期刊文献+

新兴经济体跨国企业国际化双重劣势研究 被引量:22

The Dual Disadvantages of Multinational Enterprises from Emerging Markets
原文传递
导出
摘要 "美国封杀中兴""华为在美受阻"等事件不仅是企业国际化遭遇外来者劣势的表现,也是新兴经济体企业国际化进一步遭遇来源国劣势的典型案例(即国际化"雪上加霜")。然而,已有国际商务研究主要关注外来者劣势,而对新兴经济体企业面临的来源国劣势研究不足。更为重要的是,当前学术界对两种劣势存在混淆使用的现象,降低了国际商务理论对新兴经济体跨国企业国际化的解释力。因此,如何从根源上厘清两种劣势的差异性,又如何预防双重劣势,已成为学术界和实践界亟待解决的问题。鉴于此,本文基于组织身份理论视角,以华为、中兴在美国市场多次受阻作为研究对象,采用扎根理论方法,归纳外来者劣势和来源国劣势的形成机制及其互动机制。本文的理论贡献是从组织身份视角解释外来者劣势和来源国劣势,对两种劣势的差异性进行系统比较,并揭示两种劣势的互动关系。此外,本文对中国企业国际化预防和减弱双重竞争劣势具有启示意义。 The events such as the blockade of ZTE and Huawei by the United States are not only the manifestations of the liability of foreignness that multinational enterprises faced during internationalization,but also the manifestations of liability of origin on the basis of liability of foreignness faced by multinational enterprises from emerging markets.However,the international business studies have mainly focused on the liability of foreignness and lack an understanding of the liability of origin faced by firms from emerging markets.What is more important is that the current academic circles confuse and even misuse the two disadvantages,which reduces the explanatory power of international business theory to multinational enterprises from emerging markets.Therefore,how to clarify the difference between the liability of foreignness and liability of origin,and whether there are interactive relationships between the two disadvantages,these questions have become an urgent problem to be solved.Based on the theory of organizational identity,this paper takes Huawei and ZTE s repeated blockages in the U.S.market as the research subjects,and uses the grounded theory method to summarize the formation mechanism and interaction mechanism of liability of foreignness and liability of origin.The results show that:(1)from the perspective of organizational identity,liability of foreignness is mainly caused by the organizational identity ambiguity,which is caused by information deficit.The core of liability of foreignness is the“foreign identity”of multinational enterprises,that is,as“foreign enterprises”,the host country stakeholders lack a clear understanding of“who the enterprises are”.The main reasons for the lack of information about Chinese enterprises by stakeholders in host countries are insufficient information disclosure,lack of cooperation,lack of communication and so on,and organizational identity ambiguity is manifested in vague ownership structure,vague enterprise background and vague business purpose.(2)By contrast,liability of origin is mainly caused by the stigmatization of organizational identity,which is caused by the negative image of the country of origin.Organizational identity stigmatization refers to the mistrust,defilement and discrimination of the essential characteristics of multinational enterprises by the host country stakeholders,and organizational identity stigmatization leads to the disadvantages such as lack of legitimacy,barriers to market entry and barriers to resource acquisition.The core of liability of origin is the“country of origin identity”of multinational enterprises,that is,the negative country image produces a negative imprint on the organizational identity of multinational enterprises.(3)Liability of foreignness and liability of origin present a dynamic evolution process.On the one hand,liability of foreignness is an important incentive to lead to the liability of origin,because in the situation of organizational identity ambiguity,the host country stakeholders are more inclined to judge multinational enterprises organizational identity according to the country of origin.On the other hand,liability of origin will strengthen the liability of foreignness,because the negative image of the home country will lead to information distortion,and then strengthen the ambiguity of the organizational identity of multinational enterprises.The theoretical contribution of this paper is to explain the formation mechanism of the liability of foreignness and liability of origin from the perspective of organizational identity,systematically compare the differences between the two disadvantages,and reveal the interactive relationship between the two disadvantages.Finally,the conclusion of the research puts forward management instructions on how Chinese multinational enterprises can implement to reduce and weaken liability of foreignness and liability of origin.
作者 杨勃 YANG Bo(School of Economics,Tianjin University of Finance Economics,Tianjin,300222,China;Business Administration Postdoctoral Mobile Station,School of Business,Nankai University,Tianjin,300071,China)
出处 《经济管理》 CSSCI 北大核心 2019年第1期56-70,共15页 Business and Management Journal ( BMJ )
基金 教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目"中国企业逆向跨国并购后的组织身份管理模式研究:影响因素 动态演化与并购绩效"(18YJC630222) 天津市教委科研计划项目(人文社科)"克服来源国劣势:中国跨国企业组织身份意义给赋研究"(SK2017110)
关键词 来源国劣势 外来者劣势 组织身份 新兴经济体跨国企业 扎根理论 liability of origin liability of foreignness organizational identity emerging markets multinational enterprises grounded theory
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

二级参考文献243

  • 1李洪涛,孙元欣.信任、合作与企业绩效[J].现代管理科学,2013,1(3):21-22. 被引量:1
  • 2饶远立,邵冲.46家国内企业使命陈述的实证分析[J].南开管理评论,2005,8(1):64-68. 被引量:18
  • 3赵孟营.组织合法性:在组织理性与事实的社会组织之间[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2005(2):119-125. 被引量:72
  • 4潘镇,鲁明泓.在华外商直接投资进入模式选择的文化解释[J].世界经济,2006,29(2):51-61. 被引量:41
  • 5Barnard H. Overcoming the liability of foreignness without strong firm capabilities: The value of market-based resources [J]. Journal of International Management, 2010,16 (2) : 165- 176.
  • 6Black J S and Mendenhall M. Cross-cultural training effective- ness:A review and theoretical framework for future research [J]. Academy of Management Review, 1990, 15 (1): 113-136.
  • 7Calhoun M A. Unpacking liability of foreignness: Identifying culturally driven external and internal sources of liability for the foreign subsidiary[J]. Journal of International Manage- ment,2002,8(3):301-321.
  • 8Eden L and Miller S R. Distance matters: Liability of foreign- ness,institutional distance and ownership strategy[A]. Hitt M A and Cheng J (Eds.). Advances in international manage- ment[C], New York: Elsevier, 2004 : 187- 221.
  • 9Hennart J F, et al. Do exits proxy a liability of foreignness? The case of Japanese exits from the US[J]. Journal of Inter- national Management, 2002,8 (3) : 241 - 264.
  • 10Henisz W and Williamson O. Comparative economic organiza- tion within and between countries[J]. Business and Politics, 1999,1 (3) : 261 -276.

共引文献182

同被引文献305

引证文献22

二级引证文献124

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部