Search results

The purpose of this paper is to address the internationalization of Russian multinationals by critically challenging existing assumptions about “springboard” foreign market selection by emerging market firms.

The authors studied foreign market selection decisions for 497 international merger and acquisition (M&A) and joint venture (JV) deals completed by Russian multinational enterprises (MNEs) between 1997 and 2009. The statistical model tests the impact of the geographic, political and economic distances of the host country from Russia on Russian MNEs' foreign market selection decisions.

Contrary to existing assumptions, the host country's geographic closeness to Russia, and its being an ex‐USSR republic or a tax haven, positively affected the country's probability of attracting an M&A or JV deal by a Russian MNE, while the similar level of economic development did not significantly influence the MNEs' foreign market selection decisions. The patterns of significance among the explanatory variables vary for Russian MNEs operating in the natural resources industries.

Further studies may extend the observation period, enlarge the database with Greenfield and export deals by Russian MNEs, and add cross‐country cultural distances to the explanatory variables.

Russian managers should consider the “distances” that might influence firms' foreign investment decisions. This paper also allows host country governments willing to formulate policies aimed at the attraction of Russian outward foreign direct investments to obtain a better understanding of Russian MNEs' international strategies.

One of the few quantitative studies on the topic, this research suggests that Russian MNEs choose their own means of foreign market selection, combining gradual and leapfrog approaches to internationalization.

This paper examines how Russian multinational enterprises (MNEs) operating in the metallurgical industry strategise under the highly complex conditions of their home institutional environment.

The findings are based on a qualitative multiple-case study of eight Russian metallurgical MNEs that took place in 2014–2015. The authors conducted 34 semi-structured interviews, made observations and took reflexive field notes.

The analysis reveals that Russian MNEs utilise four different strategies–cooperation, persuasion, avoidance and adaptation–when dealing with federal and regional home governments. These MNEs simultaneously utilise multiple strategies while capitalising on their own organisational attributes.

Unlike many other studies, this paper examines institutional complexity within two distinct layers of the Russian Government, regional and federal, rather than considering the aggregate notion of “home government”. The paper also identifies and analyses MNEs’ specific strategies to navigate different layers of institutional complexity.

This chapter focuses on the influence of the home government on the internationalization of Russian multinational enterprises (MNEs). It views government involvement and political connectedness as a form of informal connections and networks that seriously impact operations in general and internationalization, in particular in the case of Russian multinationals. Using the literature on MNEs from emerging markets and our familiarity with Russian business and political specificities, we develop a set of five propositions devoted to the subject. We further discuss the research and management implications of our analysis.

Economic sanctions imposed by the EU and United States on Russia have brought significant changes into Russian foreign economic policy, in particular leading to deepening cooperation with Asian countries and China in particular. The present contribution aims to shed light on the influence of sanctions on Russian multinational enterprises (MNEs) internationalization toward China using the example of energy and information and communication technology (ICT) industries.

The chapter builds on case study analysis. The choice of sectors allows us to highlight the recent strategic trends in the internationalization of oil and gas industry, dominated by state-owned multinationals, and in ICT by privately owned companies.

Our results provide empirical data for understanding the influence of sanctions on MNEs from the country being under the sanctions. In the case of Russian oil and gas industry and ICTs, research indicates that the shift toward China was not initiated primarily by the sanctions. In both cases, expansion to Asian markets was correlated with business interests in the Chinese market. However, changes in geopolitical and macroeconomic business environment accelerated Russian MNE’s pivot to China, for the purposes of attracting capital and reaching new markets in context of deteriorating relations with western partners. The cases demonstrate a moderating role of the industry in the context of sanctions, helping compensate for the slowdown of economic relations with traditional partners.

The novelty of the chapter is to delineate the consequences of sanctions on MNEs from the country being under sanctions. In this way, it illustrates the role of geopolitical environment in intensifying internationalization of Russian MNEs toward China.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a better understanding of how the government influences the internationalization of emerging MNEs and, more specifically, answer the questions how and to what extent does the combination of the home country government’s control and interest influence Russian MNEs.

First, the author examined sector-specific factors and institutional forces that affect the development of the Russian economy’s industries. Second, the author has classified the sectors included in this study into four groups according to the following two main criteria: the interest of the government in the development of the sector, and the degree of state control for the firms in the sector. Third, the author has analyzed the forms and types of the government participation in firms’ internationalization in defined groups based on the observation of industries’ legislative acts and state decrees and orders. After that, the author has verified the existence of certain similarities of strategies under the governmental influence, and finally discussed the extent of the control and interest implied by the government toward these firms.

After analyzing the patterns of the state involvement in firms’ internationalization in various groups the author found that some of the groups are characterized by similar types of government role and their responses are, also, sometimes similar. The author presents a more detailed look at the above results in Table III, and explain the two-sided role of the government in different groups of firms.

While the literature emphasizes that institutional forces shape the internationalization of emerging multinational enterprises, they have not been comprehensively linked to explaining the contradictory role of the government in this process. The author addresses this gap by examining an integrated influence that home government factors (namely, control and interest) exert in enabling firms to compete abroad. In addition, the author contributes to the knowledge about the behavior of Russian firms, which is one of the less researched areas in the field of international management.

The paper also has value for companies’ strategists as it provides them with understanding of the complexity of government-related determinants influencing the internationalization process of their firms and the types of firms’ abilities to be developed or supported. It also provides a practical tool for modeling their international strategy formation and accounting for different types of state influences on internationalization of EM firms.

This paper highlights the government-related aspects of the internationalization of Russian MNEs. Even when they go abroad with strong product capabilities and a proactive managerial style, they still benefit from home country institutional resources. The author sees the strength of the empirical findings in further extension of the understanding of origins, consequences and prospects of internationalization of emerging market firms with the home government involvement.

Wars, and violent conflicts generally, can generate significant institutional dynamics and new legitimacy pressures for multinational enterprises (MNEs). The purpose of this paper is to understand the nature or source of institutional pressures facing MNEs in war and to examine how MNEs respond and navigate these institutional pressures.

This is a conceptual paper.

Through the theoretical lens of institutional theory and drawing on insights from the devastating Russian–Ukrainian war in Europe, the study provides a framework that explains the nature of institutional pressures impacting MNEs in a major war conflict and how MNEs respond to these pressures. Central to the framework is the impact of formal and informal institutions on MNEs during war. As a result of regulatory and social pressures, MNEs have to make important strategic decisions either to protect their legitimacy or to defend their economic objectives against institutional demands.

As the paper situates the pressures of war for MNEs in a formal and informal institutional context, this offers a new approach to understanding the costs and pressures of war on MNEs.

The purpose of this paper is to look into state ownership and political support as two factors that influence the process of internationalization of Russian MNEs.

The authors observe the theory and empirical evidence behind the phenomenon.

The authors find that state ownership and governmental political support are two mechanisms of the transformation of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) to MNEs in Russia.

The topic is not covered sufficiently in the literature. The paper is based on the recent findings by the paper co-authors.

The purpose of this paper is to reveal how the host and the home countries’ formal institutions may affect mergers and acquisitions (M&A) abandonment by Russian multinational enterprises (MNEs), and how MNE industry can influence the results. The second objective of the study is to have a separate look at the negative experience, and to uncover its influence on M&A deal completion.

In the study, a sample of 446 international M&A deals initiated by Russian MNEs in the period of 2000–2014 is empirically tested by means of logistic regression analysis.

The empirical analysis indicates that better business environment in the host country is crucially important whereas development of business freedom at home may make the international M&A less attractive and increases the likelihood of M&A deal abandonment. Thus, the larger the institutional distance by this indicator the more likelihood the deal is completed. Contrary results are implied for property rights: the larger the distance between Russia and host country, the lower likelihood of M&A deal completion. Failure experience decreases the likelihood of acquisition completion whereas international experience increases.

The study has number of limitations: individual-level variables were not included in the model; and a limited number of factors were tested due to availability of data and moderate sample size.

The study indicates that better development of business freedom and moderate property rights protection in the host country are the most favorable factors for an M&A deal completion. Russian policymakers should realize that development of property rights protection in Russia ensures success of MNEs abroad, and development of business freedom reduces the outflow of capital from the economy.

The paper makes several theoretical and practical contributions: it contributes to institutional international business literature, indicating in which particular cases institutional distance has positive or negative effect on M&A completion. It also contributes to organizational learning literature, confirming that failures inhibit learning, and firms tend to repeat previous mistakes. Finally, the paper widens the scarce research on Russian MNEs, and on the role of the home country institutions for MNE’s behavior abroad.

This study addresses foreign markets selection decisions by Russian mobile telecommunications operators and the impact of top management team composition on the degree of firms’ internationalization.

The qualitative exploratory study analyzed 24 foreign market entry decisions and the composition of the top management team of the two leading Russian mobile telecommunications operators, VimpelCom and Mobile Telesystems (MTS/AFK Sistema).

Russian mobile telecommunications operators adopted a gradual approach to foreign market selection, as the study revealed the positive impact of the target market’s geographic proximity to Russia on the investment decision. The international background of the top management team was positively related to the increasing distance of the selected foreign markets.

Further studies may include quantitative evaluation of investment decisions by mobile telecommunications operators from other emerging-market firms, as well as a longer observation period and investment decisions by firms operating in other industries.

Russian and other emerging-market firms should evaluate the importance of the top management team composition and international experience prior to initiation of the internationalization process.

Russian multinationals represent a relatively understudied phenomenon, despite the importance of outward foreign direct investments from Russia among other emerging-market firms.

This exploratory study attempts to cast some light on the state of market segmentation and the issues faced by practitioners amongst a sample of Russian subsidiaries of Western multinational enterprises (MNEs) operating in fast‐moving consumer goods markets.

Qualitative research in the form of depth interviews with seven respondents was undertaken at five MNEs (covering 11 brands across 13 product categories) and one Russian‐owned company which had recently recruited its senior management from Coca‐Cola in Moscow. MNEs were chosen because it was believed they would have the resources to acquire such expertise and knowledge as was necessary to develop a segmentation structure.

The companies researched had indicated that, in most cases, they had not been fully satisfied with their segmentations and so were engaged in continual attempts to improve their segmentations. For the majority, need‐state segmentation was currently seen as a considerable step forward but other options were being investigated. The study shows that factors influencing the search for the better segmentation need to include the nature of the product but also the stage of development of the product category, itself resulting, in most cases, from the pattern of market development in transition economies.

The research uses only a limited number of respondents but there was a large degree of commonality in respect of the key broad issues.

The study has implications for the factors to be taken into account when designing segmentation approaches, including the nature and stage of development of the product category and the purpose of the segmentation.

As far as is known, this is the first study which addresses segmentation issues amongst Russian subsidiaries of Western FMCG multi nationals.