{"title":"正规机构、多元化类型和多元化-绩效关系:一项荟萃分析","authors":"Pete Tashman, Ettore Spadafora, Dominik Wagner","doi":"10.1108/mbr-12-2021-0175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe authors meta-analyze research on the diversification–performance relationship to empirically establish the impact of home-country formal institutional quality on this relationship. Prior research assumes that a country’s formal institutional quality negatively affects the diversification–performance relationship, especially when it involves unrelated diversification. However, empirical evidence for these propositions is inconclusive because existing studies consider blocks of countries with limited institutional heterogeneity. To provide more clarity, this study aims to consider the diversification–performance relationship across developed, emerging and developing countries.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe meta-analysis relies on a sample of 293 effect sizes of the diversification–performance relationship from 76 primary studies across 15 countries between 1988 and 2019. The sample excludes effects sizes from papers that consider both product and international diversification to control for complex interactions between the strategies, as well as papers that did not consider both related and unrelated diversification.\n\n\nFindings\nThe results confirm that stronger home-country formal institutions weaken the diversification–performance relationship by decreasing the relative efficiency of internal markets versus external ones. Further, the effect is less negative for related diversification because this strategy can better exploit market frictions in countries with stronger formal institutions and more efficient external markets than its unrelated counterpart.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe study contributes to the literatures on the diversification–performance relationship and home-country governance by providing robust evidence for how formal institutional quality impacts the efficacy of related and unrelated diversification.\n","PeriodicalId":46630,"journal":{"name":"Multinational Business Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Formal institutions, type of diversification and the diversification – performance relationship: a meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Pete Tashman, Ettore Spadafora, Dominik Wagner\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/mbr-12-2021-0175\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe authors meta-analyze research on the diversification–performance relationship to empirically establish the impact of home-country formal institutional quality on this relationship. Prior research assumes that a country’s formal institutional quality negatively affects the diversification–performance relationship, especially when it involves unrelated diversification. However, empirical evidence for these propositions is inconclusive because existing studies consider blocks of countries with limited institutional heterogeneity. To provide more clarity, this study aims to consider the diversification–performance relationship across developed, emerging and developing countries.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThe meta-analysis relies on a sample of 293 effect sizes of the diversification–performance relationship from 76 primary studies across 15 countries between 1988 and 2019. The sample excludes effects sizes from papers that consider both product and international diversification to control for complex interactions between the strategies, as well as papers that did not consider both related and unrelated diversification.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe results confirm that stronger home-country formal institutions weaken the diversification–performance relationship by decreasing the relative efficiency of internal markets versus external ones. Further, the effect is less negative for related diversification because this strategy can better exploit market frictions in countries with stronger formal institutions and more efficient external markets than its unrelated counterpart.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThe study contributes to the literatures on the diversification–performance relationship and home-country governance by providing robust evidence for how formal institutional quality impacts the efficacy of related and unrelated diversification.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":46630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Multinational Business Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Multinational Business Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/mbr-12-2021-0175\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multinational Business Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/mbr-12-2021-0175","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Formal institutions, type of diversification and the diversification – performance relationship: a meta-analysis
Purpose
The authors meta-analyze research on the diversification–performance relationship to empirically establish the impact of home-country formal institutional quality on this relationship. Prior research assumes that a country’s formal institutional quality negatively affects the diversification–performance relationship, especially when it involves unrelated diversification. However, empirical evidence for these propositions is inconclusive because existing studies consider blocks of countries with limited institutional heterogeneity. To provide more clarity, this study aims to consider the diversification–performance relationship across developed, emerging and developing countries.
Design/methodology/approach
The meta-analysis relies on a sample of 293 effect sizes of the diversification–performance relationship from 76 primary studies across 15 countries between 1988 and 2019. The sample excludes effects sizes from papers that consider both product and international diversification to control for complex interactions between the strategies, as well as papers that did not consider both related and unrelated diversification.
Findings
The results confirm that stronger home-country formal institutions weaken the diversification–performance relationship by decreasing the relative efficiency of internal markets versus external ones. Further, the effect is less negative for related diversification because this strategy can better exploit market frictions in countries with stronger formal institutions and more efficient external markets than its unrelated counterpart.
Originality/value
The study contributes to the literatures on the diversification–performance relationship and home-country governance by providing robust evidence for how formal institutional quality impacts the efficacy of related and unrelated diversification.
期刊介绍:
Multinational Business Review publishes high quality and innovative peer-review research on the strategy, organization and performance of multinational enterprise (MNE), international business history, geography of international business, and the impact of international business on economic growth and development. The journal encourages papers that are cross-disciplinary in nature, and that address new and important issues in international business. Multinational Business Review also promotes research on under-represented regions such as Africa, Central and Eastern Europe, Latin America, and South East Asia and their MNEs, as well as under-studied topics such as the role of trade, investment and other public policies. Specific topics of interest include innovation and entrepreneurship in an international context; corporate governance and ownership; social, environmental and political risk; the role of multilateral institutions; and the nature of emerging market multinationals. The title seeks strong conceptual studies, contributing to the advancement of theories and frameworks, and sound empirical work, whether qualitative or quantitative, suggesting managerial, economic or government policy recommendations. The journal encourages replication studies that contribute to our understanding of the reliability and validity of current knowledge. Finally, Multinational Business Review welcomes proposals for perspectives pieces that offer critical and challenging viewpoints; surveys of the literature particularly those that use new and innovative bibliometric methods; and special issues on topics of relevance to Multinational Business Review.