<i>In situ</i> dynamics of <scp>J</scp>apanese electronic subsidiaries in <scp>ASEAN</scp> countries: Reflections from a development perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper contributes to the theory of subsidiary evolution in multinational corporations through utilising a value chain approach. It assesses the changing activities of the branches of Japanese electronics firms located in Southeast Asia (the ASEAN region) since the 1997–1998 financial crisis. In the paper, we argue that a modest development of Japanese subsidiaries has occurred in this region during the past 10 years or so. We connect models of subsidiary development to Michael Porter's value chain in the results of a set of interviews with 37 managers in the factories, sales offices and regional headquarters of Japanese subsidiary companies located in Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand. We show that decentralisation of management functions from Japan occurred in both primary and support activities of the value chain. However, corporate long‐term research and development did not disperse to Southeast Asia and is unlikely to in the near future. The article interprets these results and highlights the need for further research relating to the evolving geography of Japanese electronics multinational corporations and their subsidiaries in Southeast Asia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".