Back to roots: TMTs’ country-specific experience,FDI preference,and political center favoritism

This paper investigates how the origin experience and work experience of top management teams (TMTs) affect foreign direct investment (FDI) decisions of multinational enterprises (MNEs), drawing on learning theories and social capital view. Using data from Standard and Poor’s firms operating in China during 2014–2016, we find that TMTs’ country-specific origin experience and work experience have a positive impact on the extent of FDI in the focal country, while we find that the former has a greater impact. Consistent with the consideration of being deeply anchored in the specific country, we find that TMTs with origin experience, relative to work experience, are more likely to choose FDI locations in the political center. We further find that the effect of origin experience on the extent of FDI and the preference for political centers will be more pronounced for MNEs with low levels of profitability. This study contributes to the literature on international business and provides practical implications for international expansion.     

Contraction under minimum wages? Operational and financial advantages of multinational subsidiaries in China

The advantages of multinational enterprises (MNEs) over domestic firms have been widely acknowledged in several streams of literature. However, a more refined analysis on the sources of their advantages is lacking. Exploiting minimum wage hikes in China as an exogenous shock, we theorize that, due to multinational advantages, the employment of multinational subsidiaries may be less affected by minimum wages than that of domestic firms, and that their multinational advantages arise from both operational and financial advantages. Using nation-wide longitudinal firm data from 1998 to 2007 and border discontinuity design (BDD) to estimate the causal effects, we find supportive evidence for our hypotheses. We contribute to the literature on multinational advantages and minimum wages.     

Mandate dynamics and the importance of mandate loss for subsidiary evolution

This paper provides insights into the dynamics of mandate loss and subsidiary charter development through exploring two research questions on what the characteristics of subsidiary mandate loss are and what roles do intra-MNE actors have in subsidiary mandate loss? The paper is based on a qualitative study of 17 cases of subsidiary mandate losses. The data revealed four distinct patterns of mandate loss depending upon what phase of mandate development the subsidiary found itself: (1) mandate loss due to a combination of failure in the new mandate or a change in the external environment. (2) mandate loss due to competition with sister subsidiaries (3) Subsidiaries shed peripheral mandates to create space and focus on the core activities (4) mature mandate loss due to misfit between subsidiary skills and that of competition in the local market. This paper contributes to the subsidiary evolution literature by elucidating the multiplicity of subsidiary mandate loss and the “prime mover” involvement in mandate loss.     

Go small or go home: Operational exposure to violent conflicts and foreign subsidiary exit

This study aims to open the black box of heterogeneous responses to violent conflicts by focusing on subsidiaries’ operational exposure to violent conflict and their decisions to exit host countries. Drawing on real options theory, we propose a viable approach multinational enterprises can take when they encounter violent conflicts in their operating locations. Our analysis of 3,479 foreign subsidiaries operating in 11 countries over 26 years suggests that the exit decision of any given subsidiary located in a conflict-affected country depends on its operational scope. However, this effect depends on the characteristics of the operations the subsidiary undertakes, specifically, whether the subsidiary conducts natural resource-seeking operations and the degree of operational overlap with the same-parent affiliates.