Framework library · International strategy
Integration-responsiveness framework
Every company that operates in several countries feels two pressures at once: to integrate activities across borders for scale, consistency and shared learning, and to respond to the differences between national markets. The framework rates each business or function on both, which shows that the right answer is rarely one model for the whole company: some activities belong at the centre, some in each country, and some need both.
Use it when
- You run businesses in several countries and the argument about what to centralise keeps recurring.
- A new group function, such as procurement, technology or product, is being set up and needs a remit that stops at the right line.
- Country managers and the centre disagree, and you want the disagreement on one page, activity by activity.
- You are expanding into new countries and want to choose an operating model before habits form.
Avoid it when
- You operate in one country. Use the McKinsey 7S framework or a business capability map for organisation questions at home.
- The question is how to adapt one product for one market. Use glocalisation strategy, which works element by element.
- You need to decide where activities are physically performed and by whom. Use global value chain configuration.
How to run it
Choose what to rate
Rate businesses, product lines or functions, not the whole company. The answer differs by activity, and that difference is what the framework is for.
Rate the pressure for global integration
High where scale economies, global customers, shared technology or a global competitor reward doing things one way everywhere. Score 1 to 5 from evidence, such as the share of cost that is scale-driven.
Rate the pressure for local responsiveness
High where customer needs, distribution, regulation or host governments differ by country. Licences, spectrum and consumer pricing usually score high.
Read the four cells
Global (integrate and standardise), multidomestic (let each country decide), transnational (integrate the core, adapt the edge) and international (little pressure either way; run from home and transfer what works).
Compare with how each is run today
The findings are the mismatches: an activity in the global cell run country by country, or a multidomestic one forced through a central process.
Decide what moves, and in what order
Pick the two or three mismatches that matter most and name who gains and who loses authority. Changes in organisation fail on the people more often than on the analysis.
Work through it
Answer the questions below, or load the worked example to see a finished one. The drawing updates as you type. Export the result as a PowerPoint deck, a Word document, an Excel workbook, a PDF or plain text.
What you type stays in this browser, so you can close the page and come back to it. It is not sent to Blue Prysm or anyone else, and the exports are made here, on your device. Privacy policy.
Mistakes to avoid
- Rating the whole company at once. A whole company tends to land in the transnational corner, which says nothing about what to change.
- Confusing pressure with preference. Rate what customers, competitors and regulators demand, not what the centre or the countries would like.
- Treating transnational as the target for everything. It is the hardest model to run; reserve it for activities that face both pressures strongly.
- Ignoring history. Bartlett and Ghoshal's point was that a company's administrative heritage limits how fast it can change, so plan the move over years, not in one reorganisation.
Where it comes from
Built on studies by C. K. Prahalad (1975) and Yves Doz (1976) and set out in Prahalad and Doz, The Multinational Mission: Balancing Local Demands and Global Vision (1987). Christopher Bartlett and Sumantra Ghoshal, in Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution (1989), used the two pressures to describe international, multinational, global and transnational companies. "Multidomestic" is a common name for the multinational type. Source.
Use it with
Work through it with us
The frameworks here are free to use as they stand. If you would rather work through the question behind this one with us, these are the ways an engagement starts.