Search results

The purpose of this paper is to identify the sources of variation in firm performance. This is one of the cornerstones of strategy research, i.e. the relative importance of industry and firm-level effects on firm performance. Multilevel analysis is well suited to analyze variance in performance when the data are hierarchically structured (industry segments consist of firms, firms operate within the context of industry segments). The Belgian industry studied is a service industry that consists of about 25 electrical wholesalers. Data were collected from 20 firms during the period 1998–2003 from responses to a questionnaire sent to all the firms in the market. The sample in the data set covers more than 95 percent of the market (in sales), as the missing firms were just fringe competitors. The results show that firm effects explain most of the variance in four performance variables. That bears out the importance of each firm having its own specific, idiosyncratic resources and competences. The explanatory power of firm effects varies by about 30–40 percent while the intra-industry effect explains around 10 percent of the variance. Even though firm effects are dominant, intra-industry effects explain a significant portion of the variance in firm-level performance. The firm effect is smaller than in previous studies. The firm effect varies across the performance measures: firm effects are higher for returns on assets than for profit margins. The industry segment effect (or intra-industry effect) is more independent of the dependent variable. The industry segment effect is in line with previous studies on the strategic group effect. Top managers should carefully choose and monitor the intra-industry domain they are in.

The purpose of this paper is to present a review of variance decomposition studies of firm performance and the theoretical foundations that served as the antecedents and promptings for this stream of research. Known collectively as “variance decomposition literature,” these studies use variance decomposition techniques to partition firm performance into various classes of effects in a bid to unveil the relative importance of factors responsible for firm performance variance.

A review of papers published in SCOPUS and institute for scientific information indexed journals was conducted.

The study found that firm, industry, corporate, business group and country effects are the major effects included in most extant studies. However, of all effects, firm effects remain the dominant and most important impact on firm performance. The effects that affect firm performance are also interdependent.

Consequently, the decisions of managers in firms are still the most important element in helping the firm to navigate industry and contextual factors, especially during periods of recession.

From the review, research gaps were identified and suggestions for future research provided. There is still much to learn from variance decomposition literature in an age of new business models, unprecedented start-up firms and from developing and emerging market countries.

Literature, spanning industrial organization and strategic management disciplines, uses variance decomposition to understand the relative importance of firm, industry and business group effects in shaping profitability variations. Some literature analyzes firm profitability under transition to liberalization. Previous research has taken a static before-and-after view on institutional change. This paper aims to focus on the dynamic process of liberalization in India, analyzing how different institutional regime changes alter firm behavior leading to changes in profitability patterns.

Based on a panel data set of several thousand Indian firms, spanning the 26-year period between 1980-1981 and 2005-2006, the authors determine the relative importance of firm, industry and business group effects in explaining manufacturing firms’ profitability variances across different institutional phases. The authors evaluate three propositions that help assess transition dynamics between phases. They determine the quantum of catch-up or falling behind by firms.

Different industries emerge as profitability leaders, as the economy progresses through different liberalization phases. Business groups that have been more effective in resource appropriation, rent-seeking, politician management and non-market activities in a controlled regime are replaced as profit leaders by those that, in a free-market economy, can be capable of intra-business resource allocation tasks and leveraging corporate capabilities.

The approach demonstrates how to analyze the underlying detailed structure of firm-level data, and performance outcomes, to derive nuanced interpretation of factors giving rise to the effects that explain profitability variances, and how to assess the way these effects behave over time. The dynamic evidence-based approach highlights what factors matter, where, when and why, in influencing profitability variances, which are a key dimension of industrial and economic performance.

We are interested in modeling the impact of spatial and interindustry dependence on firm-level innovation of Chinese firms The existence of network ties between cities imply that changes taking place in one city could influence innovation by firms in nearby cities (local spatial spillovers), or set in motion a series of spatial diffusion and feedback impacts across multiple cities (global spatial spillovers). We use the term local spatial spillovers to reflect a scenario where only immediately neighboring cities are impacted, whereas the term global spatial spillovers represent a situation where impacts fall on neighboring cities, as well as higher order neighbors (neighbors to the neighboring cities, neighbors to the neighbors of the neighbors, and so on). Global spatial spillovers also involve feedback impacts from neighboring cities, and imply the existence of a wider diffusion of impacts over space (higher order neighbors).

Similarly, the existence of national interindustry input-output ties implies that changes occurring in one industry could influence innovation by firms operating in directly related industries (local interindustry spillovers), or set in motion a series of in interindustry diffusion and feedback impacts across multiple industries (global interindustry spillovers).

Typical linear models of firm-level innovation based on knowledge production functions would rely on city- and industry-specific fixed effects to allow for differences in the level of innovation by firms located in different cities and operating in different industries. This approach however ignores the fact that, spatial dependence between cities and interindustry dependence arising from input-output relationships, may imply interaction, not simply heterogeneity across cities and industries.

We construct a Bayesian hierarchical model that allows for both city- and industry-level interaction (global spillovers) and subsumes other innovation scenarios such as: (1) heterogeneity that implies level differences (fixed effects) and (2) contextual effects that imply local spillovers as special cases.

Extant research has largely treated country image (CI) as an exogenous variable, focusing mostly on its consequences for consumers’ evaluations and purchases of products or brands originating from a country. Scant research has examined the instrumental role of a country’s brands and products in the evaluations of CI. This study aims to investigate how the brands of a country contribute to CI ratings and the conditions underlying their effect on CI.

Three experimental studies test the hypotheses, one pertaining to the effect of brands on CI (N = 227), the second to the effect of products on CI (N = 116) and the third to the effect of brands and products on industry image (N = 215). The experimental approach overcomes the limitations of cross-sectional surveys commonly used in CI studies to detect the direction of the observed effects. Furthermore, respondents (British consumers) were allowed to determine the brands and products associated with a country.

Drawing on memory schema theory, across three studies, the authors identify two types of reverse inferences: from brand to CI and from product category to CI. The reverse inference from a brand to a superordinate image is stronger for industry image than for CI.

This research focuses on consumers’ evaluations from only one country (the UK). Further research could replicate the studies across different countries and with different countries of origin (COOs). Researchers could also examine the influence of brands misidentified with the wrong COO and mistakenly stored as such in consumers’ memories.

The results are relevant for managers and consultants working with country- (place-) branding campaigns. Brands and industries can help strengthen the evaluations of the economic dimension of different countries; however, these assets are underdeveloped in country-branding campaigns. Linking countries with brands and industries in campaigns could result in positive associations, which, in turn, could enhance the reputational rating of the countries.

This research extends previous studies on the effects of a country’s products and brands on CI by incorporating the mediating role of industry image between brands/products and CI, separating the effects of brand and product category on CI, allowing consumers to determine, which brands and products are associated with a country and adopting an experimental methodology to ascertain the causal direction of the effects.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse to what extent industry, year and firm effects influence the profitability of the firms operating in the Czech food processing industry. The authors’ interest is also to investigate whether the profitability of a few firms (regarded as outliers) is able to influence the relative importance of year, firm and industry effects and to find out the relative importance of these effects for the majority of the firms.

The effects are tested using the fixed effects regression models on the unbalanced panel dataset which consists of 10,509 observations for 1,804 enterprises across the ten food sectors over the period 2003-2014. To ensure the consistency of the results, the authors use the three different measures of profitability: return on assets, return on equity and price-cost margin.

The results suggest that, on average, industry and year effects have little impact on firm profitability variance, and firm-specific effects dominate when seeking to explain firm profitability variance. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the obtained results are supported by most of the previously published studies.

Based on the findings, the authors encourage future researchers to add, as explanatory factors, governmental policies and to test their impact on firm profitability.

The study helps to fill in the research gap in the field of agribusiness, as, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, no study has been conducted yet in the Czech agribusiness environment. Considering the approach distinguishing the “average” and dominant firms in the sectors, they aim at a methodological contribution to this field of research dealing with firm profitability variation.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the magnitude of country, industry and firm‐specific effects for firms competing in emerging economies and also explore differences between high and low performers.

The authors use ANOVA methodologies on samples from firms competing in Latin America between 1990‐2006.

It was found that the firm‐specific effect is the most important one, and relatively equivalent in magnitude to the firm‐specific effects found in developed countries. Country and industry effects are less important than the firm‐specific effect. Contrary to previous studies that indicate that the country effect is relatively more important in emerging economies, the authors found that it is even less important than the industry effect, a result that has important implications for strategic management and international business theory. The source behind the strong firm‐specific effects might stem from their resources and capabilities to manage and take advantage of the institutional and macroeconomic environments. Further analysis indicates that the firm‐specific effect is relatively more important for firms showing high performance than for those firms showing low performance.

Through these findings the authors feel that further research is needed so as to arm future managers with a more clear and comprehensive strategy when doing business in a Latin American country. The paper's findings are specific for large public corporations in Latin America.

The paper allows managers to think about sources of competitive advantages in emerging economies.

The paper shows that, despite weak institutional contexts and highly volatile macroeconomic environments, managers in the region should be able to obtain substantial differences in economic performances within the region. Activities needed for such differentiation might differ from those carried out in developed countries, with more emphasis on managing institutional voids and periods of economic and political cycles but the result should be the same.

This paper uses two complementary approaches to estimate the effect of right-to-work (RTW) laws on wages and unionization rates. The first approach uses an event study design to analyze the impact of the adoption of RTW laws in five US states since 2011. The second approach relies on a differential exposure design that exploits the differential impact of RTW laws on industries with high unionization rates relative to industries with low unionization rates. Both approaches indicate that RTW laws lower wages and unionization rates. Under the assumption that RTW laws only affect wages by lowering the unionization rate, RTW can be used as an instrumental variable (IV) to estimate the causal effect of unions on wages. In our preferred specification based on the differential exposure design, the IV estimate of the effect of unions on log wages is 0.35, which substantially exceeds the corresponding OLS estimate of 0.16. This large wage effect suggests that RTW may also directly affect wages due to a reduced union threat effect.

This study aims to explore the spillover effects of supply chain corruption practices (SCCPs) on stock returns along the supply chain and within the industry. Specifically, it investigates how SCCPs affect the stock returns of corrupt firms' bystander supply chain partners and industry peers, both of which are not involved in the SCCPs.

The authors employ the event study methodology to quantify SCCPs' spillover effects in terms of abnormal stock returns. The analysis is based on 117 SCCPs occurring in China between 2014 and 2021.

The event study results show that SCCPs have negative effects on the stock returns of corrupt firms' bystander supply chain partners. Such negative effects are more pronounced for bystander buyers than bystander suppliers. However, SCCPs do not have a significant impact on the stock returns of corrupt firms' industry peers. Additional analysis further suggests that SCCPs are more likely to affect the stock returns of domestic rather than overseas bystander supply chain partners.

This study is the first attempt to thoroughly examine the spillover effects of SCCPs along the supply chain and within the industry, advancing the understanding of the financial consequences of SCCPs and providing important implications for future research and practices related to supply chain corruption.

This paper aims to integrate insights from the behavioral theory of the firm and the dynamic capabilities perspective to explain how the historical and social attainment discrepancies motivate firms to change. Specifically, this paper proposes that a negative historical attainment discrepancy encourages the firm to engage in strategic change to solve its performance problems. In contrast, this paper advanced that a positive social attainment discrepancy motivates strategic change as a mechanism to bolster the firm’s position within the industry. Further, this paper integrated the moderating effects of industry dynamism and industry munificence.

This paper tests hypotheses using panel data on 2,435 US public firms over the years from 1996 to 2018. This paper uses a fixed-effects regression model to empirically test these hypotheses.

This paper finds empirical support for the effects of both the negative historical attainment discrepancy and the positive social attainment discrepancy on the firm’s tendency to engage in strategic change. As for the hypothesized moderating effects, this paper finds that industry munificence accentuated the effects of both attainment discrepancies on the firm’s tendency to engage in strategic change. However, the results do not support the hypothesized moderating effect of industry dynamism on either of these attainment discrepancies.

This paper contributes to the research on the separate effects of historical and social comparisons within the context of strategic change. Further, the paper bolsters our understanding of how performance feedback increases the firm’s tendency to change. Finally, the paper integrates theoretical views from the behavioral theory of the firm and the dynamic capabilities perspective on how socially high-performing firms may build and sustain their competitive advantage through organizational change.