The investment motivation, strategy, and structure of Japanese manufacturing subsidiaries in the United States: An exploratory interview-based study

This dissertation is exploratory in nature and has three objectives: (1) to describe the investment motivation, strategy, and structure of Japanese manufacturing subsidiaries in the United States, (2) to compare the investment behavior, strategy, and structure of Japanese manufacturing subsidiaries in terms of their industry affiliation, size, and timing of entry into the United States, and (3) to explore possible relationships between the strategy and structure of Japanese manufacturing subsidiaries in the United States.;Data were collected from the author's personal interviews of thirty-six executives from twenty-seven Japanese manufacturing subsidiaries in the United States between December 1988 and February 1989. The sample companies had thirty-three plants in three industries: (1) transportation equipment, (2) electronics/electrical equipment, and (3) industrial/commercial machinery and computer equipment.;Some of the important findings of this study are as follows: (1) some of the most significant factors influencing the Japanese companies' decision to invest in the United States were the large U.S. market, currency fluctuation, the presence or threat of trade restrictions, and pressures from competitors or customers; (2) most of the sample companies emphasized production or sales growth, localization, and expansion or protection of market share in their goal setting; (3) most sample companies maintained multiple linkages with general management or functional departments, or both, in the parent company; and (4) the parent company relied upon personal control in overseeing the operations of their U.S. subsidiary.;The study found several important differences in the investment motivation, strategy, and structure of Japanese companies from different industries, and among companies of different sizes and ages. Both Chandler's thesis that "structure follows strategy," and Fayerweather's paradigm of "unification vs. fragmentation" offer useful paradigms to explain the relationships between some aspects of the sample companies' strategy and structure.