This practice is applied when a multinational company has the desire to integrate all its subsidiaries in an effort to meld the worldwide corporate culture. This strategy adopts the worldwide staff positions to the best recruited position (Mueller, 2001). The practice does not recognize the nationality of the staff as the headquarters, and the subsidiaries are worldwide integrated into a global corporate culture, which is highly unified and not dedicated to the headquarters. Its organizational structure is highly complex, and therefore, requires communication and integration across the borders greatly (Caligiuri & Stroh, 1995). The organization’s values are used by the company as the control strategy, which has the greatest amount of flexibility that accommodates the differences among the foreign cultures. Thus, the employees are able to integrate and internalize the values, behaviors and norms of the global company (Treven, 2001).
The global strategies that focus on the ability of the multinational companies to respond to the local conditions of the foreign environments, have been found to be successful in the global competitiveness. The geocentric strategy is the best to employ, due to its capability to incorporate the theoretical ideals. The satisfaction of the local representatives’ ideals at the cost of the global integration has been fulfilled by the polycentric and regiocentric strategies, and thus, can be placed to be the second best (Caligiuri & Stroh, 1995). The strategy of ethnocentric does not focus on the global integration and local representatives, as its focus is on the headquarters control, thus making it to be the least strategy to adopt. This strategy can lead to failure of the multinational companies, due to its inability to conform to the international cultures (Caligiuri & Stroh, 1995).