Despite the prominence of International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001 certification as a global strategy instrument, there is persistent doubt about its effectiveness as a value-generating tool, especially for multinational corporations (MNCs). This study draws on institutional theory to explain the varying market valuations of international environmental management certification following a strongly binding multilateral environmental agreement. We submit that ISO 14001 certification increases the market value of MNCs more strongly following the institutional pressures exerted by the strongly binding Paris Agreement. This effect varies due to institutional country-of-origin effects and exposure to host countries with stringent environmental regulations. We provide empirical support using a difference-in-differences analysis of 3193 MNCs from 60 countries with pledged commitments to emission reductions in the Paris Agreement.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001 has been recognized as pivotal for achieving sustainable development goals. Nevertheless, managers continue to seek financial justifications for adopting this prominent global standard. Our study shows that ISO 14001 increases the market value of multinational corporations (MNCs) more strongly following the binding Paris Agreement, as the global standard reassures investors about corporate alignment with global climate goals. Although the financial impact of ISO 14001 appears to be greater for MNCs from emerging economies, owing to the lower expectations associated with institutional quality in emerging economies, investors correct the (economic) evaluation of ISO-certified MNCs according to their exposure to host countries with stringent environmental regulations. These findings inform managers of the importance of aligning corporate sustainability with geographical diversification strategies.
Foreign-born chief executive officers (CEOs) are increasingly common in US corporations. However, little is known about whether they are held to the same performance standard as native-born CEOs. We examine whether CEO national origin moderates the relationship between firm performance and CEO dismissal. Drawing on social identity and attribution theories, we argue that CEO foreignness becomes more salient when firm performance is poor, increasing foreign-born CEOs' dismissal likelihood. Using a large sample of US firms, we find that at low levels of performance, the dismissal probability for foreign-born CEOs is 15.96% compared to 4.02% for native-born CEOs. While the increase in foreign-born CEOs in US corporations may reflect the declining importance of national origin for C-suite appointments, boards' evaluations of these “elite migrants” may be biased.
Foreign-born leaders are increasingly common in US C-suites and currently manage several global firms, including Google, Microsoft, and Pepsi. But, once hired, are foreign- and native-born CEOs evaluated uniformly by corporate boards? Given that CEOs are more likely to be dismissed when firm performance is low, we compare dismissal likelihoods for foreign- and native-born CEOs when performance is subpar. Using a sample of 11,947 observations from firms in the Standard & Poor's 1500, we find significant disparities in the dismissal likelihoods between the two groups. At low levels of performance and ceteris paribus, the dismissal likelihood for a foreign-born CEO is 15.96% compared to 4.02% for a native-born CEO, highlighting biases relating to foreign origin in CEO evaluations.
Cross-border acquisitions (CBAs) exhibit a wave-like pattern, clustering temporally, industry-wise, and at the country level. We draw upon the bargaining power perspective and argue that CBA wave context alters the relative bargaining position between acquirer and target firms, which affects deal completion. Our findings suggest that acquisition wave deals have a lower likelihood of completion compared to non-wave deals. However, within a CBA wave, we find that acquirers that move early and with a high acquisition pace have a higher likelihood of deal completion. We test our arguments on a simulation-based dataset comprising 17,815 wave and non-wave deals identified between 1990 and 2012 across 13 acquirer and 21 target countries. We contribute to the CBA literature by differentiating between wave and non-wave environments and their impact on deal completion.
Cross-border acquisitions (CBAs) often happen in waves that emerge at the industry and country-levels. These waves are characterized by heightened level of acquisition activities such that the relative position of acquirer and target firms is different within waves as compared to outside of the waves. As a result, acquisition deals announced within waves are less likely to be completed than those announced outside of the waves. At the same time, acquiring firms that announce acquisitions at an early stage within a CBA wave and move with a faster speed to conduct more acquisitions are more likely to successfully close the deals than other firms.
The literature on the internationalization of state-owned enterprises in emerging countries usually implicitly assumes continuity in the provision of key resources by home country governments. This assumption, however, does not necessarily hold in the presence of political elections in democratic emerging countries. Drawing from the resource dependence theory and the literatures on election-induced uncertainty and investment irreversibility, we study how political elections in emerging countries affect the internationalization of multinationals with state indirect ownership. Using a sample of 89 Brazilian multinationals from 2000 to 2012, we find that these state-owned multinationals are less likely to internationalize during elections than multinationals with fully private ownership. When they internationalize, they choose investments that provide them with more flexibility than those chosen by their private counterparts.
Political elections in democratic emerging countries regularly create considerable policy uncertainty and opportunism in policymaking. This affects the provision of government resources that state-owned enterprises (SOEs) depend on for their internationalization strategy. Our results show that Brazilian multinationals with state indirect ownership are less likely to internationalize in an election year, and when they do, they implement more flexible strategies than fully private multinationals. These findings suggest that SOEs need to include the timing of political elections in their long-term international strategic planning. Our study also stresses the pros and cons of the SOE-government relationship. Whereas the link to the state can offer SOEs a way to access valuable government resources, it may constrain their managerial autonomy in international strategy decisions during political elections.
Current research on digital artifacts and international business reveals that digitalization is changing how firms enter international markets and operate within them. The unbounded nature of digital artifacts provides opportunities for entrepreneur-driven firms to rapidly launch and develop digital platforms for international markets. However, extant literature provides little guidance on leveraging the specific characteristics of digital artifacts and what entrepreneurs should do to facilitate internationalization. We conducted an extensive longitudinal case study spanning more than 10 years to garner data on digital-based INV pursuing internationalization. We aimed to conceptualize a theoretical model explaining the role of entrepreneurs in integrating, building, and reconfiguring their capabilities to leverage the characteristics of digital artifacts for platform development.
What actions should entrepreneurs take to leverage the characteristics of digital artifacts to support their firm's internationalization? This study offers entrepreneurs a model to pinpoint those actions and possible avenues for digital platform development in the international market context. The model demonstrates how firms can apply digital artifact characteristics during the phases of internationalization and how those characteristics can facilitate and accelerate the international development of a digital platform. The findings also reveal how different entrepreneurial resources and capabilities should be integrated, built, and reconfigured throughout the process.
We investigate how the presence of populist rulers affects foreign direct investment in democratic countries. Our analysis sheds light on the mechanisms by which this political force impacts firms' decisions, considering the effect of institutions and internationalization strategies at the firm level in the global arena. We test our theory using instrumental variables with a panel dataset of US multinationals in 37 democratic countries between 1999 and 2020. Our findings suggest that the presence of a populist ruler at the helm of government seems to undermine firms' foreign investment and it is potentially moderated by country-level institutions and firm-level internationalization. Collectively, our results offer new insights on how populism affects multinationals' investment decisions, contributing to the literature that examines the relationship between political pressure and investment decisions.
Investing in countries with populist rulers poses a challenge for multinationals. Populist leaders constantly threaten to abruptly change the institutions that provide certainty for foreign investments. This study argues that the presence of a populist negatively affects firms' foreign investment, moderated by institutions and internationalization strategies. The adverse impacts of populism on investment are mitigated in countries with robust institutional frameworks. In such cases, the credibility of populists' promises to alter the established “rules of the game” is lower than in countries with weaker institutions. Additionally, by expanding their degree of internationalization, firms are better equipped to navigate the lack of information generated by populist rulers. Our research provides implications for managers in assessing the risks and opportunities associated with investing in such contexts.
This study delves into the relationship between alliance management capability (AMC) and the post-entry internationalization speed of small-sized and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). We develop a novel theoretical framework that illuminates the effect of co-innovation ambidexterity as a mechanism that unlocks AMC value in speeding up SME internationalization following entry into foreign markets. To validate our framework, we conduct an empirical investigation using a sample of 278 UK-based manufacturing SMEs. Our findings support the proposition that co-innovation ambidexterity is a crucial mediating mechanism through which AMC boosts the post-entry internationalization speed of SMEs. Therefore, this research sheds new light on the critical roles of AMC and co-innovation ambidexterity during the post-entry stage, which has far-reaching implications for the fields of international entrepreneurship and international strategic alliances.
Internationalizing SMEs are increasingly forming alliances with the aim of accessing and leveraging external knowledge to tackle the challenges they typically encounter during post-entry phase. However, these alliances are difficult to establish and manage, which results in high failure rates. To address this lacuna, we argue that AMC and co-innovation ambidexterity facilitate the post-entry internationalization speed of SMEs. Using data from 278 UK-based manufacturing SMEs, we show that AMC is an important capability that allows SMEs to leverage and harness the knowledge of their alliances for co-innovation ambidexterity, which, in turn, increases their post-entry internationalization speed. Together, these findings provide important insights for those SMEs' managers who aim to develop effective strategies for rapid internationalization via strategic alliances.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：