HQ versus local influence on the following decision areas:	Cronbach’s α = .88
	1. R&D/business development/service development
	2. Project selection
	3. Project time schedule
	4. Project budget
	5. Project priorities
	6. Services
	7. Service delivery
	8. Project organization
	9. Resource allocations
	10. Marketing
	11. Brand name
	12. Pricing
Distance	1. Scandinavia
	2. Europe
	3. Rest of the world

Back to article page