Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-s9k8s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-16T15:22:07.489Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ownership, resources, and business-group effects on affiliate performance: Evidence from Taiwan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2013

Chuan-Hung Wang ,
Wenyi Chu  and
Chien-Nan Chen
Chuan-Hung Wang
Affiliation:
Graduate Institute of Business Administration, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
Wenyi Chu
Affiliation:
Department of Business Administration, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
Chien-Nan Chen*
Affiliation:
Department of Business Administration, National Dong Hwa University, Hualien, Taiwan
*
Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Business groups not only help affiliates circumvent market imperfections, but they also have great influence on the economic development of emerging markets. This study applies three ways to clarify the influence of business-group effects on affiliate performance. First, this study finds that the business group can explain a respectable portion of the variations in affiliate performance. Second, this study examines the impact of family ownership, resource abundance, and resource dispersion on affiliate performance and finds that group size and financial resources positively affect affiliate performance, while family ownership and group diversification do not have a significant effect on affiliate performance. Finally, the magnitude of business-group effects is subject to the ownership and resources of each business group. Family groups, large groups, and highly diversified groups have smaller business-group effects, while groups with high financial resources have greater business-group effects, indicating that business-group effects are heterogeneous and dependent on different group features. This study provides support to the resource-based and the institution-based views of business groups.

Keywords

business-group effectsemerging marketsaffiliate performancefamily ownershipresourcediversification
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 19 , Issue 3 , May 2013 , pp. 255 - 278
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2013 

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.)

References

Agarwal, S., Ramaswami, S. (1992). Choice of foreign market entry mode: Impact of ownership, location and internalization factors. Journal of International Business Studies, 23, 1–27.Google Scholar
Ahn, M. J., York, A. S. (2011). Resource-based and institution-based approaches to biotechnology industry development in Malaysia. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 28(2), 257–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arend, R. J. (2009). Industry effects and firm effects: No effect is an island. Journal of Business Research, 62(6), 651–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballantine, J. W., Cleveland, F. W.Koeller, C. T. (1993). Profitability, uncertainty, and firm size. Small Business Economics, 5(2), 87–100.Google Scholar
Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.Google Scholar
Bourgeois, L. J. (1981). On the measurement of organizational slack. Academy of Management Review, 6, 29–39.Google Scholar
Bowman, E. H., Helfat, C. E. (2001). Does corporate strategy matter? Strategic Management Journal, 22(1), 1–23.3.0.CO;2-T>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brush, T. H., Bromiley, P. (1997). What does a small corporate effect mean? A variance-components simulation of corporate and business effects. Strategic Management Journal, 18(10), 825–835.Google Scholar
Chakrabarti, A., Singh, K., Mahmood, I. (2007). Diversification and performance: Evidence from East Asian firms. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2), 101–120.Google Scholar
Chandler, A. D. (1990). Scale and scope: The dynamics of industrial capitalism. Cambridge, MA: Belknap of Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, S. J. (2003). Ownership structure, expropriation, and performance of group-affiliated companies in Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 238–253.Google Scholar
Chang, S. J., Choi, U. (1988). Strategy structure and performance of Korean business group. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 37(2), 141–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, S. J., Hong, J. (2000). Economic performance of group-affiliated companies in Korea: Intragroup resource sharing and internal business transactions. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 429–448.Google Scholar
Chang, S. J., Hong, J. (2002). How much does the business group matter in Korea? Strategic Management Journal, 23(3), 265–274.Google Scholar
Chatterjee, S., Wernerfelt, B. (1991). The link between resources and type of diversification: Theory and evidence. Strategic Management Journal, 58, 81–112.Google Scholar
Chen, C.-N., Chu, W. (2010). Diversification, resource concentration, and business group performance: Evidence from Taiwan. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(4), 1045–1061.Google Scholar
Child, J. (1994). Management in China during the age of reform. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
China Credit Information Service Company (CCIS). (2006). Business groups in Taiwan. Taipei: China Credit Information Service Company.Google Scholar
Choi, J. P., Cowing, T. G. (2002). Diversification, concentration and economic performance: Korean business groups. Review of Industrial Organization, 21(3), 271–282.Google Scholar
Chu, W. (2004). Are group-affiliated firms really more profitable than nonaffiliated? Small Business Economics, 22(5), 391–405.Google Scholar
Chung, C. N. (2001). Markets, culture and institutions: The emergence of large business groups in Taiwan, 1950s-1970s. Journal of Management Studies, 38, 719–745.Google Scholar
Chung, C. N., Mahmood, I. P. (2006). Taiwanese business groups: Steady growth in institutional transition. In S. J. Chang (Ed.), Business groups in East Asia (pp. 70–93). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Lang, L. H. P. (2000). The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporation. Journal of Financial Economics, 58, 81–112.Google Scholar
Cyert, R., March, J. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Daily, C. M., Dalton, D. R. (1992). Financial performance of founder-managed versus professionally managed corporations. Journal of Small Business Management, 30, 25–34.Google Scholar
Dundas, K. N. M., Richardson, P. R. (1980). Corporate strategy and the concept of market failure. Strategic Management Journal, 1(2), 177–188.Google Scholar
Dundas, K. N. M., Richardson, P. R. (1982). Implementing the unrelated product strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 3(4), 287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyck, A., Zingales, L. (2004). Private benefits of control: An international comparison. Journal of Finance, 59, 537–600.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.Google Scholar
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: Social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Galbreath, J., Galvin, P. (2008). Firm factors, industry structure and performance variation: New empirical evidence to a classic debate. Journal of Business Research, 61, 109–117.Google Scholar
Geiger, S. W., Hoffman, J. J. (1998). The impact of the regulatory environment and corporate level diversification on firm performance. Journal of Managerial Issues, 10(4), 439–453.Google Scholar
Gertner, R. H., Scharfstein, D. S., Stein, J. C. (1994). Internal versus external capital markets. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(4), 1211–1230.Google Scholar
Granovetter, M. (1994). Business groups. In N. J. Smelser, & R. Swedberg (Eds.), The handbook of economic sociology (pp. 453–475). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Guillén, M. F. (2000). Business groups in emerging economies: A resource-based view. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 362–380.Google Scholar
Gupta, A. K. (1987). SBU strategies, corporate-SBU relations, and SBU effectiveness in strategy implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 30(3), 477–500.Google Scholar
Hamilton, G. G., Kao, C. S. (1990). The institutional foundations of Chinese business: The family firm in Taiwan. Comparative Social Research, 12, 135–151.Google Scholar
Harris, M., Kriebel, C. H., Raviv, R. (1982). Asymmetric information, incentives and intrafirm resource allocation. Management Science, 28(6), 604–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haveman, H. A. (1993). Organizational size and change: Diversification in the savings and loan industry after deregulation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 20–50.Google Scholar
Hawawini, G., Subramanian, V., Verdin, P. (2003). Is performance driven by industry- or firm-specific factors? A new look at the evidence. Strategic Management Journal, 24(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
Heugens, P., van Essen, M., van Oosterhout, J. (2009). Meta-analyzing ownership concentration and firm performance in Asia: Towards a more fine-grained understanding. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 26, 481–512.Google Scholar
Hill, C. W. L. (1995). Diversification and economic performance: Bring structure and corporate management back into the picture. In R. Rumelt, D. Schendel, & D. Teece (Eds.), Fundamental issues in strategy (pp. 297–321). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Lau, C. M., Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 249–267.Google Scholar
Hough, J. R. (2006). Business segment performance redux: A multilevel approach. Strategic Management Journal, 27(1), 45–61.Google Scholar
Ibarra, H. (1993). Network centrality, power, and innovation involvement: Determinants of technical and administrative roles. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 471–501.Google Scholar
Jiang, Y., Peng, M. W. (2010). Principal-principal conflicts during crisis. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 28(4), 683–695.Google Scholar
Khanna, T., Palepu, K. (1997). Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 75(4), 41–51.Google Scholar
Khanna, T., Palepu, K. (2000). Is group affiliation profitable in emerging markets? An analysis of diversified Indian business groups. Journal of Finance, 55(2), 867–891.Google Scholar
Khanna, T., Rivkin, J. W. (2001). Estimating the performance effects of business groups in emerging markets. Strategic Management Journal, 22(1), 45–74.Google Scholar
Kim, H., Hoskisson, R. E., Wan, W. P. (2004). Power dependence, diversification strategy, and performance in keiretsu member firms. Strategic Management Journal, 25(7), 613–636.Google Scholar
Kock, C., Guillén, M. (2001). Strategy and structure in developing countries: Business groups as an evolutionary response to opportunities for unrelated diversification. Industrial & Corporate Change, 10(1), 1–37.Google Scholar
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54(2), 1113–1155.Google Scholar
Lawson, M. B. (2001). In praise of slack: Time is of the essence. Academy of Management Executive, 15(3), 125–135.Google Scholar
Leff, N. H. (1978). Industrial organizations and entrepreneurship in the developing countries: The economic groups. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 26(4), 661–675.Google Scholar
Lincoln, J., Gerlach, M., Ahmadjian, C. (1996). Keiretsu network and corporate performance in Japan. American Journal of Sociology, 61, 67–88.Google Scholar
Luo, X., Chung, C. N. (2005). Keeping it all in the family: The role of particularistic relationships in business group performance during institutional transition. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3), 404–439.Google Scholar
Markides, C. C. (1995). Diversification, restructuring and economic performance. Strategic Management Journal, 16(2), 101–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGahan, A. M., Porter, M. E. (1997). How much does industry matter, really? Strategic Management Journal, 18, 15–30.Google Scholar
McGahan, A. M., Porter, M. E. (2002). What do we know about variance in accounting profitability? Management Science, 48(7), 834–851.Google Scholar
McGahan, A. M., Porter, M. E. (2005). Comment on ‘Industry corporate and business-segment effects and business performance: A non-parametric approach’ by Ruefli and Wiggins. Strategic Management Journal, 26(9), 873–880.Google Scholar
Merit, G., Kyj, L., Welsh, C. (2000). A comparison of the financial characteristics of Japanese ‘keiretsu-affiliated’ and ‘independent’ firms. Multinational Business Review, 8(2), 26–30.Google Scholar
Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., Lester, R. H., Cannella, A. (2007). Are family firms really superior performers? Journal of Corporate Finance, 13, 829–858.Google Scholar
Misangyi, V. F., Elms, H., Greckhamer, T., Lepine, J. A. (2006). A new perspective on a fundamental debate: A multilevel approach to industry, corporate, and business unit effects. Strategic Management Journal, 27(6), 571–590.Google Scholar
Montgomery, C. A. (1994). Corporate diversification. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(3), 163–178.Google Scholar
North, C. D. (1990). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Orru, M., Biggart, N. W., Hamilton, G. G. (1991). Organizational isomorphism in East Asia: Broadening the new institutionalism. In W. W. Powell, & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 361–389). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Osteryoung, J., Constand, R. L.Nast, D. (1992). Financial ratios in large public and small private firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 30(3), 35–46.Google Scholar
Palich, L. E., Cardinal, L. B., Miller, C. C. (2000). Curvilinearity in the diversification-performance linkage: An examination of over three decades of research. Strategic Management Journal, 21(2), 155–174.3.0.CO;2-2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, T. B., Wiseman, R. M. (1999). Decoupling risk taking from income stream uncertainty: A holistic model of risk. Strategic Management Journal, 20(11), 1037–1062.Google Scholar
Peng, M. W. (2002). Towards an institution-based view of business strategy. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19(2), 251–267.Google Scholar
Peng, M. W., Heath, P. S. (1996). The growth of the firm in planned economies in transition: Institutions, organizations, and strategic choice. Academy of Management Review, 21(2), 492–528.Google Scholar
Peng, M. W., Lee, S. H., Wang, D. Y. L. (2005). What determines the scope of the firm over time? A focus on institutional relatedness. Academy of Management Review, 30(3), 622–633.Google Scholar
Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of growth of the firm. New York, NY: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–191.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. (1987). From competitive advantage to corporate strategy. Harvard Business Review, 65(13), 43–59.Google Scholar
Ramaswamy, K., Li, M., Petitt, B. S. P. (2004). Who drives unrelated diversification? A study of Indian manufacturing firms. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21(4), 403–423.Google Scholar
Redding, G. (1990). The spirit of Chinese capitalism. New York, NY: W. de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roquebert, J. A., Phillips, R. L., Westfall, P. A. (1996). Market vs. management: What ‘drives’ profitability? Strategic Management Journal, 17(8), 653–664.Google Scholar
Rumelt, R. P. (1991). How much does industry matter? Strategic Management Journal, 12(3), 167–185.Google Scholar
Schmalensee, R. (1985). Do markets differ much? American Economic Review, 75(3), 341–351.Google Scholar
Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., Dino, R. N. (2003). Toward a theory of agency and altruism in family firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(4), 473–490.Google Scholar
Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Shane, S. A. (1998). Making new franchise systems work. Strategic Management Journal, 19(7), 697–707.Google Scholar
Short, J. C., Ketchen, D. J., Palmer, T. B., Hult, G. T. M. (2007). Firm, strategic group, and industry influences on performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2), 147–167.Google Scholar
Singh, J. V. (1986). Performance, slack and risk-taking in organizational decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 29(3), 562–585.Google Scholar
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Wong, S. L. (1985). The Chinese family firm: A model. The British Journal of Sociology, 36(1), 58–72.Google Scholar
Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Hoskisson, R. E., Peng, M. W. (2005). Strategy research in emerging economies: Challenging the conventional wisdom. Journal of Management Studies, 42(1), 1–33.Google Scholar
Yeh, Y. H. (2005). Do controlling shareholders enhance corporate value? Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13(2), 313–325.Google Scholar
Yiu, D., Bruton, G. D., Lu, Y. (2005). Understanding business group performance in an emerging economy: Acquiring resources and capabilities in order to prosper. The Journal of Management Studies, 42(1), 183–206.Google Scholar
Young, M., Peng, M. W., Ahlstrom, D., Bruton, G., Jiang, Y. (2008). Governing the corporation in emerging economies: A review of the principal-principal perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 196–220.Google Scholar