Subsidiaries’ behavioural responses to volatile local contexts in emerging African markets: evidence from Nigeria

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to explore subsidiaries’ behavioural responses to volatile institutional pressures in the local context of the emerging Nigerian market.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors built on institutional and contingency theory to analyse previous literature on developed markets and apply it to African contexts. The authors used a context-specific volatile local context model to show how porous formal and strong informal institutions constitute international business (IB) as a contested terrain in the host country. The authors also used a qualitative methodology, involving multiple actors, to investigate this phenomenon in practice.

Findings

The findings indicated different types of institutional pressures shaping volatile local contexts, which together or separately impact subsidiaries, depending on their degree of exposure. Subsidiaries behaviourally respond to cope with these pressures through inclusive negotiations involving their home and host countries’ networks.

Originality/value

Previous research has imposed developed markets’ norms on emerging African markets, regardless of their volatility. As subsidiaries’ responses to local contexts in emerging African markets are poorly understood, the authors developed a volatile local context model, showing how IB becomes a contested terrain in host countries and the authors proposed a model that differentiates between informal institutions. The authors highlighted the impact of contextual pressures on subsidiaries, according to their levels of exposure to the local context. The authors concluded that committed alignment with a local context is necessary for presenting an effective contingent response to its volatilities.

Citation

Ahworegba, A.H., Garri, M. and Estay, C. (2022), "Subsidiaries’ behavioural responses to volatile local contexts in emerging African markets: evidence from Nigeria", Multinational Business Review, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 364-387. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBR-06-2020-0138