Transition economies are often characterized by underdeveloped formal institutions, often resulting in an unstable environment and creating a void usually filled by informal ones. Entrepreneurs in transition environments thus face more uncertainty and risk than those in more developed economies. This article examines the relationship of institutions and entrepreneurship in Russia and China in the context of institutional theory by analyzing private property as a formal institution, as well as trust and blat/guanxi as informal institutions. This article thus contributes to the literature on entrepreneurship and institutional theory by focusing on these topics in transition economies, and by emphasizing how their relationship differs from that in developed economies. We conclude that full convergence toward entrepreneurs' reliance on formal institutions may not readily occur in countries like Russia and China due to the embeddedness of informal institutions. Instead, such countries and their entrepreneurs may develop unique balances between informal and formal institutions that better fit their circumstances. Implications for the theory and practice of entrepreneurship in such environments are also offered. Russian and Chinese Entrepreneurship in an Institutional ContextEntrepreneurship is critical for the economic development of Russia and China as they transition from central planning and large state-owned enterprises, although China continues to support many of those favored enterprises, as does Russia in strategic sectors like energy. This article analyzes how the void of formal institutions in transition economies affects the relationship between entrepreneurship and institutions, and how the relationship differs from that in developed economies. It focuses on the environmental context and the void of formal institutions, like the security of private property rights, and explains how traditions and informal institutions, specifically trust and blat/guanxi, have filled that void. Such a contrast can make a significant contribution to the literature by examining the specific context of transition economies, since entrepreneurship is recognized as "a context-dependent social process through which individuals and teams create wealth by Please send correspondence to: Sheila
This paper treats organizations as adaptive systems that have to match the complexity of their environments. The nature of this complexity is analyzed by linking an institutional Information-Space (I-Space) framework to the work of complexity theorists. The I-Space framework identifies the codification, abstraction, and diffusion of information as cultural attributes. Codification involves the assignment of data to categories, thus giving them form. Abstraction involves a reduction in the number of categories to which data needs to be assigned for a phenomenon to be apprehended. Information is diffused through populations of data-processing agents, thus constituting the diffusion dimension. Complexity theorists have identified the stability and structure of algorithmic information complexity in a way that corresponds to levels of codification and abstraction. Their identification of system parts and the richness of cross-coupling draws attention to the fabric of information diffusion. We discuss two modes of adaptation to complex environments: complexity reduction and complexity absorption. Complexity reduction entails getting to understand the complexity and acting on it directly, including attempts at environmental enactment. Complexity absorption entails creating options and risk-hedging strategies, often through alliances. The analysis, and its practical utility, is illustrated with reference to China, the world's largest social system. Historical factors have shaped the nature of complexity in China, giving it very different characteristics than those typical of Western industrial countries. Its organizations and other social units have correspondingly handled this complexity through a strategy of absorption rather than the reduction strategy characteristic of Western societies. Western firms operating in China therefore face a choice between maintaining their norms of complexity reduction or adopting a strategy of complexity absorption that is more consistent with Chinese culture. The specifics of these policy alternatives are explored, together with their advantages and disadvantages. The paper concludes with the outlines of a possible agenda for future research, focusing on the investigation of complexity-handling modes and the contingencies which may bear upon the choice between them.
Received internationalization theory argues that firms occupy domestic space before going abroad; in other words, large, oligopolistic firms are most likely to internationalize. The experience of China, whose economy is fragmented and whose firms are small by global standards, suggests otherwise. We construct a model of small firm internationalization driven by the relative transaction costs of crossing domestic (in the case of China, provincial) and international borders. When the costs of crossing domestic borders exceed the costs of crossing international borders, firms will internationalize at a relatively early stage of development. In the case of China, local protectionism and inefficient domestic logistics increase the costs of doing business domestically; moreover, protection of property rights in the West and the advantages afforded Chinese owned firms reconstituted as foreign entities operating in China decrease the costs of 'going out'. We coin the term 'institutional arbitrage' to capture Chinese firms' pursuit of efficient institutions outside of China. We argue that strategic exit from the home country rather than strategic entry into foreign markets may explain the internationalization of many Chinese firms.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.