Institutional and Resource‐based Explanations for Subsidiary Performance

Abstract

Addressing calls to integrate insights from institutional theory and the resource-based view, we bring together dual theoretical explanations from institutional theory and the resource-based view to examine the effectiveness of transfer of practice and human capital development as two routes to subsidiary performance. Our study of Hong Kong firms with subsidiaries in Mainland China shows that both routes positively affect subsidiary performance. However, our data show that our sampled firms struggled to successfully transfer practices from their parents. We attribute an explanation for this to the characteristics of practices as organizational capabilities in which transfer is made harder by the difficulty in replicating such capabilities. Consequently, developing subsidiary human capital is an important ally to practice transfer as a means to achieve superior subsidiary performance. Our results raise interesting questions about practice transfer and the resource-based view relevant to future scholarly research.

Big Data and Predictive Analytics and Manufacturing Performance: Integrating Institutional Theory, Resource‐Based View and Big Data Culture

“…Hence, institutional theory has several implications for the RBV (see Oliver, 1997). Following Oliver (1997) and Hughes et al (2017), we argue that institutional pressures affect positively firm resources, which further help build BDPA organizational capability. Liang et al (2007) argue that in contrast to other organizational theories such as transaction cost economics (TCE) and resource dependence theory (RDT), institutional theory posits that structural and behavioural changes in organizations are driven less by competition and desire for efficiency and more by the need for organizational legitimacy.…”

“…Following Oliver () and Hughes et al . (), we argue that institutional pressures affect positively firm resources, which further help build BDPA organizational capability. Liang et al .…”

Subnational Location Capital: The Role of Subnational Institutional Actors and Socio‐spatial Factors on Firm Location

“…With regard to subnational location, this often relates to the advantages available from the surrounding ecosystem and its composite actors. They may include locational and technical capability, access to knowledge, capital flows and investment opportunities (Buckley & Munjal, 2017;Hughes et al, 2017;Shirodkar et al, 2017).…”

A perspective on multinational enterprise’s national identity dilemma

“…Institutional logics provide the common rules that govern organisational action in a given institutional environment (Hughes, Powell, Chung & Mellahi, 2017;Kasper & Streit, 1998;Nicolini, Delmestri, Goodrick, Reay, Lindberg & Adolfsson, 2016;Thornton 2004). Greenwood, Díaz, Li, and Lorente (2010, p. 521) argue that "organizational forms and managerial practices are manifestations of, and legitimated by, institutional logics".…”