scholarly journals Do Institutional Distances Influence South-South Cross-Border Acquisitions?

Internext ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 190
Author(s):  
Stephanie Tonn Goulart Moura ◽  
Juliano Krug ◽  
Christian Falaster ◽  
Iara Regina dos Santos Parisotto

Different countries have different institutional environments. In this way, multinational companies must deal with the difficulties imposed by the differences between their home environment and that of the country where they are inserted. In this article, we analyze the effects of institutional distance on South-South acquisitions. Specifically, we analyze the effect of institutional distance on the amount of participation chosen in Latin American international acquisitions in Brazil. More specifically, the effect of institutional distance is analyzed through the percentage of shares acquired in international acquisitions. Our results contribute to the theory in international business because it explains why Latin American companies prefer to make total acquisitions even in situations of high institutional distances.

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 454-481 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rushiun Liou ◽  
Kevin Lee ◽  
Scott Miller

Purpose Emerging-market multinational companies (EMNCs) utilize cross-border merger and acquisitions (M&As) to acquire strategic assets that compensate for their resource deficiencies. Therefore, developed markets have become important destinations for EMNCs. Institutional distance constitutes a major source of competitive disadvantage for foreign firms competing with indigenous firms. The purpose of this paper is to examine the ownership pattern of cross-border M&As in the USA, and determine if EMNCs respond to institutional distance differently than advanced-market multinational companies (AMNCs). Design/methodology/approach Based on the extant literature in institutional theory as well as internationalization strategy, a quantitative study was carried out. Hypotheses were proposed and tested using fixed effects panel regressions. Findings This paper finds that both AMNCs and EMNCs take smaller ownership positions when there is greater cognitive and normative distance. The negative association is stronger for AMNCs than for EMNCs. Further, the larger the regulative distance in the positive direction, meaning a higher level of development in the host market than in the home market, the more AMNCs and EMNCs are led to opt for a higher ownership position, with EMNCs being less influenced by regulative distance. Research limitations/implications Though findings are robust and stable, this study is limited to observations that only have US target firms. Originality/value By integrating the literature from institutional theory and strategy, this paper offers a clearer understanding and distinction of the acquisition decisions made by EMNCs and AMNCs.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Camille Cochrane

<p>Purpose - Globalization has increased competition to an international level. However, limited market experience causes uncertainty, affecting how firms strategize their entry. Institutional distance can be a dominant cause of such environmental uncertainty. The institutional environment incorporates three institutional pillars; the regulatory pillar, the normative pillar and the cognitive pillar. Institutions are shaped by culture and desires to protect domestic business, meaning institutions differ between countries. This is known as institutional distance. There is, however, a research gap concerning the relative influence of institutional pillars on cross-border acquisition ownership, when institutional distance is present. This thesis seeks to research the influential effect of all three institutional pillars on acquisition ownership, when firms are faced with institutional distance.  Theory - Institutional theory was the fundamental theory used in this research, applying the sociology perspective of Scott (1995). Firstly, investigations were conducted on individual pillars to see how each pillar influenced acquisition ownership. Secondly, individual pillar findings were then combined and compared, to illustrate their relative influence on acquisition ownership. Such simultaneous acknowledgement of all three institutional pillars, provided new insight on the relative effects of institutions on acquisition ownership.  Methodology - This study implemented a single method approach, using quantitative analysis. Archival data was gathered focusing on firms from three industries in eleven selected countries who conduct cross-border acquisitions (CBAs). CBAs were chosen due to their popular use as a research construct in imitation research. Cognitive distance, normative distance and regulatory distance were then used to measure institutional distance. Cognitive distance effects were measured using frequency based imitation. Normative distance was measured using two of Hofstede’s (1980) cultural value dimensions: uncertainty avoidance and collectivism. Regulatory distance was measured using World Bank Governance Indicators. Thus, it was important to strategically choose home countries to ensure a variety of dimension and indicator values with which to conduct a reliable study. Logistic regression, conducted with STATA, was then used to analyze relationships between institutions and acquisition ownership.  Key Findings – The findings illustrate that all three institutional pillars have an influential effect on acquisition ownership decisions. This reinforces the emerging belief, that studies must include all three institutional pillars in research. This finding adds to this scant research. Analyzing the comprehensive institutional environment produces more reliable results.  The findings suggest that institutional pillars form an institutional hierarchy when institutional distance exists between the home and host countries. Regulatory distance have the strongest influence on acquisition ownership. Severe regulatory sanctions threaten illegitimate behaviours, forcing foreign entrants to prioritize compliance to regulatory institutions. Normative distance has the second strongest impact on acquisition ownership. Its tacit nature camouflages dysfunctional cultural complexities that disrupt strategy implementation, which can cause a firm to relocate. Lastly, cognitive distance has the third strongest influence on acquisition ownership. Its lack of severe repercussions facilitates the prioritization of the previous two pillars. However, cognitive distance acknowledgement is important as it illustrates how host participants interpret stimuli from their environment, which informs foreign entrants of appropriate cross-national responsive behaviour.  Contributions - This study contributes to international business research by illustrating the hierarchical formation of the influence of institutional pillars on cross-border acquisition ownership, where institutional distance is present. This contribution has managerial implications. Managers are strongly encouraged to consider all of regulatory pillar, normative pillar and cognitive pillar when venturing abroad. Further, managers must acknowledge the institutional pillar hierarchy and prioritize responses accordingly, to avoid crippling outcomes that could lead to poor acquisition outcomes. Lastly, this thesis contributes to literature by highlighting the need to include collectivism as a research construct in ownership studies. Prior studies have narrowly focused on uncertainty avoidance and power distance. However, collectivism has been observed to influence ownership, likely due to the recent rise of Asia in international business.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Camille Cochrane

<p>Purpose - Globalization has increased competition to an international level. However, limited market experience causes uncertainty, affecting how firms strategize their entry. Institutional distance can be a dominant cause of such environmental uncertainty. The institutional environment incorporates three institutional pillars; the regulatory pillar, the normative pillar and the cognitive pillar. Institutions are shaped by culture and desires to protect domestic business, meaning institutions differ between countries. This is known as institutional distance. There is, however, a research gap concerning the relative influence of institutional pillars on cross-border acquisition ownership, when institutional distance is present. This thesis seeks to research the influential effect of all three institutional pillars on acquisition ownership, when firms are faced with institutional distance.  Theory - Institutional theory was the fundamental theory used in this research, applying the sociology perspective of Scott (1995). Firstly, investigations were conducted on individual pillars to see how each pillar influenced acquisition ownership. Secondly, individual pillar findings were then combined and compared, to illustrate their relative influence on acquisition ownership. Such simultaneous acknowledgement of all three institutional pillars, provided new insight on the relative effects of institutions on acquisition ownership.  Methodology - This study implemented a single method approach, using quantitative analysis. Archival data was gathered focusing on firms from three industries in eleven selected countries who conduct cross-border acquisitions (CBAs). CBAs were chosen due to their popular use as a research construct in imitation research. Cognitive distance, normative distance and regulatory distance were then used to measure institutional distance. Cognitive distance effects were measured using frequency based imitation. Normative distance was measured using two of Hofstede’s (1980) cultural value dimensions: uncertainty avoidance and collectivism. Regulatory distance was measured using World Bank Governance Indicators. Thus, it was important to strategically choose home countries to ensure a variety of dimension and indicator values with which to conduct a reliable study. Logistic regression, conducted with STATA, was then used to analyze relationships between institutions and acquisition ownership.  Key Findings – The findings illustrate that all three institutional pillars have an influential effect on acquisition ownership decisions. This reinforces the emerging belief, that studies must include all three institutional pillars in research. This finding adds to this scant research. Analyzing the comprehensive institutional environment produces more reliable results.  The findings suggest that institutional pillars form an institutional hierarchy when institutional distance exists between the home and host countries. Regulatory distance have the strongest influence on acquisition ownership. Severe regulatory sanctions threaten illegitimate behaviours, forcing foreign entrants to prioritize compliance to regulatory institutions. Normative distance has the second strongest impact on acquisition ownership. Its tacit nature camouflages dysfunctional cultural complexities that disrupt strategy implementation, which can cause a firm to relocate. Lastly, cognitive distance has the third strongest influence on acquisition ownership. Its lack of severe repercussions facilitates the prioritization of the previous two pillars. However, cognitive distance acknowledgement is important as it illustrates how host participants interpret stimuli from their environment, which informs foreign entrants of appropriate cross-national responsive behaviour.  Contributions - This study contributes to international business research by illustrating the hierarchical formation of the influence of institutional pillars on cross-border acquisition ownership, where institutional distance is present. This contribution has managerial implications. Managers are strongly encouraged to consider all of regulatory pillar, normative pillar and cognitive pillar when venturing abroad. Further, managers must acknowledge the institutional pillar hierarchy and prioritize responses accordingly, to avoid crippling outcomes that could lead to poor acquisition outcomes. Lastly, this thesis contributes to literature by highlighting the need to include collectivism as a research construct in ownership studies. Prior studies have narrowly focused on uncertainty avoidance and power distance. However, collectivism has been observed to influence ownership, likely due to the recent rise of Asia in international business.</p>


2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joss G. Vargas-Hernnndez ◽  
Edgar Ernesto VVzquez VVzquez

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 37-59
Author(s):  
Karen Newman

Cross-national distances between national cultures and national institutions have been studied extensively in the last two decades, particularly with respect to their effects on the conduct of international business. Yet varying levels of analysis, inconsistent definitions, and different operationalizations of cross-national distances inhibit theoretical and empirical advances. Three approaches to non-geographic cross-national distance permeate the literature: psychic distance, national cultural distance, and institutional distance. The meaning of psychic distance has become muddied by evolving operationalizations, from objective indicators to individual perceptions. National cultural distance has been confused with both psychic distance and institutional distance. Various and inconsistent institutional arrangements and business practices are used as measures of institutional distance. This article reviews overlaps, inconsistencies, and ambiguities in the definitions and measurements of psychic, national cultural and institutional distance; suggests a way to rationalize the three constructs; and offers two competing models to explain the role of all three distances in international business decisions.


2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Gaby Ramia ◽  
Simon Marginson ◽  
Erlenawati Sawir ◽  
Chris Nyland

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document