Search

Cross-border alliances expose firms to heightened risks, posing different governance and control challenges than domestic alliances. We examine the impact of differences in alliance partner countries' institutional environments. Analysis of survey data supports our contention that cross-border alliances involve a greater reliance on formal controls, particularly when firms collaborate with partners in countries with a weaker institutional environment. These relations exist regardless of governance structure (i.e., equity or non-equity alliance) that prior research considers a critical choice for addressing cross-border alliance risks. Additional analyses show that four subdimensions of institutional characteristics (voice and accountability, regulatory quality, rule of law, and control of corruption) and one subdimension of formal controls (behavior controls) are the main drivers in the association between institutional distance and reliance on formal controls. These findings demonstrate the distinct impact of institutional environment as a country-level determinant of alliance control choices. Data Availability: Due to confidentiality agreements with respondents, the data cannot be released publicly. JEL Classifications: D23; D82; L22; M4. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research examines FDI-mediated domestic firms' technological catch-up by considering institutional differences between home and host countries, the role of marketing capabilities, and the joint effects of institutional differences and the degree of foreign ownership. Using firm-level panel data for Indian manufacturing industries, we find that FDI-mediated technological catch-up in domestic firms is conditional on institutional differences between the home and host country of multinational enterprises and the level of marketing capabilities of foreign-owned affiliates. In addition, we find that technological catch-up in domestic firms is likely to be positively influenced by the presence of wholly foreign-owned firms from institutionally close countries, whereas we find some evidence that the presence of minority foreign-owned firms may have a negative effect on domestic technological catch-up, regardless of institutional differences. We also provide theoretical and policy implications of our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal for East European Management Studies is the property of Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article explores the international dimensions of multinationals' corporate political activities, focusing on an international issue-climate change-being implemented differently in a range of countries. Analyzing data from Financial Times Global 500 firms, it examines the influence on types and process of multinationals' political strategies, reckoning with institutional contexts and issue saliency. Findings show that the type of political activities can be characterized as an information strategy to influence policy makers toward market-based solutions, not so much withholding action on emission reduction. Moreover, multinationals pursue self-regulation, targeting a broad range of political actors. The process of political strategy is mostly one of collective action. International differences particularly surface in the type of political actors aimed at, with U.S. and Australian firms focusing more on nongovemment actors (voluntary programs) than European and Japanese firms. Influencing home-country (not host-country) governments is the main component of international political strategy on climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]