Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Towards an Institution-Based View of Business Strategy

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Journal of Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article focuses on a key question: Why do strategies of firms from different countries differ? Drawing from recent research on business strategies in Asian organizations, this article outlines the emergence of an institution-based view of business strategy which sheds light on why firms differ, reviews four streams of research in a broad range of countries, and critiques and extends some of the current work by suggesting a number of future research directions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Au, K., M.W. Peng, and D. Wang. (2000). “Interlocking Directorates, Firm Strategies, and Performance in Hong Kong: Towards a Research Agenda. ” Asia Pacific Journal of Management 17(1), 29-47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. ” Journal of Management 17, 99-120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beamish, P. (1993). “The Characteristics of Joint Ventures in the People's Republic of China. ” Journal of International Marketing 1(2), 29-48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boddewyn, J. and T. Brewer. (1994). “International-Business Political Behavior: New Theoretical Directions. ” Academy of Management Review 19, 119-143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boisot, M. and J. Child. (1996). “From Fiefs to Clans and Network Capitalism: Expanding China's Emerging Economic Order. ” Administrative Science Quarterly 41, 600-628.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruton, G., D. Ahlstrom, and J. Wan. (2001). “Turnaround Success of Large and Midsize Chinese Owned Firms: Evidence from Hong Kong and Thailand. ” Journal of World Business 36, 146-165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, G. (1993). “A Sociological View on Why Firms Differ. ” Strategic Management Journal 14, 237-249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, S.J. and J. Hong. (2000). “Economic Performance of Group-Affiliated Companies in Korea: Intragroup Resource Sharing and Internal Business Transactions. ” Academy of Management Journal 43, 429-449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, M.-J. (2001). Inside Chinese Business. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J. (1972). “Organizational Structure, Environment, and Performance: The Role of Strategic Choice. ” Sociology 6, 1-22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J. (1994). Management in China During the Age of Reform. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, C. (2001). “Markets, Culture, and Institutions: The Emergence of Large Business Groups in Taiwan, 1950s-1970s. ” Journal of Management Studies 38, 719-745.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. (1937). “The Nature of the Firm. ” Economica 4, 386-405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, L. and D. North. (1970). Institutional Change and American Economic Growth. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. and W. Powell. (1991). “Introduction. ” InW. Powell and P. DiMaggio (eds.), The NewInstitutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dore, R. (1987). Taking Japan Seriously. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, J. (1997). “Effective Interfirm Collaboration: How Firms Minimize Transaction Costs and Maximize Transaction Value. ” Strategic Management Journal 18, 535-556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, J. and K. Nobeoka. (2000). “Creating and Managing a High-Performance Knowledge-Sharing Network: The Toyota Case. ” Strategic Management Journal 21, 345-367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farh, J., C. Earley, and B. Cheng. (1997). “Impetus for Action: A Cultural Analysis of Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Chinese Society. ” Administrative Science Quarterly 42, 421-444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (1996). Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerlach, M. (1992). Alliance Capitalism: The Social Organization of Japanese Business. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabher, G. and D. Stark (eds.). (1997). Restructuring Networks in Post-Socialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1994). “Business Groups. ” In N. Smesler and R. Swedberg (eds.), Handbook of Economic Sociology. pp. 453-475. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, G. and R. Feenstra. (1995). “Varieties of Hierarchies and Markets: An Introduction. ” Industrial and Corporate Change 4, 51-91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, C. (1995). “National Institutional Structures, Transaction Cost Economizing, and Competitive Advantage: The Case of Japan. ” Organization Science 6, 119-131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and Organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoskisson, R., L. Eden, C.M. Lau, and M. Wright. (2000). “Strategy in Emerging Economies. ” Academy of Management Journal 43, 249-267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoskisson, R. and M. Hitt. (1994). Downscoping. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keister, L. (2000). Chinese Business Groups. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, L. and R. Worthley. (1981). “The Role of Culture in Comparative Management: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. ” Academy of Management Journal 24, 164-173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khanna, T. and K. Palepu. (1997). “Why Focused Strategies May be Wrong for Emerging Markets. ” Harvard Business Review July/August, 41-51.

  • Khanna,T. and K. Palepu. (2000). “Is Group Affiliation Profitable in Emerging Markets?AnAnalysis of Diversified Indian Business Groups. ” Journal of Finance 55, 867-891.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khanna, T. and J. Rivkin. (2001). “Estimating the Performance Effects of Business Groups in Emerging Markets. ” Strategic Management Journal 22, 45-74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau, C.M. and L. Busenitz. (2001). “Growth Intentions of Entrepreneurs in a Transition Economy: The People's Republic of China. ” Entrepreneurship Theory and Research Fall, 5-20.

  • Lau, C.M. and H. Ngo. (2001). “Organization Development and Firm Performance:AComparison of Multinational and Local Firms. ” Journal of International Business Studies 32, 95-114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P. and J. Lorsch. (1969). Organization and Environment. Homewood, IL: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K., M.W. Peng, and K. Lee. (2002). “Institutional Transitions and Diversification Discount. ” Working Paper. Columbus: Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, G. and T. Teck. (1995). “Diversification Strategies, Firm Characteristics, and Performance Among Singapore Firms. ” International Journal of Management 12, 223-233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linz, S. and G. Krueger. (1998). “Enterprise Restructuring in Russia's Transition Economy: Formal and Informal Mechanisms. ” Comparative Economic Studies 40, 5-52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo, Y. and M.W. Peng. (1999). “Learning to Compete in a Transition Economy: Experience, Environment, and Performance. ” Journal of International Business Studies 30(2), 269-296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsusaka, J. (1993). “Takeover Motives during the Conglomerate Merger Wave. ” RAND Journal of Economics 24, 357-379.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, R., I. MacMillan, I. Yang, and W. Tsai. (1992). “Does Culture Endure, or is it Malleable? Issues for Entrepreneurial Economic Development. ” Journal of Business Venturing 7, 441-458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R., B. Smith, K. Seawright, and E. Morse. (2000). “Cross-Cultural Cognitions and the Venture Creation Decision. ” Academy of Management Journal 43, 974-993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. (1991). “Why do Firms Differ and How Does it Matter?” Strategic Management Journal 12(winter), 61-74.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, C. (1997). “Sustainable Competitive Advantage: Combining Institutional and Resource-Based Views. ” Strategic Management Journal 18, 679-713.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M.W. (1997). “Firm Growth in Transition Economies: Three Longitudinal Cases from China, 1989-96. ” Organization Studies 18(3), 385-413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M.W. (2000a). Business Strategies in Transition Economies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M.W. (2000b). “Controlling the Foreign Agent: How Governments Deal with Multinationals in a Transition Economy. ” Management International Review 40(2), 141-165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M.W. (2001a). “How Entrepreneurs Create Wealth in Transition Economies. ” Academy of Management Executive 15(1), 95-108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M.W. (2001b). “The Resource-Based View and International Business. ” Journal of Management 27(6), 803-829.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng,M.W. (2002). “Cultures, Institutions, and Strategic Choices: Towards an Institutional Perspective on Business Strategy. ” In M. Gannon and K. Newman (eds.), The Blackwell Handbook of Cross-Cultural Management. (pp. 52-66). Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M.W., K. Au, and D. Wang. (2001). “Interlocking Directorates as Corporate Governance in Third World Multinationals: Theory and Evidence from Thailand. ” Asia Pacific Journal of Management 18(2), 161-181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M.W. and P. Heath. (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., S. Lee, and J. Tan, (2001). “The keiretsu in Asia: Implications for Multilevel Theories of Competitive Advantage. ” Journal of International Management 7(4), 253-276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M.W., Y. Lu, O. Shenkar, and D. Wang. (2001). “Treasures in the China House: A Review of Management and Organizational Research on Greater China. ” Journal of Business Research 52(2), 95-110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M.W. and Y. Luo. (2000). “Managerial Ties and Firm Performance in a Transition Economy: The Nature of a Micro-Macro Link. ” Academy of Management Journal 43(3), 486-501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M.W., Y. Luo, and L. Sun. (1999). “Firm Growth via Mergers and Acquisitions in China. ” In L. Kelley and Y. Luo (eds.), China 2000: Emerging Business Issues. pp. 73-100. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, E. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. (1980). Competitive Strategy. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. (1996). “Commentary on the Nature of Institutional Embeddedness. ” Advances in Strategic Management13, 293-300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puffer, S. (1994). “Understanding the Bear: A Portrait of Russian Business Leaders. ” Academy of Management Executive 8(1), 41-54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelt, R., D. Schendel, and D. Teece (eds.). (1994). Fundamental Issues in Strategy: A Research Agenda. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W.R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenkar, O. and J. Li. (1999). “Knowledge Search in International Cooperative Ventures. ” Organization Science 10, 134-143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenkar, O. and M. von Glinow. (1994). “Paradoxes of Organizational Theory and Research: Using the Case of China to Illustrate National Contingency. ” Management Science 40, 56-71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spicer, A., G. McDermott, and B. Kogut. (2000). “Entrepreneurship and Privatization in Central Europe: The Tenuous Balance Between Destruction and Creation. ” Academy of Management Review 25, 630-649.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, D. (1996). “Recombinant Property in East European Capitalism. ” American Journal of Sociology 101, 993-1027.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, J., and R. Litschert. (1994). “Environment-Strategy Relationship and its Performance Implications: An Empirical Study of the Chinese Electronics Industry. ” Strategic Management Journal 15, 1-20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, J. and M.W. Peng. (2002). “Culture, Nation, and Entrepreneurship: Implications for an Emerging Economy. ” Working Paper. Columbus: Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wan, C. (1998). “International Diversification, Product Diversification, and Firm Performance of Hong Kong MNCs. ” Asia Pacific Journal of Management 15, 205-217.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, S. (2000). “Competition, Capabilities, and the Make, Buy, or Ally Decisions of Chinese State-Owned Firms. ” Academy of Management Journal 43, 324-341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. (1991). “Strategizing, Economizing, and Economic Organization. ” Strategic Management Journal 12, 75-94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xin, K. and J. Pearce. (1996). “Guanxi: Good Connections as Substitutes for Institutional Support. ” Academy of Management Journal 39, 1641-1658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yan, A. and B. Gray. (1994). “Bargaining Power, Management Control, and Performance in U.S.-China Joint Ventures: A Comparative Case Study. ” Academy of Management Journal 37, 1478-1517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, M., M.W. Peng, D. Ahlstrom, and G. Bruton. (2002). “Governing the Corporation in Emerging Economies: A Principal-Principal Agency Perspective. ”Working paper. Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, B. and M.W. Peng. (2000). “Telecom Competition, Post-WTO Style. ” China Business Review May-June, 12-21.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University, 2100 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA

    Mike W. Peng

Authors
  1. Mike W. Peng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Peng, M.W. Towards an Institution-Based View of Business Strategy. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 19, 251–267 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016291702714

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016291702714

Search

Navigation