Is there a liability of foreignness in global banking? An empirical test of banks' X‐efficiency

When a company operates outside of its home country, it may suffer a ‘liability of foreignness.’ Does this a priori theoretical expectation hold in the global banking industry? Banks increasingly compete outside of their home countries, and operating environments often differ sharply across countries, both in terms of financial markets and credit risk. In this paper, we report the results of an empirical test of the liability of foreignness in the global banking industry, using Fitch–IBCA BankScope data for the period 1989–96. Our findings strongly support the liability of foreignness hypothesis. Further, the data show some evidence that the X‐efficiency of a foreign‐owned bank is strongly influenced by the competitiveness of its home country and the host country in which it operates. Lastly, we find that in some environments U.S.‐owned banks are more X‐efficient than other foreign‐owned banks in some environments, but less X‐efficient in others. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A path to value creation for foreign entrepreneurs

Research summary : Firms founded by foreign entrepreneurs constitute an influential and growing part of the world economy. Yet, the existing research has given little consideration to the strategies of foreign entrepreneurs beyond their decisions to start a firm. In this article, we address this gap by examining how foreign entrepreneurs may bring value to their firms as firm managers. We argue that foreign owner‐managers may benefit their firms by having access to home‐country resources. We demonstrate that, compared to hired local managers, foreign owner‐managers reduce firms' operating costs by disproportionately hiring home‐country labor when this labor is more cost‐efficient. This effect is larger for labor‐intensive industries and for entrepreneurs from less wealthy countries. Managerial summary : Foreign entrepreneurs represent an important part of the world economy. Yet, we know little of how foreign entrepreneurs manage their firms. In this article, we examine whether foreign entrepreneurs and domestic managers hire different employees. We find that when foreign entrepreneurs manage their firms personally, they hire a larger number of foreign workers, and such workers are cheaper and more productive than the local labor. Conversely, domestic managers tend to hire local employees, despite their higher relative wages. Foreign owner‐managers are particularly valuable in labor‐intensive industries and when their home‐country labor is inexpensive. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Understanding liability of foreignness in an Asian business context: A study of the Korean asset management industry

This study provides an in-depth understanding of the liability of foreignness (LOF) in an Asian business context. Based on previous literature, we distinguish the two distinct cost components that comprise LOF: The cost of foreignness and the cost of multinationality. Whereas the former refers to the costs incurred by foreign firms when they develop location-specific advantages in a host country environment, the latter refers to the costs associated with an MNC’s multinational operation, more specifically, transferring firm-specific advantages from the home country (or elsewhere) and adapting them to a particular host country context. Based on this distinction, we investigate whether and how persistently each of these costs exists in an Asian business environment. Our data on the Korean asset management industry support the presence of both costs, resulting in lower performance increase of foreign firms relative to local ones from utilizing location- and firm-specific advantages, respectively. Furthermore, in our study setting, compared to the cost of foreignness, the cost of multinationality persists longer in the market, suggesting that the latter is more difficult and takes a longer time for MNCs to mitigate than the former. Our results provide important insights into detailed aspects of strategic challenges confronted by MNCs in the Asian business context from which they can derive effective strategic responses.     

Do foreign entrepreneurs benefit their firms as managers?

Research summary: The entrepreneurship literature has extensively studied an individual's decision to found a new venture, but it has little to say about the individual's choice to operate this venture personally or hire an agent. This decision is particularly challenging for foreign entrepreneurs, who, in addition to traditional factors, such as agency costs and personal preferences, need to take into consideration the benefits and liabilities of foreignness. Using novel data on foreign entrepreneurial firms and instrumenting for the owner‐manager choice with a visa policy change, we find that managing foreign entrepreneurs significantly improve firm performance. Our results further suggest that foreign owner‐managers reduce operating costs but have no effect on the firm's productivity and growth. Managerial summary: Immigrants represent a significant part of the population in the United States and Europe and are often more entrepreneurial than local nationals. However, a person starting a firm in a foreign country faces unique challenges. One important choice that a foreign entrepreneur has to make is whether to operate the firm personally or hire a local agent. Foreign entrepreneurs are often believed to be worse managers because they have limited local knowledge and skills. However, our results point to the contrary: We find that managing foreign entrepreneurs significantly improve firm performance by decreasing firms' operating costs. This happens because foreign owner‐managers often have access to unique resources, higher work incentives, and superior management skills acquired at home. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Status in a strange land? Context‐dependent value of status in cross‐border venture capital

Research Summary: While recent literature has depicted status as an intangible asset that is firm‐specific and mobile, we have a limited understanding of whether status confers advantage in a way similar to other intangible assets. This study examines the macro‐structural contingencies that influence the marginal value of firm status as firms expand to new markets. Building on the literatures on status and social approval assets, as well as globalization and international management, we hypothesize that two conditions influence how valuable home‐country status will be in a given host country: the interconnectedness of the home and host countries, and their relative position in the global network. We test our hypotheses in a study of 187 venture capital (VC)‐backed biotechnology ventures in 19 countries between 1990 and 2006. Managerial Summary: Startups typically prefer high‐status VC investors for endorsements, network connections, and resources. One might expect the benefits of high‐status VCs to be even higher when they invest across borders. Yet, we show that status is ingrained in context, and that the performance advantage of partnering with high‐status cross‐border VC firms depends on the relationship between the country of the VC firm and that of the startup. We find that, when the VC industries in the two countries are more connected, the positive effect of cross‐border VC firm status on successful exit is amplified. However, when the VC firm comes from a more central country than the startup, the benefits of VC firm status are less pronounced and vice versa.     

THE DYNAMICS OF THE LIABILITY OF FOREIGNNESS: A GLOBAL STUDY OF SURVIVAL IN FINANCIAL SERVICES

We study the impact of ‘foreignness’ on survival in interbank currency trading worldwide over the period 1974–93. In particular, we develop hypotheses on the behavior of the liability of foreignness over time, and on the consequences of evolving sources of firm-level competitive advantage on this liability. We test these hypotheses on the population of 2667 market-making trading rooms located in 47 countries worldwide that either existed in 1974 or entered the industry between 1974 and 1993. The results show that there is a liability of foreignness, and that it changes over time. Further, strategic and organizational factors such as the adoption of technology by these firms and their mode of internal control significantly influenced survival, as did location-related factors such as the intensity of local and foreign competition. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Identifying liabilities of foreignness and strategies to minimize their effects: the case of labor lawsuit judgments in the United States

Most foreign direct investment (FDI) theories assume that foreign subsidiaries are at a disadvantage relative to domestic firms; that is, they suffer a liability of foreignness. Following this reasoning, most FDI research has focused on advantages foreign investors must possess to overcome whatever disadvantages they face. Research directly investigating the sources of foreign subsidiary disadvantages has been notably lacking, despite the fact that understanding disadvantages could uncover ways to reduce exposure to these liabilities of foreignness and improve management of FDI. This study focuses on whether labor lawsuit judgments represent a liability for foreign subsidiaries operating in the United States (U.S.). Specifically, I tested whether 486 British, German, and Japanese subsidiaries operating in the U.S. had more labor lawsuits brought to judgment than a matched sample of U.S.‐owned firms. Results indicate that foreign subsidiaries faced significantly more labor lawsuit judgments in both federal and state jurisdictions. I also investigated several variables hypothesized to be associated with a reduction in labor lawsuit judgments facing foreign subsidiaries. Foreign subsidiaries who used American top officers or whose parent firms had more U.S. operations faced fewer lawsuits, while foreign subsidiaries using human resource professionals actually faced more labor lawsuit judgments. Implications of these findings and avenues for future research are discussed. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Liability of foreignness in global competition? Financial service affiliates in the city of London

This study was inspired by the observation that foreign financial service firms operating in the City of London do not suffer the liability of foreignness to the extent suggested by theory. To examine the reasons for this departure from theory, the study advances a theoretical framework that distinguishes between three types of advantages that together account for the competitive performance of MNEs relative to that of indigenous firms. Empirical analyses of a sample of 296 foreign financial service firms in the City of London show that in this particular context major sources of competitive performance are the firm‐specific advantages and the advantages of multinationality, where British firms may not necessarily possess an advantage over foreign firms. An examination of the validity of the findings, in order to assess the extent to which this situation is unique to the City of London or rather signifies a more general trend that requires theoretical modifications and extensions, is emphasized as a major task for future research. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Foreign ownership and long‐term survival

We study the relative survival of foreign‐ and domestically owned companies in Denmark over more than a century (1895–2005). Contrary to previous studies that have emphasized the liability of foreignness, we find evidence of a significant survival premium for foreign‐owned companies; however, the premium declines over time and disappears entirely in the last decade leading up to 2005. Further evidence indicates that the foreign survival premium is negatively influenced by new foreign entry, and that the long‐run decline is caused by increasing competition between foreign subsidiaries. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Does bribery in the home country promote or dampen firm exports?

This study examines the impact of bribery within the home country on firm exports by developing two contrasting hypotheses. On the one hand, preferential treatment resulting from government officials in exchange for bribes may promote exports by enhancing efficiency and enabling bribing firms to better compete in foreign markets. On the other hand, preferential treatment resulting from bribes may decrease exports by providing firms with more established positions within the domestic market diminishing the incentive to explore foreign markets. Adopting the three‐stage least squares method, we test these competing arguments using a sample of firms operating within transition economies. We find that bribery within the home country decreases rather than increases firm exports. The implications of our findings are discussed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do‐no‐harm versus do‐good social responsibility: Attributional thinking and the liability of foreignness

Research summary: The efforts of multinational corporations to be socially responsible do not always engender positive evaluations from overseas stakeholders. Drawing on attribution theory, we argue that two heuristics guide stakeholders in evaluating firms' social performance: foreignness and the valence of firms' social responsibility. We provide evidence from a field study of secondary stakeholders and an experimental study involving 129 non‐governmental organizations. Consistent with attribution theory, the liability of foreignness is minimized when firms engage in “do‐good” social responsibility (focused on proactive engagement creating positive externalities) but is substantial when firms engage in “do‐no‐harm” social responsibility (focused on attenuating negative externalities). In online supporting information, Appendix S1, we demonstrate that these evaluations have consequences for whether stakeholders subsequently cooperate, or sow conflict, with firms. Managerial summary: There is no guarantee that efforts to be socially responsible will improve multinational corporations' relations with overseas stakeholders, such as customers, governments, and activists. In a field study and an experiment, we unpack when foreign firms suffer from harsh stakeholder evaluations. Foreign firms especially suffer from harsh evaluations when they conduct “do‐no‐harm” CSR rather than “do‐good” CSR. Stakeholders attribute the motive for foreign firms' do‐no‐harm CSR to managerial interests and shareholder pressures, perceiving a wedge between managers and owners (who may be unmotivated to reduce the negative impacts of their business activities) and local stakeholders (who bear the social costs). A practical implication is that foreign firms gain more from highlighting do‐good rather than do‐(no)‐harm CSR initiatives. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Explaining outcomes in competition among foreign multinationals in a focal host market

Multinational enterprises (MNEs) from different home regions now routinely confront one another in third markets. There is, however, little conceptual or theoretical literature on the determinants of outcome patterns in these contests. This paper offers a first attempt at systematic and parsimonious conceptualization of the issue. In Brazil, for instance, while U.S.‐based MNEs such as Coca‐Cola and IBM lead in their sectors, other leading U.S. MNEs including Citibank, GE, and Pfizer are outsold by European rivals that appear less competitive globally. Extending theory on the liability of foreignness and firm‐specific advantages, we contend that (i) the MNE whose home nation has greater ties to the focal host nation (along geographic, colonial, immigration, linguistic, and institutional dimensions) will lead in that host nation; and (ii) ties notwithstanding, if an MNE's firm‐specific advantages are so superior that it outsells a rival MNE in that rival's home market, then it will outsell that rival as well in the focal host market. Based on this we develop a conceptual framework, statistical analysis pertaining to MNE competition in Brazil, and three avenues for fruitful new research. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Productivity enhancement at home via cross‐border acquisitions: The roles of learning and contemporaneous domestic investments

We examine whether ex post domestic productivity gains accrue to firms making cross‐border acquisitions. We argue that cross‐border acquisitions can enhance the acquirers' productivity at home, and we posit that these domestic productivity gains will be greater when there are learning opportunities in the target's host country and when contemporaneous domestic productivity‐enhancing investments are made by the acquirer in conjunction with the acquisition. These predictions are supported by data drawn from a sample of French acquiring and nonacquiring firms. Our results indicate that cross‐border acquisitions and investing in productivity at home are complementary: each makes the other more beneficial to firm productivity. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Firm non‐market capabilities and the effect of supranational institutional safeguards on the location choice of international investments

Research Summary : We investigate the extent to which firms rely on supranational institutional safeguards versus their non‐market capabilities to offset the risks of investing abroad. We argue that firms with non‐market capabilities are insensitive to supranational institutional safeguards when choosing the location of their international investments. We show that supranational agreements between an investor's home and host nation, operationalized as bilateral investment treaties (BITs), increase the likelihood of investment, but there is substantial firm heterogeneity with respect to this relationship. Firms with various forms of non‐market capabilities are not sensitive to BITs, whereas other firms are more likely to invest under BITs. We advance the understanding of how firm non‐market capabilities can substitute for supranational institutional arrangements in addressing risks associated with host country institutional weaknesses. Managerial Summary : The risk of expropriation is one of the main concerns companies have when investing abroad. Because of this, many countries implement bilateral investment treaties (BITs) to safeguard foreign investments, alleviate foreign investor concerns, and promote investments. We show that only those companies without political competence or political connections favor countries with BITs when choosing where to invest. Companies with political competence or political connections, on the other hand, ignore BITs and apparently rely on their ability to influence governments whenever their foreign investments face expropriation threats. As a result, politically connected or competent companies can enter markets most of their competitors lacking these capabilities shy away from. They can, therefore, do business in environments in which they face less competition.     

Network effects and competition: an empirical analysis of the home video game industry

Building on the resource‐based view of the firm, we advance the idea that a firm's customer network can be a strategic asset. We suggest that network effects are a function of network size (i.e., installed customer base) and network strength (i.e., the marginal impact of a unit increase in network size on demand). We empirically study these network effects in the 16‐bit home video game industry in which the dominant competitors were Nintendo and Sega. In the spirit of the new empirical IO framework, we estimate a structural econometric model assuming the data are equilibrium outcomes of the best fitting noncooperative game in price and advertising. After controlling for other effects, we find strong evidence that network effects are asymmetric between the competitors in the home video game industry. Specifically, we find that the firm with a smaller customer network (Nintendo) has higher network strength than the firm with the larger customer base (Sega). Thus, our results provide a possible explanation for this situation in which the firm with a smaller customer network (Nintendo) was able to overtake the sales of a firm with a larger network size (Sega). Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Cross‐border acquisitions by state‐owned firms: How do legitimacy concerns affect the completion and duration of their acquisitions?

Research summary: Cross‐border acquisitions may raise legitimacy concerns by host‐country stakeholders, affecting the acquisition outcomes of foreign firms. We propose that theorization by local regulatory agencies is a key mechanism that links legitimacy concerns with acquisition outcomes. Given that theorization is time consuming and its outcome is uncertain, we argue that state‐owned foreign firms experience a lower likelihood of acquisition completion and a longer duration for completing a deal than other foreign firms. Moreover, we introduce a set of firm characteristics (target public status, target R&D alliances, and acquirer acquisition and alliance experiences) that may affect the threshold level of legitimacy, thereby altering the proposed relationships. Our framework and findings provide useful implications for institutional theory on its core concept of legitimacy. Managerial summary: Cross‐border acquisitions by state‐owned foreign firms may lead to national security concerns and thus debates and discussions among local regulatory agencies. We argue that such institutional processes may reduce the likelihood of acquisition completion and prolong the duration of acquisition completion. Using cross‐border acquisitions in the United States, we find that acquisitions by state‐owned foreign firms are not less likely to be completed than acquisitions by other foreign firms, but they take more time to be completed. Moreover, state‐owned foreign firms are less likely to complete an acquisition when the target firm has more R&D alliances. However, their acquisition experience and alliance experience in the host country increase the likelihood of acquisition completion, whereas their alliance experience alone shortens the acquisition duration. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Right person in the right place: How the host country IPR influences the distribution of inventors in offshore R&D projects of multinational enterprises

Research summary : Prior work has shown that the strength of the intellectual property regime (IPR) in a host country influences offshore R&D to that country. Building on this work we propose that the strength of the IPR in a host country differentially influences the threat of knowledge leakage on projects that are produced for the location where the multinational firm is headquartered (home) versus the offshore location to which the R&D project is sent (host). We argue and show that when the host location has a weak IPR, fewer host inventors are involved in host R&D projects when compared to home R&D projects. We test our hypotheses using a dataset of patents held by US assignees, but coinvented in 43 host locations with differing IPR strength. Managerial summary : Multinational enterprises often cite the weak IPRs at emerging economy host destinations as a significant impediment to offshore R&D activities in those countries, despite the abundant supply of inexpensive scientific talent there. We find that the weak IPR at the host destination is a greater impediment to offshore R&D that is aimed for end use at the host market than for R&D that is aimed for end use globally or in the home market. Since IPRs are local, a weaker IPR at the host location does not protect IP that is relevant to the host market. Since the IPR at the home country is more relevant for technologies aimed at the home market, the IPR at the host country is irrelevant for such R&D projects. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

R&D investment dynamics in agglomerations under weak appropriability regimes: Evidence from Indian R&D labs

What are the dynamics of R&D investment when firms agglomerate in environments with weak intellectual property rights protection? Specifically, do foreign and domestic firms present equal opportunities for free riding by domestic firms in such environments? We examine the impact on local firms' R&D investment from knowledge spillovers originating from co‐located foreign and domestic firms within and across industries. Building on fieldwork in India, we predict free riding by local firms on nearby foreign and local firms. Furthermore, we expect local firms to free ride more from other local firms within their industry and from foreign firms across industries. Analyzing a sample of 3,475 R&D lab investment decisions during 2003–2010 in India, we find that local firms free ride from other local firms both within and across industries. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Political hazards and entry modes of Chinese investments in Africa

Africa has achieved the fastest growth rate of inward foreign direct investment (FDI) recently. Yet heightened political hazards present substantial challenges to foreign firms in Africa. This study examines the entry strategies that firms may take to mitigate such hazards by exploring the relationship between political hazards and entry mode choices in Africa. We further consider how an investing firm’s host country experience and foreign aid provided by its home country government to host countries in Africa can influence this relationship. In a sample of listed Chinese firms’ investments in Africa from 2000 to 2014, we find that Chinese firms tend to use the joint venture mode when political hazards are high in an African country. This relationship is weakened when they accumulate host country experience and when the Chinese government’s foreign aid to an African country increases. Our findings point to firm-level strategies to mitigate political hazards as well as instruments available to home country governments to help their multinational firms operating in host countries characterized by unstable political environments.     

The impact of liability of foreignness on international venture capital firms in Singapore

This empirical study explores the impact of the liability of foreignness on international venture capital (VC) firms in Singapore as well as the response. In the stage of VC deal assessment, international VC firms are found to originate fewer unsolicited deals from networks compared to domestic ones due to the liability of foreignness. In response to such liability, international VC firms primarily use their homegrown advantages, and originate more solicited deals from networks.