Search results

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 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.

What core strategic capabilities should multinational and domestic firms possess to create competitive organization in Russia? In this chapter, we try to answer this question with our pilot case study of six firms operating in the Russian high-tech, low-tech, and services markets – four global companies and two Russian firms. Our research shows that customer orientation is the crucial strategic capability, highlighted by all of the firms involved in the research. For multinational and high-tech players, this is followed by research and development, mentioned by two-thirds of the respondents. Moreover, the four multinational companies leverage their strategic capabilities of cross-cultural management and general sales capabilities as keys for their success in Russia. Russian firms emphasize importance of entrepreneurship, understanding local customer needs, and an engaged team as strategic capabilities that particularly differentiate them from the multinational players in the Russian market.

This paper examines how personal networks influence the internationalization process of Russian multinational corporations.

We identify and review 78 articles published in five International Business journals that address the role of networking and relationships in firm internationalization. We then use the network perspective to examine how Russian multinationals internationalize.

Combining the key conclusions of the reviewed studies with insights from the network perspective, and adding insights that we have gained both through first-hand experience and by following the Russian business media, we develop a model that links personal networking and Russian multinationals’ internationalization. We outline four functions that personal networking plays – access to information and knowledge, resource commitment, development of marketing and sales capabilities, and further network expansion.

This paper challenges established views of how firm internationalization occurs. It combines two previously unrelated streams of literature, the network model of internationalization and the role of personal networking within the Russian business environment, and argues that personal networking plays a much larger role in how Russian MNCs internationalize than has the International Business literature has acknowledged.

Russia is one of the leaders in outward FDI from emerging market economies and at the same time Russian MNCs have their specific features. The purpose of this chapter is to analyze characteristics of Russian MNCs by researching relationship between specificities of Russian economic and political model, on the one hand, and specific features of Russian MNCs, on the other hand.

For these researches, traditional instruments of neoclassical theory are basically used.

The principal finding is that specific characteristics of Russian MNCs reflect specificities of Russia’s economic and political model. To some extent, they correlate with characteristics of MNCs of other two leading emerging economies – China and India.

Russian MNCs operate in line with principal theories of FDI, that is, on the basis of their country and firms’ comparative advantages. However, they possess specific features: many of them are state-controlled MNCs; private MNCs are controlled by oligarchs; all of them have tight relations with offshores and offshore conduit countries. The comparison with China and India shows that some of these specific features are typical of Chinese and Indian MNCs to more or less extent.

The empirical part of the chapter analyzes scope, industrial and geographical profiles of Russian MNCs, their motivation and management, impact on Russian economy and regional integration.

National MNCs with their offshore affiliates are the leading tax evasion economic agents in Russia. Moreover, stable FDI outflow reduces gross capital formation in Russia which is insufficient (19–25% of GDP) for substantial economic growth by standards of emerging economies in this decade (from 4.3 to −3.8 in Russia, from 6.8 to 9.5 in China, from 5.1 to 7.3 in India).

The principal value (originality) of the chapter is its comparatively detailed review of main aspects of Russian MNCs’ worldwide activity made from the point of view of its connection to Russia’s economic and political model.

To analyze internationalization patterns among large Russian multinational corporations (MNCs).

Case study analysis of systematic internationalization attempts within three industries: IT, banking, and steel. For case studies, secondary data was used along with industry expert interviews.

The first finding is that Russian firms actively pursuing internationalization strategies through mergers and acquisitions (M&As) and greenfield investments were not as successful as several optimistic assessments had earlier suggested. Few global corporate champions emerged among Russian MNCs, despite a decade of record high outward foreign direct investments (OFDI). Secondly, we observed the unique trend of splitting operations between international and Russian businesses, which proved more sustainable than operating as a single firm. For example, the IBS-Luxoft group achieved success through gradual legal and organizational separation of branches in order to serve rising demand in developed markets and from its Russian business within the same industry. This double-headed strategy divides a business into two parts that are controlled by the same owners, but operate independently: one firm operates within the home market, while another firm aims to expand globally. This seems to be a typical trend, confirming recent findings for Russian small and medium enterprise (SME) internationalization and reinforcing earlier literature on institutional constraints in the Russian economy.

We analyzed major cases from three actively internationalizing industries. For each industry, we extensively analyzed one main case in particular. Industries’ choice also affects specific internationalization strategies.

This study identifies two distinct approaches in the literature on Russian business internationalization and attempts to combine both. We will also highlight organizational dilemmas as well as patterns in Russian businesses’ successful and failed internationalization strategies over the last decade. We identified an original double-headed internationalization strategy consisting of the separation of the national and global businesses, rather than leveraging their synergy. We will also question the established optimistic assessment of Russian MNC internationalization.

This chapter examines the possibilities of economic growth in Russia from the perspective of the development of organizational capability, namely through the study of best managerial practices of multinational companies (MNCs) doing business in Russia, and their use by Russian companies. With tightening competition, companies are forced to focus on the development of organizational capabilities. Our large-scale empirical research into the managerial capabilities and management practices of MNCs and Russian companies employs a comprehensive sample of 1,530 companies and 1,245 companies in 2016 and 2017, respectively, covering the 10 main sectors of economic activity in Moscow and the Moscow region. The analysis was performed across five managerial capabilities: communication, leadership, problem-solving and decision-making, conflict resolution, and motivation, each subdivided into five management practices. Using statistical methods, we identified the major statistically significant differences in and between the managerial practices of MNCs and Russian companies operating in the Russian market, and their dynamics from 2016 to 2017. Taking MNCs operating in the Russian market as a benchmark, we discover that Russian companies need to close the gap in 17 out of the 25 managerial practices in order to maintain competitiveness in the Russian market and be able to influence their economic growth in Russia.

The paper displays the cultural profile of the Russian management and explores the different roles of factors linked to the history of Russia and current transition to market and democracy. It further develops interpretation of empirical data collected through the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) research project. The survey of managers of multinational companies doing business in Russia tests the cultural profile of the Russian management and confirms the behavioral advantages (visible In-group and Institutional Collectivism) and disadvantages (low Uncertainty Avoidance and Assertiveness) of this culture.

The research question is how home country corruption and nationalism may affect operations of BRIC multinational enterprises. BRIC composition permits a comparison of two authoritarian regimes and two constitutional democracies. Each BRIC features a different combination of corruption and nationalism. The chapter adds South Africa information for two limited reasons. First, from 2010 South Africa is a member of the BRIC summit process. South Africa is an important entry point to Africa, for BRIC multinationals and particularly for China. Second, concerning corruption and nationalism South Africa is analytically useful as a control context that helps illustrate but does not appear to change highly exploratory BRIC findings.

The chapter draws on limited literature and information concerning corruption and nationalism in BRICs to suggest tentative possibilities. Transparency International provides bribe payers index estimates for 28 large economies, with important multinational enterprises, and corruption perceptions index estimates including those 28 countries. These estimates include the four BRICs and South Africa. The available sources suggest some suggested findings about varying impacts of home country corruption and nationalism on operations of BRIC multinationals.

China and Russia are authoritarian regimes in transition from central planning-oriented communist regimes. They are global military powers, expanding influence in their respective regions. Brazil, India, and South Africa are constitutional democracies. India, a nuclear-armed military power, seeks a regional leadership role in South Asia. Brazil and South Africa are key countries economically in their regions. BRIC multinationals are positioned between home country and host country conditions. Chinese and Russian multinationals may reflect a stronger nationalistic tendency due to home country regimes and ownership structure.

The chapter is an original but highly exploratory inquiry into impacts of corruption and nationalism on BRIC multinationals. Extant BRIC literature tends to understudy effects of home country corruption and nationalism on managerial mindset and incentives in either commercial or state-owned enterprises.