The New Normal in the international business landscape reflects a world challenged by economic volatility and political hostilities. This suggests increased political risk, even for MNEs operating in developed markets. We use the legitimacy‐based view of political risk to examine how political affinity between host and home markets may contribute to an MNE’s post‐acquisition performance in a developed market. A high degree of political affinity signifies aligned national interests thus reducing legitimacy concerns faced by MNEs during post‐acquisition integration. Based on cross‐border M&A deals focused on U.S. targets completed by MNEs representing 45 countries between 2004 and 2012, we find that MNEs from countries with greater political affinity to the U.S. experience better post‐acquisition performance. We also investigate two country‐level factors that intensify the threat to legitimacy; the MNEs’ home market economic status and the presence of a financial crisis in the host market. Our findings indicate that political affinity mitigates risk for MNEs originated from emerging economies much more than for MNEs originated from developed economies, whereas a financial crisis reduces the benefit of political affinity.

Purpose Many multinational corporations that originate from emerging economies (emerging market multinational corporations (EMNCs)) opt for acquiring a target firm in a developed market to expediently upgrade their strategic capabilities. To successfully achieve their strategic goals in the developed markets, EMNCs may use market actions and nonmarket actions to mitigate the potential risk derived from the national political differences between their home emerging economy and host developed economy. This paper aims to extend the legitimacy-based view of political risk to study the influence of political animosity – defined as misalignment of the host-home countries’ national interests – on the EMNCs’ market and nonmarket strategy in a developed market. Design/methodology/approach In this paper, we examine all EMNCs that made cross-border acquisitions of the USA targets from 2005 to 2011. The final sample consists of 252 acquisitions originating from 25 emerging markets. This paper used Tobit regression analysis to test the direct and moderating hypotheses. Findings Facing a high level of political animosity between their home country and the host developed economy, EMNCs use a market strategy by acquiring less ownership stake in the developed market, as well as engage in a nonmarket strategy by increasing lobbying activities. In addition, because of the heightened legitimacy concerns of developed market shareholders, cross-listed EMNCs have a greater tendency than non-cross-listed EMNCs to improve their legitimacy through their market and nonmarket strategy. Originality/value The current paper sheds light on EMNCs’ international strategy in developed markets by examining both market and nonmarket actions. EMNCs are shown to be strongly motivated to engage in acquisitions in developed markets so they can acquire invaluable strategic resources, such as brands and distribution channels, to compete with the developed market multinationals. A sophisticated ownership strategy and corporate political activities are invaluable for EMNCs to catch up with developed market multinationals.

Research Summary: We argue that because influence in the political arena can net benefits for firms, investors will respond favorably to indications of firm political influence. We focus on testimony before Congress because it is one of the most highly sought after and influential points of governmental access. Our findings indicate that firms reap positive abnormal returns surrounding Congressional testimony and that investors respond more favorably to aspects of testimony that indicate additional political influence (i.e., witness status, testimony length, and committee jurisdiction). Further, we find regulatory risk strengthens the effect of witness status and testimony length while Congressional negativity strengthens the effect of witness status. Taken together, our results suggest that investors respond favorably to indications that firms have influence in the political arena. Managerial Summary: Our findings showcase that investors react positively to firm Congressional testimonies and their attributes, such as the status of a firm representative, the length of the testimony, and the committee industry jurisdiction. Further, we also find that investors will respond even more positively to these Congressional testimony attributes when a firm is facing high regulatory risk and when the Congressional representative's tone is negative. In general, our findings suggest that firms may gain

Research Summary We examine the effect of institutions on performance differences between founder and professional CEOs. We do so by integrating an institutional perspective with findings from the literatures on CEOs' managerial discretion and cognition. Specifically, we theorize that in informal institutional environments characterized by high power distance and individualism and in formal institutional contexts characterized by low regulatory and political quality, differences in cognitive styles lead founders to enjoy performance advantages over professional CEOs. The results of our meta‐analysis of 117 studies across 22 countries conducted between 1987 and 2020 support our predictions. We conclude by discussing the implications for research and policy regarding institutional development and the governance of entrepreneurial firms. Managerial Summary We develop a framework to examine the influence of the institutional environment on performance differences between founder and professional CEOs. Our results show that founder CEOs experience performance advantages across high discretionary institutional settings when compared with professional CEOs. Boards may use this information to guide their recommendations or decisions related to founder CEO succession or retention. Moreover, firms pursuing international strategies such as joint ventures may also use this information as one of their search criteria while shortlisting their potential prospect partners.

Because prior knowledge may not generalize to the COVID-19 setting, scholars are racing to test the efficacy of existing theoretical frameworks during COVID-19. Most business studies are conceptual or surveys of damage. The main purpose of the paper is to extend the forthcoming stream that tests firm performance by examining it during COVID-19. We examine the sales growth of 1298 US manufacturers during COVID-19 compared to their pre-COVID-19 baselines. Riskier firms with higher R&D intensities performed better during COVID-19, especially when cash-to-inventory levels were low. This study is among the first to empirically identify actionable predictors of firm performance during COVID-19 via a quantitative analysis of strategies and performance outcomes. Understanding what type of firms perform at higher levels during COVID-19 will help decision makers make more informed decisions moving forward. Employing ordinary least squares (OLS) regression to test our hypotheses, our findings suggest that R&D intensive firms should pivot tactically regarding current asset management, if needed, but not strategically, while prioritizing inventory versus cash retention. The positive effect of inventory versus cash extends theory by suggesting a new boundary condition related to pandemics that reverses the positive link between cash and performance found during crises with more conventional levels of turbulence. Our most important contribution, however, is practical, via the testing of predictors that can help firms during COVID-19. For example, we found that firms with higher levels of operating risk experienced 60 percent more sales growth than risk-averse firms. This knowledge that risk-taking predicted performance during COVID-19 (especially when coupled with a focus on R&D intensity and inventory level) may encourage those that can adopt less risk-averse strategies, while others focus on tactical adjustments or mitigative measures during COVID-19 and future black swan events.