DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING AND STRATEGY

Management in a
Globalizing Economy

(MSc Course 2307)

Peter Hagstrom, Ph.D., Associate Professor

Course Syllabus, August 2017

1
 Course Overview

The overall purpose of this course is to introduce students to important

issues in the strategy, organisation and management of companies
operating in the present, globalizing economy. The course can be
summarised in three words: pragmatic, eclectic, and honest. Pragmatic,
because the teaching will be about issues and concepts that many of you
will face in your business or other careers very soon. Eclectic, because I
deliberately have drawn on a wide variety of theoretical ideas, rather
than imposing a single view of the world on your thinking. Honest in the
context of this course means that the life, opportunities and problems of
international managers are discussed in an unvarnished, non-glorifying
way.

Teaching Philosophy

In a word, the philosophy of the course is: Interaction. My assumption

going into class every day is that you have all prepared the cases and/or
read the assigned articles, and that you want to discuss your thoughts on
that material. I am definitely interested in your opinions, and I believe
that learning occurs most effectively when you are somewhat confused
but actively engaged in the process.

I also want to emphasise my belief in the leverage of group work. I

encourage groups to get together every day before class to discuss the
case study and/or assigned readings. Besides potentially improving your
learning, you will in the process improve the inter-personal skills in
multi-cultural groups so crucial for a successful manager of today. The
potential for learning is most probably at least as high vis-à-vis your
study group as in class. I encourage you to take advantage of this
opportunity.

The course builds on the assumption that fundamentally you are

responsible for your own education. I can only attempt to provide you
with opportunities for your own learning.

Evaluation

The total course grade will be calculated as follows:

Class Participation: 20%

Individual Project: 30%

2
 Take-Home Exam: 50%

Class Participation:

The quality of lectures, case analyses, in-class workshops, and small-

group discussions will depend on your participation and contribution to
every session. Thus, it is important that you have read all the assigned
material prior to class and arrive prepared to discuss it. For an increased
learning experience, you are encouraged to meet in your working groups
to prepare cases and to go through the assigned questions before
meeting in class.

Participation is not graded in terms of quantity but of quality (of course,

the latter assumes a certain level of the former). Contributions can take
many forms and the following represent what is considered to be
valuable types of contributions that are taken into account when
assessing your participation grade: presenting an insightful analysis or
argument, defending a position and/or engaging in useful debate, acting
as an interpreter, bringing in new perspectives or insights into the
discussion based on reading or other experience, moving the discussion
forward or to another level of analysis, introducing innovative
alternatives and making connections between different parts of the
course sessions and materials.

If you feel that your contribution did not get a sufficient hearing in class
or if you are absent from a session, you are welcome to submit a page or
two on the session topic/issues (cf. all the readings assigned to the
session) to the teacher. These hard-copy hand-ins should be submitted at
the end of the course (cf. below). Please, apply the participation criteria
in the paragraph above. – Attendance is not mandatory, but it will affect
your participation grade.

Individual Project:

You will have a choice regarding the individual hand-in:

Either you should submit an individual management/organizational

project of your choice. This may be evaluating the management of an
international firm in the context of its strategy and organization or
discussing a managerial issue connected to a firm or an industry. If you
are uncertain as to the relevance of your chosen topic, please seek
advance approval from me. The intention is to have several sorts of
projects, but which are of an arm’s-length nature while still catering for
different learning interests. This course covers a wide range of topics and
can thus not sufficiently probe them all. This option offers you an
opportunity to do so or to pursue a related topic. - If your imagination
leaves you wanting, suggestions will be offered.

3
Or you could write a paper describing which issues you found most
interesting, or disturbing, or surprising during the course. It is supposed
to be a reflective document. In other words, you are writing a learning
journal, which only your teacher will read and grade. It is supposed to
give you an opportunity for personal reflection on your learning
experience.

In both cases the chosen hand-in should have a maximum of 3,500 words
and be in hard-copy format. Treat these as academic products and refer
to course material or any other material you feel is appropriate to support your
argument.

Take-Home Exam:

The final exam (maximum 5,000 words), which is meant to test what you
have learned during the entire course, will be handed out on Tuesday,
October 17. It may be completed individually or in a group of a maximum
of five course participants. - Detailed information about the exam will be
given during the course.

Delivery

All submissions (voluntary case & literature hand-ins, individual

project and take-home exam) should be delivered in separate
receptacles in hard-copy no later than Monday, November 13 (at
12:00 noon) at the Department of Marketing and Strategy,
Holländargatan 32, level 6). Use of course material is strongly
recommended (other relevant source material is, of course,
allowed and encouraged). For your own good (and mine), please,
structure your submissions and identify them clearly.

All grading will use Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Criteria, which is

appended for your convenience.

Literature

1.  Articles (on the course web under ‘literature’ or ‘downloads’) and
cases (also on the course web and some to be handed out – for
copyright reasons).
2.  Additional readings to be distributed in class.

4
Course and Teaching Staf

Tina Bengtsson, Course Administrator, Room C 628,

Holländargatan 32, Stockholm School of Economics, E-mail:
tina.bengtsson@hhs.se, Phone: 08-736 9530.

Peter Hagström, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of

Marketing and Strategy, Stockholm School of Economics, E-mail:
peter.hagstrom@hhs.se, Phone: 08-7369505; 070-2533932.

Welcome to the course!

/Peter

5
 SCHEDULE

Management in a Globalizing Economy (MGE)

N.B. Please, also see the course web for possible, up to date schedule and session changes.
It is most likely there will be changes. – Also, note that most sessions are ‘doubled’, i.e.
you can – in those cases – choose which session to attend.

MGE 1 Introduction to International Organization and Management

Mon 08-28
13:15-15:00
Room Torsten
& 15:15-17:00
Room: Torsten

MGE 2 Lecture: Organizing the MNC: The Local and the Global
Tue 08-29
13:15-15:00
Room: Torsten
& 15:15-17:00
Room: Torsten

Readings:
1. Perlmutter (1969), The Tortuous Evolution of the Multinational
Evolution, Columbia Journal of World Business, January-February,
pp. 9-18.
2. Hedlund (1986), The Hypermodern MNC – A Heterarchy?, Human
Resource Management, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 9-35.

MGE 3 Case: Philips versus Matsushita: A New Century, a New Round

Mon 09-04
13:15-15:00
Room: Torsten
& 15:15-17:00
Room: Torsten

Assignment:
1. Compare the historical strategies and structures pursued by Philips and
Matsushita. What factors account for the differences?
2. What are the key strategic and organizational challenges that each
company is currently facing?

Reading:

6
 1. Gupta & Govindarajan (2001), Converting Global Presence into
Global Competitive Advantage, The Academy of Management
Executive, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 45-58.

MGE 4 Case: Ingvar Kamprad and IKEA

Thu 13:15-15:00
Room: Torsten
& 15:15-17:00
Room: Torsten

Assignment:
1. How can we explain IKEA’s international success?
2. Evaluate IKEA´s internationalisation strategy.
3. Why the sudden problems in the US?

Readings:
1. Schumpeter (1942), The Process of Creative Destruction (excerpt)
2. Birkinshaw & Hood (2001), Unleash Innovation in Foreign
Subsidiaries, Harvard Business Review, March-April, pp. 3-8.

MGE 5 Case: Sr. Frango da Guia: Success or Failure in Brazil

Tue 09-12
13:15-15:00
Room: Torsten
& 15:15-17:00
Room: Torsten

Assignment:
1. How well prepared do you think Manuel Costa was for
internationalization?
2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the different options
Manuel Costa has to resolve the Brazilian situation?
3. What should Manuel Costa do now?

Readings:
1. Dawar & Frost (1999), Competing with Giants: Survival Strategies for
Local Companies in Emerging Markets, Harvard Business Review,
March-April, pp. 119-129.
2. Johansson & Vahlne (1977), The Internationalization Process of the
Firm – A Model of Knowledge Development and Increasing Foreign
Market Commitments, Journal of International Business Studies,
Spring/Summer, pp. 23-32.
3. Forsgren, M. and Hagstrom, P. (2001), Ignorant Internationalization?
The Uppsala Model and Internationalization Patterns for Internet-
Related Firms, Communications & Strategies, No. 42, 2nd Quarter,
pp. 209-224.
4. Staw (1981), The Escalation of Commitment to a Course of Action,
The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 6, No. 4, 577-587.

7
MGE 6 Which Multinational Corporation?
Thu 09-14 Case: House of Tata: Acquiring a Global Footprint
13:15-15:00
Room: Torsten
& 15:15-17:00
Room: Torsten

Assignment:
1. What is your assessment of the Tata Group operating companies?
2. What is your assessment of the role of Tata Group center in
‘globalization’?
3. Should Tata Motors’s bid for Ford’s Land Rover and Jaguar units?

Readings:
1. Tallman, S. & Fladmoe-Lindquist, K. (2002), Internationalization,
Globalization and Capability-Based Strategy, California Management
Review, Oct.
2. Grant, R. M. (1991), The Resource Based Theory of Competitive
Advantage: Implications for Strategy Formulation, California
Management Review, Vol. 33, Spring, pp. 114-135.
3. Khanna, T. & Palepu, K. G (2006), Emerging Giants:Building Wold-
Class Companies in Developing Countries, Harvard Business
Review, Oct.

MGE 7 Hybrid MNCs (Trading Firms)

Tue 09-19 Case: Li & Fung: Beyond “Filling in the Mosaic”, 1995-1998 (HBS
13:15-15:00 Case 9-398-092)
Room: 750
& 15:15-17:00
Room: 750

Assignment:
1. Why is Li & Fung so profitable?
2. What are the benefits of the Li & Fung matrix sourcing system?
3. What are the challenges the company faces going ahead and should it
expand?

Readings:
1. Magretta, J. (1998), Fast, Global, and Entrepreneurial: Supply Chain
Management, Hong Kong Style, Harvard Business Review, Sep-Oct, pp.
102-114.
2. Lovas, B. and Ghoshal, S. (2000), Strategy as Guided Evolution,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21, pp. 875-896.

MGE 8 Case: Nordea Markets: Socio-Cultural Integration Challenges

Thu 09-21

8
13:15-15:00
Room: Torsten
OR 15:15-17:00
Room: Torsten
Assignment:
1. What are the key issues in managing cultural integration? How do you
think Peter Nyegaard has succeeded?
2. What issues have apparently created internal confrontation in Nordea
Markets? What can Peter Nyegaard do to resolve conflicts and fight
against internal politics?
3. What do you see as the key future challenges for Nordea Markets?

Reading:
1. Birkinshaw, Bresman and Håkanson (2000), Managing the Post-
Acquisition Integration Process: How the Human Integration and the
Task Integration Processes Interact to Foster Integration, Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 395-425.

MGE 9 Case: Transforming Carlsberg into a Cosmopolitan Firm

Tue 09-26
15:15-17:00
Room: Torsten
& Fri 09-23
15:15-17:00
Room: Torsten
Assignment:
1. How much cultural integration between Carlsberg and Baltika is
desirable?
2. Which culture should prevail at Baltika?
3. How much time should the integration take?

Reading:
1. Larsson and Finkelstein (1999), Integrating Strategic, Organizational
and Human Resource Perspectives on Mergers and Acquisitions: A Case
Survey of Synergy Realization, Organization Science, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.
1-26.

MGE 10 Case: ING Insurance Asia/Pacific

Thu 09-28
13:15-15:00
Room: Torsten
& 15:15-17:00
Room: Torsten

Assignment:
1. As Jacques Kemp, what is your take of ING Insurance Asia/Pacific?
2. What kind of changes do you propose?
3. What major challenges are you likely to encounter in trying to
implement your changes?

Readings:

9
 1. Kaplan, R. & Norton, D. (2006), How to Implement a New Strategy
Without Disrupting Your Organization, Harvard Business Review, Mar,
pp. 100-109.
2. Verbeke, A. & Rugman, A. (2004), A Perspective on Regional and
Global strategies of Multinational Enterprises, Journal of International
Business Studies, Vol. 34, No. 6, pp. 3-18.

MGE 11 Case: Corruption in International Business (A)

Fri 09-29
13:15-15:00
Room: Ragnar
& 15:15-17:00
Room: Ragnar

Readings:
1. Brademas & Heimann (1998), Tackling International Corruption: No
Longer Taboo, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 77, No. 5, pp. 17-22.
2. Jones, G. & Gendron, A. (2005), In Search of Global Regulation,
Harvard Business School.

MGE 12 Case: Frans Rykkebosch: An International Manager (A)

Mon 10-02
13:15-15:00
Room: Ragnar
& 15:15-17:00
Room: Ragnar

Assignment:
1. What would you do if you were in Frans´s shoes?
2. From a Human Resource Management perspective, what should the
company do?

Readings:
1. Tung (1987), Expatriate Assignments: Enhancing Success and
Minimizing Failure, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 1,
No. 2, pp. 117-126.
2. Black & Gregersen (1999), The Right Way to Manage Expats,
Harvard Business Review, March-April, pp. 2- 8.

MGE 13 Case: Martha Goldberg Aronson: Leadership and Decisions at Mid-

Tue 10-03 Career
13:15-15:00
Room: Torsten
& 15:15-17:00
Room: Torsten

Assignment:

10
 1. Should Martha accept the overseas position? Why? Why not?
2. What similarities and dissimilarities between the corporate and
individual perspectives do you see when it comes to motivating
international assignments?
3. What responsibility does a firm have for an employee having a
‘reasonable’ work-life balance?

Reading:
. 1. Hill, L. (1998), Managing Your Career, Harvard Business School.
2. Bartolomé & Evans (1980), Must success cost so much?, Harvard
Business Review, March-April, , pp. 137-148.

MGE 14 International Human Resource Management (Visitor Ms. Karin Ersson-

Ekstam, Consultant & Former Human Resource Development Manager)
Thu 10-05
13:15-15:00
Room: Ragnar
OR 15:15-17:00
Room: Ragnar

Assignment:
Be prepared to ask questions regarding MNC human resource
management in general and, in particular, in the Swedish dairy
machinery producer DeLaval.

Reading:
1. www.delaval.com

MGE 15 Case: Governance and Sustainability at Nike (A) (Case: 9-313-146)

Wed 10-11
10:15-12:00
Room: Ragnar
& 13:15-15:00
Room: 750

Assignment:
1. How do you judge Nike’s way of of dealing with corporate
responsibility and sustainability issues?

Reading:
1. Case: Loblaw Inc. and Rana Plaza.

MGE 16 Cooperation between Business and NGOs (Visitor Mr. Mattias

Forsberg, Manager,Child Rights and Business)

11
Thu 10-12
13:15-15:00
Room: Torsten
OR 15:15-17:00
Room: 720

Reading:
1.www.savethechildren.se

MGE 17 Sum-Up, Evaluation and Exam Distribution

Tue 10-17
13:15-15:00
Room: Ragnar
&15:15-17:00
Room: Ragnar

MGE 18 Held in Reserve

Tue 10-17
13:15-15:00
Room: Ragnar
&15:15-17:00
Room: Ragnar

12