Multinationality refers to the extent to which firms' business activities span across national borders. Moving beyond prior emphasis on the consequences of multinational expansion, this study sheds light on the antecedents by analyzing how firm resources influence changes in multinationality. Building on the resource-based view of the firm, we propose a framework that consists of resource determinants in two categories: knowledge-based and property-based resources. Empirical results obtained from a sample of publicly held US manufacturing companies show that knowledge-based resources generate faster and longer-lasting influences on international growth than property-based resources. Specifically, resources related to technological and marketing knowledge, and property-based resources related to organizational slack and internally generated profits, are found to be significant driving forces behind growth in multinationality. This study not only advances our understanding of the antecedents of multinational expansion, but also provides implications and avenues for future research. Journal of International Business Studies (2007) 38, 961–974. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400305

No abstract

Whether firms with more alliance experience perform better than those with less and whether the alliance strategy interacts with diversification strategy to shape firm performance are two critical but underexplored questions. To address these queries, this study develops a three-level sigmoid framework built upon a marginal analysis that contrasts alliance benefits and alliance costs, and considers the moderation of diversification that often closely works with the alliance in shaping firm performance. Empirical results obtained from firms in two alliance-populated industries support first that the alliance experience-performance relationship is S-shaped in that the linkage is negative to alliance novices, positive to alliance experts, and negative again to alliance overusers; and second, that the shape of this sigmoid curve varies systematically between high-and low-diversified firms. Copyright © 2015 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Keywords: strategic alliance, alliance experience, firm performance, sigmoid model, alliance-performance relationship Résumé Les entreprises qui ont plus d'expériences en matière d'alliance réussissent-elles mieux que celles qui en ont moins? La stratégie d'alliance interagit-elle avec la stratégie de diversification pour définir la performance de l'entreprise? Voilà deux questions importantes qui n'ont pas toujours bénéficié de l'attention des chercheurs. Pour y apporter des éléments de réponse, la présente étude propose un cadre sigmoïde à trois niveaux construit sur une analyse marginale qui d'une part, contraste les bienfaits de l'alliance avec ses coûts, et, d'autre part, examine la modération de la diversification qui s'associe souvent étroitement à l'alliance pour façonner la performance. Les résultats empiriques obtenus des firmes de deux industries dotées d'alliances indiquent que la relation expériences en matière d'alliance/performance est en forme S dans la mesure où le lien est négatif pour les débu-tants en alliance, positif pour les experts en alliance et négatif pour les firmes qui en font un usage excessif. Les résultats montrent aussi que la forme de cette courbe sigmoïde varie systématiquement selon que les firmes sont hautement ou faiblement diversifiées.

Abstract

Nowadays many firms seek hard-to-imitate assets via allying with or acquiring other firms that own desired resources. As such, how to choose between alliances and acquisitions becomes a critical decision, and one important determinant is interfirm factors. This study probes three crucial yet underexplored interfirm differences, and develops scales to capture managers’ perceptions of the differences that, based on managerial cognition literature, dictate the ally-versus-acquire choice. Further, we argue that managers adjust their judgement across varying objective conditions. Each perceived difference is thus paired with a moderator identified respectively from the resource-based view, competitive dynamics, and collaborative capability literature. Evidences on Taiwanese firms show that a larger resource-deployment difference enhances acquisition likelihood, while greater differences in marketing praxis and human resource management increase alliance formation. Moreover, the resource-deployment difference leads to alliances for relatively younger partners, and the difference in human resource management favors acquisitions when focal firms have more interfirm governance experience.