The Sources of Competitive Advantage For Emerging Market Multinationals
The Sources of Competitive Advantage For Emerging Market Multinationals
The Sources of Competitive Advantage For Emerging Market Multinationals
Punching above their weight: The sources of competitive advantage for emerging
market multinationals
Farok J. Contractor
Article information:
To cite this document:
Farok J. Contractor , (2013),"Punching above their weight", International Journal of Emerging Markets,
Vol. 8 Iss 4 pp. 304 - 328
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJoEM-06-2013-0102
Downloaded on: 20 September 2015, At: 12:04 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 107 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 3763 times since 2013*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:158848 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1746-8809.htm
IJOEM
8,4
304
Farok J. Contractor
Introduction
Boxing categorizes contestants into different weight classes because the force of a punch
is typically proportional to the boxers weight. 20 years ago, in 1993, with the exception
of S. Korea, only 18 other companies based in emerging markets appeared on the Fortune
Global 500 list, and almost all of these were lumbering state-supported firms such as
Pemex or Indian Oil in extractive industries with few competitive advantages or
distinctiveness beyond their government conferred oligopoly and size. Their degree of
internationalization was negligible and they survived behind protectionist barriers.
Their international punch was puny compared with their domestic size or weight.
Today emerging market champions are present in a wide range of industry sectors.
Many were born only in the last two or three decades having none of the institutional
advantages enjoyed by their advanced country competitors. Founded only in 1988,
Huaweis sales by 2012 exceeded $32 billion, and with a R&D/sales ratio of 13 percent
it invests over $4 billion annually in research centers in eight nations selling products
Punching above
their weight
305
IJOEM
8,4
306
country MNEs with their superior internalized FSAs such as technology, skills and
access to rich capital markets. And emerging nations were supposed to suffer
immiserizing growth as low-end commodity exporters[1] (Bhagwati, 1958).
On the contrary, the same expansion of global FDI and trade also strengthened local
firms who learned quickly about world-class standards, methods and technology, and
learned how to compete. The open-door policies increased the absorptive capacity of
many local firms, which later became globally competitive EMMs. Meyer (2004) reviews
the beneficial impact of inward FDI on recipient nations general competitiveness. Local
firms learn by imitation. Foreign MNEs train local employees, engineers and alliance
partners who take their learning over to other local firms. Spillovers of technology also
occur as an industry cluster of local suppliers develops. Labor skills and management
competence improve, and the industry as a whole gets connected to its global peers,
global industry associations and standards. The absorptive capacity and competitiveness
of emerging nations came to further fruition by the 1990s with a substantial increase in
the numbers and quality of their engineers and technical graduates (Lynn and Salzman,
2006; Arora and Gambardella, 2004).
Two information technology (IT) related developments starting in the 1990s further
reinforced EMM competitiveness, giving EMMs unprecedented access to advanced
nation technology. First, the penetration of IT-enabled methods began to spur an
unprecedented codification of corporate knowledge. Technology and management
processes that were tacit and resident only in the minds of senior engineers and staff,
were rendered explicit and written down in manuals, software, expert systems and
protocols (Steinmueller, 2000; Contractor and Ra, 2002). Admittedly, the prime
motivation was to improve the codifying firms own productivity in their home base in
advanced nations. But being codified, the information could then be more easily
discoverable, intelligible and absorbable by alliance partners, licensees, supply chain
members and foreign subsidiary employees. Second, the spread of the internet and
industry platforms, by the late 1990s, saw an unprecedented expansion of outsourcing,
offshoring and outsourcing (Contractor et al., 2010), as well as international licensing
which was the fastest growing mode of international business between 1982 and 2011[2].
This spread of technology to constellations of licensees and partners in an
internet-aware world makes EMMs more cognizant of opportunities, facilitates the
transfer of knowledge, and is manifest in:
.
the finer slicing of the value chain; and
.
the consequent global disaggregation of pieces or slices of these value chains
over a larger set of collaborators worldwide (Mudambi and Swift, 2011).
Many, if not all, of the collaborators of the global value chain can then learn and
improve their own competitiveness.
We can identify two additional changes in emerging market economies that increased
the competitiveness of their companies. With growth rates consistently higher than
developed nations, many of the larger ones such as the BRICS[3] nations, Mexico or
Turkey achieved sufficiently large domestic market size that conferred a scale advantage
on their firms they previously did not enjoy. Ramamurti (2012) speculates as to whether
this, in itself, may be considered a weak ownership advantage. Finally, the enormous
growth of capital markets worldwide and particularly in emerging nations meant that
EMMs were, for the first time, able to raise capital on an equal footing with their
Punching above
their weight
307
IJOEM
8,4
308
More importantly, Firm B enjoys and can expend a much larger R&D budget for the
next generation of technology than Firm A. For this simple economic truth there are no
diminishing returns to scale[4] and illustrates how Samsung has been able to catch up
with its more established rival Apple in mobile telephony and computers.
2. Outsource producers aspiring to climb the smiling curve
Producing on a large-scale for other foreign brands has been a traditional path towards
internationalization for several companies. However, it has not proven easy to build the
EMMs own brand name. It took the Korean conglomerates such as LG or Samsung
decades of steady advertising to achieve global recognition. Galanz Enterprise Group
Co. of Guangdong is the world biggest producer of microwave ovens in 2013, but lacks
any brand or company name recognition amongst the bulk of their foreign customers.
ZTE (Shenzhen) is one of the leading manufacturers of mobile handsets that nobody
has heard of in Europe or North America.
Many of these outsource manufacturers have established brand names in their
home markets and aspire to break out of the constraints of being stuck with the
low-profit production/assembly middle of the value chain, to reach the higher profit
elements of the beginning (innovation) and end (brand value) portions of the value
chain the smiling curve strategy popularized by Stan Shih[5] and elaborated on in
Mudambi (2008).
However, it is difficult to simultaneously climb both ends of the smiling curve. Acer
has global brand recognition but is weak or undistinguished at the R&D end of the
Punching above
their weight
309
IJOEM
8,4
310
The above six strategies used by EMMs are by no means unique to developing
countries, or unprecedented. However, compared with MNEs from advance nations,
EMMs are more likely to be born-global; expand early to a more heterogeneous set of
countries; are more likely to depend on conglomerate or ethnic group, family and state
support; more likely to rely on acquisitions in order to rapidly gain needed capabilities;
and exhibit a higher propensity to form alliance relationships.
This overall pattern of international expansion by EMMs is in striking contrast to
the market-seeking or home FSA exploiting strategies that have historically been
practiced by advanced nation multinationals. Very few EMMs operate from a
position of global strength or from an assumption of dominance. Rather it is the
stance of a canny boxer facing a heavier opponent, an attitude that requires being
astute about how to overcome weakness, a dose of humility, and a view from
below behavioral and cultural traits that may have helped EMMs to punch above
their weight in international competition. In the next sections I propose hypotheses
that link the performance or success of EMMs with the behavioral attributes of their
leaders and managers, as well as contextual or structural factors that may promote
their international success.
Behavioral and cultural traits of EMM leadership
As it is, academia provides few generalizable conclusions or recommendations about
the link between leadership attributes, culture and firm performance. Moreover,
emerging markets themselves exhibit a diversity of traits, levels of economic
development and administrative heritages. With few general conclusions this far,
management of emerging market firms therefore is a relatively unexplored and fertile
field for research (Kiss et al., 2012). The discussion below, about how the background of
EMM managers influences their internationalization, is necessarily couched as a set of
propositions or hypotheses.
Drawing on the work of North (1991) about the meaning of institutions as a mental
construct, Dhanaraj and Khanna (2011) include customs, traditions, habits and other
culturally-rooted behavior as part of the institutional framework of a society that in turn
shapes corporate behavior and success. I connect this with the literature on leadership or
top management characteristics. Gibson and Birkinshaw (2004) show that
ambidexterity skills or predisposition, in middle and senior managers, is strongly
correlated with business unit success. Luo and Rui (2009) extend this to emerging
country managers. Ambidexterity is not a concept amenable to uni-dimensional
definition or measurement. It incorporates several behavioral traits such as alertness to
opportunity, cooperation and network building, inter-temporal tradeoff judgment skills,
multitasking, greater tolerance of ambiguity, a willingness to be adaptable and flexible,
and finally a dose of compassion and humanity. If one rubric can be used to describe
these behavioral or cultural attributes, it may be called the view from below a view of
business competition that does not assume strategic superiority but recognizes that
humility, flexibility, nimbleness and a clear-eyed willingness to seize opportunities when
presented, enable the EMM to punch above its weight.
I present below a set of propositions as a fertile research agenda (but with
the obvious caution that variation in both home and host nations needs to be
controlled for):
P1.
Punching above
their weight
311
IJOEM
8,4
312
Hofstede et al. (2010) added a fifth cultural dimension to Hofstedes (1984) study
that was originally labeled Confucian Dynamism but later renamed Long-term
Orientation. Noland (2003) linked long-term orientation to religious roots such as
Hinduism and Buddhism and proposed a positive correlation with business success.
Li et al. (2001) show that cultural traits, including long term orientation, influence
investment preferences and performance of JVs in China. However, systematic
assessment of this variable across emerging markets as a group is lacking:
P2.
First, let us start with a word of caution. While the literature on EMMs abounds with
examples of alliances as an important means of EMMs international growth,
comprehensive data are lacking that would show an across the board greater
propensity to form alliances and cooperative relationships, compared to advanced
nation MNEs. Second, we know that alliances are formed for a multiplicity of reasons
ranging from simple sharing of project risk, to dividing up markets, to learning
(Contractor and Lorange, 1988). But we lack evidence to prove the specific research
question in P4 that EMMs have a greater propensity to learn from partners other
than the obvious fact that companies from emerging nations have a generally greater
need for technology acquisition.
Anecdotal evidence is widespread, however. For example, Bonaglia et al. (2007)
describe how a Mexican company, Mabe, leveraged learning from a JV with General
Electric for refrigerators that enabled it to not only expand in Mexico but have operations
as a preferred supplier in the USA. Today, Embraer of Brazil is not only a dominant
manufacturer in the under-100 passenger region jet, but has its own design and R&D
capabilities. But in its early days, in the 1990s, Embraer relied on several alliance partners
ranging from Kawasaki of Japan and Latecoe`re of France, to develop its aircraft. Partners
were also useful to share commercial risks (Oliveira et al., 2013). Similarly, learning
technology as a licensee of Liebherr of Germany in 1984, Haier of China is today one of the
largest producers of refrigeration equipment. It is on its way to becoming a global brand.
Of course, the strategic value of international alliances goes beyond learning from
partners. Alliances also act as a means of learning about foreign markets, segments,
channels, influencers, cultural cues or pitfalls, foreign regulatory requirements, as well
as business behavior and etiquette. The Indian Bollywood company, Reliance
Entertainments alliance and investment in Steven Spielbergs DreamWorks is based
on the increasing globalization of audiences, the pooling of production facilities and
directoral talent between Hollywood and Bollywood, learning from each other about
cultural hot buttons and opportunities, sharing each others distribution channels,
and simple risk-sharing of the high up-front costs of producing movies.
The race does not always belong to the strong. It may be won by the firm that can
better learn from its partner and then is willing to exhibit dynamic capabilities in
reconfiguring its resources with flexibility and humility (Zahra et al., 2006):
P5.
A small but growing literature on the role of humility in corporate leadership (Owens
and Hekman, 2012; de Waal and Sivro, 2012) shows preliminary results that such
leadership styles are beneficial to organizational performance. Here we are not
referring to an outward show of meekness, versus a strong facade as seen in high
power-distance cultures (Hofstede et al., 2010). Rather, I refer to a recognition on the
part of the EMM manager that value may be gained from an open-minded approach
that assumes a strategic view from below a recognition of the need to learn and
play catch-up (Peng, 2012).
An example of clearheaded willingness to cater to and adapt products for different
customer types explains the unlikely international success of GoodBaby. Started in the
small town of Lujia in Jiangsu Province by a former school teacher Mr Zheng-Huang
Song had a tinkerers approach and invented the push and rock stroller for the
Chinese market. He later inculcating to his top management the need to study and
understand each customers preferences. Willingness to learn foreign customer habits,
Punching above
their weight
313
IJOEM
8,4
314
and cater to every cultural nuance, the company launches over 400 new products and
models every year[6] and is known to its purchasers in Europe and the USA as a firm
eager to please. (Their US designs for baby strollers are large and have cup holders.
Designs for Scandinavia stress elegance, while designs for the Japanese market are
lean and fold into compact storage shapes).
The founder and CEO of CEMEX, Mr Lorenzo Zambrano promulgates a management
philosophy to his leadership team, dubbed The CEMEX Way, which emphasizes
shedding any hubris or not invented here (NIH) syndrome. Instead, with any new
venture or acquisition, they look for ways to transfer best practices, or arbitrage cheaper
inputs across global operations. Frugal and lean production methods learned in
emerging nations (including Mexico) were transferred to Spain, resulting in annual
savings of $120 million, just as the Spanish operation taught the use of petroleum coke as
fuel (which resulted in substantial savings in worldwide operations). Spanish sources of
financing were much cheaper than interest rates available to CEMEX anywhere else
(Lessard and Lucea, 2009). Altogether, CEMEX appears to have enjoyed billions in
savings and benefits from this management philosophy or approach.
In international operations, cross-border learning and arbitrage opportunities
frequently exist. However, it takes a clearheaded, humble and frugal top-management
style to use this advantage of multinationality to its fullest extent:
P6.
A multi-billionaire who until recently drove himself in a five year old Lincoln automobile
and has lived for decades in a house he purchased for $31,500 in a middle-class section
of Omaha, Warren Buffet is a logical admirer of, and large investor in, BYD, a Chinese
electric car and lithium-ion battery producer. Williamson and Yin (2013) describe how
BYD is arguably the worlds leader in reducing the cost of lithium-ion battery production
from $40 to $12 by innovating a new production process that uses cheaper materials
and can be performed at room temperature. This substantial saving has resulted in
lithium-ion batteries gradually replacing nickel-cadmium batteries worldwide, not only
in vehicles, but in a range of applications from tools to appliances.
Like Warren Buffet who began his career delivering newspapers, EMM managers
remember their roots. A frugal mindset inculcated through the company, can be an
ownership or FSA for EMMs. It is manifested in three areas:
(1) Frugal process or engineering innovation like CEMEXs or BYDs organized
search for production process savings.
(2) Frugal design innovation that responds to customer needs in emerging
nations by creatively lean and inexpensive yet thoroughly functional
designs. GEs electrocardiogram machine that can perform a test on a patient
for $1 (Immelt et al., 2009) or the Tata Nano car for $2,500 are two among many
such examples of minimalist designs. But more importantly, these platforms
can then be scaled up the income ladder to work in advanced and affluent
markets. GEs research center in India (incidentally one of GEs largest R&D
operations in the world) is developing concepts that will reduce health care
costs in the USA and Europe. Mango, a mobile communication software startup
in Bangalore partnered with the American firm Qualcomm which then bought
over the software rights for use in other nations. Grameen Banks microfinance
models are adapted and used for crowd-funding in the USA. GE [. . .] expects
Levy et al. (2007) describe a global mindset as the awareness by top managers of a
company, of cultural and national diversity, and the ability to identify best foreign
practices, and incorporate these into their companys operation, leading to superior
performance. A cosmopolitan world view also promotes human resource policies
conducive to inducting talent from other nations. It also leads to better functioning of
multi-cultural or dispersed teamwork. An excellent example is Lorenzo Zambrano of
CEMEX who came from a cosmopolitan Mexican family and was educated in the USA.
However, a positive relationship between a global mindset and firm performance
remains an unresolved question for further research. For one thing, there is
considerable variation in the degree of international exposure across emerging nations.
Second, what empirical support there exists for this positive hypothesis is conditioned
by mediating variables such as the foreign assignment experience of managers, the
degree of cross-border supply chain fragmentation of the firm and industry
dynamism (Bouquet et al., 2008). This study also found the relationship between
global mindset and performance to be curvilinear. Tan and Meyer (2010) are agnostic
about the value of diversified business groups but offer the idea that the international
work experience of group managers can have a positive effect on the success of new
international ventures undertaken by one of the groups companies. Clearly, more
research is needed before generalizations can be made for all EMMs.
Thus, far we have offered seven hypotheses or propositions on the competitive
advantages that may accrue to EMMs because of the behavioral or cultural
proclivities of their top management teams. In addition, at the national level, we can
Punching above
their weight
315
IJOEM
8,4
316
outweigh the disadvantages and result in superior performance? Certainly there exist
several examples of family controlled EMMs that are very successful such as the Koc
family group of companies based in Turkey or the Tata Group[8] from India that are
successful multinationals.
Does the greater incidence of diversified conglomerate structure in EMMs confer an
advantage?
Two conclusions are broadly accepted as received wisdom. First, that product
diversification in a developed economy setting is not necessarily optimal. Second, that
many EMMs nevertheless are product diversified groups (Khanna and Yafeh, 2007).
The hypothesis is that in emerging nations, characterized by poorly developed
institutional settings, the benefits of group affiliation outweigh their disadvantages.
Benefits include pooling of ideas, talent and capital across group firms (thereby
garnering for the group faster and superior human and financial capital); the value of
the groups brand or reputation in both consumer and equity markets (Fombrun, 2005);
and more arguably, that some conglomerates like GE or CEMEX that have grown
mainly through acquisitions, develop an internal expertise in identifying acquisition
targets and managing post-merger integration. That is to say, acquisition targeting
and management skills is an internalized ownership advantage that gives them
superior international growth. For example, in CEMEX, under the leadership of
Lorenzo Zambrano, with multiple acquisitions, the group codified their acquisitions
expertise by writing a manual or creating an acquisition template.
We cannot, however, ignore the counter view, espoused by Karnani (2012) who
studied Indian MNEs foreign acquisitions and found that they destroyed shareholder
value, especially after the onset of the global recession. For instance, Suzlon was in
considerable financial distress in 2011-2012, having become over-leveraged. In 2013
Tata Steel wiped $1.6 billion off the books of their Corus Steel acquisition, having paid,
in retrospect, far too a high a price for the acquisition (The Economist, 2013). What the
field needs is a deep look at the sources of EMMs acquisitions expertise, if any, and
how and whether that translates into an ownership or firm-specific advantage.
The home country pool of scientists and engineers (and cheap labor)
While no econometric measurement exists quantifying the benefit of relatively
low-salary technical and scientific talent accruing to EMMs, this cheaper input is
undoubtedly a competitive advantage especially in recent decades as the capabilities
of technologists in emerging nations has begun to rival those of their peers in advanced
nations. We have the dirty secret of IBM employing more persons in India[9] than in
the USA (many of them skilled workers). American companies like GE and Dow
Chemical similarly are shifting some of their R&D to China. Kumar et al. (2013) report
that the Chinese operations patent intensity[10] is higher than in other Dow Chemical
operations. BYD, Suzlon, Reliance, and Infosys have appeared on several lists of the
most innovative companies (Kumar et al., 2013).
The home country pool of scientists and engineers constitutes a competitive
advantage for EMMs in three ways. First, good and sometimes world-class talent can
be hired for considerable savings over their OECD counterparts. Many emerging
nation engineers have been educated in advanced nations universities. Internet
communications, the worldwide spread of technical journals, the explosion in
Punching above
their weight
317
IJOEM
8,4
318
international conference travel, and the sheer fact that companies are codifying and
sharing their knowledge (Steinmueller, 2000; Contractor and Ra, 2002) mean that
emerging nation scientists can keep abreast of their fields while working for EMMs at
lower salaries. Second, EMMs increasingly participate in, and learn from, their role as
global supply chain partners. The fine-slicing of global value chains, including the
slicing and offshoring of even R&D functions, means that EMMs can learn and
eventually leverage their own capabilities and extend them to other portions of the
value chain that are more profitable (Contractor et al., 2010). For example, by 2015
approximately half of all clinical trials of incipient drugs (a portion of pharmaceutical
R&D) will be performed in developing and transitional economies. Third, contract
research (not just for duplicate research for tests like clinical trials but for new
product development) is a fast growth area for EMMs. High-end software development
in services is already well known in firms like IBM (India), Tata Consultancy Service or
Infosys. The computer animation capabilities in India are one driver for alliances
between Bollywood, Hollywood and firms like Reliance Entertainment. Now, even in
manufacturing we are beginning to see R&D projects specifically commissioned to
develop new products for advanced nation markets, as in Suzlon (for wind turbines
installed in Europe or the USA), GoodBaby and the Dow Chemicals Company.
Finally, we cannot neglect the considerable advantage to EMMs not only from
talented and low-cost scientists and engineers, but also from cheap labor (Aulakh et al.,
2000). While this is undoubtedly a factor explaining the international success of
companies like Haier, Galanz or export-intensive garment producers in Bangladesh,
the strategic value of cheap labor in the home country does not universally apply. First
of all, this factor applies best in labor-intensive production. The fact is that not all
production has a high labor content in overall costs. Second, as the smiling curve
argument suggests (Mudambi, 2008), other portions of the value chain if occupied by
the EMM yield much higher profitability, so that even with costly labor at home a firm
can be globally competitive overall. Excellent examples of this are companies like
Samsung or Hyundai that produce at a relatively high labor cost in Korea, but more than
offset that higher cost because of the value of their global brand and R&D. Third,
automation can substitute for labor. Contractor (2012a) compares productivity measures
across several nations. Despite very high manufacturing wages (e.g. $34 an hour for the
American worker, versus an average of $1.60 in China), some manufacturing jobs have
been returning to the USA for reasons Contractor (2012a) details. After all, despite
average manufacturing wages of $34 in the USA and $47 in Germany, these two nations
rank just behind China as top exporters of goods because of high labor productivity.
By contrast, India despite wage rates about the same as Chinas exports less than
one-fifth the volume of China. Manufacturing competitiveness is not merely a matter of
hourly wages, but is also substantially affected by company investments in automated
equipment, and labor productivity.
How a diaspora of emerging nation managers and ethnic ties can constitute a
competitive advantage?
Several of the large emerging nations enjoy the advantage of having large diasporas.
The Indian diaspora is estimated to be between 20.7 to 22 million worldwide, with
around 4 million in North America and over 2 million in Europe (The Economist, 2011;
Wikipedia[11]). The Chinese diaspora is estimated at about 40 million in all, but this is
Punching above
their weight
319
IJOEM
8,4
320
That firms in China are state-supported and are guided by state dominated
institutions, and that they exhibit conformist and isomorphic behavior, hardly needed
empirical verification, but was demonstrated by Cui and Jiang (2012) who tracked the
investment behavior of 132 FDI entries made by Chinese firms during 2000-2006. A far
more critical review of the depth and extent of Chinese government support is found in
Haley and Haley (2013), who allege massive subsidies, active support for technology
acquisitions, and protectionism.
In general, in several emerging countries, state support may be manifested in diverse
ways. Obviously, state financing means that the investment risk is not borne by private
shareholders or groups. Additionally, special incentives are sometimes offered for
outbound FDI projects, in the form of lower interest loans, or tax reduction (Luo et al.,
2010; Duysters et al., 2009). Various ministries can front the costs of foreign market
research, identify acquisition targets and negotiate FDI facilitating investment treaties
and double-tax avoidance treaties. In rare cases, heads of state have been known to lobby
their counterparts in the foreign nation, to allow the entry of a particular investment on
favorable terms. The knowledge that a firm is related/owned by a state (as opposed to
privately-owned), ipso facto, reduces political risk in the foreign location, for example in
Chinese investments in Africa (Alden and Davies, 2006). (The hypothesis is that a host
government will be less likely to pressure a foreign firm if it is state owned because of
fears of diplomatic repercussions or retaliation.)
State support can be even more important, in the long run, when government policies
serve as an incubator of incipient multinationals. Embraer, today a highly successful
Brazilian commercial aircraft manufacturer, began as a state-owned enterprise (SOE).
In 2008, in a barely disguised move to muscle into the commercial aircraft global
oligopoly, China created Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC) with the
stated strategic objective of rivaling Boeing and Airbus (Kumar et al., 2013). Aided by the
huge domestic aviation market (Itself dominated by government-aided airlines who
would buy aircraft from COMAC[13]), aided by government financing, and aided by
inward FDI policies that mandate that foreign firms must ally with local partners and
share technology, COMAC is on its way by 2015 to delivering its C919 aircraft
(a 168 passenger jet which will compete with the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320), to six
Chinese airlines and Ryan Air. The Chinese automobile sector is another example of
deliberate policies, mandating JVs and technology transfer, which have positioned
Chinese auto companies like Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC) or Geely
to become global players. Similar examples abound in the natural resources sector across
many emerging countries.
The competitive advantage of a common language or English skills
A number of studies in international business and economic geography have used a
common language as a dummy variable. A common language was found to explain
cross-border shareholding patterns (Grinblatt and Keloharju, 2001); knowledge
diffusion (using patent citations as a measure in MacGarvie, 2005); trade patterns
(Fratianni, 2007); and determinants of FDI flows between countries (Globerman and
Shapiro, 2002 or di Giovanni, 2005). However, a common language has not been the
main focus of a study explaining FDI flows.
A common language can be a proxy for cultural similarity or low cultural distance
and sometimes works better as an explanatory variable than the multi-dimensional
cultural distance construct (whose use as an explanatory variable has come under
serious criticism by authors like (Shenkar, 2012).
The importance of language in facilitating international business FDI is more direct and
self-evident (than more subtle psychological factors such as power-distance or
masculinity (Hofstede et al., 2010)). We see as examples Chinese investments in Mandarin
and Wu-speaking nations. We see it in Brazilian investments in Angola (Oliveira et al., 2013)
and by cases such as CEMEXs acquiring two Spanish companies which was an
important step on the companys path towards full internationalization. At first blush,
Indian EMMs may appear to be different. But they too have tended to follow their countrys
unofficial but common language of business namely English with substantial
investments in the USA, the UK and Canada. FDI related to outsourcing of service functions
in particular is driven in part by a common language skills as witnessed by service work
offshored from North America and the UK to the Philippines and India (Doh et al., 2009).
Conclusion
Like a boxer facing a heavier opponent, emerging nation multinationals (EMMs) have
had to learn how to punch above their weight in order to compete with advanced
nation firms with larger resources, richer home economies, a longer history of
internationalization, and knowledge, capital and brand reputation accumulated over
many decades. By contrast, EMMs are much younger (many did not exist 25 years
ago), more nimble, shrewd, and aggressive in M&A. They suffer not only from the LOF
(Eden and Miller, 2004; Zaheer, 1995) that all internationally expanding firms face, but
do so to a greater degree. This is because EMMs have only recently internationalized,
and because EMMs operating in advanced nation markets face a larger institutional
and cultural distance, than in the traditional patterns of FDI flows when a
multinational from one developed nation invested in another developed country.
The objective of this paper was to comprehensively review the field and identify the
sources of global competitiveness for EMMs. Many of the factors in this paper are
proposed as hypotheses because empirical evidence is scantly. This also makes for a
promising future research agenda. EMMs appear to fall into six strategy archetypes, ones
that are near a global competitiveness scale; outsource producers or mass assemblers
seeking to climb one or both ends of the smiling curve (Mudambi, 2008); global
knowledge and process consultants; EMMs replicating their home country experience in
other emerging nations; and natural resource seekers.
The paper next ventured in relatively unexplored territory the link between
the behavioral traits of top management and cultural setting of EMM companies, and
firm performance or success. As a set of seven hypothesis it was proposed that the
competitive success of EMMs is dependent on its leaderships:
(1) long term orientation;
(2) tolerance of ambiguity;
(3) humility or servant-leadership style;
(4) global mindset;
(5) frugal mindset, as well as;
(6) a relationships-oriented home culture that results in; and
(7) a greater propensity to learn from cooperative relationships and alliances.
Punching above
their weight
321
IJOEM
8,4
322
For the most part, we only have anecdotal and case evidence for these propositions, but
they provide a fruitful line of further research.
Besides the fact that the home nations of many EMMs are relationship-rich cultures,
what other characteristics of the home base may constitute an advantage? Does the
greater incidence of private equity or family control, and product conglomerate
structure provide strength? (In each case, contrary views and caveats are indicated.)
The advantages of a home nation pool of lower cost scientists, engineers and labor, as
well as the sizeable Chinese, Indian and Brazilian diasporas are explored. Opinion is far
more equivocal about the importance of state support in explaining EMM success
(except in the case of China). Finally, the paper examines the role of a common
language in the international growth of EMMs.
In the broadest sense the issue this review tackles is this: since most EMMs are
initially weak in, or lack significant internalized, ownership, or FSAs in the
beginning of their internationalization path, we have to look to two other sources for
their performance or competitive strengths. Accordingly, this analysis disaggregates
and identifies each of the strands of:
(1) the home country location advantages of EMMs; and
(2) advantages of a multinational scope that make up for their relative lack of FSAs.
Notes
1. Later, Prof. Jagdish Bhagwati became apostate to his own views and is today a champion of
FDI and free markets.
2. At an annual rate of 11.75 percent compared with 9.46 percent annual growth for FDI
worldwide and 7.86 percent for international trade (estimates by the author, are in nominal
US dollars, from various sources including UNCTAD and WTO).
3. BRICS is an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (ONeill, 2001).
4. R&D budget size is not always a guarantee of success. We find a counter example in the
pharmaceutical industry where the giants, despite enormous budgets, have shown a poor
rate of innovation. Consequently, the sector as a whole is veering towards alliances with
more nimble bio-tech startups which seem to do better in the discovery and molecular
analysis phases of pharmaceutical R&D than their Big-Pharma partners.
5. Former CEO of Acer.
6. www.gbinternational.com.hk/rd.php
7. Conspicuous displays of wealth, in a high power-distance culture, interact uneasily with
Confucian values. The same executive that rides to work in a luxury automobile will then
demand frugality and cost-consciousness from employees.
8. The Tata companies are actually almost all publicly listed, and the last family scion, Ratan
Tata stepped down as Chairman in 2012, handing control over to an outsider. However, the
structure of the conglomerate is such that two holding companies (Tata Sons and Tata
Industries) wield effective control over each group company through two mechanisms: (i) the
holding companies have minority shareholding but control the biggest single bloc of shares,
the rest being widely dispersed over the public and financial institutions, and (ii) respect for
tradition whereby succession is passed from each chairman to his choice as successor. So far,
the ties of finance, ethnicity and tradition have held the group together.
9. Since this is politically sensitive, after 2009 IBM has stopped disclosing the size of its Indian
subsidiaries employment.
10. Comparisons of patents across nations are to be viewed with caution, however, since
scientists from different nations have a different predilection to file patents. (In China this is
a matter of great national pride and several of the patents filed there are of doubtful
commercial value.) Moreover, each nations Patent Office rules still vary significantly.
Nevertheless, there is little doubt about the innovation potential of Chinese scientists, their
relatively low cost, and their better grasp of the feedback loop from market or consumer
preferences to R&D.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF MAURITIUS, Mr oumesh dhomun At 12:04 20 September 2015 (PT)
11. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-resident_Indian_and_person_of_Indian_origin
12. Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_diaspora
13. Boeing and Airbus wish they were so lucky as to have a guaranteed-in-advance market base.
However, we should not forget that Boeing itself is state-supported (through its defense
business) and Airbus is a consortium supported by European Governments. Both Boeing
and Airbus enjoy, albeit to a lesser degree, the advantages of government support discussed
in this section of the paper.
References
ACCA (2012), The rise of capital markets in emerging and frontier economies, Association of
Chartered Certified Accountants, available at: www.accaglobal.com/content/dam/acca/
global/PDF-technical/global-economy/pol-tp-rcm.pdf
Ahlstrom, D., Bruton, G. and Yeh, K. (2007), Venture capital in China: past, present, and future,
Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 247-268.
Alden, C. and Davies, M. (2006), A profile of the operations of Chinese multinationals in Africa,
South African Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 73 No. 1, pp. 83-96.
Arora, A. and Gambardella, A. (2004), The globalization of the software industry: perspectives
and opportunities for developed and developing countries, National Bureau of Economic
Research No. 10538.
Asmussen, C., Pedersen, T. and Dhanaraj, C. (2009), Host-country environment and subsidiary
competence: extending the diamond network model, Journal of International Business
Studies, Vol. 40, pp. 42-57.
Athreye, S. and Kapur, S. (2009), Introduction: the internationalization of Chinese and Indian
firms trends, motivations and strategy, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 18 No. 2,
pp. 209-221.
Aulakh, P., Kotabe, M. and Teegen, H. (2000), Export strategies and performance of firms from
emerging economies: evidence from Brazil, Chile and Mexico, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 342-361.
Bhagwati, J. (1958), Immiserizing growth: a geometrical note, The Review of Economic Studies,
Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 201-205.
Bhattacharya, A., Bradtke, T., Ermias, T., Haring-Smith, W., Lee, D., Leon, E., Meyer, M.,
Michael, D., Tratz, A., Ukon, M. and Waltermann, B. (2013), Allies and Adversaries: 2013
BCG Global Challengers, Boston Consulting Group, Boston, MA.
Bonaglia, F., Goldstein, A. and Mathews, J.A. (2007), Accelerated internationalization by
emerging markets multinationals: the case of the white goods sector, Journal of World
Business, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 369-383.
Bouquet, C., Morrison, A. and Birkinshaw, J. (2008), International attention and multinational
enterprise performance, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 40 No. 1,
pp. 108-131.
Punching above
their weight
323
IJOEM
8,4
324
Buckley, P., Forsans, N. and Munjal, S. (2012), Host-home country linkages and host-home
country specific advantages as determinants of foreign acquisitions by Indian firms,
International Business Review, Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 878-890.
Buckley, P., Clegg, L., Cross, A., Liu, X., Voss, H. and Zheng, P. (2007), The determinants of
Chinese outward foreign direct investment, Journal of International Business Studies,
Vol. 38, pp. 499-518.
Burkitt, L. (2011), GE bases X-ray unit in China, Wall Street Journal, July 26.
Cantwell, J. and Mudambi, R. (2005), MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandates, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 26 No. 12, pp. 1109-1128.
Carlock, R.S. and Ward, J.L. (2010), When Family Businesses Are Best: The Parallel Planning
Process for Family Harmony and Business Success, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY.
Contractor, F.J. (2012a), 7 reasons to expect US manufacturing resurgence, Yale Global, August.
Contractor, F.J. (2012b), Why do multinational firms exist? A theory note about the effect of
multinational expansion on performance and recent methodological critiques, Global
Strategy Journal, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 318-331.
Contractor, F.J. and Lorange, P. (1988), Why should firms cooperate? The strategy and
economics basis for cooperative ventures, Cooperative Strategies in International
Business, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, pp. 3-30.
Contractor, F.J. and Ra, W. (2002), How knowledge attributes influence alliance governance choices:
a theory development note, Journal of International Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 11-27.
Contractor, F.J., Kumar, V., Kundu, S. and Pedersen, T. (2010), Reconceptualizing the firm in a
world of outsourcing and offshoring: the organizational and geographical relocation of
high-value company functions, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 47 No. 8, pp. 1417-1433.
Cuervo-Cazurra, A. and Genc, M. (2008), Transforming disadvantages into advantages:
developing-country MNEs in the least developed countries, Journal of International
Business Studies, Vol. 39 No. 6, pp. 957-979.
Cui, L. and Jiang, F. (2012), State ownership effect on firms FDI ownership decisions under
institutional pressure: a study of Chinese outward-investing firms, Journal of
International Business Studies, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 264-284.
de Waal, A. and Sivro, M. (2012), The relation between servant leadership, organizational
performance, and the high-performance organization framework, Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 173-190.
Dhanaraj, C. and Khanna, T. (2011), Transforming mental models on emerging markets,
Academy of Management Learning & Education, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 684-701.
Dhanaraj, C., Lyles, M.A., Steensma, H.K. and Tihanyi, L. (2004), Managing tacit and explicit
knowledge transfer in IJVs: the role of relational embeddedness and the impact on
performance, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 35 No. 5, pp. 428-442.
di Giovanni, J. (2005), What drives capital flows? The case of cross-border M&A activity and
financial deepening, Journal of International Economics, Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 127-149.
Doh, J.P., Bunyaratavej, K. and Hahn, E.D. (2009), Separable but not equal: the location
determinants of discrete services offshoring activities, Journal of International Business
Studies, Vol. 40 No. 6, pp. 926-943.
Dunning, J. (1988), The eclectic paradigm of international production: a restatement and some
possible extensions, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 79 No. 1, pp. 1-31.
Duysters, G., Jacob, J., Lemmens, C. and Yu, J. (2009), Internationalization and technological
catching up of emerging multinationals: a comparative case study of Chinas Haier group,
Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 325-349.
(The) Economist (2011), Diasporas: mapping migration, The Economist, November 17,
available at: www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/ll/diasporas
(The) Economist (2013), Tata Steel goodwill hunting: what the Corus write-off reveals,
The Economist, May 18.
Eden, L. and Miller, S.R. (2004), Distance matters: liability of foreignness, institutional distance
and ownership strategy, Advances in International Management, Vol. 16, pp. 187-221.
Fombrun, C. (2005), Corporate reputations as economic assets, in Hitt, M., Freeman, R. and
Harrison, J. (Eds), The Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management, Blackwell, Oxford,
pp. 289-312.
Fratianni, M. (2007), The gravity equation in international trade, in Rugman, A. (Ed.), Oxford
Handbook of International Business, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Gibson, C.B. and Birkinshaw, J. (2004), The antecedents, consequences and mediating role of
organizational ambidexterity, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 209-226.
Globerman, S. and Shapiro, D. (2002), Governance infrastructure and US foreign direct
investment, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 19-39.
Govindarajan, V. and Trimble, C. (2011), The CEOs role in business model reinvention,
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 89 No. 1, pp. 108-114.
Govindarajan, V. and Trimble, C. (2012), Reverse Innovation: Create Far from Home, Win
Everywhere, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Grinblatt, M. and Keloharju, M. (2001), How distance, language, and culture influence
stockholdings and trades, The Journal of Finance, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 1053-1073.
Guillen, M.F. and Garcia-Canal, E. (2009), The American model of the multinational firm and the
new multinationals from emerging economies, The Academy of Management
Perspectives, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 23-35.
Haley, U. and Haley, G. (2013), Subsidies to Chinese Industry: State Capitalism, Business Strategy,
and Trade Policy, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, J. and Minkov, M. (2010), Cultures and Organizations: Software of the
Mind, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Hoskisson, R.E., Eden, L., Lau, C.M. and Wright, M. (2000), Strategy in emerging economies,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 249-267.
Immelt, J.R., Govindarajan, V. and Trimble, C. (2009), How GE is disrupting itself, Harvard
Business Review, Vol. 87 No. 10, pp. 56-65.
Jacques, M. (2008), As Chinas power grows, the diaspora starts to flex its worldwide muscle,
The Guardian, June 10.
Karnani, A. (2012), The dubious value of international acquisitions by emerging economy
firms, in Gupta, A.K., Wakayama, T. and Srinivasa Rangan, U. (Eds), Global Strategies
for Emerging Asia, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Khanna, T. and Palepu, K. (2006), Emerging giants, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84 No. 10,
pp. 60-69.
Khanna, T. and Palepu, K.G. (2010), Winning in Emerging Markets: A Road Map for Strategy
and Execution, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Khanna, T. and Yafeh, Y. (2007), Business groups in emerging markets: paragons or parasites?,
Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 331-372.
Kiss, A., Danis, W. and Cavusgil, S. (2012), International entrepreneurship research in emerging
economies: a critical review and research agenda, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 27
No. 2, pp. 266-290.
Punching above
their weight
325
IJOEM
8,4
326
Knight, G.A. and Cavusgil, S.T. (2005), A taxonomy of born-global firms, MIR: Management
International Review, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 15-35.
Kumar, V., Mudambi, R. and Gray, S. (2013), Internationalization, innovation and institutions:
the 3 Ps underpinning the competitiveness of emerging market firms, Journal of
International Management, April 8.
Leblang, D. (2010), Familiarity breeds investment: diaspora networks and international
investment, American Political Science Review, Vol. 104 No. 3, pp. 584-600.
Lessard, D. and Lucea, R. (2009), Mexican multinationals: insights from CEMEX,
in Ramamurti, R. and Singh, J. (Eds), Emerging Multinationals from Emerging Markets,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Levy, O., Beechler, S., Taylor, S. and Boyacigiller, N. (2007), What we talk about when we talk
about global mindset, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 38, pp. 231-258.
Li, J., Lam, K. and Qian, G. (2001), Does culture affect behavior and performance of firms? The case
of joint ventures in China, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 32, pp. 115-131.
Lorenzen, M. and Mudambi, R. (2012), Clusters, connectivity and catch-up: Bollywood and
Bangalore in the global economy, Journal of Economic Geography, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 501-534.
Luo, Y. (2003), Industrial dynamics and managerial networking in an emerging market: the case
of China, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 24 No. 13, pp. 1315-1327.
Luo, Y. and Rui, H. (2009), An ambidexterity perspective toward multinational enterprises from
emerging economies, Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 49-70.
Luo, Y., Xue, Q. and Han, B. (2010), How emerging market governments promote outward FDI:
experience from China, Journal of World Business, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 68-79.
Lynn, L. and Salzman, H. (2006), Collaborative advantage: globalization of innovation and
engineering, Issues in Science and Technology, Winter.
MacGarvie, M. (2005), The determinants of international knowledge diffusion as measured by
patent citations, Economics Letters, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 121-126.
Mathews, J.A. (2006), Dragon multinationals: new players in 21st century globalization, Asia
Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 5-27.
Meyer, K.E. (2004), Perspectives on multinational enterprises in emerging economies, Journal
of International Business Studies, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 259-276.
Meyer, K.E., Mudambi, R. and Narula, R. (2011), Multinational enterprises and local contexts:
the opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness, Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 235-252.
Mudambi, R. (2008), Location, control and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries,
Journal of Economic Geography, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 699-725.
Mudambi, R. and Swift, T. (2011), Leveraging knowledge and competencies across space:
the next frontier in international business, Journal of International Management, Vol. 17
No. 3, pp. 186-189.
NASSCOM (2012), Indian IT-BPO industry, press releases, available at: www.nasscom.org/
Indian-itbpo-industry
Noland, M. (2003), Religion, culture, and economic performance, Institute for International
Economics Working Paper No. 03-8, Peterson Institute for International Economics,
Washington, DC.
North, D.C. (1991), Institutions, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 97-112.
Oettl, A. and Agrawal, A. (2008), International labor mobility and knowledge flow
externalities, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 39 No. 8, pp. 1242-1260.
Oliveira, M., Borini, F. and Fleury, A. (2013), Innovation by Brazilian EMNEs, in Williamson, P.,
Ramamurti, R., Fleury, A. and Fleury, M. (Eds), The Competitive Advantage of Emerging
Market Multinationals, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 11-28.
ONeill, J. (2001), Building better global economic BRICs, Global Economics Paper No. 66,
Goldman Sachs, November.
Owens, B.P. and Hekman, D.R. (2012), Modeling how to grow: an inductive examination of
humble leader behaviors, contingencies, and outcomes, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 787-818.
Peng, M.W. (2012), The global strategy of emerging multinationals from China, Global Strategy
Journal, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 97-107.
Perkowski, J. (2008), Managing the Dragon: How Im Building a Billion-Dollar Business in China,
Random House, New York, NY.
Ramamurti, R. (2012), What is really different about emerging market multinationals?, Global
Strategy Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 41-47.
Ramamurti, R. and Singh, J. (2009), Emerging Multinationals in Emerging Markets, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2003), Extending the theory of the multinational enterprise:
internalization and strategic management perspectives, Journal of International Business
Studies, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 125-137.
Serrasqueiro, Z., Nunes, P.M. and da Silva, J.V. (2012), Are financing decisions of family-owned
SMEs different? Empirical evidence using panel data, Journal of Management
& Organization, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 363-382.
Shenkar, O. (2012), Beyond cultural distance: switching to a friction lens in the study of cultural
differences, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 12-17.
Steinmueller, W.E. (2000), Will new information and communication technologies improve the
codification of knowledge, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 361-376.
Tan, D. and Meyer, K.E. (2010), Business groups outward FDI: a managerial resources
perspective, Journal of International Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 154-164.
Tung, R.L. and Chung, H.F. (2010), Diaspora and trade facilitation: the case of ethnic Chinese in
Australia, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 371-392.
UNCTAD (2012a), Investment Policy Monitor Database, available at: http://investmentp
olicyhub.unctad.org/Views/Public/IndexIPM.aspx
UNCTAD (2012b), World Investment Report 2012, United Nations, Geneva.
UNCTC (1991), Government Policies and Foreign Direct Investment, UNCTAD, New York, NY.
Vahlne, J.E. and Wiedersheim-Paul, F. (1973), Economic distance: model and empirical
investigation, Export and Foreign Establishments, University of Uppsala, Uppsala,
pp. 81-159.
Verbeke, A. (2009), International Business Strategy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Wang, S., Hii, R., Zhong, J. and Du, P. (2013), Recent trends of ethnic Chinese retailing in
Metropolitan Toronto, International Journal of Applied Geospatial Research (IJAGR),
Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 49-66.
Williamson, P. and Yin, E. (2013), Innovation by Chinese EMNEs, in Williamson, P.,
Ramamurti, R., Fleury, A. and Fleury, M. (Eds), The Competitive Advantage of Emerging
Market Multinationals, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 64-80.
(The) World Bank (2005), Global Development Finance: Mobilizing Finance and Managing
Vulnerability, World Bank, Washington, DC.
Punching above
their weight
327
IJOEM
8,4
328