Search results

Purpose: Through globalization, financial markets have become more integrated and their tendency to act together has increased. The majority of the literature states that there is a cointegration between developed and emerging markets. How do positive or negative shocks in developed markets affect emerging markets? And how do positive or negative shocks in emerging markets affect developed markets? For this reason, the aim of the study is to investigate the asymmetric causality relationship between developed and emerging markets with Hatemi-J asymmetric causality test.

Design/methodology/approach: In this study, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) index was used to represent developed markets and the Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) Emerging Market Index was used to represent emerging markets. The asymmetric causality relationship between the DJIA Index and the MSCI Emerging Market Index was investigated using monthly data between January 2009 and April 2019. In the first step of the study, the Johansen Cointegration Test was used to determine whether there is a cointegration between the markets. In the next step, the Hatemi-J asymmetric causality test was applied to see the asymmetric causality relationship between the markets.

Findings: There is a weak correlation between developed and emerging markets. This result is important for international investors who want to diversify their portfolios. As a result of the Johansen Cointegration Test, it was found that there is a long-term relationship between the MSCI Emerging Market Index and the DJIA Index. Therefore, investors who make long-term investment plans should not forget that these markets act together and take into account the causal relationship between them. According to the asymmetric causality test results, a unidirectional causality relationship from the MSCI Emerging Market Index to the DJIA Index was determined. This causality shows that negative shocks in the MSCI Emerging Market Index have positive effects on the DJIA Index.

Originality/value: This study contributes to the literature as it is one of the first studies to examine the asymmetrical relationship between developed and emerging markets. This study is also useful in predicting the short- and long-term relationship between markets. In addition, this study helps investors, portfolio managers, company managers, policymakers, etc., to understand the integration of financial markets.

We view emerging-market multinational corporations (EMNCs) as agents for global isomorphism. EMNCs seek to enter developed markets not only to expand their business operations but also to acquire advanced knowledge to enhance their core competencies. In entering these markets, EMNCs are subject to coercive, normative and cognitive pressures as they seek legitimacy. Once these firms gain legitimacy in advanced markets through the adoption of local business practices, they transfer these approaches to their headquarters in developing markets, establishing best practices in their home markets. Further, EMNCs may engage in efforts aimed at changing the institutional environment in the developing market to facilitate the transfer of learned practices from the developed market. Thus, we propose that these best practices lead to global isomorphism, but also note instances where symbolic adoption of developed market practices may slow the isomorphic process.

Purpose – The purpose of the paper is to advance knowledge on how firms should rethink and develop their innovation architecture by leveraging emerging market opportunities.Design/methodology/approach – The paper provides a conceptual framework comprising the drivers and consequences of innovation architecture across emerging and developed markets. It also highlights emerging market innovation characteristics using detailed examples.Findings/conclusions – Most of the future growth in the global economy will come from emerging markets. Successful global firms will have to rethink and develop their innovation architecture by leveraging innovations developed for emerging markets. By balancing the long-term costs and benefits of innovations in both developed and emerging markets, global firms can successfully reshape their innovation architecture.Practical implications – From a practical perspective, the paper provides guidelines to executives for managing innovation architecture across emerging and developed markets. Innovations appropriately developed and launched in emerging markets have the potential to expand global consumer base and increase shareholder value.Social implications – From a societal standpoint, the paper helps improve consumer welfare in emerging markets by offering a roadmap to develop safe, relevant, and affordable products for mainstream customers. Reverse innovations, developed primarily for emerging markets also benefit consumers in developed markets and enhance their social welfare.Value/originality – The paper provides an original theoretical contribution in an important and underexplored research area – emerging market innovation. It is the first to develop an in-depth analysis of innovation architecture, advance a conceptual framework of the role of emerging markets in the development and consequences of innovation architecture, and offer a roadmap for strategic management of innovation architecture. Academic researchers, practitioners, and policy makers will benefit from this paper.

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 World Health Organization estimated that in 1999 roughly one-third of the world's population lacked access to essential medicines that would have saved or improved their lives. Our analysis focuses on how pharmaceutical product patents restrict access to essential medicines in developing countries. It is well established that pharmaceutical product patents provide little incentive for pharmaceutical companies to develop new medicines designed to treat diseases prevalent in developing countries or to market in developing countries those patented medicines developed to treat diseases prevalent in developed countries. Economists have developed theoretical models showing that these incentives could be changed if (1) developing countries provided intellectual property protection for new pharmaceutical innovations and (2) an international regulatory framework were established to facilitate pharmaceutical companies setting lower prices in developing countries and higher prices in developed countries for patented medicines. We develop an index of property rights in pharmaceutical innovations covering 129 countries from 1960 to 2005. It shows that in 1960 only a handful of countries provided significant protection for pharmaceutical innovations, but by 2005 over 95 percent of countries in our sample provided significant statutory protections. However, an international framework to allow pharmaceutical companies to price discriminate has not been put in place. We conclude that international price discrimination mechanisms, compulsory patent licenses, and regional patent buyouts are not viable mechanisms for providing access to essential medicines to patients in developing countries. Global patent buyouts are more likely to achieve this goal, as they are not founded on an impractical separation of pharmaceutical markets in developing and developed countries and they provide critical incentives to develop new essential medicines.

This study draws upon the interorganizational imitation theory and endorsement literatures to explain the entry mode decisions of emerging-market firms (EMFs) into developed markets. Specifically, the study argues that EMFs entering developed markets pay differential attention to the prior actions of reference groups – by type of country of origin (whom to follow?) and by entry mode (how to imitate?). We test our hypotheses with a sample of 591 entries by EMFs investing in the United States over a 10-year period. The results support an isomorphism-based framework with different influences across reference groups by country of origin and entry mode. We find a dominant form of isomorphism, even after controlling for transaction costs and resource-based explanations.

Research on internationalization of emerging market firms (EMFs) has received an increasing attention in the international management field. A central argument in a majority of these studies is that the internationalization of EMFs is different from that of firms from developed economies, and existing internationalization theories are insufficient to fully explain this new phenomenon. We conduct a critical review of important studies on the internationalization of EMFs to address two related questions. First, is the internationalization of EMFs really a new phenomenon, never been witnessed in the past? Second, does it warrant new theoretical developments? Our review suggests that there are important variations in the internationalization strategies of EMFs and developed economy firms, within EMFs from different emerging economies, and during different time periods. A thorough understanding of motivations, paths, processes, and performances of EMFs does require new theoretical approaches that can take into account the unique aspects of EMFs.

Since innovation is often at the heart of firm success and national growth, the relationship between the country-level factors that either encourage or discourage firm innovation and the subsequent effects on international marketing need to be better understood. Rapid changes in communication and the global competitive environment require that the traditional models for international business be reconsidered. In so doing, we evaluate the relationship between a country's patent protection regimes and firm innovation. We consider whether strong patent rights lead to increased or decreased innovation for firms competing in Developed, Developing, and Least Developed countries. Implications are explored for how individual firms, countries, and the international community can support public policy for encouraging and improving innovation and its diffusion. Finally, the managerial and international marketing implications of these relationships will be examined.

The chapter provides an economic explanation and perspectivation of strategic asset seeking of multinational enterprises from emerging economies (EMNEs) as a prominent feature of today’s global economy.

The authors apply and extend the “springboard perspective.” This perspective submits that EMNEs acquire strategic assets in developed markets primarily for use in their home markets.

The authors succumb that the springboard perspective is alluring theoretically as well as empirically as it suggests that when EMNEs acquire strategic assets, they experience liabilities of foreignness (LOF) that are low relative to those of MNEs from developed markets. The authors concede to this LOF asymmetry but also point out that liabilities of outsidership (LOO) can offset or weaken the home-market advantage of some EMNEs when competing with MNEs.

LOO appears as the more relevant concept to use when explaining strategic asset seeking of EMNEs. A set of propositions are formulated to guide empirical testing.

The insights gained from using the springboard perspective and the LOO concept are non-trivial: They basically predict future dominance of ‘insider’ EMNEs at the expense of MNEs from developed markets.

The purpose of this chapter is to conceptually analyze reverse transfers of human resource management practices from subsidiaries of transnational corporations in emerging markets to their headquarters in developed countries.

This is a conceptual chapter based on a review of the pertinent literature. Analysis is performed at the organizational and national levels.

We identify the type of transnational corporation best positioned to learn and utilize the potential of its emerging market subsidiaries to advance its human resource management practices. We further identify the types of practices best suited for reverse transfer.

Empirical tests of our propositions are needed. We encourage researchers to extend our research by considering the regional (supra-national), industry and individual levels of analyses.

Managers are informed when and where potential for learning new practices is the greatest, and are urged to scrutinize those corporate units where such potentials exist, and yet transfers do not occur.

Emerging markets offer substantial learning potential for transnational corporations, yet most recent studies focus on transfer of technology and product innovations from subsidiaries, leaving the transfer of human resource management practices largely unexplored. Therefore, this study advances research on organizational knowledge and innovation management, and organization of transnational corporations.