No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Familiarity and the Multinational Corporation in Latin America: Acceptance or Contempt?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2022
Extract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
One cannot help but ask, “Are international businesses, like the fabled Don Quixote, making dragons of windmills?” We have seen a great rise in international business investment. We have also seen a corresponding rise in business attempts to prevent an awareness by local nations of this increased foreign investment. The general feeling is that increased awareness will lead to greater resentment. The question, however, has not been directly asked: What happens to the evaluation of foreign firms in a specific setting in Latin America as the rate of foreign investment climbs and is more keenly perceived? In an attempt to determine if we are realistically assessing the situation in Latin America, a study was conducted in four Central American countries: El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. These countries were selected because they have been among the rapidly developing countries of Latin America since the formation of the Central American Common Market (CACM) in the early 1960s, receiving considerable foreign investment.
- Type
- Research Reports and Notes
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1977 by the University of Texas Press
References
Notes
1. Michael Z. Brooke and H. Lee Remmers, The Strategy of Multinational Enterprise, Organization, and Finance (New York: American Elsevier Publishing Co., Inc., 1970), p. 251.
2. Ibid., p. 252.
3. Sec for example, Richard W. Wright, “Is the Multinational Firm in Danger?,” Business Horizons, April 1971, pp. 31–34.
4. “Sales of foreign manufacturing affiliates of U.S. based MNC's rose from $23.6 billion in 1960 to $76.8 billion in 1970.” David W. Ewing, “MNC's on Trial,” Harvard Business Review, May/June 1972, p. 130. See, also, Robert C. Maddox, “Problems and Trends in Assigning Managers Overseas,” Personnel, January/February 1971, p. 54.
5. For a discussion of the evaluation of political risk, see Stefan H. Robock, “Political Risk: Identification and Assessment,” Columbia Journal of World Business, July-August 1971.
6. See, for example, Wolfgang G. Friedmann and Jean-Pierre Beguin, Joint International Business Ventures in Developing Countries (New York: Columbia University Press, 1971), p. 11.
7. “Managing the Multinationals,” The Economist, 31 October 1970, p. 55.
8. The Strategy of Multinational Enterprise, p. 272.
9. Robert C. Maddox, Wage Differences between United States and Guatemalan Industrial Firms in Guatemala, Studies in Latin American Business No. 10, Bureau of Business Research, Graduate School of Business (Austin: University of Texas, 1971), p. 3.
10. Ibid.
11. “Problems and Trends.”
12. Robert C. Maddox, “Cultural Attitudes: An Obstacle in the Managerial Training of Latin Americans by United States Firms,” Marquette Business Review, Winter 1964, p. 145.
13. Donald A. Fink, “The Role of the Multinational Corporation in the Economic Development Process,” MSU Business Topics, Autumn 1972, p. 62.
14. Richard A. Sandell and Owen T. Stebbins, “United States—Latin America: A Time for Reciprocity,” MSU Business Topics, Autumn 1972, p. 23.
15. Sherwood H. Peres, “Management Pitfalls to Avoid when Moving into Asia,” 1973 Proceedings of Southwest Division, Academy of Management, Division of Research, College of Business Administration (Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Louisiana State University, 1973), p. 129.
16. Lee C. Nehrt, J. Frederick Truitt, and Richard W. Wright, International Business Research: Past, Present, and Future (Indiana University: Bureau of Business Research, Graduate School of Business, 1970), p. 275.
17. Roberto de Oliveira Campos, “Multinational Enterprise—Friend or Foe to Latin America,” Interplay, March 1971, p. 38.
You have
Access