Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of rapid internationalization by emerging-market multinational enterprises (EMNEs) on their innovation performance. It also seeks to identify any potential moderating factors that could influence this relationship.

By analyzing data from listed Chinese MNEs from 2012 to 2022, this study applies a negative binomial regression model to test the research hypotheses.

This study uncovers an inverted U-shaped relationship between the internationalization speed of EMNEs and their innovation performance. It also suggests that strong absorptive, learning and managerial capacities could play positive moderating roles in the effect of internationalization speed on EMNEs’ innovation performance.

This study highlights rapid global expansion, promoting new knowledge acquisition for EMNEs. However, due to time-compression dilemmas with limited EMNE firm-specific advantages, overly accelerated internationalization hinders learning effectiveness. Additionally, this study reveals the critical importance of three firm-specific capacities in EMNEs – absorptive, learning and managerial capacities – in efficiently assimilating newly acquired knowledge from foreign markets and enhancing their innovation performance through rapid internationalization.

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 extant literature on emerging market multinationals (EMNEs) suggest that they derive their advantages from factors such as economies of scale, and that they internationalise, in large measure, to access technology. However, support for this framework typically comes from analysis of static data, comparing EMNEs and OECD MNEs at a point in time. Little attention is paid to their development paths in a dynamic setting. We examine these propositions directly using an approach that enables us to decompose productivity growth of firms into its components, namely, changes in scale economies, technological progress and technical efficiency. We compare Chinese MNEs with their non-MNE domestic counterparts and developed country MNEs that have operations in China. We demonstrate that Chinese MNEs continue to derive much of their productivity growth from changes in scale economies, while developed country MNEs continue to have an advantage with respect to technical progress. Both these types of MNEs have a significant advantage over Chinese non-MNE domestic firms.

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.

Using Triad-based multinational enterprises as their empirical setting, influential scholars in international management uncovered key organizational characteristics needed to create globally integrated and locally responsive multinationals. They proposed a “modern” theory of multinationals' organization (Hedlund, 1994). But recently, a new generation of multinationals from emerging markets has appeared. Little is known about their organizational choices and some scholars even doubt that they leverage organizational capabilities altogether. Does the “modern” theory still hold in their case? This exploratory study of three emerging-market multinationals (EMNEs) discloses that for reasons related to their origin in emerging economies and to the competitive specificities of these economies, EMNEs approach the global and local conundrum in ways which are both similar – and vastly different – from recommendations of the “modern” theory. We inductively develop a new theory that accounts for the evolution of organizational capabilities in EMNEs to reconcile global integration and local responsiveness. We discuss its implications for the executives of both emerging and Triad-based multinationals.

The existing research on institutional distance implicitly posits the monotonic effect of contextual differences on the multinational enterprise (MNE) behaviors (e.g. entry mode, research and development (R&D) investment and subsidiary reverse knowledge transfer). Namely, MNEs from the same home to the same host countries are thought to have homogenous perceptions on the institutional influences and thus behave similarly. However, the authors argue that MNEs, due to their different performance aspirations in host countries, will have heterogenous perceptions on such contextual influences and thereafter behave differently.

Drawing on the behavioral theory of the firm and employing a unique sample comprised of 140 Chinese MNEs' foreign direct investments (FDIs) in Taiwan in 2017, the authors developed and tested the hypotheses.

The authors found that the emerging-market MNEs' (EMNEs’) perceptions of higher local institutional difficulties will be strengthened when their local performances are below their aspiration levels, making them more risk-taking. Nevertheless, EMNEs' local experiences and local equity-based partnerships will mitigate such negative perceptions, mitigating their risk-taking orientation.

The empirical findings make contributes to the international business (IB) literature by extending knowledge on the determinants and conditions of the heterogeneity in EMNEs' behavioral orientations when in face of the same institutional distance. The authors also provide managerial implications by showing that EMNEs' firm-specific resources (i.e. local experience and local equity-based partnership) will alter their perceptions of local institutional difficulties, leading to different behavioral orientations.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of international expansion of emerging markets multinationals (EMNEs) on the home country nonmarket political strategy and why some EMNEs intensify this political tie more than others.

We test our theoretical framework using longitudinal data, with 16 years of observations, in Multilatinas and state loans from Brazil, one of the main outward foreign direct investment (OFDI) players in the world and the OFDI leader in Latin America.

Theoretically grounded on the institution-based view of strategy, it can be postulated that international expansion is a driver of home country nonmarket political strategy. It can also be hypothesized that political tie intensity is affected by the capacity of EMNEs to deal with international expansion issues without having to depend on relationship with homes country nonmarket political actors. The results provide support for the hypotheses presented.

This paper contributes to the EMNE internationalization literature by extending the understanding of the underlying motivations and forces shaping the home country nonmarket political strategy of multinationals from emerging markets and, thus, helping understand why some EMNEs tend to be more politically active than others. Likewise, the study contributes to advancing understanding regarding the home country strategic responses adopted by Multilatinas and the forces behind the nonmarket political strategies they employ in their international expansions, especially during turbulent times.

This study aims to examine whether exploitative and exploratory overseas R&D have independent and significant effects on emerging economy multinational enterprises' (EMNEs’) innovation performance and whether top management team (TMT) nationality diversity and openness have a moderating effect on these relationships.

This study analyzes data collected from Chinese-listed manufacturing enterprises for 2007 to 2018.

Empirical results show that both exploitative and exploratory overseas R&D can help improve EMNEs' innovation performance. The authors further find that TMT nationality diversity and TMT openness strengthen the aforementioned relationships.

This study presents the first empirical evidence showing whether and when exploitative and exploratory overseas R&D have independent and heterogeneous effects on EMNEs' innovation performance.

The extent to which emerging multinational enterprises (EMNEs) challenge extant international management (IM) theories is a question under current discussion. The purpose of this paper is to confront two classic theories (internationalization process model (IPM) and post-acquisition integration types) to several EMNEs strategies within their initial conceptual frameworks, exploring how their practices lead to extend and update existing models.

This paper compares the classic IPM with the development stages of iconic EMNEs. This reveals how EMNEs’ strategies can be analyzed within extant conceptual frameworks, extending their theoretical content. This approach is then applied to an empirical study of post-acquisition integrations conducted in France by EMNEs from 11 countries of origin.

Two theories are discussed, with suggested updates, within their extant frameworks, taking into account EMNEs’ strategies. First, the initial IPM is re-explored to reveal concentrated paths, from all quadrants of the framework. Similarly, post-integration typologies are updated, including the partnering approach frequently implemented by EMNEs, and the holding approach empirically identified with some specific features (subjection).

This paper combines an analysis of some iconic EMNEs’ internationalization processes and empirical data on up-market acquisitions by EMNEs from diverse countries of origin. It provides suggestions to update two IM theories.

The apparent success of emerging market multinational (EMNE) operations in the Global South has led some to launch a claim of competitive advantage in investing in markets with higher institutional risk. However, there has not been sufficient econometric investigation into all the forces driving South-South foreign direct investment (FDI). The purpose of this paper is to investigate the claim of institutional advantage and to further our understanding of South-South FDI.

The paper employs a simple econometric model of FDI flows to investigate the differences between the factors driving FDI from developed country MNEs and EMNEs. The model is tested on a bilateral sample of FDI stock data of 21 developed and 22 emerging source economies and over 80 host countries.

Contrary to the contention of the previous literature, the empirical results find little support for the claim to EMNE institutional advantage. EMNEs are just as sensitive to institutional risk as MNEs. The relatively higher participation of EMNE FDI in the Global South may be explained by other shared similarity factors across developing markets and competitive disadvantages in entering developed markets.

The findings of this paper cast some doubts on the hope that EMNEs will improve the FDI demands of least developed countries (LDCs). Healthy institutions are an important prerequisite for attracting FDI, regardless of whether it originates from developed or emerging economies.