Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T05:19:04.629Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Depth vs. Breadth: Network Strategy in Emerging Markets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2020

Shameen Prashantham ,
Abby Jingzi Zhou Open the ORCID record for Abby Jingzi Zhou [Opens in a new window]  and
Charles Dhanaraj
Shameen Prashantham*
Affiliation:
China Europe International Business School, China
Abby Jingzi Zhou
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham Ningbo, China
Charles Dhanaraj
Affiliation:
Temple University, USA
*
Corresponding author: Shameen Prashantham ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Using survey data from China and India, we explore the impact of network strategy of new ventures in emerging markets. We focus on two critical dimensions of network strategy, namely, broadening and deepening the network and two types of knowledge: market knowledge and technological knowledge. We find that proactive network deepening is associated with market knowledge and network broadening with technological knowledge. From a network perspective, our work highlights the counterintuitive outcomes of breadth versus depth orientation in network strategy, highlighting differences between advanced and emerging economies. We use a post-hoc multi-group analysis to show the differences even within the two emerging markets: India and China. The direct effect of partnering proactiveness on market knowledge in India is significantly higher than that in China but there is no significant difference as to the effect of technological knowledge. We use this exploratory study to highlight the opportunities for network and entrepreneurship scholars to study emerging markets and, in particular, undertake comparative studies between new ventures in China and India.

摘要

摘要

基于中国和印度的调查数据，我们探讨了新兴市场中新创企业网络战略的影响。我们重点研究了网络战略的两个关键维度：网络拓宽和网络深化，以及两类知识：市场知识和技术知识。我们发现，前瞻性的网络深化与市场知识相关，同时，积极的网络拓宽与技术知识相关。从网络的角度来看，我们的研究突出了网络战略中广度和深度目标与直觉相反的结果，并突出了发达经济体和新兴经济体之间的差异。我们通过后续的多群组分析来显示印度和中国两个新兴市场之间的差异。在合作主动性对市场知识的直接影响方面，印度明显高于中国，但其对技术知识的影响则没有显著差异。

Аннотация

АННОТАЦИЯ

На основании данных опроса из Китая и Индии, мы изучаем влияние сетевой стратегии, которую используют новые предприятия на развивающихся рынках. Мы рассматриваем два важных аспекта сетевой стратегии, а именно расширение и углубление сети, а также два типа знаний: знание рынка и технологическое знание. Мы обнаруживаем, что активное углубление сети связано со знанием рынка, а расширение сети с технологическими знаниями. С точки зрения сетевой теории, наша работа приходит к противоречивым выводам, которые связаны с аспектами широты и глубины в сетевой стратегии, подчеркивая различия между развитыми и развивающимися странами. Мы применяем ретроспективный анализ нескольких групп, чтобы показать различия даже на двух развивающихся рынках: в Индии и Китае. Прямое влияние партнерской активности на знание рынка в Индии значительно выше, чем в Китае, однако нет никаких существенных различий в отношении влияния технологических знаний. Мы проводим это предварительное исследование, чтобы показать возможности для изучения в сфере связей и предпринимательства на развивающихся рынках и, в особенности, для сравнительных исследований новых предприятий в Китае и Индии.

Resumen

RESUMEN

Usando datos de encuestas en China y en India, exploramos el impacto de la estrategia de redes en operaciones nuevas en mercados emergentes. Nos enfocamos en dos dimensiones críticas de la estrategia de redes, concretamente, ampliación y profundización de la red y en dos tipos de conocimiento: conocimiento del mercado y conocimiento tecnológico. Encontramos que una profundización proactiva de la red está asociada con un conocimiento del mercado, y una ampliación de la red con conocimiento tecnológico. Desde una perspectiva de redes, nuestro trabajo resalta los resultados contraintuitivos de la orientación de ampliar versus profundizar en la estrategia de redes, resaltando las diferencias entre economías avanzadas y emergentes. Usamos un análisis de grupos múltiples post hoc para mostrar las diferencias incluso entre dos mercados emergentes: India y China. El efecto directo de la proactividad de asociación en el conocimiento de mercado en India es más alto significativamente que en China, pero no hay una diferencia significativa en cuanto al conocimiento tecnológico. Usamos este estudio exploratorio para resaltar las oportunidades para estudiosos de las redes y el emprendimiento para estudiar mercados emergentes y, en particular que emprendan estudios comparados entre nuevas operaciones en China e India.

Keywords

Chinaemerging marketentrepreneurshipIndiaknowledgenetworksnew venture创业知识分享网络战略предпринимательствообмен знаниямисетевая стратегияemprendimientointercambio de conocimientoestrategia de redes
Type
Article
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , May 2020 , pp. 229 - 260
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 The International Association for Chinese Management Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Accepted by: Senior Editor Jiangyong Lu

References

REFERENCES

Afthanorhan, W. 2013. A comparison of partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) and covariance based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) for confirmatory factor analysis. International Journal of Engineering Science and Innovative Technology, 2(5): 198–205.Google Scholar
Ahuja, G., Soda, G., & Zaheer, A. 2012. The genesis and dynamics of organizational networks. Organization Science, 23(2): 434–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Autio, E., George, G., & Alexy, O. 2011. International entrepreneurship and capability development—qualitative evidence and future research directions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(1): 11–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Autio, E., Sapienza, H. J., & Almeida, J. G. 2000. Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity, and imitability on international growth. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5): 909–924.Google Scholar
Banalieva, E., & Dhanaraj, C. 2019. Internalization theory for the digital economy. Journal of International Business Studies, forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batjargal, B., Hitt, M. A., Tsui, A. S., Arregle, J.-L., Webb, J. W., & Miller, T. L. 2013. Institutional polycentrism, entrepreneurs' social networks, and new venture growth. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4): 1024–1049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boso, N., Story, V. M., & Cadogan, J. W. 2013. Entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation, network ties, and performance: Study of entrepreneurial firms in a developing economy. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(6): 708–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruton, G. D., Su, Z., & Filatotchev, I. 2018. New venture performance in transition economies from different institutional perspectives. Journal of Small Business Management, 56(3): 374–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckley, P. J., & Prashantham, S. 2016. Global interfirm networks: The division of entrepreneurial labor between MNEs and SMEs. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 30(1): 40–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chatterjee, D., & Sahasranamam, S. 2018. Technological innovation research in China and India: A bibliometric analysis for the period 1991–2015. Management and Organization Review, 14(1): 179–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chetty, S., & Pahlberg, C. 2015. An internationalizing entrepreneurial firm's network is their networth. In Fernhaber, S. A. & Prashantham, S. (Eds.), Routledge companion to international entrepreneurship. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edition. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Corredoira, R. A., & Mcdermott, G. A. 2014. Adaptation, bridging and firm upgrading: How non-market institutions and MNCs facilitate knowledge recombination in emerging markets. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(6): 699–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coviello, N. E. 2006. The network dynamics of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(5): 713–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. 2001. Survival and profitability: The roles of experience and intangible assets in foreign subsidiary performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 44(5): 1028–1038.Google Scholar
Dhanaraj, C., Lyles, M. A., Steensma, H. K., & Tihanyi, L. 2004. Managing tacit and explicit knowledge transfer in IJVs: The role of relational embeddedness and the impact on performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5): 428–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. 2006. Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3): 659–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elango, B., & Pattnaik, C. 2007. Building capabilities for international operations through networks: A study of Indian firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4): 541–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emirbayer, M., & Goodwin, J. 1994. Network analysis, culture, and the problem of agency. American Journal of Sociology, 99(6): 1411–1454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eriksson, K., Johanson, J., Majkgard, A., & Sharma, D. D. 1997. Experiential knowledge and cost in the internationalization process. In Forsgren, M., Holm, U., & Johanson, J. (Eds.), Knowledge, networks, and power: 337–360. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Fang, Y., Wade, M., Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. 2013. An exploration of multinational enterprise knowledge resources and foreign subsidiary performance. Journal of World Business, 48(1): 30–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filatotchev, I., Liu, X., Lu, J., & Wright, M. 2011. Knowledge spillovers through human mobility across national borders: Evidence from Zhongguancun Science Park in China. Research Policy, 40(3): 453–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fornell, C., & Bookstein, F. L. 1982. Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4): 440–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. 1981. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3): 382–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gadiesh, O., Leung, P., & Vestring, T. 2007. The battle for China's good-enough market. Harvard Business Review, 85(9): 80.Google Scholar
Godinho, M. M., & Ferreira, V. 2012. Analyzing the evidence of an IPR take-off in China and India. Research Policy, 41(3): 499–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gulati, R. 1999. Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 20(5): 397–420.3.0.CO;2-K>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. 2011. PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 19(2): 139–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. 2013. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), London, UK: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Hallen, B. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. 2012. Catalyzing strategies and efficient tie formation: How entrepreneurial firms obtain investment ties. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1): 35–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, M. T. 1999. The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1): 82–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, M. T., Mors, M. L., & Løvås, B. 2005. Knowledge sharing in organizations: Multiple networks, multiple phases. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5): 776–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoskisson, R. E., Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., & Peng, M. W. 2013. Emerging multinationals from mid-range economies: The influence of institutions and factor markets. Journal of Management Studies, 50(7): 1295–1321.Google Scholar
Hulland, J. 1999. Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2): 195–204.3.0.CO;2-7>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. 2009. The Uppsala internationalization process model revisited: From liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(9): 1411–1431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khanna, T. 2007. Billions of entrepreneurs: How China and India are reshaping their futures and yours. London, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
Khavul, S., Pérez-Nordtvedt, L., & Wood, E. 2010. Organizational entrainment and international new ventures from emerging markets. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(1): 104–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiss, A. N., Danis, W. M., & Cavusgil, S. T. 2012. International entrepreneurship research in emerging economies: A critical review and research agenda. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2): 266–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kock, N. 2015. Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(4): 1–10.Google Scholar
Krishnan, R. T., & Prashantham, S. 2018. Innovation in and from India: The who, where, what, and when. Global Strategy Journal: 1–21.Google Scholar
Lei, W. 2017. Emerging agenda of Chinese innovation and entrepreneurship research. Management and Organization Review, 13(1): 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewin, A. Y., Chiu, C. Y., Fey, C. F., Levine, S. S., McDermott, G., Murmann, J. P., & Tsang, E. 2016. The critique of empirical social science: New policies at management and organization review. Management and Organization Review, 12(4): 649–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, H., & Atuahene-Gima, K. 2001. Product innovation strategy and the performance of new technology ventures in China. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6): 1123–1134.Google Scholar
Li, H., & Zhang, Y. 2007. The role of managers' political networking and functional experience in new venture performance: Evidence from China's transition economy. Strategic Management Journal, 28(8): 791–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liang, H., Saraf, N., Hu, Q., & Xue, Y. 2007. Assimilation of enterprise systems: The effect of institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management. MIS Quarterly, 31(1): 59–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, J., Chen, L., & Kittilaksanawong, W. 2013. External knowledge search strategies in China's technology ventures: The role of managerial interpretations and ties. Management and Organization Review, 9(3): 437–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, X., Lu, J., Filatotchev, I., Buck, T., & Wright, M. 2010. Returnee entrepreneurs, knowledge spillovers and innovation in high-tech firms in emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(7): 1183–1197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, X., Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Dai, O., & Lu, J. 2010. Human mobility and international knowledge spillovers: Evidence from high-tech small and medium enterprises in an emerging market. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4(4): 340–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorenzen, M., & Mudambi, R. 2013. Clusters, connectivity and catch-up: Bollywood and Bangalore in the global economy. Journal of Economic Geography, 13(3): 501–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, J., & Tao, Z. 2010. Determinants of entrepreneurial activities in China. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(3): 261–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, Y., & Bu, J. 2018. Contextualizing international strategy by emerging market firms: A composition-based approach. Journal of World Business, 53(3): 337–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, Y. D., & Child, J. 2015. A composition-based view of firm growth. Management and Organization Review, 11(3): 379–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marion, T. J., Eddleston, K. A., Friar, J. H., & Deeds, D. 2015. The evolution of interorganizational relationships in emerging ventures: An ethnographic study within the new product development process. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(1): 167–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mariotti, F., & Delbridge, R. 2012. Overcoming network overload and redundancy in interorganizational networks: The roles of potential and latent ties. Organization Science, 23(2): 511–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., Balla, J. R., & Grayson, D. 1998. Is more ever too much? The number of indicators per factor in confirmatory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33(2): 181–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKinsey. 2018. Outperformers: High-growth emerging economies and the companies that propel them. San Francisco, CA: McKinsey Global Institute.Google Scholar
Peng, M. W., Lebedev, S., Vlas, C. O., Wang, J. C., & Shay, J. S. 2018. The growth of the firm in (and out of) emerging economies. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, in press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phene, A., Fladmoe-Lindquist, K., & Marsh, L. 2010. Breakthrough innovations in the U.S. biotechnology industry: The effects of technological space and geographic origin. Strategic Management Journal, 27(4): 369–388.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5): 879–903.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prashantham, S., & Birkinshaw, J. 2008. Dancing with gorillas: How small firms can effectively partner with multinational corporations. California Management Review, 51(1): 6–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prashantham, S., & Birkinshaw, J. 2019. MNE–SME cooperation: An integrative framework. Journal of International Business Studies, forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prashantham, S., & Dhanaraj, C. 2010. The dynamic influence of social capital on the international growth of new ventures. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6): 967–994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prashantham, S., & Dhanaraj, C. 2015. MNE ties and new venture internationalization: Exploratory insights from India. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(4): 901–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prashantham, S., & Yip, G. S. 2017. Engaging with startups in emerging markets. MIT Sloan Management Review, 58(2): 51–65.Google Scholar
Ramamurti, R. 2004. Developing countries and MNEs: Extending and enriching the research agenda. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(4): 277–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramamurti, R., & Hillemann, J. 2018. What is ‘Chinese’ about Chinese multinationals? Journal of International Business Studies, 49(1): 34–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ready, D. A., Hill, L. A., & Conger, J. A. 2008. Winning the race for talent in emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 86(11): 62–70.Google ScholarPubMed
Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2001. Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 22(3): 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkar, M. B., Echambadi, R., & Harrison, J. S. 2001. Alliance entrepreneurship and firm market performance. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7): 701–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigfusson, T., & Chetty, S. 2013. Building international entrepreneurial virtual networks in cyberspace. Journal of World Business, 48(2): 260–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stam, W., Arzlanian, S., & Elfring, T. 2014. Social capital of entrepreneurs and small firm performance: A meta-analysis of contextual and methodological moderators. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1): 152–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su, Z., Xie, E., & Wang, D. 2015. Entrepreneurial orientation, managerial networking, and new venture performance in China. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(1): 228–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y.-M., & Lauro, C. 2005. PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48(1): 159–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tracey, P., & Phillips, N. 2011. Entrepreneurship in emerging markets: Strategies for new venture creation in uncertain institutional contexts. MIR: Management International Review, 51(1): 23–39.Google Scholar
Vissa, B. 2012. Agency in action: Entrepreneurs' networking style and initiation of economic exchange. Organization Science, 23(2): 492–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, C. L. 2008. Entrepreneurial orientation, learning orientation, and firm performance. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 32(4): 635–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & Van Oppen, C. 2009. Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly, 33(1): 177–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. 2003. Knowledge–based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and medium–sized businesses. Strategic Management Journal, 24(13): 1307–1314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, Z., & Tsui, A. S. 2007. When brokers may not work: The cultural contingency of social capital in Chinese high-tech firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1): 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamakawa, Y., Peng, M. W., & Deeds, D. L. 2008. What drives new ventures to internationalize from emerging to developed economies? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1): 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yip, G. S., & Mckern, B. 2016. China's next strategic advantage: From imitation to innovation. Camrbidge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., & Sapienza, H. J. 2001. Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology–based firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7): 587–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., & Tontti, V. 2002. Social capital, knowledge, and the international growth of technology-based new firms. International Business Review, 11(3): 279–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zahra, S. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hitt, M. A. 2000. International expansion by new venture firms: International diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5): 925–950.Google Scholar
Zahra, S. A., Sapienza, H. J., & Davidsson, P. 2006. Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: A review, model and research agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 43(4): 917–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Y., & Li, H. 2010. Innovation search of new ventures in a technology cluster: The role of ties with service intermediaries. Strategic Management Journal, 31(1): 88–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, L., Barnes, B. R., & Lu, Y. 2010. Entrepreneurial proclivity, capability upgrading and performance advantage of newness among international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(5): 882–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, S., Li, P., Zhou, A., & Prashantham, S. 2019. The cultural roots of compositional capability in China: Balanced moderation. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, L., Wu, W.-P., & Luo, X. 2007. Internationalization and the performance of born-global SMEs: The mediating role of social networks. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4): 673–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zott, C., & Huy, Q. N. 2007. How entrepreneurs use symbolic management to acquire resources. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1): 70–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar