The effect of cultural distance on entry mode choice, international diversification, and MNE performance: a meta-analysis

Abstract

Although a growing literature indicates that cultural distance – that is, differences between national cultures – is an important determinant of organizational actions and performance, both empirical and theoretical concerns abound. In this study, the relationships of cultural distance with entry mode choice, international diversification, and MNE performance are examined by meta-analyzing data from 66 independent samples, with cumulative sample sizes ranging from 2,255 to 24,152. Regression results failed to provide statistical evidence of significant relationships between cultural distance and entry mode choice, international diversification, and MNE performance. The examination of moderator effects, however, yielded important results. We found a strong negative association between cultural distance and entry mode choice for US-based MNEs. The cultural distance–international diversification relationship was negative for high-technology industries, while it was positive for other industries. Cultural distance also had a strong positive effect on MNE performance for developed country investments. A similar, strong positive relationship was found between cultural distance and international diversification in studies with more recent samples. Results of this study indicate that substantial additional research is needed before the role of cultural distance is fully understood. Journal of International Business Studies (2005) 36, 270–283. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400136

Home country institutions and the internationalization of state owned enterprises: A cross-country analysis

“…While researchers have recognized the importance of both home and host country institutions for international strategies, most empirical work has focused on host country characteristics (e.g., Delios & Henisz, 2003; or the distance between home and host countries (e.g., Estrin et al, 2009a, Tihanyi et al, 2005. In contrast, the influence of home country institutions has been largely neglected (Henisz & Zelner, 2010;Morck et al, 2008).…”

The motives and performance of cross-border acquirers from emerging economies: Comparison between Chinese and Indian firms

“…This composite index has been widely used in the international business literature (Barkema, et al, 1996;Flores & Aguilera, 2007;Lee, Shenkar, & Li, 2008;Loree & Guisinger, 1995;Meschi & Riccio, 2008;Park & Ungson, 1997;Thomas & Grosse, 2001;Tihanyi, Griffith, & Russell, 2005). Although other measures of cultural distance have been suggested (Barkema, et al, 1996;Drogendijk & Slangen, 2006;Park & Ungson, 1997;Ronen & Shenkar, 1985;Schwartz, 1994;Shenkar, 2001), Drogendijk and Slangen (2006) show that "it may be premature to dismiss Hofstede's work as outdated or as inaccurately reflecting national cultures".…”

Global Social Tolerance Index and multi-method country rankings sensitivity

“…This measure may also help in better understanding the determinants of constructs such as country reputation (e.g., Newburry, 2012) and cultural intelligence (e.g., Thomas et al, 2015). Social tolerance also appears to be an important factor in cultural distance, a construct that has been shown to play a major role in various international business phenomena from entry modes to international collaboration (cf., Shenkar, 2001;Tihanyi, Griffith, & Russel, 2005). From a multinational company perspective, it allows the exploration of questions such as how operating in countries with different tolerance profiles impacts the coordination of MNC policies across countries.…”