TRENDS IN MANAGING THE CORPORATE INFRASTRUCTURE OF TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS

International Business: Research Teaching and Practice 2007 1(1) TRENDS IN MANAGING THE CORPORATE INFRASTRUCTURE OF TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS Robert Materna Department of Leadership, Management, and Technology, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Worldwide, 600 S. Clyde Morris Boulevard, Daytona Beach, FL 32114-3900 The purpose of this paper is to share findings from recent research on a major change that is occurring in the management of the modern enterprise with a focus on the implications for transnational corporations. The results presented in this paper are based, in part, on a much larger piece of research conducted by a leading professional association on the subject of Enabling Work in a Networked World. INTRODUCTION The subject of integrated corporate infrastructure management began to surface in the mid-1990s as progressive business leaders began seeking new ways to reduce costs and improve the responsiveness and efficiency of their firms (Materna and Parker, 1998). The topic is so new that neither researchers nor practitioners have been able to agree on a label, but the essence of the concept revolves around the need to integrate, streamline, and align the management of the corporate infrastructure with the continuously changing business needs of the enterprise (Robertson, 1999; Bell and Joroff, 2001). In most corporations, this refers to the systematic and integrated management of the non-core activities of the firm s value chain that typically include Human Resources (HR), Information Technology (IT), Corporate Real Estate (CRE), and other functions such as Finance, Legal, or Administrative Services depending on the nature of the enterprise (Ellzey, Valenziano, Materna, Dunn, Kurtz and Zimmerman, 2004). This concept is graphically illustrated in Figure 1. Telephone: (770) 722-4923 Email: rmaterna@mindspring.com 119

R. Materna Managing Transnational Corporate Infrastructure HR IT CRE Other Services (Finance, Legal, Administration, etc.) Figure 1. Integrated Corporate Infrastructure Management At first glance, this may appear to be a somewhat trivial issue compared to other challenges facing transnational corporations but the implications are significant. The purpose of this paper is to present a summary of findings from the research and explore the implications of these findings for the management of the infrastructure for transnational corporations. BUSINESS RATIONALE The business rationale for exploring new and better ways to manage the corporate infrastructure is grounded in the need for the step-level improvements in corporate performance that are being demanded by CEOs, stockholders, and other enterprise stakeholders. Indeed, more than one business leader has suggested that this may be one of the newest sources of competitive advantage for those firms that are willing to embrace the magnitude of change required to implement this concept. But when proposing changes that might be truly disruptive it is fair to pose the questions why now, what s different, and what is the business rationale? (Christensen, 1997; Christensen and Raynor, 2003) Some of the changes in the business environment that are new and different for corporations in today s world include: First, and perhaps most importantly, is the fact that the globalization of business is no longer ad hoc or theoretical. It is real, pervasive, and changing the nature of competition and the structure of industries around the world. 120

International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice 2007 1(1) Second, in most transnational corporations, almost all of the firm s key processes have now been web-enabled. When coupled with the capabilities of today s knowledge management systems, many senior executives now have access to the information they need, when and where they need it, to assist them in making almost real-time adjustments to the enterprise. Third, the nature of work itself is changing. As has been well documented, there is a massive change occurring where the focus on physical labor is shifting to a focus on knowledge work. This has huge implications for where and how work can be done and the type of infrastructure that is required to support such changes. Somewhat related is the fact that the workforce itself is changing and corporations can more readily scan the globe for the full-time, part-time, or freeagent talent they need. Fourth, because of many of the changes noted above, there has been significant growth in both outsourcing and offshoring. These changes affect not only the corporation itself, but the infrastructure and processes of their partners that must, in turn, also be aligned and integrated with the clients they serve. Fifth, there has been a steady shift in focus from just looking at financials, to a focus on multiple measures of performance using balanced scorecards and other similar techniques. Also, the emerging importance of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), transparency, and sustainable development is finally entering the mainstream as major corporations around the world acknowledge its importance. Sixth, as the rate of change continues to accelerate, the importance of flexibility has increased, resulting in the need for corporations to be able to more readily enter and exit markets, develop new products, open or close facilities, redeploy people, or reconfigure their supply chains to meet the needs of a continuously changing market. Finally, following 9/11, workplace security and disaster recovery have surfaced as major issues for firms operating around the world. These factors, in turn, have stimulated interest in the need for more robust and global infrastructuredependent business continuity solutions. Taken together, all of these factors are creating new opportunities for thoughtful leaders to reexamine the roles and capabilities of their infrastructure in reducing costs, improving time-to-market, stimulating innovation, accessing new talent, reducing redundancies, improving productivity, and managing business continuity across the enterprise. RESEARCH M ETHODOLOGY The results presented here are part of a much larger multi-year research program conducted by CoreNet Global, the world's premier association for corporate real estate and related professionals. More specifically, the research was designed and managed by the CoreNet Global Learning Foundation, a non-profit organization established to 121

R. Materna Managing Transnational Corporate Infrastructure conduct research and deliver learning programs on behalf of CoreNet Global. The formal title of the program was Corporate Real Estate 2010: Enabling Work in a Networked World: A Research and Leadership Development Program for Corporate Real Estate and Infrastructure Management Professionals. The focus and theme of the overall research initiative was on Enabling Work in a Networked World where the program was developed and launched for the purpose of transforming the manner in which corporate real estate and other elements of the infrastructure are managed in large corporations. Within the program, the following eight major research topics were identified: the Changing Nature of Work and the Workplace; the Strategic Role of Place; Asset Management and Portfolio Optimization; Integrated Corporate Infrastructure Management; New Models for Service Delivery and the Transformation of the Service Provider Industry; the Role of Technology and the Web; Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility; and Enterprise Leadership, which addressed the skills and competencies for successful corporate real estate and infrastructure leaders. For the purpose of this paper, the focus is on one of the eight topics listed above; the evolving discipline of integrated corporate infrastructure management and the implications for transnational corporations. Overall Research Process The process began in early 2003 when several members of the CoreNet Global staff met to define the problem explicitly. The problem, in this case, was that changes in globalization, technology, the nature of work, and other factors were (and still are) forcing firms to adopt new business models to maintain or increase their competitiveness. Thus, the research challenge was to develop a rigorous method for capturing the impact of the changes on the enterprise and systematically documenting how leading firms are dealing with the problem of redefining themselves to cope more effectively with the changing business environment. Figure 2 illustrates key steps in the overall research process. Once the problem was defined, the next step was to review existing literature and findings obtained from years of Discovery Forums and discussions with industry leaders around the world. Discovery Forums represent another somewhat unique form of research that was developed by the CoreNet Global Learning Foundation to explore and document trends and best practices in industry. These forums are invitation-only events of 25 to 30 professionals that engaged in facilitated peer-to-peer learning and Problem Defined Industry Background Vision Research for 2010 Conducted Drafted Research Propositions Interviews with Industry & Structured Leaders & Leading Industry Findings Organizational Reports Interview Content Practices & Survey Validated Readiness & Guides Experts Case Studies Prepared & with Industry Diagnostics Presentations Developed Conducted Documented Administered Leaders Prepared Delivered Figure 2. Key Steps in the Overall Research Process 122

International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice 2007 1(1) events of 25 to 30 professionals that engage in facilitated peer-to-peer learning and knowledge sharing in a safe environment. Over 40 forums had been held in North America, Europe and Asia at the time this article was being written. Based on the information collected, CoreNet Global then created research teams to address each of the eight topics noted above. Once the teams were formed, the next key step was to create a common vision for what corporate real estate management might look like in 2010. This document, The Vision: Enabling Work in a Networked World, listed the major factors driving change in corporations, the anticipated characteristics of a successful enterprise in 2010, and described, in some detail, each of the eight research areas (Materna, 2003). In retrospect, this paper served two particularly important roles. First, it was an effective way to communicate the various forces driving change in industry but, perhaps even more important, it provided a critical foundation for insuring that the eight research teams were working toward a common and collaborative vision. Using The Vision as a baseline, each research team developed a number of research propositions to explore by interviewing selected leaders across different industry sectors. Following the interviews, each team then documented its findings using a number of case studies to illustrate key points. This information was, in turn, validated by thought-leaders at an Industry Leader Roundtable held in Tampa, Florida, in late 2003. Using these findings CoreNet Global hired The Gallup Organization to conduct a survey of corporate real estate professionals and infrastructure leaders in major corporations. These results were reviewed at yet another meeting of the research teams in Dallas in early 2004. CoreNet Global then developed organizational readiness diagnostics for each area to assist leaders in evaluating the readiness of their corporate real estate and infrastructure functions and has since published a series of reports to document the findings of the research teams in each area. Overall Research Proposition The overall research proposition for the team that addressed the integrated management of the infrastructure was as follows: Integrated corporate infrastructure management (ICIM) will be a key source of competitive advantage for leading firms in 2010. To explore this premise in more depth, a number of more specific research propositions were developed. Specific Research Propositions The research propositions were labeled big bets by the research team to reinforce the fact that the issues being explored have the potential to radically transform how companies allocate and manage their resources as well as how they execute their key business strategies. The term big bet was borrowed from Sun Microsystems, which has periodically used the phrase to describe major changes in strategy at Sun. The five propositions developed by the ICIM research team proposed that, by 2010: P 1 : ICIM will be accepted as a best practice by leading multinational corporations. 123

R. Materna Managing Transnational Corporate Infrastructure P 2 : ICIM will be implemented in different ways in different companies resulting in a spectrum of solutions that range from formal organizational structures to the management of service providers that offer integrated solutions. P 3 : Successful ICIM programs will be characterized by a common vision, common frameworks for evaluating investments, common business processes, a customer service orientation, well-defined points of interface with other corporate functions, and common models for managing the performance of the infrastructure. P4: The adoption of ICIM, combined with a continued focus on core competencies, will result in a further blurring of lines between the enterprise and its supply chain resulting in service partners managing significant portions of the firm s integrated infrastructure. P5: Trends towards ICIM will result in major changes to the service provider industry. Firms Interviewed In an attempt to gather information across a broad cross-section of industries, interviews were conducted with senior corporate real estate and infrastructure managers at American Express, Bank of America, Capital One, CIGNA, Cisco Systems, Dow Chemical, FleetBoston Financial, Ford Land, General Services Administration, Herman Miller, Hewlett Packard, Humana, JP Morgan Chase, McKesson, Microsoft, Nokia, Nortel Networks, Northern Trust, Sabre Holdings, Procter and Gamble, Sun Microsystems, The Hartford, The St. Paul Companies, and United Technologies. As discussed in the following section, the results from this process were used to develop a broader survey of North American and European professionals. The Gallup Survey Based on feedback from the research teams, CoreNet Global and the teams thought that a broader survey of the industry was needed. As a result, in late 2003 CoreNet Global hired The Gallup Organization to assist in conducting a survey of CoreNet Global corporate members and other professionals on key topics related to enabling work in a networked world. A total of 2917 e-mail invitations were sent with 314 individuals completing the survey resulting in an 11 percent response rate. For a web-based survey that included 31 questions with multiple parts, experts have stated that this was a good response rate and above industry averages for surveys of this type. SELECTED FINDINGS As abstract as some of these ideas might seem to those who have not been involved, the research team found that large multinationals such as Bank of America, Sun Microsystems, JPMorgan Chase, Nortel, Nokia, Procter and Gamble and many 124

International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice 2007 1(1) others are already experimenting with different ways to improve and streamline the management of their corporate infrastructures. RESPONSE TO RESEARCH PROPOSITIONS Based on the information obtained from the structured interviews and the Gallup survey, the research team found substantial support for each research proposition. To enhance readability, each proposition is repeated, followed by a brief discussion of the findings. P 1 : ICIM will be accepted as a best practice by leading multinational corporations. The research team was somewhat surprised by how readily industry leaders seem to accept the idea that ICIM would be accepted as an industry best practice by 2010. As indicated in Figure 3, this was validated by the Gallup survey which revealed that 67 percent of the 308 leaders and managers who responded to the question agreed that integrated corporate infrastructure management will be accepted as an industry best practice by 2010. Another 10 percent neither agreed nor disagreed. 23% 10% 67% N = 308 Strongly Agree or Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree or Strongly Disagree Figure 3. ICIM as Industry Best Practice by 2010 The resarch team was also surprised by the fact that even though the sample size is limited, the European respondents seem to feel even more strongly about this concept than their US counterparts. These results are illustrated in Figure 4. 125

R. Materna Managing Transnational Corporate Infrastructure Percent of Respondents 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 7 3 Strongly Disagree 16 6 Somewhat Disagree 10 8 Neither Agree or Disagree 47 40 Somewhat Agree 36 27 Strongly Agree N = 240/36 US Europe Figure 4. A Comparison of US and European Attitudes towards ICIM as a Best Practice P 2 : ICIM will be implemented in different ways in different companies resulting in a spectrum of solutions that range from formal organizational structures to the management of service providers that offer integrated solutions. Based on research conducted to-date, there is strong evidence to support the fact that even though similar corporations in similar industries may have similar visions, the migration path for getting from where they currently are to where they want to be can be substantially different. However, as more interviews were conducted, it began to appear as though firms and their infrastructures could be classified according to the extent to which corporate functions were independent, centralized, integrated and optimized. In some firms there is very little cross-functional integration while, in others, integration occurs at the project level through the use of cross-functional project teams. There are also a small number of firms that seem to have embraced this as a core part of a strategy to boost productivity, accelerate time-to-market, achieve higher levels of business continuity, or meet other business goals. P 3 : Successful ICIM programs will be characterized by a common vision, common frameworks for evaluating investments, common business processes, a customer service orientation, well-defined points of interface with other corporate functions, and common models for managing the performance of the infrastructure. As noted above, even though firms in similar industries can have similar visions for what they want to accomplish with their infrastructures, the manner in which this is carried out can be substantially different depending on the culture and needs of the organization. Based on the research conducted by CoreNet Global, the greatest benefits seem to occur if the senior leaders of the corporate functions can develop a common vision for the role of the infrastructure followed by the implementation of common, or at least well integrated sets of strategies for dealing with customers, justifying shared investments, and reliably measuring and managing the performance of the 126

International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice 2007 1(1) infrastructure. However, it should also be noted that significant benefits can also be realized through the integrated management of HR, IT, CRE and other activities at the project level, although the benefits will not be as great. P 4 : The adoption of ICIM, combined with a continued focus on core competencies, will result in a further blurring of lines between the enterprise and its supply chain resulting in service partners managing significant portions of the firm s integrated infrastructure. There was also evidence to suggest that the trend towards the outsourcing of major non-core functions may increase by 2010. This phenomenon is often referred to as Business Process Outsourcing or BPO. When asked whether they thought that major elements of the infrastructure could be outsourced to partners that are not part of the formal organizational structure by 2010, the results are summarized in Figure 5. Once again, even though the sample size is limited, the percent of European respondents who stated that they somewhat agree or strongly agree with this statement was greater than their US counterparts. Percent of Respondents 60 50 40 30 20 10 3 3 18 10 9 7 48 40 40 22 0 Strongly Disagree Somewhat Disagree Neither Agree or Disagree Somewhat Agree Strongly Agree N = 192/30 US Europe Figure 5. A Comparison of US and European Attitudes towards the Outsourcing of Major Portions of the Infrastructure The research team also felt that as the outsourcing of major infrastructure functions increases, it is likely that firms will align themselves with partners that can offer increasingly integrated solutions on a global basis. After discussing this issue with senior people from a large number of corporations, in the opinion of the research team, the question is no longer if but when highly capitalized new entrants will begin to appear to meet these market needs. 127

R. Materna Managing Transnational Corporate Infrastructure P 5 : Trends towards ICIM will result in major changes to the service provider industry. As suggested in the paragraph above, one of the propositions posited by the research team was that demand for integrated services is going to drive major changes in service provider industries. When asked to rate the extent to which corporate decisions to integrate their infrastructures will force service providers to integrate their offerings in a corresponding way by 2010, both US and European respondents overwhelming agreed that major changes are likely (See Figure 6). Percent of Respondents 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 8 3 Strongly Disagree 13 11 Somewhat Disagree 16 6 Neither Agree or Disagree 60 44 Somewhat Agree 20 20 Strongly Agree N = 224/35 US Europe Figure 6. A Comparison of US and European Attitudes on the Impact of ICIM on Service Providers To respond to what is being suggested here, existing providers and new entrants will be expected to be more strategic, able to leverage their experience and best practices from other clients, and offer a full range of integrated solutions on a regional or global basis using alliances where necessary. To offer integrated services of this scope will require significant investments in people with the right talent and experience; information systems that are able to track and manage resources for their clients; and facilities that are located in the primary markets being served. IMPLICATIONS FOR TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS If one accepts Bartlett and Ghoshal s premise that one of the primary roles of a transnational corporation is to leverage economies of scale in developing products and services for global markets while retaining local responsiveness, the importance of the corporate infrastructure becomes readily apparent (Bartlett and Ghoshal, 1988, 1992a, 1992b). In fact, the corporate infrastructure of the modern corporation touches almost every activity associated with where to locate RandD centers, manufacturing sites, major distribution facilities, retail outlets, and even call centers. It also affects the firm s ability to share information; develop new products; leverage the talent of its global workforce; and optimize the performance of its global supply chain to meet the needs of customers 128

International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice 2007 1(1) in different local or regional markets. In short, the firm s corporate infrastructure is one of those necessary but not sufficient capabilities that enable a firm to execute its core business strategies. In today s global environment, it also raises anew many of the questions that have traditionally been faced by international or global corporations, i.e., the need to insure that their physical, human, and electronic infrastructures are capable of supporting the business needs of the enterprise. According to Bartlett and Ghoshal, transnational corporations need to focus on building three distinct capabilities: global scale efficiencies and competitiveness; national-level responsiveness and flexibility; and the ability to leverage knowledge and learning across markets on a worldwide basis. But to achieve this in complex organizations, the infrastructure must be strategically aligned, integrated across functions, and systematically deployed to provide these capabilities. Aligned with Corporate and Business Unit Strategies One of the keys to being able to achieve step-level improvements in performance is the need to build and sustain alignment between the infrastructure and the business goals and strategies of the enterprise. Key steps include understanding the business of the business; building a business case that captures both the financial and non-financial costs and benefits of any required investments; securing executive support to implement any changes required; putting the people, processes, and systems in-place to measure the performance of the infrastructure and maintain alignment; and leveraging the knowledge capital, cost savings, speed, and other synergies that can be obtained by deploying integrated infrastructure solutions across a global platform. Integrated Across Functions In addition to alignment with the business needs of the corporation, the corporate infrastructure must also be internally integrated across functions. Indeed, as suggested by Kim, Park and Prescott (2003), global integration in transnational corporations can only be achieved through the use of organizational mechanisms for coordination and control. However, even though higher levels of integration are certainly needed across Finance, IT, HR, Corporate Real Estate and other areas, there are also certain tasks that will remain unique to each function. Preliminary evidence suggests that the key is to define a common vision for the role of the infrastructure and a consistent set of integrated strategies for delivering services to the firm s internal and external customers. Approaches for achieving this range from the use of cross-functional teams to address ad hoc needs, to the creation of managerial councils which oversee strategic infrastructure initiatives, and regular discussions in the C-suite (the CEO, CIO, COO, CFO, etc.) that address the desired role and capabilities of the infrastructure. Deployed to Support the Geographical Needs of the Enterprise The challenge here is to offer integrated infrastructure solutions designed and deployed to support the global, regional, and local needs of the enterprise. Many years ago, Heenan, Perlmutter, Chakravarthy and others suggested that corporate activities such as marketing, manufacturing, human resources, finance, and other areas need to be 129

R. Materna Managing Transnational Corporate Infrastructure aligned with the international strategies of the corporation. Fortunately, they also provided us with some useful frameworks for thinking about how to ensure that the firm s strategies and supporting services are aligned and deployed in a consistent and optimal manner (Perlmutter, 1969; Heenan and Perlmutter, 1979; Chakravarthy and Perlmutter, 1985; Perlmutter and Heenan, 1986). Although the EPRG model was formally introduced in 1969, it remains a relevant and useful tool for thinking about how to align the firm s resources, systems, and processes with the geographical strategies of the corporation. Building on the work of Perlmutter, Heenan and Chakravarthy, Table 1 highlights how the EPRG typology can be applied to assist decision-makers in evaluating their current and desired approach for managing their international operations. Observers will note, however, that there is one substantial difference between this model and what has previously been published in this area. Arrows have been added to reinforce the need for higher levels of integration across the firm s corporate infrastructure functions to insure that decisions to deploy infrastructure resources are not sub-optimized, or are at least made with the full realization that different international strategies are being used for different elements of the infrastructure. Given the trend toward outsourcing discussed earlier, one concern is that while outsourcing may provide substantial benefits at the functional level, many of the synergistic benefits of a fully integrated infrastructure can be lost if major elements of the infrastructure are not cross-functionally integrated and deployed to support the same EPRG profile (or hybrid profile) of the enterprise. Figure 7 graphically illustrates how gaps can be created if elements of the infrastructure have different EPRG profiles. In some situations, the firm may choose to design and deploy some functions differently to support specific goals, but such situations must be managed in order to avoid sub-optimizing the overall configuration and management of the firm s infrastructure resources. In the figure below, the firm has chosen to adopt a regiocentric approach towards its infrastructure, but its financial strategies, administrative policies and HR strategies still reflect the ethnocentric views of the parent and are not aligned with the regiocentric strategies, systems, and processes that have been deployed within the Corporate Real Estate and IT functions. CONCLUSIONS Developing effective, efficient, and highly integrated infrastructure solutions has the potential to challenge some of our most commonly accepted theories about factors that influence the success or failure of transnational corporations. Today s business environment demands new thinking about how to support the global needs of the enterprise and integrated corporate infrastructure management may be one of the keys in determining the success or failure of transnational firms in the future. 130

International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice 2007 1(1) 131

R. Materna Managing Transnational Corporate Infrastructure Real Estate and Workplace Strategies IT Strategies HR Strategies Financial Strategies Administrative Policies Global (G) Regional (R) Multi-Domestic (P) Domestic (E) Current Profile Preferred Profile Figure 7. Using the EPRG Model to Design and Configure the Corporate Infrastructure SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS This research was designed to be primarily case-based, supplemented by a broader survey of managers across key geographic regions and industry sectors. Due to time and resource constraints, it was not possible to test all of the propositions as formal research hypotheses from all of the research teams across all geographic regions and industries. Nor was it possible to conduct all of the interviews needed to address in detail the impact of integrated corporate infrastructure management across all of the functions that comprise the corporate infrastructure. Even though an attempt was made to interview people in different functions, in reality, most of the people interviewed and who responded to the survey were, or had been, corporate real estate executives. As a result, even though over 200 interviews with industry leaders were conducted in less than six months and a substantial amount of information was obtained from the survey, the responses presented in this paper must be assumed to be biased in favor of that particular discipline. To obtain a more complete picture of the true state of infrastructure management in larger corporations, more work needs to be done. 132

International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice 2007 1(1) AREAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH Although the research to-date suggests that this is a promising new area for improving the competitiveness of transnational corporations, more study is required to fully understand many of the complex issues involved. Some of the areas that need more work include: Exploring differences, if any, between the perceived need for higher levels of integration across corporate functions. Such work should examine this issue across different industry sectors, countries, and geographical regions. Identifying different approaches for implementing and managing crossfunctional integrated solutions, and the key steps and governance models involved. Identifying and documenting examples of how firms are justifying the crossfunctional investments that are often necessary to achieve the step-level benefits in innovation, time-to-market, employee satisfaction, and cost reduction that are possible through integrated corporate infrastructure management. Developing models that can more effectively predict the optimal configuration of the corporate infrastructure under different business conditions. Assessing the impact of ICIM on service provider firms and industries. As companies continue to outsource their non-core functions, it is clear that, at some point, firms are going to start asking for one stop shopping. In other words, in the not-to-distant future, progressive firms will be looking for service providers, or networks of providers, that can deliver fully integrated infrastructure solutions that are designed to meet the needs of transnational corporations on a global basis. REFERENCES Bartlett, C. & Ghoshal, S. (1988) Organizing for worldwide effectiveness: The transnational solution, California Management Review, 31(1): 54-74. Bartlett, C. & Ghoshal, S. (1992) What is a global manager?, Harvard Business Review, 70(5): 124-132. Bartlett, C. & Ghoshal, S. (1992) Transnational Management, Irwin: Homewood, Illinois. Bell, M. & Joroff, M. (2001) The Agile Workplace: Supporting People and Their Work, Gartner and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Chakravarthy, B. & Perlmutter, H. (1985) Strategic planning for a global business, The Columbia Journal of World Business, 20(2): 3-10. Christensen, C. (1997) The Innovator s Dilemma, Harvard Business School Press: Boston, Massachusetts. Christensen, C. & Raynor, M. (2003) The Innovator s Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth, Harvard Business School Press: Boston, Massachusetts. 133

R. Materna Managing Transnational Corporate Infrastructure Ellzey, F., Valenziano, S., Materna, R., Dunn, D., Kurtz, T. & Zimmerman, C. (2004) Corporate Real Estate 2010: Integrated Resource and Infrastructure Solutions, CoreNet Global: Atlanta, Georgia. Heenan, D. & Perlmutter, H. (1979) Multinational Organization Development, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company: Reading, Massachusetts. Kim, K., Park, J.H. & Prescott, J.E. (2003) The global integration of business functions: A study of multinational businesses in integrated industries, Journal of International Business Studies, 34(4): 327-344. Materna, R. (2003) The Vision. Enabling Work in a Networked World: A Collaborative Vision of the Role of Corporate Real Estate in 2010, CoreNet Global: Atlanta, Georgia. Materna, R. & Parker. J. (1988) Corporate Infrastructure Resource Management: An Emerging Source of Competitive Advantage, (Research Bulletin, No. 22) The IDRC Foundation: Norcross, Georgia. Perlmutter, H. (1969) The tortuous evolution of the multinational corporation, Columbia Journal of World Business, 4: 9-18. Perlmutter, H. & Heenan, D. (1986) Cooperate to compete globally, Harvard Business Review, 64(2): 136-152. Robertson, K. (1999) Work Transformation: Planning and Implementing the New Workplace, HNB Publishing: New York. 134