制度距离、资源松弛、国外市场进入

IF 8.6 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Róisín Donnelly, Saptarshi Purkayastha, Tatiana S. Manolova, Linda F. Edelman
{"title":"制度距离、资源松弛、国外市场进入","authors":"Róisín Donnelly, Saptarshi Purkayastha, Tatiana S. Manolova, Linda F. Edelman","doi":"10.1057/s41267-023-00647-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Traditional theories from the international business and strategy literatures have posited that institutional distance constrains firm internationalization and that slack financial and managerial resources can be redeployed to help overcome this distance and facilitate growth. However, are slack resources equally effective when entering host markets of different institutional quality? Combining an institutional economics’ view of distance with a Penrosean perspective on resources, we argue that financial slack allows firms “to pay their way” into more institutionally developed markets, whereas managerial slack allows firms “to work their way” into less institutionally developed markets. From data on the internationalization of 307 Indian computer software companies over 16 years, we find support for our hypotheses when considering formal institutional distance. We also find that managerial slack mitigates informal institutional distance, irrespective of the direction of internationalization. Additional robustness tests, using propensity score matching, and an alternative sample of 3600 manufacturing firms from 49 countries, support our main results. Our findings suggest that slack is not a generic panacea for overcoming institutional distance, in that the effectiveness of each type of slack is dependent on both the direction of entry and the type of institutional distance to be overcome, formal or informal.</p>","PeriodicalId":48453,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Business Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Institutional distance, slack resources, and foreign market entry\",\"authors\":\"Róisín Donnelly, Saptarshi Purkayastha, Tatiana S. Manolova, Linda F. Edelman\",\"doi\":\"10.1057/s41267-023-00647-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Traditional theories from the international business and strategy literatures have posited that institutional distance constrains firm internationalization and that slack financial and managerial resources can be redeployed to help overcome this distance and facilitate growth. However, are slack resources equally effective when entering host markets of different institutional quality? Combining an institutional economics’ view of distance with a Penrosean perspective on resources, we argue that financial slack allows firms “to pay their way” into more institutionally developed markets, whereas managerial slack allows firms “to work their way” into less institutionally developed markets. From data on the internationalization of 307 Indian computer software companies over 16 years, we find support for our hypotheses when considering formal institutional distance. We also find that managerial slack mitigates informal institutional distance, irrespective of the direction of internationalization. Additional robustness tests, using propensity score matching, and an alternative sample of 3600 manufacturing firms from 49 countries, support our main results. Our findings suggest that slack is not a generic panacea for overcoming institutional distance, in that the effectiveness of each type of slack is dependent on both the direction of entry and the type of institutional distance to be overcome, formal or informal.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48453,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Business Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Business Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-023-00647-6\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Business Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-023-00647-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

来自国际商业和战略文献的传统理论认为,制度距离限制了企业的国际化,闲置的财务和管理资源可以重新配置,以帮助克服这种距离,促进增长。然而,在进入不同制度质量的东道国市场时,闲置资源是否同样有效?结合制度经济学关于距离的观点和彭罗斯关于资源的观点,我们认为,财务松弛允许企业“支付自己的方式”进入制度更发达的市场,而管理松弛允许企业“努力”进入制度不发达的市场。从16年来307家印度计算机软件公司的国际化数据中,我们发现在考虑正式制度距离时,我们的假设得到了支持。我们还发现,无论国际化方向如何,管理松弛都会缓解非正式制度距离。使用倾向得分匹配和来自49个国家的3600家制造企业的替代样本进行的额外稳健性检验支持了我们的主要结果。我们的研究结果表明,松弛并不是克服制度距离的通用灵丹妙药,因为每种松弛的有效性都取决于进入的方向和要克服的制度距离的类型,是正式的还是非正式的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Institutional distance, slack resources, and foreign market entry

Traditional theories from the international business and strategy literatures have posited that institutional distance constrains firm internationalization and that slack financial and managerial resources can be redeployed to help overcome this distance and facilitate growth. However, are slack resources equally effective when entering host markets of different institutional quality? Combining an institutional economics’ view of distance with a Penrosean perspective on resources, we argue that financial slack allows firms “to pay their way” into more institutionally developed markets, whereas managerial slack allows firms “to work their way” into less institutionally developed markets. From data on the internationalization of 307 Indian computer software companies over 16 years, we find support for our hypotheses when considering formal institutional distance. We also find that managerial slack mitigates informal institutional distance, irrespective of the direction of internationalization. Additional robustness tests, using propensity score matching, and an alternative sample of 3600 manufacturing firms from 49 countries, support our main results. Our findings suggest that slack is not a generic panacea for overcoming institutional distance, in that the effectiveness of each type of slack is dependent on both the direction of entry and the type of institutional distance to be overcome, formal or informal.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
84
期刊介绍: The Selection Committee for the JIBS Decade Award is pleased to announce that the 2023 award will be presented to Anthony Goerzen, Christian Geisler Asmussen, and Bo Bernhard Nielsen for their article titled "Global cities and multinational enterprise location strategy," published in JIBS in 2013 (volume 44, issue 5, pages 427-450). The prestigious JIBS Decade Award, sponsored by Palgrave Macmillan, recognizes the most influential paper published in the Journal of International Business Studies from a decade earlier. The award will be presented at the annual AIB conference. To be eligible for the JIBS Decade Award, an article must be one of the top five most cited papers published in JIBS for the respective year. The Selection Committee for this year included Kaz Asakawa, Jeremy Clegg, Catherine Welch, and Rosalie L. Tung, serving as the Committee Chair and JIBS Editor-in-Chief, all from distinguished universities around the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信