The Moderating Effect of Dynamic Capabilities and Institutional Context on Internationalization of Turkish Business Groups

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the outward foreign direct investment (FDI) location choices of leading Turkish business groups (TBGs) regarding internationalization motives, dynamic capabilities (DC), and institutional context. The scope of the study consists of eleven multinational TBGs with FDI exceeding 100 million USD and a two-stage mixed method was used. In the qualitative methodology, person-to-person interviews and content analysis were used for determining TBGs’ internationalization motives and DC. The quantitative methodology included an analyses that measured the effect of internationalization motives on location choice with the moderation of DC and institutional context. The qualitative stage results of the research suggested that TBGs act with market, resource, efficiency, and strategic asset-seeking motives. Formal institutions were effective in TBGs’ internationalization, and their DC consists of marketing, internationalization, and innovation capabilities. According to the quantitative stage results, institutional context moderated the effect of dynamic capabilities between internationalization motives and location choice. The importance and originality of this study were that it explored the internationalization process of business groups (BGs) and affiliates, and it investigated the effect of DC and institutional context with a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches.

Keywords

• Business Groups
• Dynamic Capabilities
• Internationalization Motives
• Emerging Country
• Formal Institutions

References

1. Adams, R., Bessant, J., & Phelps, R. (2006). Innovation Management Measurement: A Review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(1), 21-47. google scholar
2. Aguilera, R. V., CrespnCladera, R., Infantes, P. M., & Pascual-Fuster, B. (2020). Business groups and inter-nationalization: effective identification and future agenda. Journal of World Business, 55(4), 1-17. google scholar
3. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. USA: Sage Publications. google scholar
4. Âlvarez, I., & Marin, R. (2010). Entry modes and national systems of innovation. Journal of International Management, 16, 340-353. google scholar
5. Ando, N., & Ding, D. Z. (2014). An integrative institutional approach to MNC performance in China. Asia Pacific Business Review, 20(4), 541-557. google scholar
6. Arend, R. J., & Bromiley, P. (2009). Assessing the dynamic capabilities view: Spare change, everyone?. Strategic Organization, 7(1), 75-90. google scholar
7. Bayraktar, Y., & Tutuncu, A. (2022). Does tax planning affect R&D expenditures? A study of Borsa Istanbul (BIST) Manufacturing Sector. Istanbul Business Research, 51(2), 563-581. google scholar
8. Benito, G. R. (2015). Why and how motives (still) matter, The Multinational Business Review, 23(1), 15-24. google scholar

9. Breznik, L., & Hisrich, R. D. (2014). Dynamic capabilities vs. innovation capability: Are they related?. Jo-urnal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 21(3), 368-384. google scholar
10. Brouthers, K. D., & Hennart, J. F. (2007). Boundaries of the firm: Insights from international entry mode research. Journal ofManagement, 33(3), 395-425. google scholar
11. Chakrabarty, S. I., & Wang, L. (2012). The long-term sustenance of sustainability practices in MNCs: A dynamic capabilities perspective of the role of R&D and internationalization. Journal ofBusiness Ethics, 110, 205-217. google scholar
12. Child, J., & Rodrigues, S. B. (2005). The internationalization of Chinese firms: A case for theoretical exten-sion?. Management and Organization Review, 1 (3), 381-410. google scholar
13. Chittor, R. (2009). Internationalization of emerging economy firms-need for new theorizing. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 45(1), 27-40. google scholar
14. Collison, S. C., & Narula, R. (2014). Asset recombination in international partnerships as a source of impro-ved innovation capabilities in China. The Multinational Business Review, 22(4), 394-417. google scholar
15. Colpan, A., Hikino, T., & Lincoln, J. (2010). The Oxford Handbook of Business Groups. Oxford University Press, New York. google scholar
16. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. USA: Sage Publications. google scholar
17. Dau, L. A., Randall, M., & Yeung, B. Y. (2021). Business groups and the study of international business: A Coasean synthesis and extension. Journal of International Business Studies, 52, 161-211. google scholar
18. Deilos, A., & Henisz, W. (2000). Japanese firms’ investment strategies in emerging economies. The Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 305-323. google scholar
19. 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
20. Dunning, J. H. (1998). Location and the multinational enterprise: A neglected factor?. Management Interna-tional Review, 33, 7-15. google scholar
21. Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. (2010). The institutional origins of dynamic capabilities in multinational enterprises. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(4), 1225-1246. google scholar
22. Egan, P. J. W. (2013). R&D in the periphery? Foreign direct investment, innovation, and institutional quality in developing countries. Business and Politics, 15(1), 1-32. google scholar
23. Ellonen, H. K., Jantunen, A., & Kuivalainen, O. (2011). The role of dynamic capabilities in developing inno-vation-related capabilities. International Journal of Innovation Management, 15(3), 459-478. google scholar
24. Eng, Y., & Spickett-Jones, J. (2009). An investigation of marketing capabilities and upgrading performance of manufacturers in mainland China and Hong Kong. Journal of World Business, 44, 463-75. google scholar
25. Erdener, C., & Shapiro, D. M. (2005). The internationalization of Chinese family enterprises and Dunning’s eclectic MNES paradigm. Management and Organization Review, 1(3), 411-436. google scholar
26. Fainshmidt, S., Pezeshkan, A., Frazier, L., Nair, A., & Markowski, E. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and organizational performance: A meta-analytic evaluation and extension. Journal of Management Studies, 53(8), 1348-1380. google scholar
27. Filatotchev, I., & Piesse, J. (2009). R&D, internationalization and growth of newly listed firms: European evidence. Journal of International Business Studies, 40, 1260-76. google scholar
28. Fisak, B., Bryant, A., & Klein, K. (2020). Self-focused attention as a predictor of post-event and anticipa-tory processing: Examination of a moderation model. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 13, 203-217. google scholar
29. Gölgeci, I., & Arslan, A. (2014). Internationalization of emerging economy firms to developed economies: A discussion on institutional pressures and marketing and supply chain capabilities. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 22(7), 587-602. google scholar
30. Griffith, D. A., & Harvey, M. (2001). A resource perspective of global dynamic capabilities. Journal of Inter-national Business Studies, 32(3), 597-606. google scholar
31. Gürbüz, S. (2019). Sosyal bilimlerde aracı, düzenleyici ve durumsal etki analizleri (1st ed.). Ankara, Turkey: Seçkin Yayıncılık. google scholar
32. Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: The Guilford Press. google scholar
33. He, X., & Zhang, J. (2018). Emerging market MNCs’ cross-border acquisition completion: Institutional image and strategies. Journal of Business Research, 93, 139-150. google scholar
34. Hillman, A. J., & Wan, W. P. (2005). The determinants of MNES subsidiaries’ political strategies: Evidence of institutional duality. Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 36, 322-340. google scholar
35. Hsu, C., & Wang, C. (2012). Clarifying the effect of intellectual capital on performance: The mediating role of dynamic capability. British Journal ofManagement, 23(2), 179-205. google scholar
36. Huang, X., & Renyong, C. (2014). Chinese private firms’ outward foreign direct investment: Does firm ow-nership and size matter?. Thunderbird International Business Review, 56(5), 393-406. google scholar
37. Konara, P., & Shirodkar, V. (2018). Regulatory institutional distance and MNCs’ subsidiary performance: Climbing up vs. climbing down the institutional ladder. Journal of International Management, 24(4), 333-347. google scholar
38. Kor, Y., & Mahoney, J.T. (2005) How dynamics, management, and governance of resource deployments influence firm-level performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 489-96. google scholar
39. Luo, Y. (2000). Dynamic capabilities in international expansion. Journal of World Business, 35(4), 355-378. google scholar
40. Luo, Y., & Tung, R. L. (2018). A general theory of springboard MNESs. Journal of International Business Studies, 49, 129-152. google scholar
41. Michailova, S., & Zhan, W. (2015). Dynamic capabilities and innovation in MNC subsidiaries. Journal of World Business, 50, 576-583. google scholar
42. Ngo, L.V., & O’Cass, A. (2012). In search of innovation and customer-related performance superiority: The role of market orientation, marketing capability, and innovation capability interactions. Journal of Pro-duct Innovation Management, 29(5), 861-877. google scholar
43. Ngo, L. V., Bucic, T., Sinha, A., & Lu, V. (2019). Effective sense-and-respond strategies: Mediating roles of exploratory and exploitative innovation. Journal ofBusiness Research, 94(1), 154-161. google scholar
44. North, D. (1990). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. New York: Cambridge Uni-versity Press. google scholar
45. O’Cass, A., & Sok, P. (2012). Examining the role of within functional area resource-capability complemen-tarity in achieving customer and product-based performance outcomes. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 20, 345-63. google scholar
46. Öniş, Z., & Türem, U. (2002). Entrepreneurs, democracy, and citizenship in Turkey. Comparative Politics, 34(4), 439-456. google scholar
47. Perkins S. E. (2014). When does prior experience pay? Institutional experience and the multinational corpo-ration. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(1), 145-181. google scholar
48. Pinho, J. C., & Prange, C. (2016). The effect of social networks and dynamic internationalization capabilities on international performance. Journal of World Business, 51(3), 391-403. google scholar
49. Pitelis, C. N., & Teece, D. (2015). Dynamic capabilities, the multinational corporation, and (Capturing co-created value from) innovation. Oxford Handbook of the Corporation. New York: Oxford University Press. google scholar
50. Ramachandran, I., Clark, K., Mclver, D., & Miller S. R. (2011). Selecting state or private joint venture part-ners in emerging markets: Impact of liability of foreignness and rule of law. Advances in International Management, 24, 153-179. google scholar
51. Ripolles, M., & Blesa, A. (2012). International new ventures as “Small multinationals”: The importance of marketing capabilities. Journal of World Business, 47(2), 277-287. google scholar
52. Rodenbach, M. & Brettel, M. (2012). CEO experience as micro-level origin of dynamic capabilities. Mana-gement Decision, 50(4), 611-634. google scholar
53. Singh, D., Oberoi, J. S., & Ahuja, I. (2013). An empirical investigation of dynamic capabilities in managing strategic flexibility in manufacturing organizations. Management Decision, 51, 1442-1461. google scholar
54. Stevens, C. E., & Shenkar, O. (2012). The liability of home: Institutional friction and firm disadvantage abroad.” Institutional Theory in International Business and Management Advances in International Ma-nagement, 25, 127-148. google scholar
55. Stoian, C. (2013). Extending Dunning’s investment development path: The role of home country institutio-nal determinants in explaining outward foreign direct investment. International Business Review, 22(3), 615-637. google scholar
56. Tartaglione, A., & Formisano, V. (2018). A dynamic view of marketing capabilities for SMEs’ export perfor-mance. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 10(1), 126-135. google scholar
57. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and micro foundations of sustainable en-terprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350. google scholar
58. Teece, D. J. (2009). Dynamic capabilities and the essence of the multinational enterprise. In Dynamic capa-bilities and strategic management, New York: Oxford University Press Inc. google scholar
59. Vithessonthi, C., & Racela, O. (2016). Short-and long-run effects of internationalization and R&D intensity on firm performance. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 34, 28-45. google scholar
60. Weber, P. (1990). Basic content analysis. USA: Sage Publications. google scholar
61. Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 991-995. google scholar
62. Yang, M. (2015). Ownership participation of cross-border mergers and acquisitions by emerging market firms. Management Decision, 53(1), 221-246. google scholar
63. Zaheer, S. (1995). Overcoming the liability of foreignness. The Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 341-363. google scholar