تناسب محیط بازار داخلی با خارجی: مطالعه اکتشافی از رابطه تناسب با عملکرد

This research draws on the foreign market entry and organizational strategy literatures to address the relationship between home and foreign market environmental congruence and overseas venture performance. Theoretical arguments from prior studies have been juxtaposed in that transaction cost and diversification perspectives hypothesize different outcomes of firm entry into heterogeneous or homogeneous market environments. Using polynomial regression we test hypotheses regarding the home and overseas environmental congruence–venture performance relationship, and the organizational factors which act as moderators of this relationship. The results show that traditional transaction cost and market replication theories fail to fully explain the value of environmental fit when matching overseas market with domestic market profiles. Furthermore, the findings reveal that the moderating effects of organizational factors on the market congruence–venture performance relationship are also counter-intuitive to traditional perspectives. Managerial implications, study limitations, and directions for future research are offered.

The search for match, or fit, between organizational and environmental structures has been a core concept in normative models of strategy formulation (Vorhies & Morgan, 2003; Zajac, Krattz, & Bresser, 2000). Recent examinations in this area have included human resource fit with environment (Wright & Snell, 1998), multi-national subsidiary similarities (Rosenzweig & Singh, 1991), dynamic capabilities (Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997), and flexibility (Ghemawat & del Sol, 1998), among a variety of other critical topics. Since strategic fit has become a central tenet of strategy formulation, the firm's ability to achieve strategic fit has been deemed critical in the pursuit of specific performance goals (Ginsberg & Venkatrman, 1985; Zajac et al., 2000). While significant organizational and organizational–environmental fit research does exist, and the possibility for this research to provide models for effective environment–environment fit seems intuitive, to date no suitable framework exists for evaluating the benefits of choosing overseas markets which fit, or match, markets currently in the firm's portfolio. What remain unknown are the performance implications of congruence (or fit) between cross-national market environments, and the degree to which organizational factors moderate the congruence–performance relationship in multinational firms. This leaves a significant gap in the literature relative to the value of strategic market choices. Similar to Zajac et al. (2000), we see the vacancy of research in the environmental fit area as attributable to specific problems which hinder the theoretical development and empirical testing within this domain. First, “some researchers remain justifiably uncomfortable with the static orientation that the concept of fit has historically implied” (Zajac et al., 2000, p. 429). To date, the conceptual and methodological tools needed to predict and assess an organization's strategy in changing environments are yet to emerge. Second, simple bivariate techniques popular in strategic research do not permit an accurate conceptualization or measurement of what is essentially a curvilinear phenomenon. Third, and perhaps most importantly, the theoretical arguments in prior foreign market entry studies, namely transaction cost and diversification theories, are juxtaposed in their perspectives of the value of market choices. Transaction cost advocates argue for the value of asset-specific transfers and market replication, while diversification theory posits that a diverse portfolio of markets reduces risk and enhances performance outcomes. The objective of this article is to provide an exploratory study of the value of market congruence to the firm's overseas ventures. First, we define environmental fit and then draw on both the strategy and foreign market entry literatures to argue that the relationship between the fit, or congruence, of the firm's domestic and foreign market environments and overseas venture performance is significant. Second, the fact that a firm's contingencies are both environmental and organizational implies a potential tension between a firm's strategic fit position versus a fit between the firm's strategy and its unique competencies (Zajac et al., 2000). Thus, we draw on the organizational theory and foreign market entry literature to model potential moderators of the environmental congruence–performance relationship, namely: (1) degree of vertical integration within the overseas market; (2) degree of global strategic orientation; and (3) degree of product standardization, versus the adaptation alternative. These relationships are illustrated in Fig. 1. In order to avoid the traditional problems with measuring strategic fit, we adapt the methodology of Edwards and Parry (1993) and utilize polynomial regression equation analysis to test the hypotheses. The paper is organized as follows. We begin by reviewing the importance of domestic and foreign market environments and define the concept of fit, which ranges from lack of fit to congruence. Next, we review the conflicting theoretical perspectives which have hindered our ability to effectively predict the value of market congruence. Based on the extant literature, we then argue that venture performance is significantly influenced by the degree of domestic and foreign market environment fit. We then develop hypotheses based on the relevant literature pertaining to the potential moderators of the market congruence–venture performance relationship. Measurement and data collection are described next, followed by a detailed discussion of the data analysis strategy. Finally, the results are presented, along with their managerial and research implications.

In our study, we have addressed a juxtaposition within the literature, in that two distinct research streams have offered often conflicting conclusions relative to the value of market congruence. While our findings may seem counter-intuitive, it should be remembered that the value of market disparity, reflected in the firm's ability to absorb new knowledge, practices, and innovations, has not been sufficiently researched. Furthermore, our findings are restricted by certain conditions, and therefore have some limitations. First, our sample includes manufacturing firms and thus no service firms were investigated. Given the importance of service industries, the often acute differences between manufacturing and service influencers, and the increasing service representation in multinational operations, we view this as an important limitation of our findings. Second, we have looked at firms who were primarily established in the U.S. with subsequent moves overseas. This excludes other multinationals that would have different market profiles (i.e., non-U.S.) and thus the value of congruence between these markets was not investigated. Third, we have not studied the popular ‘born-global’ phenomenon in which firms simultaneously enter multiple markets, a market entry method which lacks a time lag exemplified in our study. All of these conditions may render differing results relative to the value of market fit, and thus our findings may be applicable to a sub-set of multinationals. In short, the value of diversification versus standardization of markets warrants considerably more research. Finally, the variance explained by the polynomial results in the study, while comparatively low to some linear models in the literature, still indicates that the models account for between 2.5 and almost 6% of venture performance. Given the compressed margins, competition for sales volume and market share, and reduced return on assets experienced by firms in the global marketplace, we feel that the potential decrease of up to 6% of market performance (as measured in our study) resulting from poor market choices provides significant incentive to managers to choose ventures carefully, and investigate the value of market diversification versus congruence. While our application of congruence techniques has extended our understanding of environmental fit, future research should apply these procedures to answer a number of key questions. First, as firms continue to shift supply chain activities across different host country environments (Reuer & Leiblein, 2000), researchers should investigate the value of matching markets for specific operational tasks. Second, fit measurements could be used for evaluating the benefits of matching specific strategies (channels, organizational design) across multiple markets. Traditionally, investigations of alignment or standardization of strategies have been undertaken using linear or analogue models that fail to address the curvilinear nature of strategic fit. Finally, these techniques should be applied to understanding the value of market fit and specific entry modes utilized by firms for establishing or enlarging their overseas market presence. As the importance of foreign market entry choices and performance in organizational strategy continues to increase, the ability of the firm to correctly identify profitable markets will directly impact performance outcomes and survivability. However, as this study shows, beneficial foreign market choices are largely impacted by the fit of the overseas market's environmental profile with that of the domestic market. This is a critical finding, since markets are often chosen either for their size, convenience, stability, or predicted growth potential. Application of organizational knowledge and assets specific to the firm enables managers to enter and operate in overseas markets with greater effectiveness, this either in stable or dynamic environments. By understanding the importance of correct environmental fit in foreign market choices, managers can increase the chances of successful multinational operations.