**3. Part 2: technology strategy of multinational companies**

The globalization set pace for expansion of those who could sell their products and services around the globe. Netflix, Amazon, Google, Mondelez, Vodafone, McDonald and may such companies in diverse sectors established their businesses in multiple countries. Challenges are different now which result from different cultures, traditions, languages from customer service perspective and the compliance requirement from local regulations perspective. Geppert and Mayers [12] bring out the sociopolitical dimension of such organizations. All these became part and parcel of the technology strategy as well.

Two other very relevant factors, that technology strategists unaware of, came to fore viz. Social and Political environment. Adding these two:


**Figure 3** shows the factors that need to be considered while formulating technology strategy of multinational company. Do notice, in addition to technical, operational and economic aspects, socio-political dimension has been added as an intervening factor. I will discuss here additional two factors added above and then move onto the changes in other factors.

Operational considerations are influenced by social and political factors in a multinational company. They are crucial for a company having manufacturing and/or service centers in multiple countries and customers spread globally. The technology strategy of such a company is fundamentally different for a multinational organization from that of a national organization. I have discussed operational considerations further in Section 3.3.

#### **Figure 3.**

*Technology strategy of a multinational company.*

#### **3.1 Social factors**

Societies in different countries have different level of adoption to technology. As an example World Bank published Digital Adoption Index for 180 countries based on data available up to 2016. The Statista gives Digital Competitiveness Ranking for 2021 representing countries ability to adopt digital technologies. Having such information handy is helpful in deciding depth of technology that may be planned in certain countries.

Orlikowski [13] concluded many decades ago that the use of technology is ultimately depended on the users of technology and not on the designers of technology. Same technology may be deployed in completely different manner by one set of people than others. An excellent example may the use of intra-company chat systems. There are companies who have used it as a tool for solving complex technical issues with the collaboration of experts spread around the world, while others have used it only for social chat. Orlikwoski and Gash [14] talk about 'Technological Frames' that users develop. Their understanding and use of technology is influenced by their technological frames.

In the contemporary world the technology strategy of multinational company is invariably formulated in the parent company, as most other business/functional strategies. It is expected that the affiliate companies and business unit spread around the world accept and follow the strategy as mandate. The conflict originates in the expectation that people working in different cultures in the affiliate company would simply accept what is conveyed to them. In the real world many times the perceived impact creates dissatisfaction, also resulting in low motivation and lower morale. The head of such a far-away unit understands and raises it at a higher level of the parent management, which now turns out to be a political issue as well shown in **Figure 4**.

**Figure 4** shows the how a social factor can turn to be a political issue. It may be just the perception of people amongst the employees of affiliate company that may have to be overcome at political level. Orlikowski [15] brings out interpretive flexibility of technology. This allows people in affiliates to interpret social implications which the interest groups can shape into political issue quickly.

**Figure 4.** *Socio-political environment of a multinational company.*
