BİR NORMATİF KURUM OLARAK ULUSLARARASI META STANDARTLARIN DİKEY DYSY YAYILIMLARI SÜRECİNDEKİ ROLÜ: TÜRKİYE OTOMOTİV SANAYİİNDE ÇOKLU ÖRNEK OLAY ÇALIŞMASI

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı kurumsal çevrenin normatif unsurlarından birisini temsil eden standartların Türkiye otomotiv sanayiinde dikey DYSY yayılımlarını nasıl yönlendirdiğini, yerel örgütlere odaklanarak derinlemesine incelemektir. Nitel araştırma desenlerinden çoklu örnek olay çalışmasının benimsendiği çalışmada yedi yerel tedarikçi örgüt araştırmaya dahil edilmiştir. Görüşmeler, gözlem notları ve dokümanların veri kaynağı olarak kullanıldığı araştırmada veriler içerik analizine tabi tutulmuştur. Gerçekleştirilen analizler sonucunda standartların kapsamı, standartlar kaynaklı denetimler, müşterilerin standartları ve standartları algılama biçimleri kodları ön plana çıkmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, ayrıntılı standartların yerel tedarikçi örgütler için kurulan dikey bağlantıların yoğunluğunu ve dolayısıyla dikey DYSY yayılımlarını verimlilik boyutunda olumlu yönde etkilediğini göstermektedir. Ancak standartları algılama biçimleri ve tedarik zincirindeki pozisyonlarına duyarlı bir şekilde, standartların yenilikçilik ve uluslararasılaşma yayılımlarını olumsuz yönde etkileyebilme potansiyeli taşıdığı da ortaya çıkmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• DYSY Yayılımları
• Türkiye Otomotiv Sanayii
• Uluslararası Meta Standartlar
• Uluslararasılaşma

THE ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL META STANDARDS AS A NORMATIVE INSTITUTION IN THE PROCESS OF VERTICAL FDI SPILLOVERS: A MULTI CASE STUDY IN TURKISH AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

Öz

The aim of this study is to examine in depth how standards, which represent one of the normative elements of the institutional environment, vertical FDI spillovers in the Turkish automotive industry, focusing on local organizations. Seven local supplier organizations were included in the study, in which multiple case studies were adopted from qualitative research designs. In the research, where interview notes, observations and documents were used as data sources, the data were subjected to content analysis. As a result, the scope of the standards; the audits based on the standards; the standards of the customers; and the way they perceive the standards are the codes that stand out. The findings show that detailed standards positively affect the density of vertical links established for local supplier organizations and therefore vertical FDI spillovers in terms of productivity. However, it is also revealed that standards have the potential to negatively affect the spillovers of innovation and internationalization, sensitive to their perception of standards and their position in the supply chain.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• FDI Spillovers
• Turkish Automotive Industry
• International Meta-Standards
• Internationalization

Kaynakça

1. Ahlstrom, D., & Bruton, G. D. (2010). Rapid institutional shifts and the co–evolution of entrepreneurial firms in transition economies. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(3), 531-554.
2. Aitken, B. J., & Harrison, A. E. (1999). Do domestic firms benefit from direct foreign investment? Evidence from Venezuela. American economic review, 89(3), 605-618.
3. Alcacer, J., & Chung, W. (2007). Location strategies and knowledge spillovers. Management science, 53(5), 760-776.
4. Alfaro, L., Rodríguez-Clare, A., Hanson, G. H., & Bravo-Ortega, C. (2004). Multinationals and linkages: an empirical investigation [with Comments]. Economia, 4(2), 113-169.
5. Altomonte, C., & Pennings, E. (2009). Domestic plant productivity and incremental spillovers from foreign direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 40, 1131-1148.
6. Arias, M. E. & Guillen, M.F. (1998). The Transfer of Organizational Management Techniques Across Borders. The Diffusion and Consumption of Business Knowledge, içinde, (110-137). London: Macmillan.
7. Asiedu, E., & Esfahani, H. S. (2001). Ownership structure in foreign direct investment projects. Review of Economics and statistics, 83(4), 647-662.
8. Berger, P. L., & Luckman, T. (1967). The Social Structure of Reality, Alien Lane.

9. Berry, F. S., & Berry, W. D. (2018). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. Theories of the policy process, 253-297.
10. Boiral, O. (2012). ISO certificates as organizational degrees? Beyond the rational myths of the certification process. Organization Studies, 33(5-6), 633-654.
11. Bournakis, I., Christopoulos, D., & Mallick, S. (2018). Knowledge spillovers and output per worker: an industry‐level analysis for OECD countries. Economic Inquiry, 56(2), 1028-1046.
12. Brunsson, Nils (2000). Standardization and Uniformity, N. Brunsson and B. Jacobsson (Ed.). A World of Standards içinde, (138 – 151). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13. Buckley, P.J. & Casson, M. (1976). A Long-Run Theory of The Multinational Enterprise. Future of The Multinational Enterprise içinde, (32-65). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
14. Buckley, P. J., Clegg, J., & Wang, C. (2002). The impact of inward FDI on the performance of Chinese manufacturing firms. Journal of international business studies, 33, 637-655.
15. Buckley, P. J., Wang, C., & Clegg, J. (2007). The impact of foreign ownership, local ownership and industry characteristics on spillover benefits from foreign direct investment in China. International business review, 16(2), 142-158.
16. Busenitz, L. W., Gomez, C., & Spencer, J. W. (2000). Country institutional profiles: Unlocking entrepreneurial phenomena. Academy of Management journal, 43(5), 994-1003.
17. Casadesus, M., & Karapetrovic, S. (2005). Has ISO 9000 lost some of its lustre? A longitudinal impact study. International journal of operations & production management, 25(6), 580-596.
18. Caves, R. E. (1974). Multinational firms, competition, and productivity in host-country markets. Economica, 41(162), 176-193.
19. Chang, S. J., & Xu, D. (2008). Spillovers and competition among foreign and local firms in China. Strategic Management Journal, 29(5), 495-518.
20. Chen, M. J., Su, K. H., & Tsai, W. (2007). Competitive tension: The awareness-motivation-capability perspective. Academy of management Journal, 50(1), 101-118.
21. Christensen, C.M. (2013). The innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail, 1. Baskı, Harvard Business Review Press.
22. Cullingworth, B. S. (1992). An ambitious quality strategy. ISO 9000 News, 1(2), 7-8.
23. Dahl, P. S., & Hansen, K. M. (2006). Diffusion of standards: the importance of size, region and external pressures in diffusion processes. Public Administration, 84(2), 441-459.
24. Demena, B. A., & van Bergeijk, P. A. (2019). Observing FDI spillover transmission channels: evidence from firms in Uganda. Third World Quarterly, 40(9), 1708-1729.
25. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage.
26. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review, 147-160.
27. Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research policy, 11(3), 147-162.
28. Du, L., Harrison, A., & Jefferson, G. (2011). Do Institutions Matter for FDI Spillovers? The Implications of China’s Special Characteristics, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 5757.
29. Dunning, J. H. (2001). The eclectic (OLI) paradigm of international production: past, present and future. International journal of the economics of business, 8(2), 173-190.
30. Escobar Gamboa, O. R. (2013). Foreign direct investment (FDI) determinants and spatial spillovers across Mexico's states. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 22(7), 993-1012.
31. Franceschini, F., Galetto, M., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2018). ISO 9001 certification and failure risk: any relationship?. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 29(11-12), 1279-1293.
32. Gereffi, G. (1994). The organization of buyer-driven global commodity chains: How US retailers shape overseas production networks. Commodity chains and global capitalism, 95-122.
33. Gómez‐Haro, S., Aragón‐Correa, J. A., & Cordón‐Pozo, E. (2011). Differentiating the effects of the institutional environment on corporate entrepreneurship. Management Decision.
34. Guler, I., Guillén, M. F., & Macpherson, J. M. (2002). Global competition, institutions, and the diffusion of organizational practices: The international spread of ISO 9000 quality certificates. Administrative science quarterly, 47(2), 207-232.
35. Hall, R.E. & Jones, C.I. (1999). Why Do Some Countries Produce So Much More Output Per Worker Than Others?, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(1). 83-116.
36. Han, J., Chen, Y., & Sun, H. (2021). Foreign direct investment spillover effect on China’s sustainable development. Ecological Chemistry and Engineering S, 28(1), 117-127.
37. Henning, R. (2000). Selling Standards, A World of Standards, içinde, (114-124). Oxford University Press, Oxford.
38. Heras-Saizarbitoria, I., & Boiral, O. (2015). Symbolic adoption of ISO 9000 in small and medium-sized enterprises: The role of internal contingencies. International Small Business Journal, 33(3), 299-320.
39. Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and organization: do American theories apply abroad?. Organizational dynamics, 9(1), 42-63.
40. Huang, J. T. (2004). Spillovers from Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau investment and from other foreign investment in Chinese industries. Contemporary Economic Policy, 22(1), 13-25.
41. İlhan-Nas, T., & Şahin, F. (2018). Doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımı kaynaklı teknolojik yayılımların yerel firmaların uluslararasılaşma faaliyetleri üzerindeki etkileri. YOAD Yönetim ve Organizasyon Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1), 59-102.
42. İlhan-Nas, T., Okan, T., Tatoglu, E., Demirbag, M., & Glaister, K. W. (2018a). The effects of ownership concentration and institutional distance on the foreign entry ownership strategy of Turkish MNEs. Journal of Business Research, 93, 173-183.
43. İlhan-Nas, T., Okan, T., Tatoglu, E., Demirbag, M., Wood, G., & Glaister, K. W. (2018). Board composition, family ownership, institutional distance and the foreign equity ownership strategies of Turkish MNEs. Journal of World Business, 53(6), 862-879.
44. İlhan-Nas, T., Okan, T., & Şahin, F. (2021). Doğrudan Yabancı Sermaye Yatırım Kaynaklı Teknolojik Yayılımların Türk Imalat Sanayiindeki Yerel Firmaların Yenilik ve Ar-Ge Gelişimleri Üzerindeki Etkileri, TÜBITAK 1003- Öncelikli Alanlar Ar-Ge Programı Projesi.
45. Javorcik, B. S. (2004). Does foreign direct investment increase the productivity of domestic firms? In search of spillovers through backward linkages. American economic review, 94(3), 605-627.
46. Javorcik, B. S., & Spatareanu, M. (2008). To share or not to share: Does local participation matter for spillovers from foreign direct investment?. Journal of development Economics, 85(1-2), 194-217.
47. Jude, C. (2016). Technology spillovers from FDI. Evidence on the intensity of different spillover channels. The World Economy, 39(12), 1947-1973.
48. Judge, W., Li, S., & Pinsker, R. (2010). National adoption of international accounting standards: An institutional perspective. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(3), 161-174.
49. Kostova, T. (1997). Country Institutional Profiles: Concept and Measurement, Academy of Management Proceedings 1, 180-184.
50. Kostova, T., & Roth, K. (2002). Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: Institutional and relational effects. Academy of management journal, 45(1), 215-233.
51. Kostova, T., & Zaheer, S. (1999). Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management review, 24(1), 64-81.
52. Kostova, T., Beugelsdijk, S., Scott, W. R., Kunst, V. E., Chua, C. H., & van Essen, M. (2020). The construct of institutional distance through the lens of different institutional perspectives: Review, analysis, and recommendations. Journal of International Business Studies, 51, 467-497.
53. Krammer, S. M. (2015). Do good institutions enhance the effect of technological spillovers on productivity? Comparative evidence from developed and transition economies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 94, 133-154.
54. Lane, C. (1997). The social regulation of inter-firm relations in Britain and Germany: market rules, legal norms and technical standards. Cambridge journal of economics, 21(2), 197-215.
55. Laskurain-Iturbe, I., Arana-Landín, G., Heras-Saizarbitoria, I., & Boiral, O. (2021). How does IATF 16949 add value to ISO 9001? An empirical study. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 32(11-12), 1341-1358.
56. Lenger, A., & Taymaz, E. (2006). To innovate or to transfer? A study on spillovers and foreign firms in Turkey. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 16, 137-153.
57. Liu, C. H. (2009). Effect of ISO/TS 16949 on Six Sigma: The empirical case of Taiwanese automobile and related industries. Total Quality Management, 20(11), 1229-1245.
58. Liu, X., Siler, P., Wang, C., & Wei, Y. (2000). Productivity spillovers from foreign direct investment: Evidence from UK industry level panel data. Journal of International Business Studies, 31, 407-425.
59. Magd, H. A. (2008). ISO 9001: 2000 in the Egyptian manufacturing sector: perceptions and perspectives. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management.
60. Markusen, J. R., Venables, A., Konan, D. E., & Zhang, K. H. (1996). A Unified Treatment of Horizontal Direct Investment, Vertical Direct Investment and The Pattern of Trade in Goods and Services, NBER Working Papers, 5696(3). 1-32.
61. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American journal of sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
62. Meyer, K. E. (2004). Perspectives on multinational enterprises in emerging economies. Journal of international business studies, 35, 259-276.
63. Meyer, K. E., & Sinani, E. (2009). When and where does foreign direct investment generate positive spillovers? A meta-analysis. Journal of international business studies, 40, 1075-1094.
64. Moralles, H. F., & Moreno, R. (2020). FDI productivity spillovers and absorptive capacity in Brazilian firms: A threshold regression analysis. International Review of Economics & Finance, 70, 257-272.
65. Munir, K. A. (2002). Being different: How normative and cognitive aspects of institutional environments influence technology transfer. Human Relations, 55(12), 1403-1428.
66. Narula, R., & Driffield, N. (2012). Does FDI cause development? The ambiguity of the evidence and why it matters. The European Journal of Development Research, 24, 1-7.
67. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
68. Orlic, E., Hashi, I., & Hisarciklilar, M. (2018). Cross sectoral FDI spillovers and their impact on manufacturing productivity. International Business Review, 27(4), 777-796.
69. Özen, Ş. (2007). Yeni Kurumsal Kuram: Örgütleri Çözümlemede Yeni Ufuklar ve Yeni Sorunlar, Ali Selami Sargut ve Şükrü Özen (Ed.). Örgüt Kuramları, içinde, (237-331). Imge, Ankara.
70. Perri, A., & Peruffo, E. (2016). Knowledge spillovers from FDI: a critical review from the international business perspective. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18(1), 3-27.
71. Pratt, M. G. (2008). Fitting oval pegs into round holes: Tensions in evaluating and publishing qualitative research in top-tier North American journals. Organizational Research Methods, 11(3), 481-509.
72. Qian, H. (2018). Knowledge-based regional economic development: A synthetic review of knowledge spillovers, entrepreneurship, and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Economic Development Quarterly, 32(2), 163-176.
73. Rao, S. S., Ragu-Nathan, T. S., & Solis, L. E. (1997). Does ISO 9000 have an effect on quality management practices? An international empirical study. Total quality management, 8(6), 335-346.
74. Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of political Economy, 98(5), 71-102.
75. Ryan, M. J., & Eyers, D. R. (2017). Digital manufacturing for spare parts: Scenarios for the automotive supply chain. Third Summit of ACMA Centre for Technology, Pune, India
76. Schmitz, H., & Knorringa, P. (2000). Learning from global buyers. Journal of development studies, 37(2), 177-205.
77. Senge, K. (2013). The ‘new institutionalism’in organization theory: Bringing society and culture back in. The American Sociologist, 44, 76-95.
78. Scott, W.R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
79. Scott, W. R. (2008). Approaching adulthood: the maturing of institutional theory. Theory and society, 37, 427-442.
80. Singh, J. (2007). Asymmetry of knowledge spillovers between MNCs and host country firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 38, 764-786.
81. Singh, N. (2014). Automotive industry response to its global QMS standard ISO/TS-16949. Globalization and Standards: Issues and Challenges in Indian Business, 121-142.
82. Sönmez, A. (2012). ÇUŞ’lar Yoluyla Teknoloji Yayılımları ve Transferi: Türkiye Otomotiv Sanayii Üzerine Bir Saha Çalışması, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
83. Stenholm, P., Acs, Z. J., & Wuebker, R. (2013). Exploring country-level institutional arrangements on the rate and type of entrepreneurial activity. Journal of business venturing, 28(1), 176-193.
84. Terlaak, A., & King, A. A. (2006). The effect of certification with the ISO 9000 Quality Management Standard: A signaling approach. Journal of economic behavior & organization, 60(4), 579-602.
85. Tian, X. (2007). Accounting for sources of FDI technology spillovers: Evidence from China. Journal of international business studies, 38, 147-159.
86. Wang, C. C., & Wu, A. (2016). Geographical FDI knowledge spillover and innovation of indigenous firms in China. International business review, 25(4), 895-906.
87. Xu, B. (2000). Multinational enterprises, technology diffusion, and host country productivity growth. Journal of development economics, 62(2), 477-493.
88. Yao, S., & Wei, K. (2007). Economic growth in the presence of FDI: The perspective of newly industrialising economies. Journal of Comparative Economics, 35(1), 211-234.
89. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, SAGE Inc.
90. Yingxi, M., & Hung, J. H. (2018). Inward FDI and economic growth: A comparative analysis of China versus India. The State of China’s State Capitalism: Evidence of Its Successes and Pitfalls, 239-262.
91. Zhang, Y. (2019). Institutions, firm characteristics, and FDI spillovers. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 55(5), 1109-1136.