تاثیر اختیار مدیریتی، نوآوری و عدم قطعیت بر شدت صادرات : چشم انداز گزینه های واقعی

Geographic sales diversification (i.e., exports) is a multidimensional phenomenon that has primarily been examined using a single theoretical perspective drawn from international trade or organizational strategy. This study uses managerial discretion, real options, and innovation literatures to examine the roles of managers, context, and environment in motivating geographic sales diversification. We contribute to the international business and organizational strategy literatures by highlighting how the combination of managerial discretion, capacity to offer innovative products, and uncertainty can motivate export-driven internationalization.

Although the diversification of sales markets through exports is a complex strategic decision influenced by many factors, it has primarily been analyzed using a theoretical lens taken from either the literatures of international trade or organizational strategy. One influential perspective that identifies the drivers of geographic sales diversification (i.e., exports) is the sequential approach to internationalization which builds on product life cycle and international trade concepts to explain the process of internationalization (Cavusgil, 1984, Johanson and Vahlne, 1990, Johanson and Wiedersheim-Paul, 1975 and Mudambi and Zahra, 2007). This theory suggests that firms with innovative products will establish themselves in their respective domestic markets before expanding internationally; usually by exporting to foreign markets (Johanson and Vahlne, 1990 and Mudambi and Zahra, 2007). Conversely, organizational strategy literature has historically relied on transaction cost economics (TCE) to explain the process of geographic sales diversification as part of internationalization strategy (Boisot and Child, 1996 and Chi and McGuire, 1996). TCE highlights the difficulties of writing, executing, and monitoring contractual arrangements with international partners (Oxley, 1999 and Williamson, 1985). It focuses on the contractual hazards and opportunistic behavior that can surface among exchange partners due to uncertainty, information asymmetry, and difficulty enforcing contracts (Verwaal and Donkers, 2002 and Zacharakis, 1997). Though either perspective may explain a choice of modes for internationalization, the consensus among scholars is that internationalization is a complex, multidimensional phenomenon; and a more complete picture will emerge by incorporating the role of managerial discretion in the process (Chi and McGuire, 1996, Crossland and Hambrick, 2011, Oviatt and McDougall, 2005 and Reuer and Tong, 2005). Indeed, the role of the top management team (TMT) cannot be overestimated in terms of strategic decisions such as internationalization (Crossland and Hambrick, 2011 and Hambrick and Finkelstein, 1987). As a result, managers require high levels of discretion in order to pursue certain modes of internationalization such as geographic sales diversification. However, the literature has yet to focus its attention on how managers with decision-making latitude may leverage contextual and environmental factors such as innovation levels and uncertainty to pursue geographic sales diversification (Leonidou, 1998, Shaver, 2011 and Zahra et al., 2000). In sum, the role of managerial discretion along with contextual and environmental factors in affecting geographic sales diversification has remained understudied (Crossland and Hambrick, 2011, Leonidou and Katsikeas, 1996 and Salomon and Shaver, 2005). This study draws on managerial discretion, real options, and innovation literatures to explore the motivations for geographic sales diversification. Our theoretical framework is developed around one overarching theme: greater managerial discretion, combined with certain industry contextual and environmental variables, motivates a greater reliance on exports as a growth option. Our hypotheses are tested using a large sample of U.S. manufacturing industries, based on their degree of variance, in terms of both managerial discretion and innovation (Hambrick and Abrahamson, 1995 and Silverman, 1999). Industry-level analysis is chosen because firms in an industry often share attributes that allow for the aggregation of firm effects and the development of a composite model (Klein, Dansereau, & Hall, 1994). Indeed, industry exports are a key international trade metric that is universally reported by such national agencies as the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Our contribution to the extant literature involves developing an integrated theoretical model used to examine the role of managers, context (i.e., level of innovations) and environmental pressures (i.e., uncertainty) in explaining variance in the level of exports. This study applies the insights of strategic choice and environmental determinism perspectives to the internationalization process, and is one of the first to draw on the theoretical underpinnings of real options and managerial discretion views to propose that managers require considerable freedom and authority over firm resources and structure to make internationalization-related decisions (notable exceptions include Tong et al., 2008 and Crossland and Hambrick, 2011). We further contribute to the literature by highlighting the role of contingencies in affecting the relationship between managerial discretion and industry exports. We begin with a brief review of the literature, including real options, managerial discretion and innovations. Next, we discuss their relevance within the context of internationalization, particularly industry exports. This is followed by developing hypotheses and discussing methods. We conclude with presenting results, discussion, and implications.

7.1. Theoretical implications In the context of international business and global strategy, our findings have a number of theoretical implications. First, we provide a theoretical foundation for future research by empirically validating that the internationalization process is influenced by the combination of managerial discretion, capability to offer globally competitive innovative products, and the nuances of the domestic environment. One implication was that key executives such as CEOs must have the authority and resources to develop globally competitive innovations in order to pursue geographic sales diversification. Second, our findings underscore the importance of globally competitive innovations and the domestic environment as a driver for geographic sales diversification. This study highlights the role of contextual factors (innovations) and environmental contingencies in affecting the relationship between managerial discretion and geographic sales diversification. As such, the findings are consistent with the conceptual insights of scholars like Burgelman and Grove, who in 2004 proposed that “…a company's strategy resides in its strategic actions (p. 13)…top management's beliefs… are the most important drivers of a company's strategy [since] leaders’ strategic actions respond to external and internal selection pressures [in how] rapid technological change may alter the industry structure (pp. 14–15)… strategic action interacts with the environment (p. 30)…. technological platform …give(s) rise to the emergence and growth of ecosystems (p. 42).” Following Tong et al., 2008, our study contributes to the real options and internationalization literatures by extending a real options view to examine issues related to international business. The present study is one of the first to use the managerial discretion view to integrate divergent scholarly insights on strategic choice versus environmental determinism, particularly in the context of internationalization (notable exceptions include Tong et al., 2008 and Crossland and Hambrick, 2011). Overall, we contribute to the literature at the intersection of upper echelon, international trade, and strategy literatures by extending the managerial discretion view to the realm of geographic sales diversification. Our findings also have implications for related areas, such as international entrepreneurship, which examine phenomena like the role of top managers in promoting international corporate venturing. We believe that scholars in these areas should be able to use our findings on the role of managerial discretion, innovations, and environment to potentially motivate international corporate venturing between established firms and potential startups worldwide. 7.2. Managerial relevance In addition to theoretical implications, our findings should yield important implications for managers. Those with high levels of discretion may want to leverage their latitude for action and assert their authority to pursue internationalization if sufficiently armed with innovative offerings while facing environmental pressures at home. Such managers should confidently develop internationalization strategies for markets with the potential for growth as their firms are well positioned to pursue geographic sales diversification. Second, superior value will be generated for both primary and secondary stakeholders when managers with high levels of discretion and innovative offerings are forced to shed inertia. Consistent with Finkelstein et al. (2009), managers may develop innovation capability and environmental scanning systems to assess and respond to changes more effectively. Third, from a public policy perspective, such managers can proactively contribute to national GDP and GNP by pursuing internationalization. On one hand, geographic sales diversification benefits domestic firms by providing opportunities to developing markets worldwide. On the other hand, venturing into international markets can provide a new revenue stream as well as global legitimacy for domestic brands and firms while hedging against uncertainty in the domestic markets. From a policy perspective, managerial initiatives for geographic sales diversification have serious implications for the growth of domestic economy, businesses, and human capital. 7.3. Limitations, future research and extensions In terms of industry context and environmental factors our research framework is by no means exhaustive. Our analysis had certain limitations, as it was conducted at a relatively macro (industry) level, assuming homogeneity among firms (Klein et al., 1994). It has been established in the literature that implications for studies of ‘managerial discretion’ at the industry level permeate across levels; Rajagopalan and Datta (1996) and Rajagopalan and Finkelstein (1992) studied this phenomenon at the mesa level, whereas Carpenter and Golden (1997) studied the same at the micro-level. However, some potential biases may have been introduced due to the level of study. It is possible that firms within each SIC code are not involved in equivalent activities to the extent assumed by the U.S. Census Bureau. Indeed, shortcomings in SIC classification led to the development of the finer-grained North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), which provides further detail about firm activity than the SIC codes. A systemic longitudinal analysis at the firm level in different industries, using CEOs as respondents, could bring new insights into the role of managers motivating geographic sales diversification under firm-specific contingencies. Future research could explore how firm-level differences in TMT members’ attributes (education, position, background, etc.) influence the choice of modes of internationalization (e.g., international joint ventures, FDI, greenfields). Researchers may also wish to examine the role of discretion, innovation, and environment in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) and alliance decisions, particularly those involving MNCs and young firms from different countries. Some researchers may seek to establish unequivocal causality between the constructs proposed in the study. Although we performed Univariate Analysis of Variance7 to further test relationships, our research design does not allow us to claim causality unequivocally. We can, however, make inferences about causality with some confidence, since the results of Univariate analysis are consistent with our findings. We hope that future research will use longitudinal data to pursue a lag structure, building on the theoretical foundation developed in this study. Researchers could then use a Granger causality test, panel data regression analysis, or time series analysis to establish causality. Other studies might examine how managerial discretion combined with firm capabilities influence strategic choice of different modes (alliances vs. acquisitions vs. greenfields vs. joint ventures) for international market entry. For instance, firms’ information technology (IT) and supply-chain capabilities may promote the use of one mode of internationalization over another, depending on the levels of discretion by managers in different industries. Similarly, scholars interested in cross-cultural approaches might distinguish between export destinations, analyzing how a country's cultural variables such as power distance influence managerial decisions. Though this study was limited to U.S. manufacturing industries, we believe that the findings have implications for emerging economies that aspire to become large producers of goods and consumer markets. Countries poised to become the dominant suppliers of manufactured goods will have large domestic markets in 2025–2050 (Ohmae, 2005). Both the extant literature and our findings suggest that the rich experience of U.S. firms in dealing with complex internationalization issues should have normative implications for managers in emerging markets—managers who may proactively engage in developing innovative capabilities and exercising the option to geographically diversify in order to meet the challenge of domestic environmental pressures.