The burgeoning of ibusiness firms in the modern digital economy challenges the received internationalization theory. Given that ibusinesses such as social networking sites create value by providing a digital platform for users to interact with one another, we employ a user-network perspective and externalization logic, suggesting that ibusinesses' internationalization process depends critically on users' collective interactions, instead of being solely driven by firms' market commitments as noted by the Uppsala model. However, ibusinesses may suffer from liabilities of outsidership due to the boundedness of international network effects. Drawing on social network theory, we demonstrate that such liabilities can be mitigated by first diffusing the ibusiness platform in countries with higher clout. Our analysis using a unique dataset of mobile ibusiness platforms finds empirical support for the hypotheses. We discuss theoretical implications for the network approach of the Uppsala model in the digital era.

No abstract

We consider the applicability to digital platforms of extant international business scholarship. The organization of digital platforms has been seen to such an extent as predicated upon the bundling of external resources for collective value creation that their expansion may follow the logic of externalization. We further that literature contrasting the governance of network multinationals with that of platform-centric ecosystems. Building on and extending the theory of the ecosystem, we propose the concept of ecosystem-specific advantages. We identify costs and difficulties in the transfer of such advantages to new markets, emphasizing in particular the idea of bottlenecks. We then propose a framework that can be applied to future research on digital platforms, focusing on the users, suppliers of complementary products, and platform firms. We also call for research on the dynamic process of creating, transferring, and upgrading ecosystem-specific advantages. Journal of International Business Studies (2019).

This study examines the institutional mechanisms through which business groups impact innovation in emerging markets. Rather than merely viewing groups as the result of a weak institutional environment, this study proposes that there are complementary elements between groups and institutions, enabling groups to benefit from interactions with their institutional environment. Evidence from a large sample of Chinese firms indicates that the effects of groups on innovation are pronounced when the group is affiliated to a higher level government agency and when the level of region-specific marketization is higher. The findings point to the context-dependent nature of the innovation and the existence of both substitution and complementary effects between business groups and institutions.

Drawing from institutional polycentrism, we advance understanding of how affiliation with different government levels influences innovativeness and profitability in emerging countries. Our framework suggests that as different government levels vary in their objectives and resources, they affect firm innovativeness vis-à-vis profitability in qualitatively different ways. The analysis of 18,430 Chinese firms shows that affiliation with higher-level governments enhances firms' innovativeness, whereas affiliation with lower-level governments is effective for enhancing profitability. Our framework also clarifies how location-specific institutional substitution occurs, indicating that the usefulness of government affiliation for innovativeness depends on how effectively legal institutions protect intellectual property in each region.

No abstract

Although it has been suggested that institutional context influences a firm's innovation performance, the role of regulatory institutions has been underexplored. Extending previous research, this study investigates whether and how regulatory institutions (i.e. state ownership, region-specific marketization and industry-specific institutional policy) affect innovation performance of emerging market enterprises (EMEs). Evidence derived from a large sample of Chinese manufacturing firms demonstrates that state ownership positively moderates the effect of R&D intensity on innovation performance. However, state ownership is not equally beneficial for all firms. Our analysis shows that region-specific marketization and industry-specific institutional policy enhance the innovation-enhancing effect of state ownership.By revealing the role of regulatory institutions, our study points to the importance of looking beyond firm boundaries to understand why EMEs are able to innovate despite their weak internal capabilities.

 This study examines the role of region-specific institutions in explaining foreign direct investment (FDI) spillovers. The findings reveal that domestic firms in different regions of China do not equally benefit from inward FDI. Firms that operate in regions with higher levels of intellectual property right (IPR) protection, market development and international openness are better able to absorb spillovers and improve their productivity. By demonstrating how subnational location-bound institutions influence the spillover effects of FDI, the paper extends prior literature that largely focuses on either firm-and industry-specific determinants or on country-level institutional idiosyncrasies.