Search results

The purpose of this paper is to analyze corporate scope decisions in acquisitions with a focus on the relationship between target country unfamiliarity and acquirer-to-target relatedness and on the moderating effects played by product diversification and international experience.

Using a dataset of 689 acquisitions completed in the period 2007-2013 by acquirers located in 60 countries, this paper utilizes an ordered logistic regression analysis.

With greater target country unfamiliarity, acquirers are encouraged to pursue greater acquirer-to-target relatedness. This finding suggests that acquirers tend to seek a balance between product and international diversification to reduce the sources of uncertainty in their acquisition moves. While past international experience strengthens this relationship, diversification experience has a negative moderating effect and hence encourages acquirers to reduce relatedness at increasing market unfamiliarity.

The originality of this paper is twofold. First, the authors extend the traditional internationalization-diversification framework to an unfamiliarity-relatedness relationship in the context of acquisitions. Second, the authors propose a construct of target country unfamiliarity in acquisitions that goes beyond the traditional domestic vs cross-border dichotomy by including previous experience in the target country.

The costs of doing business abroad (CDBA) is a well-known concept in the international business literature, measuring the disadvantages or additional costs borne by multinational enterprises (MNEs) that are not borne by local firms in a host country. Recently, international management scholars have introduced a second concept, liability of foreignness (LOF). There is confusion in the two literatures as to the relationship between CBDA and LOF, as evidenced in a recent special issue on liability of foreignness (Journal of International Management, 2002). We argue that LOF stresses the social costs of doing business abroad, whereas CDBA includes both economic and social costs. The social costs arise from the unfamiliarity, relational, and discriminatory hazards that foreign firms face over and above those faced by local firms in the host country. Because the economic costs are well understood and can be anticipated, LOF becomes the core strategic issue for MNE managers. We argue that the key driver behind LOF is the institutional distance (cognitive, normative, and regulatory) between the home and host countries, and explore the ways in which institutional distance can affect LOF. We operationalize our arguments by showing how institutional distance and liability of foreignness can provide an alternative explanation for the MNE’s ownership strategy when going abroad.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an in‐depth examination of country‐of‐origin (COO) perceptions of consumers in a multinational setting. It shows how explanatory factors like demographics, familiarity with a country's products, purchase behaviour and psychological variables jointly work to explain consumers' COO perceptions.

This is a quantitative study using a drop‐off and pick‐up survey among three samples of consumers in Canada, Morocco and Taiwan. The final sample size was comprised of 506 male consumers. The data were analyzed using factor analysis to group countries of origin and analyses of variance to relate COO perceptions to the explanatory variables.

The familiarity with products made in a country was the strongest predictor of country perceptions, followed by nationality and the manufacturing process and product complexity dimensions of country evaluation. Canadians had the highest propensity to distinguish between countries of origin on the basis of product technological complexity and manufacturing dimensions and Moroccans the least. Taiwanese appeared to show animosity towards China.

The study used an only‐male sample from a limited number of countries. Future research should seek to develop a multi‐dimensional scale for the familiarity construct. They should also explore the concept of consumer capacity to distinguish between COOs. Cross‐national studies using cognitive style scales should be carried out. A qualitative examination of Taiwanese's COO perceptions is also recommended.

It seems important to increase consumers' familiarity with a COO and its products to improve its overall perception. Products made in Latin American countries have the lowest level of familiarity in general. Thus, increasing familiarity with their products is particularly important to achieve export success.

This study contributes to the marketing and international business literatures and provides insights to international marketers by bringing valuable information that can help make decisions as to where to manufacture and how to promote global products. It provides guidance as to what types of nations are likely to require multi‐dimensional information about countries of origin.

This paper aims to apply the Capital Market Liability of Foreignness (CMLOF) framework to the audit fees of a sample of foreign firms listed on US exchanges to examine whether American auditors price foreignness.

The four components of the CMLOF are institutional distance (civil versus common law system and enforcement), information asymmetry (disclosures and mandatory IFRS adoption), unfamiliarity (exports, English language and geographical distance) and cultural difference [Hofstede (1980) dimensions of culture]. These variables are examined in a regression model that explains audit fees to determine the auditor perception of risk associated with the CMLOF.

Examining the factors that mitigate perceived agency costs, this investigation determines that auditors price risk according to each component of the liability of foreignness. Audit fees are higher for shareholders of firms headquartered in countries exhibiting greater institutional distance, unfamiliarity and cultural distance. Audit fees are higher for firms when their home country requires additional disclosures or the adoption of IFRS to reduce information asymmetry.

CMLOF is costly for capital market participants and has implications for auditors, shareholders of foreign firms and managers considering listing in the US Auditors, and investors should carefully assess this risk for pricing and valuation, and managers should take action, to the extent possible, to reduce the firm-specific level of unfamiliarity and increase transparency.

This paper is the first to apply the CMLOF to examine whether auditors price aspects of foreignness of their non-US-headquartered clients.

Emerging-market multinational companies (EMNCs) utilize cross-border merger and acquisitions (M&As) to acquire strategic assets that compensate for their resource deficiencies. Therefore, developed markets have become important destinations for EMNCs. Institutional distance constitutes a major source of competitive disadvantage for foreign firms competing with indigenous firms. The purpose of this paper is to examine the ownership pattern of cross-border M&As in the USA, and determine if EMNCs respond to institutional distance differently than advanced-market multinational companies (AMNCs).

Based on the extant literature in institutional theory as well as internationalization strategy, a quantitative study was carried out. Hypotheses were proposed and tested using fixed effects panel regressions.

This paper finds that both AMNCs and EMNCs take smaller ownership positions when there is greater cognitive and normative distance. The negative association is stronger for AMNCs than for EMNCs. Further, the larger the regulative distance in the positive direction, meaning a higher level of development in the host market than in the home market, the more AMNCs and EMNCs are led to opt for a higher ownership position, with EMNCs being less influenced by regulative distance.

Though findings are robust and stable, this study is limited to observations that only have US target firms.

By integrating the literature from institutional theory and strategy, this paper offers a clearer understanding and distinction of the acquisition decisions made by EMNCs and AMNCs.

In developed markets, emerging market multinational enterprises (EMNEs) seem to be more discriminated by host country nationals than foreign developed market multinational enterprises (DMNEs). They are challenged with host country nationals’ prejudices and face a stigma of being from emerging markets. While literature agrees that EMNEs suffer from additional disadvantages due to their country-of-origin, research fails to identify those factors that may lead to a higher discrimination against EMNEs than against foreign DMNEs.

Based on institutional theory, we look at institutional-related and resource-related antecedents that have an impact on various forms of direct and indirect discrimination by host country nationals.

Our framework analyzes the crucial differences between host country nationals’ perception of EMNEs and foreign DMNEs and the resulting challenges for EMNEs in the developed world. It enhances our understanding of the importance of institutional environments in explaining differences in host country nationals’ discrimination against foreign MNEs.

The liability of foreignness has long been acknowledged as a key concept in international business research. Departing from the cost side of foreignness, this chapter explores intangible benefits of foreignness exclusive to multinational enterprises in a host country in addition to tangible benefits such as preferential tax policies. Intangible benefits of foreignness are defined as advantages of foreignness so as to distinguish from assets of foreignness – tangible benefits of foreignness. Drawing on institutional theory and social comparison theory, we propose that advantages of foreignness can lead to important firm-specific performance-related outcomes, which have been generally underestimated in the international business literature.

This study aims to examine the international joint venture (IJV) partnership strategy in Europe from an institutional perspective. A firm operating in a foreign country via an IJV can partner with a local firm from the host country, a firm from the same home country or a firm from a third country. This study takes the first step in examining the determinants of these partner choices.

This study tests hypotheses based on a data set of 637 IJVs in Europe.

Foreign firms are less likely to operate in a partnership with a firm from the home country or from a third country (compared to operate in a partnership with a local firm) when the host country institutions are weaker or institutional distance is larger. Also, foreign firms’ disinclination to operate in a partnership with a firm from the home/third country when the host country institutions are weaker or institutional distance is larger will diminish with greater host-country experience.

This study provides important insights for firms for evaluating partner choice and potential collaborations in the European region with heterogenous institutions.

The partner choice among the above three forms has been neglected in the literature. This study first conceptualized that the institutional profile of the host country and institutional distance between the host country and the home country can determine the partner choice.

Most of the research studies on entry mode have been done through the lens of manufacturing firms from mature economic countries entering the Global South countries, and most of the related frameworks and theories have been developed to explain this perspective. This paper presents an understanding of entry mode strategies of services firms from the Global South countries entering into countries with mature economies by considering six software services firms in India entering the US market. The study develops a framework that incorporates multiple theories – both from an emerging economy perspective as well as a services perspective.

This study is exploratory in nature and focuses on the how and why aspects of strategic decisions. Qualitative research has traditionally been chosen when the main research objective is to improve understanding of a phenomenon. A multiple case study approach was used in this research. One of the key aspects of this study is the impact of different theories (institutional, network and other theories) on enterprises of different sizes. Therefore six cases – two each on small, medium and large enterprises – were selected.

Results identify addressable market size, cultural aspects, firm size, resource and service characteristics as dominating factors that influenced choice of entry modes. From a theoretical perspective, the author finds that theories such as transaction cost theory, eclectic paradigm and other popular theories associated with entry mode do not successfully explain the entry mode strategies for firms from the Global South. Strategic theory, such as resource-based view, motivation of a firm, have some application but do not explain, in isolation, all aspects of the entry mode choices.

The study is an exploratory study and needs more data to validate the themes expressed in its conclusions. The study also focused on one industry and one country. Different industries within the same country may have different characteristics and may not follow the observations found in this study. Similarly, firms from other countries with similar economic characteristics may exhibit very different behavior. As a result, the themes that were expressed for software companies in India may not be generalizable across other industries and countries.

This study is significant for both academics and managers. For academics, the study addresses a significant gap in the literature. For managers, this study provides a framework for managers to evaluate and select the entry mode strategy that would be most effective in a successful expansion into foreign countries.

This study aims to examine the multidimensional nature of institutional distance as a driver of acquisition decisions in emerging markets. Then, this study aims to offer a nuanced perspective on the role of its various formal and informal dimensions by taking into account the potential contingency role played by a firm’s context experience.

Building on institutional economics and organizational institutionalism, this study explores the heterogeneity of institutional distance and its effects on the decision to enter emerging versus advanced markets through cross-border acquisitions. Thus, institutional distance is disentangled into its formal and informal dimensions, the former being captured by regulatory efficiency, country governance and financial development. Furthermore, our framework examines the moderating effect of an acquiring firm’s experience in institutionally similar environments, defined as context experience. The hypotheses are analyzed on a sample of 496 cross-border acquisitions by Italian companies in 41 countries from 2008 to 2018.

Findings indicate that at an increasing distance in terms of regulatory efficiency and financial development, acquiring firms are less likely to enter emerging markets, while informal institutional distance is positively associated with such acquisitions. Context experience mitigates the negative effect of formal distance and enhances the positive effect of informal distance.

This study contributes to institutional distance literature in multiple ways. First, by bridging institutional economics and organizational institutionalism and second, by examining the heterogeneity of formal and informal dimensions of distance, this study offers a finer-grained perspective on how institutional distance affects acquisition decisions. Finally, it offers a contingency perspective on the role of context experience.