هافستد، شوارتز، و یا برداشت های مدیریتی؟ بررسی اثر معیارهای متفاوت فاصله فرهنگی بر انتخاب حالت ایجاد شده توسط شرکت های چند ملیتی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|11600||2006||20 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||9122 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : International Business Review, Volume 15, Issue 4, August 2006, Pages 361–380
In recent years, scholars have become increasingly critical of Kogut and Singh's [(1988). The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 411–432] cultural distance index and of Hofstede's [(1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications] underlying national culture framework. We therefore examine and compare the effects of five cultural distance measures on the choice by multinational enterprises (MNEs) between expanding abroad through greenfield or acquisition. Two of these measures are based on Hofstede (1980), another two on Schwartz [(1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, methods, and applications (pp. 85–119). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; (1999). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48(1), 12–47], and one on managerial perceptions. Analyzing a sample of foreign expansions by Dutch MNEs and controlling for other factors, we find that high scores on all cultural distance measures significantly increase the likelihood that MNEs choose greenfields, and that the explanatory power of the Hofstede and Schwartz-based measures is comparable, while that of the perceptual one is somewhat lower. We conclude that it may thus be premature to dismiss Hofstede's work as outdated or as inaccurately reflecting national cultures, and to consider Schwartz's framework to be superior.
In the last few decades, international business (IB) research has made extensive use of the concept of national cultural distance to explain the expansion behavior and affiliate success of multinational enterprises (MNEs) (see Shenkar, 2001 for an overview). National cultural distance can be defined as the extent to which the shared norms and values in one country differ from those in another (Chen & Hu, 2002; Hofstede, 2001; Kogut & Singh, 1988). One stream of IB research that has often included cultural distance as an explanatory variable is that on foreign entry mode choices by MNEs (see Harzing, 2003 for an overview). Most studies in this stream have measured the cultural distance between an MNE's home country and the target country of the expansion through Kogut and Singh's (1988) index, which is based on Hofstede's (1980) dimensions of national culture. Although scholars have become increasingly critical of this index and of Hofstede's underlying work (e.g., Schwartz, 1994; Shenkar, 2001; Steenkamp, 2001), foreign entry mode studies have continued to rely on them, since little progress has been made in developing reliable alternatives. We aim to break this status quo by examining and comparing the effects of five measures of cultural distance on the choice by MNEs between expanding abroad through greenfield investment or acquisition, the so-called ‘establishment mode choice’ (Padmanabhan & Cho, 1995). Two of these measures are based on the work of Hofstede (1980), another two on that of Schwartz (1994) and Schwartz (1999), and one on managerial perceptions, and we test their effects in a sample of foreign expansions by Dutch MNEs. Controlling for the effects of other variables affecting MNEs’ establishment mode choices, we find that high scores on all measures significantly increase the likelihood that MNEs choose greenfields and that the explanatory power of the Hofstede and Schwartz-based measures is comparable, while that of the perceptual one is lower. This leads us to conclude that it may be premature to dismiss Hofstede's (1980) work as outdated or as inaccurately reflecting national cultures, and to consider Schwartz (1994) and Schwartz (1999) more recent framework to be superior. The next section reviews the frameworks that form the basis for our cultural distance measures. We then discuss the relationship between cultural distance and establishment mode choices by MNEs, our empirical application. In the methodological section that follows we describe our data sources, the operationalization of our variables, and the statistical method we used. We then present our empirical findings and discuss them in a subsequent section. The final section concludes and offers suggestions for future research.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
This study explores the comparative effects of various measures of national cultural distance on the choice by MNEs between expanding abroad through greenfield or acquisition. Previous empirical studies examining the effect of cultural distance on this choice have typically used the well-known Kogut and Singh (1988) index based on Hofstede (1980), but the latter's work has become subject to increasing criticism in recent years (e.g., Schwartz, 1994; Steenkamp, 2001). We therefore sought to examine whether alternative measures of cultural distance, in particular those based on Schwartz's (1994) dimensions of national culture and on managerial perceptions, are better able to explain establishment mode choices by MNEs. The theoretical reason why the cultural distance to the target country should affect an MNE's choice between greenfield and acquisition is that firms located in culturally distant countries have radically different organizational and managerial practices as well as communication styles, and are hence difficult to integrate into an MNE's corporate network after they have been acquired. MNEs are therefore more likely to enter culturally distant countries through greenfield investments, as such investments allow MNEs to introduce their practices from the outset to a carefully selected workforce that fits their culture (Hennart & Park, 1993; Hofstede, 2001; Kogut & Singh, 1988). Examining the effects of five measures of cultural distance in a sample of 246 foreign expansions by Dutch MNEs, we found that high scores on all these measures significantly increase the likelihood that these MNEs choose greenfields, and that the explanatory power of the Hofstede and Schwartz-based measures is comparable, while that of the perceptual one is somewhat lower. These findings suggest that IB scholars can reliably use both Hofstede and Schwartz-based measures of cultural distance, in the form of either the Kogut and Singh (1988) index or a Euclidean distance index. It may thus be premature to dismiss Hofstede's work as outdated or as misrepresenting national cultures and to consider Schwartz's framework to be superior, even though the latter's research design was purposefully chosen for the goal of the research. Our finding that the explanatory power of the perceptual cultural distance measure is lower than that of the Hofstede and Schwartz-based ones may be caused by the fact that the perceptual measure consists of a single item. We therefore recommend future studies to develop multiple-item measures of perceived cultural distance and to examine whether these more fine-grained measures are better able to explain establishment mode choices by MNEs. The psychic distance literature (e.g., Johanson & Vahlne, 1977; O’Grady & Lane, 1996; Sullivan & Bauerschmidt, 1990) may offer valuable suggestions and templates for such measures. As our sample solely consists of foreign expansions by Dutch MNEs, we also urge scholars to examine the generalizability of our findings by replicating our tests in other settings, analyzing expansions by MNEs from other countries. Finally, we recommend future studies to examine the comparative effects of multiple measures of cultural distance on other strategic choices made by MNEs, such as that between shared and full subsidiary ownership, as well as on foreign subsidiary success. This will further increase our understanding of the validity of such measures and their underlying cultural frameworks in IB research.