125876588 study on emerging market entry strategy
Post on 29-Nov-2015
74 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
-
2 0 1 3 2
-
-
2012 11
2013 02
()
()
()
()
()
-
1. , (2012)
: ,
, 13(3), 67-98.
2. , (2012) ,
, 15(3), 225-250.
3. , (2012)
, , 20, 7-32.
*
.
-
(Emerging Market) . 500
480 .
.
.
.
,
,
.
.
,
.
2000 2012
SSCI Top . 5 (Academy of
Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Harvard Business
Review, Journal of International Business Studies, Strategic Management
Journal), 55 .
. (Institutional
Theory), (Transactional Cost Theory),
-
(Resource-based View).
, , ,
.
(competency gap)
.
.
.
. .
(System Dynamics)
(CLD, Causal Loop Diagram) .
.
8 .
.
.
. Wayism
-
.
(Wayism)
.
,
CSR/CSV
.
. .
.
.
.
,
. (delay effect)
.
.
: , , , ,
, ,
-
i
. 1
1. 1
2. 2
3. 4
. 7
1. 7
2. 8
2.1. 8
2.2. 10
2.3. 11
3. 12
. 13
1. 13
1.1. 13
1.2. 14
2. 18
2.1. 18
2.2. 21
. 24
1. 24
2. 26
2.1. 26
(1) 26
-
ii
(2) 32
(3) 35
2.2. 38
(1) Wayism 38
(2) 46
2.3.
50
3. : 55
. - 57
1. 57
2. 60
2.1. 60
2.2. 62
2.3. 65
(1) 65
(2) (Tata Motors) 67
2.4. 70
(1) 70
(2) 75
2.5. 80
(1) 80
(2) 81
(3) 83
(4) 84
-
iii
2.6. 86
(1) 86
(2) 88
3. 91
4. 93
. 96
1. 96
1.1. 96
1.2. 98
2. 99
100
-
iv
2
4
7
Keyword 12
19
23
() 25
28
40
52
58
58
64
() 72
74
78
, () 88
, , 90
95
-
v
6
15
17
20
31
34
36
Wayism 39
48
51
56
61
61
2010, 2011 87
89
92
-
.
1.
(Kumar, 2011; Johnes, 2012). 2002 2009
9 (Tse, 2010) ,
(emerging market)
.
, 2011 2020 2%
7%
(Ichii, 2012), 2030 GNP GNP
50% (Tse, 2010).
.
. 500 480
(Tse, 2010).
(Wright, Filatotchev, Hoskisson, &
Peng, 2005).
52% , GDP
60%
. 15
15 6
(Economist, 2012).
.
-
2 (Kumar, 2011; Jones, 2012).
.
(homogeneous)
. (heterogeneity)
(Wright et al., 2005)
(Wright et al., 2005)
.
2.
?
?
?
(heterogeneity) (Wright et al., 2005)
(Wright et al., 2005). ,
.
,
.
-
3
, (2012a; 2012c) .
.
, , , , , ,
, CSR(Corporate Social Responsibility, ),
.
.
,
.
.
.
-
43.
1 .
2 .
3 .
4 .
5 .
6 .
6 . 1 ,
. 2 .
. , , .
,
. 3 .
.
,
. 4
.
. 4 1
. 4 2
3 . 3
, ,
-
5.
, , . 3
, ,
, Wayism ,
, 6 . 5
.
() 100%
.
5 ,
, , .
. 6 .
, .
-
6 1
2
3
,
4
5
6
-
7.
1.
Hoskisson et al.(2000)
.
,
(institutional theory),
(resource-based view),
(transactional cost theory). Hoskisson et al.(2000)
2000 2012 .
(Gao et al., 2010) (Peng, 2003),
(social network theory)(Khanna and Rivin, 2001) ,
.
(2000~2012)
Li & Atuahene-Gima(2001), Mahmood & Rufin(2005),
Peng et al.(2005), Khanna et al.(2005), Meyer et al.(2009),
Feinberg & Gupta(2009), Henisz & Zelner(2010),
Mair et al.(2012), Simanis(2012)
Hoskisson et al.(2000), Peng & Luo(2000), Dharwadlkar &
Branders(2000), Park & Luo(2001), Gong (2001), Douma et
al.(2005), McCarthy & Puffer(2008), Bhaumik et al.(2010),
Li & Atuahene-Gima(2002), Spencer(2008), Kale et
al.(2009), Malik & Kotabe(2009), Kumar(2009), Black &
Morrison(2010), Zhang et al.(2010), Chang et al.(2012),
Tomson(2012)
-
82.
2.1. (IT, Institutional Theory)
,
.
(rules of the game) (Hoskisson et al., 2000:252). ,
.
(network-based growth strategy) (Peng & Heath, 1996).
(Khanna & Rivkin, 2001; Li &
Atuahene-Gima, 2002), (Peredo & Chrisman,
2006) (Peng, Lee, Wang, 2005;
Peter, Uhlenbruck, & Eden, 2005; Mahmood & Rufin, 2005; Bhaumik et al.,
2010). (institution) (macro)
(micro)
.
Mair, Mart, & Ventresca(2012)
.
, .
(marketization), (privatization), (heavily regulated)
(Shenkar & von Glinow, 1994)
(Hoskisson et al., 2000) .
(Peter et al., 2005; Puffer &
-
9McCarthy, 2011),
(Li, & Atuahene-Gima, 2001; Lu & Ma, 2008; Gao et al., 2010;
Tse, 2010) .
(Institutional Void)
(Henisz & Zelner, 2010).
.
Khanna Palepu 15
(Khanna & Palepu, 1997;1999; Khanna, Palepu &
Sinha, 2005).
, ,
(Khanna & Palepu, 1997; Miller et al., 2009).
(Simanis, 2012)
(problem-sensing tools) (Mair et al., 2012). ,
(Lu & Ma,
2008),
(Li & Atuahene-Gima, 2001).
.
.
(Hoskisson et al., 2000).
-
10
2.2. (TCT, Transactional Cost Theory)
(Hoskisson et al., 2000). (Hoskisson,
Hill, & Kim, 1993) , (Kogut, 1988)
.
.
(Peng & Health, 1996).
,
.
(Banga, 2007).
(agency theory) (nexus of contracts)
Hoskisson, et at.(2000)
.
(asymmetric information)
(monitoring cost) .
,
(Kogut, 1998; Hoskisson et al., 2000).
.
(Wright et al., 2005).
-
11
2.3.
RBV
. RBV
(context)
(Hoskisson et al., 2000)
(Leonard-Barton, 1992).
(Black & Morrison, 2010; Ichii,
Hattori, & Michael, 2012).
RBV
(Conner & Prahalad, 1996).
(spillover effect)
(Mahmood & Rufin, 2005; Peredo & Chrisman,
2006; Banga, 2007; Zhang, Li, Li, & Zhou, 2010)
RBV , , , ,
(Peng, 2001).
(liability of foreignness)
(Barney, Wright, &
Ketchen, 2001; Meyer, 2001; Peng, 2001; Miller & Eden, 2006; Lu & Ma,
2008)
(Chang, Gong, & Peng, 2012).
Peng(2001) (SOEs,
state-owned enterprises)
RBV
-
12
3.
. , ,
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
Keyword
Keyword
, ,
, ,
, ,
keyword
.
-
13
.
1.
1.1.
(System Dynamics) 1961 MIT Jay
Forrester [ (Industrial Dynamics)]
.
.
,
.
. (Forrester, 1961: ; , , ,
1999 )
( , 1999; Forrester, 1993; Richardson, 1991;
Richmond, 1993; Senge & Sterman, 1992).
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
14
.
.
1.2.
()
(dynamic feedback perspective)
(framework)(
, , , 1999; , 2007; , , 2009) .
,
,
. (time-based)
(feedback) , (holistic) (, 2008).
. , ()
,
( ,
2009).
.
,
.
, , (, 2008).
.
-
15
. , ,
,
,
.
- , , ,
, - (, 2007;
Meadows, 1980:31-36)
( , 1999:51, )
, (feedback) (closed
loop thinking, circular feedback system)
(circular
-
16
causation, two-way causation or feedback)
( , 1999:36; , 2007).
.
.
.
.
.
, (endogenous point of view)
,
(, 2007; Richardson, 1982:1-2; Meadows, 1980:30-31)
, (holistic) (operational thinking)
.
.
( ,
1999:38; , 2007) .
. .
, .
.
.
.
-
17
.
.
.
(High
Performance, 1994:30-31).
.
,
.
.
( , 1999:51, )
-
18
2.
2.1. (CLD, Causal Loop Diagram)
.
.
.
+, -
.
. (, +,
positive) (,-, negative) .
positive(+) negative(-) () ()
. A
B positive(+)
A B
positive(+, ) . A B
positive(+)
negative(-, ) .
. ,
, , + -
, ,
(R, Reinforcing, , )
(B, Balacing, , , )
.
-
19
A B AB
.
+
A (A) B (B)
A (A) B (B)
A B
.
-
A (A) B (B)
A (A) B (B)
A B
.
a b
A B
() .
.
R
(circle) +
(R, Reinforcing) .
.
B
(circle)
(B, Balancing) .
-
20
. (-) (-), 0
(+) . , ,
.
,
,
, .
, ,
, --
, --
.
(, 2009). , ()
() . ,
() . .
(3 ) .
-
21
2.2.
+, -
,
,
. (causal map, cognitive map,
causal loop diagram, influence diagram, word-and-arrow diagram )
(mental model) ,
(diagram) .
, . (Richardson, 1997; Sterman
2000).
()
. ,
.
.
.
, .
3
. ,
. , ,
,
-
22
(, 2007).
.
.
.
.
.
( ) .
.
. SSCI Top
.
.
-
23
1.
1)
2)
2.
,
3.
,
4.
+, *
+(), -, / -()
0
5.
BSC(Balanced Scorecard) ()
.
6.
.
.
(. , (2009), )
-
24
.
1.
2012 SSCI(Social Science Citation Index)
. SSCI
Top , Hoskisson et al.(2000)
2000 2012 .
1 emerging market, emerging countries, developing
countries , (Google Scholar)
. SSCI Top 1
. 1 1
2
.
, ,
.
.
4
5 , 55 .
Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management
Review, Harvard Business Review, Journal of International Business
Studies, Strategic Management Journal. ,
. , , .
-
25
Academy of
Management
Journal
Academy of
Management
Review
Harvard
Business
Review
Journal of
International
Business
Studies
Strategic
Management
Journal
55 14 10 17 7 7
2000 5
Hoskisson et al.,Aulakhetal,
Peng & Luo,Khanna & Palepu
Dharwadkar & Branders
2001 5Li, &
Atuahene-Gima Ghemawat Meyer
Park & LuoKhanna & Rivkin,
2002 1 Li &
Atuahene-Gima2003 1 Gong 2004 1 Davies & Walters
2005 5
Henisz & Zelner,Mahmood&Rufin,
Peng et al.,Peter et al.
Khanna et al.
2006 3 Miller & EdenPeredo & Chrisman
Douma et al.
2007 1 Banga
2008 7
Vaaler,Lu & Ma,
Mesquita & Lazzarini
McCarthy & Puffer,Spencer
Ready et al.Cuervo-Cazurra &
Genc
2009 7 Feinberg & Gupta Kanter,Kumar,
Kale et al.
Miller et al., Malik & Kotabe
Meyer et al.
2010 7
Black & Morrison,DAndrea,
Marcotte & Morrison,
Henisz & Zelner, Tse
Bhaumik et al.,Gao et al.,
Zhang et al.,
2011 3
Johnson,Kumar & Puranam
Porter & Kramer
2012 8Chang et al.,Mair et al.,
Surroca et al.,
Swant
Ichii et al.,Jones,
Simanis,Thomson
()
-
26
2.
2.1.
(1)
. ,
,
.
(Park & Luo, 2001)
.
.
,
(imitation)
(spillover effect)
(Mahmood & Rufin, 2005).
.
(Mahmood & Rufin, 2005) .
.
Fixes that fail
,
Shifting the Burden (Archetype) (Peter, 1990; ,
2004; , 2008).
(Ghemawat, 2001).
(Johnson, 2011),
-
27
(Vaaler, 2008).
(Peng & Luo, 2000).
R (Reinforcing
Loop) .
B (Balancing Loop)
.
-
28
Reference
Dharwadkar &
Branders
(2000)
(-)(-)
TMT, ,
( )
Peng & Luo
(2000)
(+)
Pakr & Luo
(2001)
(+) ()(+) ()(-)
(-)
,
,
Ghemawat
(2001)
/// (+),
(-), (+)
(+)
, ,
McCarthy &
Puffer
(2008)
(Blat) (+) (+)
( )
Sawant
(2012)
(+) (+)
(+)
Khanna & Rivkin
(2001)
(+)
-
29
()
Reference
Peredo &
Chrisman
(2006)
(+) (+) (+)
(+) ()(+) (+)
,
Davies &
Walters
(2004)
(+) (+)
(+)
() (+)
(+)
Li &
Atuahene-Gima
(2002)
(+)
(+) (-)
(-)
(-)
(+)
,
Ready, et at.
(2008)
(-), (CSR)(+)
(+), (+)
Malik & Kotabe
(2009)
(+)
(+)
-
30
Reference
Li, &
Atuahene-Gima
(2001)
(+) (+)
,
Mahmood &
Rufin
(2005)
(vested interest)(+)
(-) (+)
(+) (+)
(-) (+)
Peng et al.
(2005)
(+)
(-)
(-)
(+) (delay) (-)
Vaaler
(2008)
() (+) (-)
() (+)
Johnson
(2011)
(-)
(+)
(+)
Mair et al.
(2012)
(, , ) (-)
()
-
31
-
32
R
, B1
(unintended effect), B2
. Mahmood & Rufin(2005)
() ,
. ,
.
B2 (delay)
. , 1
,
, .
.
R
(Peng & Luo, 2000; Sawant, 2012)
,
B
.
(2)
, ,
(Khanna & Palepu, 1997; Miller, Lee, Chang, & Breton-Mille, 2009).
.
(Ready et al., 2008). ,
-
33
(Henisz & Zeln, 2005; Peng et al., 2005).
(Dharwadkar & Branders, 2000)
(Khanna & Rivkin, 2001),
(Li & Atuahene-Gima, 2002)
.
. (Meyer,
2001; Li & Atuahene-Gima, 2002; Gao, Murray, Kotabe, & Lu, 2010). ,
, ,
(Mair et al., 2012)
.
.
.
(Peng et al., 2005).
(Li & Atuahene-Gima,
2002),
(Peter et al., 2005; Feinberg &
Gupta, 2009). (, 2006;
Meyer, 2001) (Li &
Atuahene-Gima, 2002)
(Mahmood & Rufin, 2005).
-
34
.
.
,
.
(Henisz & Zelner, 2005; 2010; Miller et
al., 2009) .
Peng et al.(2005) .
B1, B2 .
(In the short run, the
importance of institutional relatedness is likely to increase, and the scope of
the firm is likely to increase.).
-
35
(Khanna & Rivkin, 2001; Li &
Atuahene-Gima, 2002).
(The higher the level of financial market development, the narrower the
scope of the firm)
(In the long run, the importance of institutional relatedness is likely to
decline, and the optimal scope of the firm is likely to contract). R1
. Lu & Ma (2008) Li &
Atuahene-Gima (2002) . , R2
. Peng et al.(2005), Dharwadkar &
Branders(2000), Khanna & Rivkin (2001), Li & Atuahene-Gima (2002)
. B1, B2
.
(3)
McCarthy & Puffer(2008)
(relationship) .
(blat) (, guanxi)
(Park & Luo, 2001)
.
,
(Park & Luo, 2001; Peng
& Luo, 2000). ,
-
36
(Sawant, 2012; Peng & Luo, 2000; McCarthy &
Putter, 2008) ,
(Davies & Walters, 2004) .
.
.
.
(Park & Luo, 2001).
(blat, ) . McCarthy &
Puffer(2008)
. (Park
& Luo, 2001; Davies & Walters, 2004; Sawant, 2012) ,
-
37
/
(Davies & Walters, 2004).
(Malik & Kotabe, 2009)
.
, .
( ) (
) .
5 .
.
.
() .
. ,
R1
R2
.
.
-
38
2.2.
(1) Wayism
17 500 141
35.2% .
2009 500 68
11.2% .
(Black & Morrison,
2010; Ichii, et al, 2012)
.
Wayism
(Black & Morrison, 2010). , , ,
Wayism . Wayism
.
(Kale, Singh, & Raman, 2009; Chang, Gong, & Peng, 2012).
Wayism
. ()
, .
. (Black & Morrison, 2010; Ichii, et al, 2012).
.
-
39
Wayism
-
40
Reference
Gong
(2003)
(+) (+)
Delay (-)
(),
Douma
et al.
(2006)
(+)
/ (-)
(+)
monitoring effect(+) (-) (-)
(-)
()
Kanter
(2009)
M&A (+)
M&A (+)
,
Hoskisson
et al.
(2000)
(+)
(+)
(+)
,
()
Spencer
(2008)
FDI (+)
FDI
-
41
()
Reference
Black &
Morrison
(2010)
Wayism (+) (+) Wayism (+)
Wayism (-)
(+) (+)
(-)
(-)
: , ,
/
DAndrea
et al.
(2010)
(+)
(+)
Zhang
et al.
(2010)
FDI (+)
FDI (+)
,
FDI
Kumar &
Puranam
(2011)
(-) (+)
(+)
(+)() (+)
R&D
(+)
-
42
()
Reference
Ichii et al.
(2012)
talent (+)
investment (+)
Upper class (-)
Thomson
(2012)
(+) MNC (+)
(+), (-)
(-), (-)
Chang et al.
(2012)
(, , )(+), (+)
(+),
Sharing identity (+)
(+)
Meyer
(2001)
(+) MNCs(+)
(-)
(-)
,
Peter et al.
(2005)
(-)
(-)
Khan et al.
(2005)
(+)
-
43
()
Reference
Miller & Eden
(2006)
(-)
(+)
(-)
Gaur et al.
(2007)
(-)
(+)
Lu & Ma
(2008)
(restricted, less open market) JV(+)
Vaaler
(2008)
() (+) (-)
() (+)
Feinberg &
Gupta
(2009)
(+)
(+) (-)
,
Miller et al.
(2009)
(+) (-) (-)
(+)
(+)
(-) (-)
(local density)
,
-
44
()
Reference
Meyer et al.,
(2009)
JV(-)
JV(-)
(, , )
,
Tse
(2010)
Policy Risk MNC (-)
MNC (+)
Henisz & Zelner
(2010)
Policy Risk (+)
CSR (+) Policy Risk(-)
CSR
Johnson
(2011)
(-)
(+)
(+)
Simanis
(2012)
Operating Cost(+)
(-) Operating Cost(-)
BOP(Bottom of
Pyramid)
Surroca et al.
(2012)
CSR(+)
CSR(-)
MNC
CSR
-
45
(Shifting the burden) (Peter,
1990; , 2004; , 2008).
B1 . B1 R1
R2 R3 . R1
(Black & Morrison, 2010).
(Black & Morrison, 2010)
(Kanter, 2009).
(Kumar & Puranam, 2011)
.
BOP(Bottom of Pramidy, )
(Prahalad & Hammond, 2002; Ichii et al., 2012).
(Thomson, 2012)
(Mahmood &
Rufin, 2005; Banga, 2007).
.
M&A
(Banga, 2007; Spencer, 2008; Zhang et al., 2010),
(Gaur et al.,
2007), (Kumar & Puranam, 2011; Ichii, et al, 2012)
.
1, 3
. 1 .
-
46
(2)
(Gong, 2003;Kanter, 2009; Ichii et al., 2012).
.
,
.
(Simanis,
2012).
(Meyer,
2001; Li & Atuahene-Gima, 20502; Khan, Palepu & Sinha, 2005; Thomson,
2012). B1 .
, ,
.
.
.
.
. ,
.
(Henisz &
Zeiner, 2010). Henisz & Zelner(2010) CSR(Corporate Social
-
47
Responsibility, ) . CSR
.
CSR
(cultural competence)
(DAndrea et al., 2010).
CSR
. CSV(Creating
Shared Value, ) .
. (Porter & Kramer, 1999; 2002; 2006; 2011, Prahalad & Hammond, 2002;
Brugmann & Prahalad, 2007). , Porter & Kramer(2006)
(Value Chain) (Diamond)
(Strategic CSR) CSR
(Societal Value)
(Economic Value) CSV (Porter & Kramer, 2011).
CSV
. CSV
.
CSV ,
CSR .
CSR CSV .
-
48
CSR, CSV
-
++
+
-
-
-
+
++
+
+
++
+
+
B1R1
R1
CSR, CSV (Porter & Kramer, 2006; 2011;
Henisz & Zelner, 2010). Porter & Kramer(2006; 2011)
, ,
. CSR
(Porter & Kramer, 2006)
(Shared value) (Porter & Kramer, 2011)
(cultural
competence) (DAndrea et al., 2010) .
BOP(Bottom of Pyramid)
CSR CSV
.
-
49
CSR CSV
.
(Miller
& Eden, 2006; Gong, 2003; Thomson. 2012). R1
(DAndrea et al., 2010).
.
(Kumar &
Puranam, 2011) .
.
.
(Li &
Atuahene-Gima, 2002; Mahmood & Rufin, 2005; Peter et al., 2005; Meyer et
al., 2009; Thomson, 2012).
.
(Delay Effect)
B1 .
1 10 .
, CSR CSV
,
,
.
-
50
. CSR CSV
.
2.3.
(emerging giant) (Khanna & Palepu, 2006; Kumar, 2009; Black &
Morrison, 2010).
.
(Cuervo-Cazurra & Genc, 2008).
(Cuervo-Cazurra & Genc, 2008)
.
.
.
M&A
(Jones, 2012). ,
(complementary
competencies) (Kumar, 2009).
M&A
.
-
51
(Kale et al., 2009).
-
52
Reference
Johnes
(2012)
(+) (+)
Natura()
Bhaumik
et al.
(2010)
(-) FDI(+)
(-)
FDI(+) FDI(+)
,
Kumar
(2009)
(+)
(+)
M&A (+)
M&A
M&A
,
Kale
et al.
(2009)
(+) (+)
(+) (+)
M&A { / /
} (+)
( )
,
-
53
()
Reference
Gao,
et al.
(2010)
/(+)
/(+)
/(+)
/(+)
,
,
Cuervo-Cazurra
& Genc
(2008)
EMNE(-)
EMNE(+)
EMNE(+)
,
Mesquita &
Lazzarini
(2008)
SME / /(+)
(+)
,
,
,
Banga
(2007)
FDI ()(+) (+)
FDI ()(+) (-)
(-)
FDI
,
-
54
(2008) .
, R2 R3
.
.
.
,
.
(Reinforcing)
. ,
.
(Black & Morrison, 2010).
.
(Ichii et al.,2012),
BOP .
(Prahalad, C. K. & Hammond, 2002),
(DAndrea et al, 2010).
.
.
-
55
3. :
.
(, ,
) ( ),
(, )
.
,
.
,
,
.
.
(Delay)
.
.
.
,
.
,
.
.
-
56
CSR, CSV
++
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ +
+
+
-
+
+
+
+-
+
+
+ +
+
-
+
-
o r
+
+
+
R1R2
B1
R3
B2
-
57
.
1.
.
(, 2006; Eisenhard, 1989).
(random sampling) (theoretical sampling)
.
,
(Eisenhardt, 1989),
. (, 2006:11 )
( )
.
, 2012
, 2004 IMF
, .
,
. 2004
.
, ,
, , (Kale, et al. 2009; Kumar,
2009).
.
-
58
(; ) ()
Spring Industries(;2005) Coteminas() Kale, et al.(2009)
Godiva(;2007) lker Group() Kale, et al.(2009)
Novelis(;2007) Hindalco() Kumar(2009)
Citigroup Global Services(;2008) Tata Group() Kumar(2009)
St.AnneNackawicPulpMill(;2005)
Minacs Worldwide(;2006)
Hindalco() Kumar(2009)
Tetley(;2000), Corus(;2007) Tata Group() Kale, et al.(2009)
Carlton International(;2001) VIP Industries() Kale, et al.(2009)
Axon Group(;2008) HCL() Kumar(2009)
Mount Gordon(;2000)
Nifty(;2003)
Hindalco() Kumar(2009)
OZ Minerals(;2009) Minmetals() Kumar(2009)
( )
( )
,
(, Kale, et al. 2009:114 )
-
59
,
(prototype) .
, ,
.
.
,
() 100%
, 9 .
(, 2006;
Eisenhard, 1989)
.
2011 11 7 2012 10 ,
. CEO
,
. CEO ,
MBA
.
1 2004 2012
CEO ,
. 2 2003 2012
( 2012. 9. 10.)
.
-
60
2.
2.1.
, ,
.
,
100% .
.
2004 9
. 1
1 ,
2 ,
.
.
2008
. ,
50% , 70%
,
.
.
, , 1
,
.
-
61
16%
15%
15%11%
11%
8%
7%6%
6% 5%Dongfeng()
Dainler Trucks()First Automotive Works ()
China Heavy National Duty Truck ()Tata Motors()
MAN-Scania ()
Volvo Global Trucks
59%23%
11%
7%
-
62
2.2.
1955
. 1965
.
, ,
, . 1971
GM 1:1 GM (GM Korea)
.
GM
.
1978
. 1983 GM
.
10 1992 GM
.
1993 , , ,
(M&A)
. 1995
. 1998
, ,
, , , ,
.
1999
. ,
-
63
, 2000
11 3 .
, GM
, 2001 GM
. GM ()
2002 10 ()( GM)
, (), (),
() .
() GM , ()
.
1)
1) 2003 GM , 2011 GM Korea(GM) , 2012 10 ()
.
-
64
1955
1965
.
1971 GM GM
1976
1978
1983 GM . ()
1992 GM 100%
1993
1995
1996 ()
1998
1999
2000 ,
2001 GM , (MOU)
2002
GM
()
()
()
-
65
2.3.
(1)
140 1868 (Jamsetji Tata)
.
625
.
. , ,
.
, 1998
2008
(Nano) . 2012 , IT,
, , , , , 7 100
. 6 80
, 85 .
2010-11 833 ,
58% . 140
,
425,000
27 .
. 31
, 774 (2011.11.17.
) , , ,
(TCS), , , , ,
.
( ) 10
, 4 () ,
-
66
. (TCS)
, , , , , ,
. ()
2 , 2 (soda ash)
, .
.
. ,
.
.
(Brand Finance)
157 100 41 ,
(Business Week)
50 17 , (The Reputation
Institute) 2009 (The Worlds Most
Reputable Companies) 11 .
.
2/3 , , , ,
, ,
(NGO) .
.
4% .
-
67
(2) (Tata Motors)
1996
~1997 2 5,000
2011~2012 16 32 8,000
.
3 , 4 , 3
. 2004 9
, 2008 (Jaguar) (Land
Rover) . , 32
. Nielsen Corporate Image
Monitor(CIM) 2011 , , ,
,
. Business Today 2011
1 .
. 1990
12
.
. , 2000 2001 50 (1 25 )
.
.
. 5
1999 ,
.
-
68
, (Manza)
.
.
60~65% 40%
2 .
2004 2005
(Hispano Carrocer) 2006
(body-building)
,
. 1961
, , , ,
.
. 4,500 1966
ERC( ) ERC ,
, , , , R&D .
.
LCV, SUV
1998 , 2005
.
.
10 (2 )
5 2008 .
(Nano) . 4
, . , (Lean)
-
69
,
, . 4
4, 5
. (Nano)
. 2000
1
. 600
2009~2010 10
.
,
.
,
.
.
.
.
. . .
. ,
. , .
-
70
2.4.
(1)
1999
2000 11 3
.
. 2002 9
50% , 30.5% 4.1%
.
() 2002
9 30 2002 11 1
226
1 5,000 17,553,733
.
2003
30% 2005
,
.
2002 12 3
.
.
,
.
-
71
()
.
.
, ( S&T
) 10
.
.
100%
, ,
,
.
.
,
. .
. ,
. .
,
.
.
. 2003 7 60
. 2003
-
72
,
.
2003 2,655 , 165 ,
64 .
() 2003 12 31
603
603
.
1,206 165
, 165
. 165
.
2003 12 31 877 6
.
()
()
6,417,165 32,085,825 36.56%
5,503,241 27,516,205 31.35%
649,825 3,249,125 37.0%
564,636 2,823,180 32.2%
523,983 2,619,915 29.9%
458,838 2,294,190 26.1%
1,622 3,436,045 17,180,225 19.57%
17,553,733 87,768,665 100.00%
-
73
2004 .
2004 2 18
2004 3 5
603 2004 3 29 (1
5,000, 1 20,000, 3,016,060)
( 943 ) ,
( 877 ) 262 2004 5 6
. 2004 5 29
( ) .
. CEO
,
,
7, ,
CFO .
(GM 67%, 51%)
100%
.
,
. , , , 10
.
.
-
74
.
.
. GM
.
.
,
.
100 ()
.
2003
, .
2003.
12
2004.
12
2005.
12
2006.
12
2007.
12
2008.
12
2009.
12
2010.
12
2011.
12
616 660 740 816 866 909 956 998 1,046
199 169 150 275 320 369 329 311 301
815 829 890 1,091 1,186 1,278 1,285 1,309 1,347
25 31 30 50 40 30 42 31 36
() 56 86 136 176 206 248 279 315
-
75
.
.
, ,
.
.
,
, 4 2
, 7
. ,
.
.
(2)
()
1 2009 .
, , , ,
.
, ,
,
.
-
76
.
15
.
2006 .
2006 1 4.5, 5, 7
, 5%
, Korea 2004 , 2007
4
ISO/TS 16949 .
. 30%
. 2004 2008
,
4, 2 , 806 1,267
60% . 2008 4
, (
, 5 ,
) , 2008
80% .
UAE, , , 40
2006 1
2008 2 .
KD(Knock Down) .
-
77
.
.
AFZAL Motors Private Limited 2005 KD
2
. KD
. (2.5~3),
(1), 5
15
.
2009
.
2003
( ),
.
2007 CEO
2007 ,
2009 CEO 30
.
-
78
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
2003.1~2003.12 2004.1~2004.12 2005.1~2005.3 2005.4~2006.3 2006~2007 2007~2008 2008~2009 2009~2010 2010~2011 2011~2012
148,889,491,911 165,597,134,428 136,835,795,619 153,537,569,041 206,105,333,698 231,529,014,397 204,874,892,297 348,237,852,654 254,400,079,995 306,817,745,173
127,140,843,510 125,006,444,705 126,854,861,614 129,917,334,071 141,010,490,269 189,057,190,321 255,021,562,389 265,045,567,513 277,843,782,914 253,339,698,815
276,030,335,421 290,603,579,133 263,690,657,233 283,454,903,112 347,115,823,967 420,586,204,718 459,896,454,686 613,283,420,167 532,243,862,909 560,157,443,988
61,859,321,998 114,617,377,818 53,390,088,730 74,754,655,758 122,618,118,919 149,366,931,382 157,537,815,941 298,380,289,998 173,491,549,325 214,514,718,628
70,445,928,832 17,495,455,522 50,566,553,552 35,500,245,577 29,915,587,814 44,513,807,596 61,036,248,101 48,066,057,189 78,837,852,857 68,951,753,889
132,305,250,830 132,112,833,340 103,956,642,282 110,254,901,335 152,533,706,733 193,880,738,978 218,574,064,042 346,446,347,187 252,329,402,182 283,466,472,517
87,768,665,000 15,080,300,000 15,080,300,000 15,080,300,000 15,080,300,000 15,080,300,000 15,080,300,000 15,080,300,000 15,080,300,000 15,080,300,000
47,585,785,853 154,264,446,808 143,403,772,201 143,403,772,201 143,403,772,201 143,403,772,201 143,403,772,201 143,403,772,201 143,403,772,201 143,403,772,201
81,451,951 108,808,323 133,236,948
8,382,472,638 -10,860,674,607 1,245,885,807 14,709,028,407 36,103,045,033 68,221,393,539 82,838,318,443 108,271,548,828 121,321,580,203 118,073,662,322
-11,838,900 6,673,592 4,056,943 6,901,169
276,030,335,421 290,603,579,133 263,690,657,233 283,454,903,112 347,120,823,967 420,586,204,718 459,896,454,686 613,283,420,167 532,243,862,909 560,157,443,988
(2003~2012, )
-
79
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
2003.1~2003.12 2004.1~2004.12 2005.1~2005.3 2005.4~2006.3 2006~2007 2007~2008 2008~2009 2009~2010 2010~2011 2011~2012
265,545,508,757 296,009,214,278 70,898,058,390 364,939,932,630 493,658,359,272 713,864,881,876 673,073,057,784 683,815,944,248 726,665,517,881 763,468,338,475
231,521,136,319 259,055,790,572 60,678,640,112 306,050,608,832 416,897,257,897 593,768,135,193 548,266,684,865 590,059,810,772 626,522,279,090 670,803,077,426
34,024,372,438 36,953,423,706 10,219,418,278 58,889,323,798 76,761,101,375 120,096,746,683 124,806,372,919 93,756,133,476 100,143,238,791 92,665,261,049
17,525,450,369 25,992,246,338 8,481,315,130 40,171,927,112 49,628,963,754 62,194,261,542 65,541,323,606 70,263,901,787 82,038,957,448 87,615,314,521
16,498,922,069 10,961,177,368 1,738,103,148 18,717,396,686 27,132,137,621 57,902,485,141 59,265,049,313 23,492,231,689 18,104,281,343 5,049,946,528
1,730,416,322 10,700,398,665 3,225,451,832 4,422,483,738 6,446,277,536 5,558,177,746 33,762,671,290 18,763,943,644 12,938,986,229 9,911,082,985
7,744,957,810 10,052,694,888 3,454,182,947 5,195,043,601 4,314,816,912 10,630,049,755 44,451,851,931 10,857,426,304 12,254,084,322 8,535,721,405
10,484,380,581 11,608,881,145 1,509,372,033 17,944,836,823 29,263,598,245 52,830,613,132 48,575,868,672 31,398,749,029 18,789,183,250 6,425,308,108
222,000,000
27,098,824,983
10,484,380,581 -15,267,943,838 1,509,372,033 17,944,836,823 29,263,598,245 52,830,613,132 48,575,868,672 31,398,749,029 18,789,183,250 6,425,308,108
4,007,771,771 3,775,403,407 263,486,226 4,481,694,223 7,869,591,619 14,680,144,626 14,354,553,768 5,965,518,644 2,723,091,875 4,395,120,989
6,476,608,810 -19,043,347,245 1,245,885,807 13,463,142,600 21,394,006,626 38,150,468,506 34,221,314,904 25,433,230,385 16,066,091,375 2,030,187,119
-
80
2.5.
2009 10 23, 2 .
23
, , , ,
.
, ,
1
.
5 3
2021
.
(1)
, 100%
.
. ,
.
.
.
-
81
.
() . () 4 14
,
. , 100%
()
.
.
.
,
.
. Market-driven company
.
(2)
.
.
2 50
.
.
-
82
.
.
.
.
2010 3 MBA
.
. , , , , , 2
2 2
. ,
.
18 .
.
.
24
. ,
.
.
.
.
-
83
,
.
.
.
.
,
. . .
(3)
CEO.
2 , 2010 10 5
. 10 30
228 Km
.
2
.
.
.
, ,
-
84
.
.
()
, , One-stop
3S(Sales, Service, Spare Parts)
.
.
(4)
.
,
. , 2003
10%
2011 15% .
5 .
. 2010 12
OSHAS 18001 .
2011
.
-
85
2012 (Toxic
free) .
.
30% .
.
70%
, 2011
10
, ,
.
. 2010 1
(ICCK) -
(CEPA)
.
5 3 , , ,
, 5 5-3-5
,
. , ,
,
. (PRIMA)
2009
2012 (German Design Award)
. 2102 , ,
3,000 40 .
-
86
2.6.
(1)
2020 680 , 3.5
, 430 , , ,
.
.
2008 .
30%
. 2011 11 10~15%
23 21
.
,
.
2 , MAN 5 7
7 7 2016 14
.
.
.
1 1
-
87
(Dongfeng) 1
. , 23%
59%
.
FTA , ,
.
.
. KOTRA 88 5 160
2 1
2 Ashok Leyland 85%
. 8
8 4
.
0
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
20102011
2010, 2011 (: )
-
88
12
15
21.5
25
30
35
35
2004 51,549 49 33,905 936 16,078 323 106 151
2005 50,747 42 31,816 832 17,213 590 108 146
2006 51,095 38 30,874 707 17,787 1,428 100 161
2007 51,906 32 29,286 698 17,874 3,863 96 157
2008 51,622 30 27,427 483 7,341 6,062 112 167
2009 53,138 30 26,858 440 16,835 8,676 118 181
2010 54,966 29 26,467 390 16,168 11,627 105 180
2011 55,784 59 25,999 357 15,497 13,594 95 183
(2)
. 2003
2004 7
. 2012 4 13 [2012
]
1.5
() .
5~6
.
, . 2011
4 .
, () (: )
-
89
2000 250 10 2010 320
10 27.5% . 1 80.7%, 1~3
7.5%, 3~5 4.8% . , 2000
20.8% 2010 17.9% .
.
55%, 74%, 30% .
. ,
,
.
-
90
2006 228,365 142,566 85,799 105,575 74,077 31,498 12,673 11,930 743
2007 237,983 149,676 88,307 109,157 70,192 38,965 14,369 13,051 1,318
2008 231,281 122,926 108,355 125,063 62,409 62,654 14,339 10,294 4,045
2009 234,205 142,570 91,635 112,872 65,501 47,371 13,812 11,186 2,626
2010 254,528 165,291 89,237 138,268 70,261 68,007 16,024 12,110 3,914
2011 275,210 178,402 96,808 143,981 72,189 71,795 15,208 12,762 2,446
, , (: )
-
91
3.
.
100% 9
,
. R1
.
.
,
.
.
.
. R1
. ,
(Limit to
Growth) .
R1
.
.
-
92
+
+
+
+
+
+ +
++
+
+
+
+
++
+
+
+
+
+
-
R1
+
-
+
-
93
4.
.
.
.
.
,
. 9
100% .
,
.
.
.
.
.
, . ,
.
CSR
.
-
94
.
. 2000
,
()
2003 2012 .
.
Kale, et al.(2009:14)
(Structure), (Activities), (Top Executives),
(Autonomy), (Speed of Integration)
.
.
.
.
(Kumar, 2009).
, ,
.
(complementary competencies) .
.
. Kale, et
al.(2009:14)
.
-
95
, ,
, ,
-
- ,
(best-in-class)
/ /
/ /
,
.
(Wayism) .
.
.
-
96
.
1.
1.1.
.
, .
,
.
. .
.
.
Wayism
.
.
CSR CSV
. CSR
CSV ,
-
97
.
.
.
.
.
(complementary competencies) .
.
. 2004 IMF
.
.
,
.
.
. CSR/CSV
,
.
-
98
1.2.
.
, ,
.
.
HR , , M&A, PMI CSR CSV . ,
2000 2012 SSCI Top
.
55
.
.
.
. ,
, .
.
.
[
] [ ]
.
.
-
99
2.
.
55 .
55 .
, .
.
.
. , , ,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
100
www.dart.fss.or.kr, 2012. 9. 10.
, , (1999), , .
(2005), , , 11(2),
63-85.
(2008), , .
, (2010),
, , 11(1),
113-141.
D&S (2007) , D&S:
2011 6-11, 2012 12-13
(1997)
, ,
(A&D) (2008) 4WD , ,
, A&D ,
(2006), .
, 17(4), 1-30.
, (2009),
, , 10(1),
33-60.
, (2012a),
: , , 13(3),
67-98.
, (2012b), , ,
15(3), 225-250.
, (2012c),
, , 20, 7-32.
-
101
(1993) :
, ,
: CEO (2004-2012)
: 1(2005 )-29(20012 )
www.tata-daewoo.com
Aulakh, P. S., Kotabe, M., & Teegen, H. (2000). Export Strategies and
Performance of Firms from Emerging Economies: Evidence from
Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Academy of Management Journal, 43,
342-361.
Banga, R. (2007). The export-diversifying impact of Japanese and US
foreign direct investments in the Indian manufacturing sector,
Journal of International Business Studies, 37(4), 558-568.
Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive adva ntage,
Journal of Management, 17, 99-120.
Barney, J., Wright, M, & Ketchen, D. (2001). The resource-based view of
the firm: Ten years after 1991, Journal of Management. 27( 6),
625-642.
Bhaumik, S. K., Driffield, N. & Pal, S. (2010). Does ownership structure of
emerging-market firms affect their outward FDI? The case of the
Indian automotive and pharmaceutical sectors, Journal of
International Business Studies, 41, 437-450.
Black, J. S. & Morrison, A. J. (2010). A Cautionary Tale for Emerging
Market Giants, Harvard Business Review, 88(9), 99-103.
Brugmann,J. & Prahalad, C. K. (2007). Cocreating Businesss New Social
Compact, Harvard Business Review, 85(2), 80-90.
Chang, Y., Gong, Y. & Peng, M. W. (2012). Expatriate Knowledge
-
102
Transfer, Subsidiary Absorptive Capacity, and Subsidiary
Performance, Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 927-948.
Conner, K. R. & Prahalad, C. K. (1996). A resource-based theory of the
firm), Knowledge versus opportunism, Organization Science. 7,
477-501.
Cuervo-Cazurra, A. & Genc, M. (2008). Transforming disadvantages into
advantages, developing-country MNEs in the least developed
countries, Journal of International Business Studies. 39(2), 957-979.
Davies, H., & Walters, P. (2004). Emergent Patterns of Strategy,
Environment and Performance in a Transition Economy, Strategic
Management Journal, 25, 347-364.
DAndrea, G., Marcotte, D. & Morrison, G. D. (2010). Let Emerging Market
Customers Be Your Teachers, Harvard Business Review, 88(12),
115-120.
Dharwadkar, B., George, G. & Brandes, P. (2000). Privatization in Emerging
Economies), An Agency Theory Perspective, Academy of
Management Review, 25(3), 650-669.
Douma, S., George, R., & Kabir, R. (2006). Foreign and domestic
ownership, business groups, and firm performance, Evidence from
a large emerging market, Strategic Management Journal, 27,
637-657.
Economist Online (2012, April, 24). Focus: Emerging-market cities.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research,
Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Feinberg, S. E., & Gupta, A. K. (2009). MNC subsidiaries and country
risk), Internalization as a safeguard against weak external
institutions, Academy of Management Journal, 52(2), 381-399.
-
103
Gao, G. Y., Murray, J. Y., Kotabe, M., & Lu, J. (2010). A Strategy Tripod
Perspective on Export Behaviors: Evidence from Domestic and
Foreign Firms Based in an Emerging Economy, Journal of
International Business Studies, 41, 377-396.
Gaur, A. S., Delios, A., & Singh, K. (2007). Institutional Environments,
Staffing Strategies, and Subsidiary Performance: Lessons from
Japanese MNCs, Journal of Management, 33(4) 611-635.
Ghemawat, P. (2001). Distance still matters, Harvard Business Review,
79(8), 137-147.
Gong, Y. (2003). Subsidiary Staffing in Multinational Enterprises: Agency,
Resources, and Performance, Academy of Management Journal,
46(6), 728-739.
Henisz, W. J. & Zelner, B. A. (2005). Legitimacy, Interest Group Pressures,
and Change in Emergent Institutions: the Case of Foreign
Investors and Host Country Governments, Academy of Management
Review, 30(2), 361-382.
Henisz, W. J. & Zelner, B. A. (2010). The hidden risks in emerging
markets, Harvard Business Review. 88(4), 88-95.
Hoskisson, R. E., Hill, C. W. L., & Kim, H. (1993). The multidivisional
structure: Organizational fossil or source of value, Journal of
Management, 19, 269-298.
Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Lau, C. M. & Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in
Emerging Economies, The Academy of Management Journal, 43(3),
249-267.
Ichii, S., Hattori S. & Michael, D. (2012). How to Win in Emerging
Markets), Lessons from Japan, Harvard Business Review, 90(5),
126-130.
-
104
Jones, G. (2012). The Growth Opportunity That Lies Next Door, Harvard
Business Review, 90(7), 141-145.
Johnson, B. (2011). The CEO of Heinz on Powering Growth in Emerging
Markets, Harvard Business Review, 89(10), 47-50.
Kale, P., H. Singh, & Raman, A. P. (2009). Dont Integrate Your
Acquisitions, Partner with Them, Harvard Business Review,
87(12), 109-115.
Kanter, R. M. (2009). Mergers that stick, Harvard Business Review, 87(10),
121-125.
Khanna, T., & Palepu K. (1997). Why focused strategies may be wrong for
emerging markets, Harvard Business Review, 75(4), 3-10.
Khanna, T., & Palepu K. (1999). The right way to restructure
conglomerates in emerging markets, Harvard Business Review,
77(4), 125-134.
Khanna, T., & Palepu K. (2000). The future of business groups in
emerging economies), Long-run evidence from Chile, Academy of
Management Journal, 43, 268-285.
Khanna, T., & Rivkin, J. W. (2001). Estimating the Performance Effects of
Business Groups in Emerging Markets, Strategic Management
Journal, 22(1), 45-74.
Khanna, T., & Palepu K. (2006). Emerging Giant: Building world class
companies in Developing Countries, Harvard Business Review,
84(10), 60-69.
Khanna, T., Palepu K. & Sinha, J. (2005). Strategies That Fit Emerging
Markets, Harvard Business Review, 83(6), 63-76.
Kogut, B. (1988). Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives,
Strategic Management Journal, 9, 319-332.
-
105
Kogut, B. & Zander, U. (1993). Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary
theory of the multinational corporation, Journal of International
Business Studies, 24(4), 625-645.
Kumar, N. & Puranam, P. (2011). Have You Restructured for Global
Success? Harvard Business Review, 89(10), 123-128.
Kumar, N. (2009). How Emerging Giants Are Rewriting the Rules of
M&A, Harvard Business Review, 87(5), 115-121.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities: A Paradox
in Managing New Product Development, Strategic Management
Journal, 13, 111-125.
Li, H., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2001). Product Innovation Strategy and The
Performance of New Technology Ventures in China, Academy of
Management Journal, 44(6), 1123-1134.
Li, H., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2002). The Adoption of Agency Business
Activity, Product Innovation, and Performance in Chinese
Technology Ventures, Strategic Management Journal, 23, 469-490.
Lu, J. W. & Ma, X. (2008). The Contingent Value of Local Partners
Business Group Affiliations, Academy of Management Journal,
51(2), 295-314.
Mahmood, I. P. & Rufin, C. (2005). Governments dilemma: The role of
government in imitation and Innovation, Academy of Management
Review, 30(2), 338-360.
Malik, O. R., & Kotabe, M. (2009). Dynamic Capabilities, Government
Policies, and Performance in Firms from Emerging Economies:
Evidence from India and Pakistan, Journal of Management Studies,
45(3), 421-450.
Mair, J., Mart, I, & Ventresca, M. (2012). Building inclusive markets in
-
106
rural Bangladesh: how intermediaries work institutional voids,
Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 819-850.
McCarthy, D. J. & Puffer, S. M. (2008). Interpreting The Ethicality of
Corporate Governance Decisions in Russia: Utilizing Integrative
Social Contracts Theory to Evaluate The Relevance of Agency
Theory, Norms, Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 11-31.
Meyer, K. E. (2001). Institutions, Transaction Costs, and Entry Mode
Choice in Eastern Europe, Journal of International Business Studies,
32(2), 357-367.
Mesquita, L. F., & Lazzarini, S. G. (2008). Horizontal and Vertical
Relationships in Developing Economies: Implications for SMEs
Access to Global Markets, Academy of Management Journal. 51(2),
359-380.
Meyer, K. E., Estrin, S., Bhaumik, S. & Peng, M. W. (2009). Institutions,
resources, and entry strategies in emerging economies, Strategic
Management Journal, 30(1), 61-80.
Miller, S., & Eden, L. (2006). Local Density and Foreign Subsidiary
Performance, Academy of Management Journal. 49(2), 341-355.
Miller, D., Lee, J. W., Chang, S. D., & Breton-Mille, I. L. (2009). Filling
the institutional void: The social behavior and performance of
family vs Non-family Technology firms in emerging markets.
Journal of International Business Studies, 40(5), 802-817
Nidumolu, R. & Prahalad, C. K. (2009). Why Sustainability Is Now the
Key Driver of Innovation, Harvard Business Review, 87(9), 56-64.
North, D.(1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic
performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Part, S. H., & Luo, Y. (2001). Guanxi and Organizational Dynamics:
-
107
Organizational Networking In Chinese Firms, Strategic Management
Journal, 22, 455-477.
Peng, M. W. (2001). The resource-based view and international business,
Journal of Management, 27, 803-829.
Peng, M. W. (2003). Institutional Transitions and Strategic Choices,
Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 275-296.
Peng, M. W., & Heath, P. S. (1996). The growth of the firm in planned
economies in transition: Institutions, organizations, and strategic
choice, Academy of Management Review, 21, 492-528.
Peng, M. W., & Luo, Y. (2000). Managerial Ties and Firm Performance in
a Transition Economy: The Nature of a Micro-Macro Link,
Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 486-501.
Peng, M. W., Lee, S. & Wang, D. Y. L. (2005). What Determines The
Scope of the Firm Over Time? A Focus on Institutional
Relatedness, Academy of Management Review, 30(3), 622-633.
Peredo, A. M., & Chrisman, J. J. (2006). Toward a Theory of
Community-Based Enterprise, Academy of Management Review,
31(2), 309-328.
Peter, S. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the
Learning Organization, Random House.
Peter, R., Uhlenbruck, K. & Eden, L. (2005). Government corruption and
the entry strategies of multinationals, Academy of Management
Review, 30(2), 383-396
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (1999). Philanthropys new agenda),
creating value, Harvard Business Review, 77(6), 121-130.
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). The Competitive Advantage of
Corporate Philanthropy, Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56-69.
-
108
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy & Society: The link
between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility,
Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78-92.
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating Shared Value, Harvard
Business Review, 90(1), 62-77.
Prahalad, C. K. & Hammond, A. (2002). Serving the Worlds Poor,
Profitably, Harvard Business Review, 80(9), 48-57.
Ready, D., Hill, L. A. & Conger, J. A. (2008). Winning the race for talent
in emerging markets(cover story), Harvard Business Review,
86(11), 62-70.
Sawant, R. J., (2012). Asset Specificity and Corporate Political Activity in
Regulated industries, Academy of Management Review, 37(2),
194-210.
Shenkar, O., & von Glinow, M. A. (1994). Paradoxes of organizational
theory and research: Using the case of China to illustrate national
contingency, Management Science, 40, 56-71.
Simanis, E. (2012). Reality Check at the Bottom of the Pyramid, Harvard
Business Review, 91(6), 120-125.
Spencer, J. W. (2008). The Impact of Multinational Enterprise Strategy on
Indigenous Enterprises: Horizontal Spillovers and Crowding out in
Developing Countries, Academy of Management Review, 33(2),
341-361.
Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and a
Complex World, McGraw-Hill.
Suhomlinova, O. (1999). Constructive destruction: Transformation of
Russian state0-owned construction enterprises during market
transition, Organization Studies, 20, 451-484.
-
109
Surroca, J., Trib, J. A. & Zahra, S. A. (2012). Stakeholder Pressure on
MNEs and the Transfer of Socially Irresponsible Practices to
Subsidiaries, Academy of Management Journal. Published online
before print July 20, 2012.
Thomson, S. J. (2012). The Perils of Partnering in Developing Markets,
Harvard Business Review, 91(6), 23-25.
Tse, E. (2010). Is It Too Late to Enter China? Harvard Business Review,
88(4), 96-101.
Vaaler, P. M. (2008). How Do MNCs Vote in Developing Country
Elections? Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 21-43.
Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Hoskisson, R. E., & Peng, M. W. (2005).
Strategy Research in Emerging Economies: Challenging the
Conventional Wisdom, Journal of Management Studies, 42(1), 1-33.
Zhang, Y., Li, H., Li, Y., & Zhou, L. (2010). FDI Spillovers In an Emerging
Market: The Role of Foreign Firms Country Origin diversity and
Domestic Firms Absorptive Capacity, Strategic Management
Journal, 31, 969-989.
-
110
Abstract
Study on Emerging Market Entry Strategy
- System Dynamics Approach -
Chung, Chang-Kwon
The Graduate School of Business Administration
Seoul School of Integrated Sciences and Technologies
Advisor: Lee, Dong-Hyun, Ph.D.
Advisor: Lee, Hyun-Joo, Ph.D.
The worldwide recession and stagnant growth in developed countries make
CEO getting interested in emerging market because of higher growth rate and
growth potential of it. 480 of the Fortune 500 companies, which have been
already operating in the emerging markets, are the evidence. But many enterprises
in developed countries, mainly in the case studies of the failure of Japanese
companies,which are regarded to have successful strategies in developed countries,
have not succeeded in emerging markets due to the very successful strategy
applied to developed market. Point is therefore that research on emerging markets
that have a unique structure is urgently needed.
The reason is as follows: First, emerging market cannot be interpreted by
the theoretical framework which is made in the developed countries. Secondly,
emerging market cannot be reviewed as a homogeneous research unit as developed
-
111
countries, because emerging-market countries have their own culture and
time-table for market-opening.
Main topic of this study is the characteristics of emerging markets, the
strategy of entering emerging market, and the expansion strategy of emerging
giant into global market. Three theoretical frameworks are selected to show
the characteristics of emerging markets, Institutional Theory, Transactional Cost
Theory, and Resource-based View. However each theoretical framework can be
useless in practice without integrating view in order to have a holistic view on
emerging market issues.
As a methodology, this study suggests a set of Causal Loop Diagram (CLD)
which integrates a series of causality mechanism drawn from literature review.
In order to make CLD more objective, all causalities are articulated from recent
55 studies (2000~2012) of SSCI Top Journals. This approach is valuable in that
it is a first try to draw all the causalities from rigorous literature review regarding
emerging market strategy. The 8 CLDs will show and clarify the strategies of
how to expand into emerging market for MNCs. In sum, political activity and
institutional void is a critical factor related to characteristics of emerging market,
and CSR/CSV and cultural distance should be considered as a leverage point.
For all this studys contribution to clarify the causality of emerging market
strategies with abundant literature review, the study has its limits in integrating
and testing CLD.
Key words: Emerging Market, Emerging Giant, Institutional Void, CSV,
Cultural Distance, Causal Loop Diagram, Systems Thinking
Student Number: 0902001014
-
112
. . ! .
.
.
.
. ()
.
, ,
, , .
.
.
, ,
,
.
.
-
113
.
Korean Management System MBA
.
Will, Leo, Lynn, Julie, Yanan, Jessica, Sean, Barry, Sunny, Annabel, Fiona,
Belief, Manli, Linx ( ), Kani (), UB (), Saken, Denis,
Ana, Indira ( ) Ali, Olga ( ), Romesh, Keshab
( ), Liyi, Alex, Kirill ( ), Kik, Pack, May, Bonnie, Kade (
)
.
.
2
,
.
2012
2013 .
.
K-12
CLE(Creative Learning Exchange) Stuntz
.
Scholarship .
.
.
-
114
.
.
.
.
.
.
. , Art &
. .
. .
.
.
. . . . .
.-
-
115
( ) cck@K-Bridge.org
18 13
,
.
K-Bridge
K-12
, ,
Aalto ( ), , EMBA
, , ,
top related