Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-v4t4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-23T13:16:05.564Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How family control influences FDI entry mode choice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2014

Ming-Sung Kao ,
Anthony Kuo  and
Yi-Chieh Chang
Ming-Sung Kao*
Affiliation:
Department of Finance and International Business, Fu Jen Catholic University, Taipei, Taiwan
Anthony Kuo
Affiliation:
Department of Finance and International Business, Fu Jen Catholic University, Taipei, Taiwan
Yi-Chieh Chang
Affiliation:
Department of Business Administration, St. John's University, Taipei Campus, Taiwan
*
Corresponding author: Ming-Sung Kao (gaums0327@gmail.com)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates how family control influences entry mode choice between joint ventures and wholly owned subsidiaries. Based on past studies revealing family-controlled firms’ unique concerns regarding the preservation of socioemotional wealth, the researchers posit that, firms with higher family control respond more drastically to perceived environmental uncertainty when choosing their entry mode. The researchers hypothesize that, when perceiving high environmental uncertainty, firms with higher versus lower family control are more likely to choose joint ventures. However, when perceiving low environmental uncertainty, firms with higher versus lower family control tend to choose wholly owned subsidiaries. The empirical results obtained from a sample of 1,644 investments undertaken by publicly listed companies in Taiwan support the hypotheses.

Keywords

corporate governanceentry modefamily businessfamily controlFDI

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , July 2013 , pp. 367 - 385
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Amemiya, T. (1994). Qualitative response models: A survey. Economics of Transport, 1(8), 147–200.Google Scholar
Anderson, E., Gatignon, H. (1986). Modes of foreign entry: A transaction cost analysis and propositions. Journal of International Business Studies, 17(3), 1–26.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. C., Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding-family ownership and firm performance: evidence from the S&P 500. The Journal of Finance, 58(3), 1301–1327.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. C., Reeb, D. M. (2004). Board composition: Balancing family influence in S&P 500 firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(2), 209–237.Google Scholar
Bae, K. H., Kang, J. K., Kim, J. M. (2002). Tunneling or value added? Evidence from mergers by Korean business groups. The Journal of Finance, 57(6), 2695–2740.Google Scholar
Beckhard, R., Dyer, G. (1983). Managing change in the family firm – Issues and strategies. Sloan Management Review, 24(3), 59–66.Google Scholar
Bertrand, M., Mehta, P., Mullainathan, S. (2002). Ferreting out tunneling: An application to Indian business groups. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(1), 121–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouthers, K. D., Brouthers, L. E. (2001). Explaining the national cultural distance paradox. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(1), 177–189.Google Scholar
Brouthers, L. E., Brouthers, K. D., Werner, S. (2000). Perceived environmental uncertainty, entry mode choice and satisfaction with EC-MNC performance. British Journal of Management, 11(3), 183–195.Google Scholar
Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., Wan, J. C. C. (2003). Turnaround in East Asian firms: Evidence from ethnic overseas Chinese communities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(6), 519–540.Google Scholar
Canabal, A., White, G. O. (2008). Entry mode research: Past and future. International Business Review, 17(3), 267–284.Google Scholar
Chang, S. J. (1995). International expansion strategy of Japanese firms: Capability building through sequential entry. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 383–407.Google Scholar
Chang, S. J. (2003). Ownership structure, expropriation, and performance of group-affiliated companies in Korea. The Academy of Management Journal, 238–253.Google Scholar
Chatterjee, S., Lubatkin, M. H., Schulze, W. S. (1999). Toward a strategic theory of risk premium: Moving beyond CAPM. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 556–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, H. L., Huang, Y. S. (2006). Employee stock ownership and corporate R&D expenditures: evidence from Taiwan's information-technology industry. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(3), 369–384.Google Scholar
Chiao, Y. C., Lo, F. Y., Yu, C.M. (2010). Choosing between wholly-owned subsidiaries and joint ventures of MNCs from an emerging market. International Marketing Review, 27(3), 338–365.Google Scholar
Child, J., Tse, D. K. (2001). Chinas transition and its implications for international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(1), 5–21.Google Scholar
Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Lang, L. H. P. (2000). The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 58(1), 81–112.Google Scholar
Coombs, J. E., Bierly, P. E. III, Gallagher, S. (2012). The impact of different forms of IPO firm legitimacy on the choice of alliance governance structure. Journal of Management & Organization, 18(4), 516–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Vries, M. (1993). The dynamics of family controlled firms: The good and the bad news. Organizational Dynamics, 21(3), 59–71.Google Scholar
Delios, A., Beamish, P. (1999). Ownership strategy of Japanese firms: Transactional, institutional, and experience influences. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 915–933.Google Scholar
Delios, A., Henisz, W. J. (2000). Japanese firms’ investment strategies in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 305–323.Google Scholar
Demb, A., Neubauer, F. (1992). The corporate board: Confronting the paradoxes. Long Range Planning, 25(3), 9–20.Google Scholar
Demirbag, M., Glaister, K. W., Tatoglu, E. (2007). Institutional and transaction cost influences on MNEs’ ownership strategies of their affiliates: Evidence from an emerging market. Journal of World Business, 42(4), 418–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dikova, D., Van Witteloostuijn, A. (2007). Foreign direct investment mode choice: entry and establishment modes in transition economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(6), 1013–1033.Google Scholar
Donckels, R., Fröhlich, E. (1991). Are family businesses really different? European experiences from STRATOS. Family Business Review, 4(2), 149–160.Google Scholar
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(7), 637–657.Google Scholar
Duncan, R. B. (1972). Characteristics of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(3), 313–327.Google Scholar
Dunning, J. H. (1993). Internationalizing Porter's diamond. Management International Review, 7–15.Google Scholar
Erramilli, M. K. (1991). The experience factor in foreign market entry behavior of service firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(3), 479–501.Google Scholar
Filatotchev, I., Strange, R., Piesse, J., Lien, Y. C. (2007). FDI by firms from newly industrialised economies in emerging markets: Corporate governance, entry mode and location. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 556–572.Google Scholar
Fisch, J. H. (2008). Investment in new foreign subsidiaries under receding perception of uncertainty. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(3), 370–386.Google Scholar
Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L., Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007). Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 106–137.Google Scholar
Gani, A. (2007). Governance and foreign direct investment links: Evidence from panel data estimations. Applied Economics Letters, 14(10), 753–756.Google Scholar
Gatignon, H., Anderson, E. (1988). Multinational corporation's degree of control over foreign subsidiaries: An empirical test of a transaction cost explanation. The Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 4, 305–336.Google Scholar
Globerman, S., Shapiro, D. (2003). Governance infrastructure and US foreign direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(1), 19–39.Google Scholar
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Makri, M., Kintana, M. L. (2010). Diversification decisions in family-controlled firms. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 223–252.Google Scholar
Habbershon, T. G., Williams, M. L. (1999). A resource-based framework for assessing the strategic advantages of family firms. Family Business Review, 12(1), 1–25.Google Scholar
Han, T. S. (2003). The economic effects of profit sharing and Taiwan-style employee stock ownership plans: Evidence from Taiwan's high-tech firms. Taiwan Academy of Management Journal, 3(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
Hennart, J. F. (1988). A transaction costs theory of equity joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 9(4), 361–374.Google Scholar
Hennart, J. F. (1991). The transaction cost theory of the multinational enterprise. The Nature of the Transnational Firm, 81–116, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
Hennart, J. F. (1993). Explaining the swollen middle: why most transactions are a mix of ‘market’ and ‘hierarchy’. Organization Science, 4(4), 529–547.Google Scholar
Hill, C. W. L., Hwang, P., Kim, W. C. (1990). An eclectic theory of the choice of international entry mode. Strategic Management Journal, 11(2), 117–128.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Culture's consequences, international differences in work-related values (Vol. 5). CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. H. (2001). Culture's consequences, second edition: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hollander, B. S. (1983). Family-owned business as a system: A case study of the interaction of family, task, and marketplace components. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Pennsylvania: University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. C., Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.Google Scholar
Johanson, J., Vahlne, J. E. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm-a model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1), 23–32.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., Mastruzzi, M. (2007). Governance matters VI: governance indicators for 1996-2006. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 4280.Google Scholar
Kim, W. C., Hwang, P. (1992). Global strategy and multinationals’ entry mode choice. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(1), 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogut, B., Singh, H. (1988). The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 411–432.Google Scholar
Kontinen, T., Ojala, A. (2010). The internationalization of family businesses: A review of extant research. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 1(2), 97–107.Google Scholar
Kumar, V., Subramanian, V. (1997). A contingency framework for the mode of entry decision. Journal of World Business, 32(1), 53–72.Google Scholar
López-Duarte, C., Vidal-Suárez, M. M. (2010). External uncertainty and entry mode choice: Cultural distance, political risk and language diversity. International Business Review, 19(6), 575–588.Google Scholar
La Porta, R., Lopoz-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., Vishny, R. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54, 471–517.Google Scholar
Li, P. Y., Meyer, K. E. (2009). Contextualizing experience effects in international business: A study of ownership strategies. Journal of World Business, 44(4), 370–382.Google Scholar
Liebowitz, B. (1986). Resolving conflict in the family owned business. Consultation: An International Journal, 5(3), 191–205.Google Scholar
Lorenzi, P., Sims, H. P. Jr, Slocum, J. W. Jr (1981). Perceived environmental uncertainty: An individual or environmental attribute? Journal of Management, 7(2), 27–41.Google Scholar
Madhok, A. (1998). The nature of multinational firm boundaries: Transaction costs, firm capabilities and foreign market entry mode. International Business Review, 7(3), 259–290.Google Scholar
Makino, S., Beamish, P. W. (1998). Performance and survival of joint ventures with non-conventional ownership structures. Journal of International Business Studies, 29(4), 797–818.Google Scholar
Makino, S., Neupert, K. E. (2000). National culture, transaction costs, and the choice between joint venture and wholly owned subsidiary. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(4), 705–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mani, S., Antia, K. D., Rindfleisch, A. (2007). Entry mode and equity level: A multilevel examination of foreign direct investment ownership structure. Strategic Management Journal, 28(8), 857–866.Google Scholar
Maug, E. (2002). Large shareholders as monitors: Is there a trade-off between liquidity and control? The Journal of Finance, 53(1), 65–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, K. E. (2001). Institutions, transaction costs, and entry mode choice in Eastern Europe. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(2), 357–367.Google Scholar
Miller, E. J., Rice, A. K. (1975). Selections from: Systems of organization. In A. D. Colman & W. H. Bexton (Eds.), in Group Relations Reader 1, AK Rice Institute: Washington.Google Scholar
Milliken, F. J. (1987). Three types of perceived uncertainty about the environment: State, effect, and response uncertainty. Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 133–143.Google Scholar
Peng, M. W., Jiang, Y. (2010). Institutions behind family ownership and control in large firms. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2), 253–273.Google Scholar
Puck, J. F., Holtbrügge, D., Mohr, A. T. (2008). Beyond entry mode choice: Explaining the conversion of joint ventures into wholly owned subsidiaries in the People's Republic of China. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(3), 388–404.Google Scholar
Puck, J. F., Holtbrügge, D., Mohr, A. T. (2009). Applicant information and selection strategies in corporate web site recruiting: The role of national culture. Handbook of research on e-transformation and human resources management technologies: organizational outcomes and challenges, 187–201, Chapter 11.Google Scholar
Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., Dino, R. N. (2003). Exploring the agency consequences of ownership dispersion among the directors of private family firms. Academy of Management Journal, 46(2), 179–194.Google Scholar
Shrader, R. C., Simon, M. (1997). Corporate versus independent new ventures: Resource, strategy, and performance differences. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(1), 47–66.Google Scholar
Slangen, A. H. L., Van Tulder, R. J. M. (2009). Cultural distance, political risk, or governance quality? Towards a more accurate conceptualization and measurement of external uncertainty in foreign entry mode research. International Business Review, 18(3), 276–291.Google Scholar
Soares, A. M., Farhangmehr, M., Shoham, A. (2007). Hofstede's dimensions of culture in international marketing studies. Journal of Business Research, 60(3), 277–284.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J. (1981). The market for know-how and the efficient international transfer of technology. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 458(1), 81–96.Google Scholar
Terpstra, V., Yu, C. M. (1988). Determinants of foreign investment of US advertising agencies. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1), 33–46.Google Scholar
Thomsen, S., Pedersen, T. (2000). Ownership structure and economic performance in the largest European companies. Strategic Management Journal, 21(6), 689–705.Google Scholar
Thornhill, S., Amit, R. (2003). Learning about failure: Bankruptcy, firm age, and the resource-based view. Organization Science, 14(5), 497–509.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Wiseman, R. M., Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (1998). A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 133–153.Google Scholar
Yeh, Y., Lee, T., Woidtke, T. (2001). Family control and corporate governance: Evidence from Taiwan. International Review of Finance, 2(1–2), 21–48.Google Scholar
Yiu, D., Makino, S. (2002). The choice between joint venture and wholly owned subsidiary: An institutional perspective. Organization Science, 13(6), 667–683.Google Scholar
Zahra, S. A. (2003). International expansion of US manufacturing family businesses: The effect of ownership and involvement. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 495–512.Google Scholar
Zahra, S. A., Pearce, J. A. (1989). Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model. Journal of Management, 15(2), 291–334.Google Scholar