請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/21324
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 趙義隆 | |
dc.contributor.author | Yu-Yuan Shih | en |
dc.contributor.author | 施友元 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T03:31:07Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2019-08-18 | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2019-08-13 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Agarwal, & Ramaswami. (1992). Choice of foreign market entry mode: Impact of ownership, location and internalization factors. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(1), 1-27.
Anand, & Delios. (1997). Location specificity and the transferability of downstream assets to foreign subsidiaries. Journal of International Business Studies, 28(3), 579-603. Armagan, & Ferreira. (2005). The Impact of Political Culture on Firms' Choice of Exploitation–Exploration Internationalization Strategy. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 5(3), 275-291. Autio, & Zander. (2016). Lean internationalization. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Proceedings. Banalieva, & Dhanaraj. (2019). Internalization theory for the digital economy. Journal of International Business Studies, 1-16. Barkema, & Vermeulen. (1998). International expansion through start-up or acquisition: A learning perspective. Academy of management journal, 41(1), 7-26. Barney. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. Benmamoun, Singh, Lehnert, & Lee. (2018). Internationalization of e-commerce corporations (ECCs) Advanced vs emerging markets ECCs. Multinational Business Review. Brewer. (2001). International market selection: developing a model from Australian case studies. International Business Review, 10(2), 155-174. Brouthers. (2002). Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influences on entry mode choice and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(2), 203-221. Brouthers, & Brouthers. (2000). Acquisition or greenfield start‐up? Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influences. Strategic Management Journal, 21(1), 89-97. Brouthers, Brouthers, & Werner. (2008). Resource-based advantages in an international context. Journal of Management, 34(2), 189-217. Brouthers, Geisser, & Rothlauf. (2016). Explaining the internationalization of ibusiness firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(5), 513-534. Cao, Navare, & Jin. (2018). Business model innovation: How the international retailers rebuild their core business logic in a new host country. International Business Review, Learning by doing: Cross-border mergers and acquisiti27(3), 543-562. Carneiro, Rocha, & Silva. (2008). Challenging the Uppsala internationalization model: a contingent approach to the internationalization of services. BAR-Brazilian Administration Review, 5(2), 85-103. Chandler. (1990). Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of the industrial enterprise (Vol. 120): MIT press. Chari, & Chang. (2009). Determinants of the share of equity sought in cross-border acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(8), 1277-1297. Collins, Holcomb, Certo, Hitt, & Lester. (2009). Learning by doing: Cross-border mergers and acquisitions. Journal of business research, 62(12), 1329-1334. Contractor, Lahiri, Elango, & Kundu. (2014). Institutional, cultural and industry related determinants of ownership choices in emerging market FDI acquisitions. International Business Review, 23(5), 931-941. Coviello, Kano, & Liesch. (2017). Adapting the Uppsala model to a modern world: Macro-context and microfoundations. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(9), 1151-1164. Dang, Li, & Yang. (2018). Measuring firm size in empirical corporate finance. Journal of Banking & Finance, 86, 159-176. Davidson. (1980). The location of foreign direct investment activity: Country characteristics and experience effects. Journal of International Business Studies, 11(2), 9-22. Delios, & Beamish. (1999). Ownership strategy of Japanese firms: Transactional, institutional, and experience influences. Strategic Management Journal, 20(10), 915-933. Dikova, Panibratov, & Veselova. (2019). Investment motives, ownership advantages and institutional distance: An examination of Russian cross-border acquisitions. International Business Review. Dow, Liesch, & Welch. (2018). Inertia and Managerial Intentionality: Extending the Uppsala Model. Management International Review, 58(3), 465-493. Eden. (2016). Multinationals and foreign investment policies in a digital world. Paper presented at the E15Initiative, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development and World Economic Forum, Geneva. www. e15initiative. org. Eden, & Miller. (2004). Distance matters: Liability of foreignness, institutional distance and ownership strategy. In ' Theories of the Multinational Enterprise: Diversity, Complexity and Relevance' (pp. 187-221): Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Ekeledo, & Sivakumar. (1998). Foreign market entry mode choice of service firms: a contingency perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(4), 274-292. Ekeledo, & Sivakumar. (2004). The impact of e-commerce on entry-mode strategies of service firms: A conceptual framework and research propositions. Journal of International Marketing, 12(4), 46-70. Elango, & Sethi. (2007). An exploration of the relationship between country of origin (COE) and the internationalization-performance paradigm. Management International Review, 47(3), 369-392. Erramilli. (1991). The Experience Factor in Foreign-Market Entry Behavior of Service Firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(3), 479-501. Erramilli. (1996). Nationality and subsidiary ownership patterns in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(2), 225-248. Erramilli, Agarwal, & Kim. (1997). Are firm-specific advantages location-specific too? Journal of International Business Studies, 28(4), 735-757. Erramilli, & Rao. (1993). Service firms’ international entry-mode choice: A modified transaction-cost analysis approach. Journal of marketing, 57(3), 19-38. Ferreira, & Tallman. (2007). Building and leveraging knowledge capabilities through cross-border acquisitions. New generations in international strategy, 162-179. Gestrin, Michael, & Staudt. (2018). The digital economy, multinational enterprises and international investment policy OECD, Paris. Globerman, & Shapiro. (2005). Assessing international mergers and acquisitions as a mode of foreign direct investment. Governance, multinationals and growth, 68-99. Haleblian, Kim, & Rajagopalan. (2006). The influence of acquisition experience and performance on acquisition behavior: Evidence from the US commercial banking industry. Academy of management journal, 49(2), 357-370. Hazarbassanova. (2016). The value creation logic and the internationalisation of internet firms. Review of International Business and Strategy, 26(3), 349-370. Hernández, & Nieto. (2016). Inward–outward connections and their impact on firm growth. International Business Review, 25(1), 296-306. Hitt, Dacin, Levitas, Arregle, & Borza. (2000). Partner selection in emerging and developed market contexts: Resource-based and organizational learning perspectives. Academy of management journal, 43(3), 449-467. Hofstede. (1984). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values (Vol. 5): sage. Iyer, Taube, & Raquet. (2002). Global e-commerce: Rationale, digital divide, and strategies to bridge the divide. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 5(1), 43-68. Javalgi, & Grossman. (2014). Firm resources and host‐country factors impacting internationalization of knowledge‐intensive service firms. Thunderbird International Business Review, 56(3), 285-300. Johanson, & Vahlne. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm—a model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1), 23-32. Johanson, & Vahlne. (1990). The mechanism of internationalisation. International marketing review, 7(4). Johanson, & Vahlne. (2009). The Uppsala internationalization process model revisited: From liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(9), 1411-1431. Jolly. (2000). Three generic resource-based strategies. International Journal of Technology Management, 19(7-8), 773-787. Kaufmann, Kraay, & Mastruzzi. (2006). Governance matters V: aggregate and individual governance indicators for 1996-2005: The World Bank. Kim. (2003). The internationalization of US Internet portals: does it fit the process model of internationalization? Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 21(1), 23-36. Knight, & Cavusgil. (2004). Innovation, organizational capabilities, and the born-global firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(2), 124-141. Kogut, & Singh. (1988). The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 411-432. Kostova. (1999). Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: A contextual perspective. Academy of management review, 24(2), 308-324. Kotha, Rindova, & Rothaermel. (2001). Assets and actions: Firm-specific factors in the internationalization of US Internet firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(4), 769-791. Kumar, Gaur, & Popli. (2016). Emerging Economy firms and Speed of International Venturing. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Proceedings. Lahiri, Elango, & Kundu. (2014). Cross-border acquisition in services: Comparing ownership choice of developed and emerging economy MNEs in India. Journal of World Business, 49(3), 409-420. Lin, Peng, Yang, & Sun. (2009). How do networks and learning drive M&As? An institutional comparison between China and the United States. Strategic Management Journal, 30(10), 1113-1132. Lu, Liu, Wright, & Filatotchev. (2014). International experience and FDI location choices of Chinese firms: The moderating effects of home country government support and host country institutions. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(4), 428-449. Luo. (1998). Strategic traits of foreign direct investment in China: A country of origin perspective. MIR: Management International Review, 109-132. Luo. (2001). Determinants of entry in an emerging economy: A multilevel approach. Journal of Management Studies, 38(3), 443-472. Luo, Hongxin Zhao, & Du. (2005). The internationalization speed of e-commerce companies: an empirical analysis. International marketing review, 22(6), 693-709. Mahnke, & Venzin. (2003). The internationalization process of digital information good providers. In MIR: Management International Review (pp. 115-143): Springer. Makino, Lau, & Yeh. (2002). Asset-exploitation versus asset-seeking: Implications for location choice of foreign direct investment from newly industrialized economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(3), 403-421. March. (1991). Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. Mathews, & Bianchi. (2010). Internet usage, internet marketing intensity and international marketing growth. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Global Marketing Conference: Marketing in a Turbulent Environment. Mazon, Moreira-da-Silva, Ferreira, & Serra. (2017). Knowledge motives in the cross-border acquisitions A case research of three Brazilian multinationals. Management Research-the Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, 15(1), 103-123. Meyer, Estrin, Bhaumik, & Peng. (2009). Institutions, resources, and entry strategies in emerging economies. Strategic Management Journal, 30(1), 61-80. Ojala, Rönkkö, & Peltonen. (2019). Contrasting Internationalization Paths of Product-and Service-oriented Software Firms. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Ojala, & Tyrvainen. (2007). Market entry and priority of small and medium-sized enterprises in the software industry: An empirical analysis of cultural distance, geographic distance, and market size. Journal of International Marketing, 15(3), 123-149. Oviatt, & McDougall. (2005). The internationalization of entrepreneurship. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(1), 2-8. Oxley, & Yeung. (2001). E-commerce readiness: Institutional environment and international competitiveness. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(4), 705-723. Peng. (2001). The resource-based view and international business. Journal of Management, 27(6), 803-829. Peteraf. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource‐based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179-191. Reddy. (2015). Determinants of cross-border mergers and acquisitions: A comprehensive review and future direction. Available at SSRN 2685548. Robertson, & Wood. (2001). The relative importance of types of information in the foreign market selection process. International Business Review, 10(3), 363-379. Root. (1994). Entry strategies for international markets: Lexington books New York. Rosenzweig. (1993). Managing Acquisitions: Creating Value through Corporate Renewal. In: JSTOR. Rothaermel, Kotha, & Steensma. (2006). International market entry by US internet firms: an empirical analysis of country risk, national culture, and market size. Journal of Management, 32(1), 56-82. Schwens, Eiche, & Kabst. (2011). The Moderating Impact of Informal Institutional Distance and Formal Institutional Risk on SME Entry Mode Choice. Journal of Management Studies, 48(2), 330-351. Shih, & Jaw. (2018). Ownership choice in cross-border acquisitions of U.S. & Chinese digital MNEs :the prominence of market size over institutional distance. Paper presented at the Academy of International Business:U.S. West Chapter 2018 Annual Conference,( Denver , USA.). Shimizu, Hitt, Vaidyanath, & Pisano. (2004). Theoretical foundations of cross-border mergers and acquisitions: A review of current research and recommendations for the future. Journal of International Management, 10(3), 307-353. Singh, & Kundu. (2002). Explaining the growth of e-commerce corporations (ECCs): An extension and application of the eclectic paradigm. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(4), 679-697. Stettner, & Lavie. (2014). Ambidexterity under Scrutiny: Exploration and Exploitation Via Internal Organization, Alliances, and Acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 35(13), 1903-1929. Teece, Pisano, & Shuen. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. Terpstra, & Yu. (1988). Determinants of foreign investment of US advertising agencies. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1), 33-46. Timmers. (1998). Business models for electronic markets. Electronic markets, 8(2), 3-8. UNCTAD. (2017). World investment report 2017: Investment and the digital economy: UN. Vadana, Torkkeli, Kuivalainen, & Saarenketo. (2019). The Internationalization of Born-Digital Companies. In The Changing Strategies of International Business (pp. 199-220): Springer. Vahlne, & Johanson. (2013). The Uppsala model on evolution of the multinational business enterprise–from internalization to coordination of networks. International marketing review, 30(3), 189-210. Vahlne, & Johanson. (2017). From internationalization to evolution: The Uppsala model at 40 years. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(9), 1087-1102. Vermeulen, & Barkema. (2001). Learning through acquisitions. Academy of management journal, 44(3), 457-476. Wentrup. (2016). The online–offline balance: internationalization for Swedish online service providers. Journal of international entrepreneurship, 14(4), 562-594. Wirtz. (2001). Electronic business: Springer-Verlag. Wittkop, Zulauf, & Wagner. (2018). How digitalization changes the internationalization of entrepreneurial firms: theoretical considerations and empirical evidence. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 6(2), 193-207. Yamin, & Sinkovics. (2006). Online internationalisation, psychic distance reduction and the virtuality trap. International Business Review, 15(4), 339-360. Yiu, & Makino. (2002). The choice between joint venture and wholly owned subsidiary: An institutional perspective. Organization Science, 13(6), 667-683. Zacharakis. (1997). Entrepreneurial entry into foreign markets: A transaction cost perspective. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 21(3), 23-40. Zing, Khan, & De Silva. (2019). The emergence of multi-sided platform MNEs: internalization theory and networks. International Business Review. Hadeel Al Sayegh, & Cornwell. (2017). Amazon clinches deal to buy Middle East online retailer Souq.com. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-souq-com-m-a-amazon-com-idUSKBN16Z0Q1 Paul Carsten, Jussi Rosendahl, & Ando. (2016). China's Tencent buys 'Clash of Clans' maker Supercell for $8.6 billion. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-supercell-m-a-tencent-holdings-idUSKCN0Z716E | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/21324 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 網際網路數位化技術促進數位商業模式發展,影響數位國際企業(MNEs)全球投資模式,傳統國際化理論對數位MNEs國際化現象的適用性有待驗證。數位MNEs跨境購併為其主要投資模式之一,跨境購併的所有權選擇是國際化的關鍵課題,但過去研究對數位MNEs跨境購併的所有權選擇所知有限。過去的文獻將數位MNEs視為同質企業,忽略數位商業模式的差異可能影響國際化策略,此部分過去的研究較少觸及;再者,數位MNEs跨境購併選擇是否適用傳統的Uppsala國際化進程模型理論仍有爭議,值得深入探討。有鑒於既有研究存在缺口,本研究以數位商業模式區分數位MNEs的異質性,以資源基礎觀點、組織學習觀點及Uppsala國際化進程模型理論作為研究的理論背景,探討數位商業模式類型、廠商層次因素以及國家層次因素對跨境購併所有權選擇的相關性影響。本論文以美國、中國及印度數位MNEs為研究對象,使用SDC資料庫蒐集數位MNEs跨境收購交易筆數664筆,並採用STATA統計分析軟體及Logistic迴歸分析等方式進行研究資料分析。
研究發現重點如下:第一,就數位商業模式類型:完全數位商業模式偏好完全所有權併購方式;若數位商業模式的銷售與行銷層面涉及高網路密集度時,偏好完全所有權併購方式;若數位商業模式的生產與營運層面涉及高網路密集度時,則偏好部分所有權併購方式。此一研究結果顯示,不同類型的數位商業模式會影響數位MNEs跨境併購的所有權選擇。第二,廠商層次因素:收購者廠商規模越大,學習策略若採取應用型(收購動機偏向尋求市場),跨境併購偏好完全所有權。在跨境併購所有權選擇的影響因素,就廠商層次因素而言,廠商規模與學習策略有顯著影響。此一結果亦顯示,資源基礎觀點及組織學習觀點等傳統國際化理論適用於解釋數位MNEs跨境併購的所有權選擇。第三,國家層次因素:就母國相對優勢而言,已開發國家廠商跨境併購偏好完全所有權;當地市場規模越大,數位基礎建設較完備,跨境併購偏好完全所有權;制度距離越大,則跨境併購偏好部分所有權。在跨境併購所有權選擇的影響因素,就國家層次因素而言,母國相對優勢、市場規模、數位基礎建設及制度距離等因素有顯著影響。第四、文化距離與當地併購經驗對數位MNEs跨境收購的所有權選擇的影響並不顯著,推測可能原因來自網際網路的存在,生產或銷售服務過程可不必在當地設置實體據點,以致心理距離(例如:文化距離)、市場知識經驗(例如:當地併購經驗)兩項因素對資源承諾的影響不顯著,這並不支持1977年Uppsala國際化進程模型理論的基本假設,但符合Yamin and Sinkovics (2006) 線上國際化觀點,資源承諾受心理距離與市場知識經驗的影響不明顯。 本研究針對國際化理論在數位MNEs之跨境併購所有權選擇的適用性提出新的發現,可提供數位MNEs跨境併購所有權選擇之良好建議,對現代國際企業管理實務頗具參考價值。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | This study employs the business model to distinguish digital MNEs heterogeneity and understand how the typology of the digital business model affects ownership choice in cross-border acquisitions of digital MNEs. Besides, this study extends the prior CBAs literature from the resource-based view, organizational learning perspectives, and Uppsala internationalization model. Our study was based on 664 digital MNEs’ CBAs between 2010 and 2018, using data from the Securities Data Company (SDC) Platinum database. Using logistic regression models, we statistically tested to understand how the typology of digital business model, firm-level factors and country-level factors differently influence the ownership choices of the U.S., Chinese and India digital MNEs involved in CBAs. This study found that the pure digital business model and high Internet intensity in marketing and sales increase the likelihood of full ownership in CBAs. However, high Internet intensity production and operations increase the likelihood of partial ownership in CBAs. In the firm-level factors, larger acquirer firm size and exploitation strategy increase the likelihood of full ownership in CBAs. In country-level factors, for digital MNEs from developed economies, market size increases the likelihood of full ownership in CBAs, whereas formal institutional distance reduces it. However, cultural distance and host country acquisition experience are not significantly related to the ownership choice in CBAs, thus overturning underlying assumptions of the Uppsala Internationalization model, but in line with Yamin and Sinkovics (2006) active online internationalization perspective. We offer several explanations for these different findings. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T03:31:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-D02724001-1.pdf: 2004586 bytes, checksum: d6a0c35a8ca3f598429aeb0bba9d92f8 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | Table of Contents
Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Research Background and Research Gap 1 1.2 Research Questions 8 Chapter 2 Theoretical Background and Hypotheses 9 2.1 Theoretical Bases 9 2.1.1 The Typology of Digital Business Model 9 2.1.2 Digital MNEs Characteristics and IB Theories on CBA Research 14 2.1.3 CBA as an Entry Mode 17 2.1.4 The Ownership Choice in CBA 20 2.1.5 Digital MNEs and Internationalization Theory 22 2.2 Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses Development 29 2.2.1 The Typology of Digital Business Model and Ownership Choice in CBA 31 2.2.2 Firm-level Factors and Ownership Choice in CBA 35 2.2.3 Country-level Factors and Ownership Choice in CBA 40 Chapter 3 Methodology 50 3.1 Research Setting and Data 50 3.2 Measurements 52 3.2.1 Dependent Variable 52 3.2.2 Independent Variables 53 3.2.3 Control variables 60 3.3 Model 60 Chapter 4 Empirical Findings 63 4.1 Overview of Hypotheses Testing 63 4.2 Descriptive Analysis 64 4.3 Hypotheses Testing 69 4.3.1 The Typology of Digital Business Model 70 4.3.2 Firm-level Factors 71 4.3.3 Country-level Factors 71 Chapter 5 Discussion 78 5.1 On the Typology of Digital Business Model 78 5.2 On the Firm-level Factors 80 5.3 On the Country-level Factors 81 Chapter 6 Conclusion 84 6.1 Conclusion 84 6.2 Contributions and Managerial Implications 88 6.3 Limitations and Directions for Future Research 89 References 91 Appendix. 99 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 數位商業模式如何影響國際化?數位國際企業跨境併購所有權之研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | How Digital Business Model Affects Internationalization? A Study on Ownership Choice in Cross-border Acquisitions of Digital MNEs | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 107-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 博士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 張東隆,連勇智,陳厚銘,吳師豪 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 數位國際企業,數位商業模式,跨境併購,所有權選擇,國際化, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Digital Multinational Enterprise (MNEs),Digital Business Model,Cross-border Acquisitions,Ownership Choice,Internationalization, | en |
dc.relation.page | 99 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201903021 | |
dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2019-08-13 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 國際企業學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 國際企業學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-108-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 1.96 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。