Asia Pacific Journal of Management

, Volume 29, Issue 3, pp 617–642 | Cite as

The impact of internationalization on performance and innovation: The moderating effects of ownership concentration

  • Shou-Min Tsao
  • Guang-Zheng ChenEmail author


Researchers in international business have long been interested in understanding the impact of internationalization on performance and innovation. However, prior studies of this research stream offer mixed results. This study contributes to this research stream by employing agency theory to investigate how ownership concentration affects the performance and innovation implications of internationalization. Specifically, we examine two primary effects of ownership concentration: the incentive alignment effect, proxied by the controlling shareholder’s cash flow rights, and the entrenchment effect, proxied by the divergence between control rights and cash flow rights of the controlling shareholder. Based on a sample of Taiwan’s publicly listed firms, we find that the incentive alignment effect moderates the relation between internationalization and performance and innovation positively and the entrenchment effect moderates the relation negatively. These findings shed light on the mixed results of the literature. In addition, most countries outside the United States and the United Kingdom have high ownership concentration; therefore, our results may be generalizable to other settings, providing insight into the role of corporate governance in internationalization.


Ownership concentration Internationalization Performance Innovation Taiwan 


  1. Aghion, P., Bloom, N., Blundell, R., Griffith, R., & Howitt, P. 2005. Competition and innovation: An inverted-U relationship. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(2): 701–728.Google Scholar
  2. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. 1991. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. 2003. Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. Journal of Finance, 58(3): 1301–1328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asakawa, K., & Som, A. 2008. Internationalization of R&D in China and India: Conventional wisdom versus reality. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(3): 375–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 1989. Managing across borders: The transnational solution. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  6. Berger, P. G. 1993. Explicit and implicit tax effects of the R&D tax credit. Journal of Accounting Research, 31(2): 131–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burgman, T. 1996. An empirical examination of multinational capital structure. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(3): 553–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Canibano, L., Garcia-Ayuso, M., & Sanchez, M. P. 2000. Shortcomings in the measurement of innovation: Implications for accounting standard setting. Journal of Management and Governance, 4(4): 319–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cantwell, J. 1989. Technological innovation and multinational corporations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. Cantwell, J. 1992. The theory of technological competence and its application to international production. In D. G. McFetridge (Ed.). Foreign investment, technology and economy growth: 33–67. Calgary: University of Calgary Press.Google Scholar
  11. Cantwell, J. 1993. The internationalization of technological activity and its implications for competitiveness. In O. Granstrand, L. Hakanson & S. Sjolander (Eds.). Technology management and international business: 137–162. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Carney, M. 2008. The many futures of Asian business groups. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(4): 595–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chen, V. Z., Li, J., & Shapiro, D. M. 2010. Are OECD-prescribed “good corporate governance practices” really good in an emerging economy?. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. doi: 10.1007/s10490-010-9206-8.
  14. Claessens, S., & Fan, J. P. H. 2002. Corporate governance in Asia: A survey. International Review of Finance, 3(2): 71–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, J. P. H., & Lang, L. H. P. 2002. Disentangling the incentive and entrenchment effects of large shareholdings. Journal of Finance, 57(6): 2741–2771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Claessens, S., Djankov, S., & Lang, L. H. P. 2000. The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporation. Journal of Financial Economics, 58(1–2): 81–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Collier, D. W. 1983. Technology in diversified decentralized firms. Journal of Business Strategy, 3(2): 91–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Collins, J. M. 1990. A market performance comparison of US firms active in domestic developed and developing countries. Journal of International Business Studies, 21(2): 271–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Contractor, F. J. 2007. Is international business good for companies? The evolutionary or multi-stage theory of internationalization vs. the transaction cost perspective. Management International Review, 47(3): 453–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Contractor, F. J., Kundu, S. K., & Hsu, C.-C. 2003. A three-stage theory of international expansion: The link between multinationality and performance in the service sector. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(1): 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cuervo-Cazurra, A. 2006. Business groups and their types. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(4): 419–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dechow, P. M., & Sloan, R. G. 1991. Executive incentives and the horizon problem: An empirical investigation. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 14(1): 51–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Francis, J., & Smith, A. 1995. Agency costs and innovation: Some empirical evidence. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 19(2): 383–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Goldberg, P. K., & Knetter, M. M. 1999. Measuring the intensity of competition in export markets. Journal of International Economics, 47(1): 27–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gomes, A. 2000. Going public without governance: Managerial reputation effects. Journal of Finance, 55(2): 615–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gomes, L. K., & Ramaswamy, K. 1999. An empirical examination of the form of the relationship between multinationality and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(1): 173–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gomez-Mejia, L., & Balkin, D. 1992. Determinants of faculty pay: An agency theory perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 35(5): 921–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grant, R. M. 1987. Multinationality and performance among British manufacturing companies. Journal of International Business Studies, 18(3): 79–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Grant, R. M., Jammine, A. P., & Thomas, H. 1988. Diversity, diversification, and profitability among British manufacturing companies, 1972–84. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4): 771–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hansen, G. S., & Hill, C. W. L. 1991. Are institutional investors myopic? A time-series study of four technology-driven industries. Strategic Management Journal, 12(1): 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Helpman, E., Melitz, M. J., & Yeaple, S. R. 2004. Export versus FDI with heterogeneous firms. American Economic Review, 94(1): 300–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hennart, J.-F. 2007. The theoretical rationale for a multinationality-performance relationship. Management International Review, 47(3): 423–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 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(3): 481–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Ireland, R. D. 1994. A mid-term theory of the interactive effects of international and product diversification on innovation and performance. Journal of Management, 20(2): 297–326.Google Scholar
  35. Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., Ireland, R. D., & Harrison, J. S. 1991. Effects of acquisitions on R&D inputs and outputs. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3): 693–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Kim, H. 1997. International diversification: effects on innovation and firm performance in product-diversified firms. Academy of Management Journal, 40(4): 767–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hitt, M. A., & Keats, B. W. 1992. Strategic leadership and restructuring: A reciprocal interdependence. In R. L. Phillips & J. G. Hunt (Eds.). Strategic leadership: A multi-organizational perspective: 45–61. New York: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
  38. Hitt, M. A., Tihanyi, L., Miller, T., & Connelly, B. 2006. International diversification: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 32(6): 831–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Holmstrom, B. 1989. Agency costs and innovation. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 12(3): 305–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hymer, S. H. 1976. A study of direct foreign investment. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  41. Jensen, M. C. 1986. Agency cost of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. The American Economic Review, 76(2): 323–329.Google Scholar
  42. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4): 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jiang, Y., & Peng, M. W. 2010. Principal-principal conflicts during crisis. Asia pacific Journal of Management. doi: 10.1007/s10490-009-9186-8.
  44. Khan, A. M., & Manopichetwattana, V. 1989. Innovative and noninnovative small firms: Types and characteristics. Management Science, 35(5): 597–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kim, W. C., Hwang, P., & Burgers, W. P. 1993. Multinationals’ diversification and the risk-return trade-off. Strategic Management Journal, 14(4): 275–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kobrin, S. J. 1991. An empirical analysis of the determinants of global integration. Strategic Management Journal, 12(1): 17–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kogut, B., & Chang, S. J. 1991. Technological capabilities and Japanese foreign direct investment in the United States. Review of Economies and Statistics, 73(3): 401–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. 1999. Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54(2): 471–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lee, K., & Kwok, C. 1988. Multinational corporations vs. domestic corporations: International environmental factors and determinants of capital structure. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(2): 195–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lee, P. M., & O’Neill, H. M. 2003. Ownership structures and R&D investments of US and Japanese firms: Agency and stewardship perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 46(2): 212–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lehn, K., Netter, J., & Poulsen, A. 1990. Consolidating corporate control: Dual-class recapitalizations versus leveraged buyouts. Journal of Financial Economics, 27(2): 557–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Li, P.-Y., & Meyer, K. E. 2009. Contextualizing experience effects in international business: A study of ownership strategies. Journal of World Business, 44(4): 370–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lins, K. V. 2003. Equity ownership and firm value in emerging markets. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 38(1): 159–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Liu, Y., Ahlstrom, D., & Yeh, K. S. 2006. The separation of ownership and management in Taiwan’s public companies: An empirical study. International Business Review, 15(4): 415–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lu, J. W., & Beamish, P. W. 2004. International diversification and firm performance: The S-curve hypothesis. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4): 598–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lu, Y., & Yao, J. 2006. Impact of state ownership and control mechanisms on the performance of group affiliated companies in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(4): 485–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Meyer, K. E. 2009. Motivating, testing, and publishing curvilinear effects in management research. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 26(2): 187–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Michel, A., & Shaked, I. 1986. Multinational corporations vs. domestic corporations: Financial performance and characteristics. Journal of International Business Studies, 17(3): 89–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Morck, D., Wolfenzon, D., & Yeung, B. 2005. Corporate governance, economic entrenchment and growth. Journal of Economics Literature, 43(3): 655–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Morck, R., & Yeung, B. 1991. Why investors value multinationality. Journal of Business, 64(2): 165–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pegels, C. C., & Thirumurthy, M. V. 1996. The impact of technology strategy on firm performance. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 43(4): 246–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Porter, M. E. 1985. Competitive advantage. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  63. Porter, M. E. 1990. The competitive advantage of nations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  64. Qian, G. 1997. Assessing product-market diversification of US firms. Management International Review, 37(2): 127–149.Google Scholar
  65. Ramaswamy, K. 1995. Multinationality, configuration, and performance: A study of MNEs in the US drug and pharmaceutical sector. Journal of International Management, 1(2): 231–253.Google Scholar
  66. Rugman, A. M. 1981. Inside the multinationals: The economics of international markets. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
  67. Ruigrok, W., & Wagner, H. 2003. Internationalization and performance: An organizational learning perspective. Management International Review, 43(1): 63–83.Google Scholar
  68. Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. 1997. A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 52(2): 737–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Stein, J. C. 1988. Takeover threats and managerial myopia. The Journal of Political Economy, 96(1): 61–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Su, Y., Xu, D., & Phan, P. H. 2008. Principal-principal conflict in the governance of the Chinese public corporation. Management and Organization Review, 4(1): 17–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sullivan, D. 1994. Measuring the degree of internationalization of a firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(2): 325–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sun, P., Mellahi, K., & Liu, G. S. 2010. Corporate governance failure and contingent political resource in transition economies: A longitudinal case study. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. doi: 10.1007/s10490-009-9184-x.
  73. Tallman, S., & Li, J. 1996. Effects of international diversity and product diversity on the performance of multinational firms. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1): 179–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tan, D., & Meyer, K. E. 2010. Business groups’ outward FDI: A managerial resources perspective. Journal of International Management, (in press).Google Scholar
  75. Tsai, W. 2001. Knowledge in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5): 996–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tybout, J. R. 2003. Plant- and firm- level evidence on “new” trade theories. In E. K. Choi & J. Harrigan (Eds.). Handbook of international trade: 388–415. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wan, C.-C. 1998. International diversification, industrial diversification and firm performance of Hong Kong MNCs. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 15(2): 205–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Young, M. N., Peng, M. W., Ahlstrom, D., Bruton, G. D., & Jiang, Y. 2008. Corporate governance in emerging economies: A review of the principal-principal perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1): 196–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Zahra, S. A., Ireland, D. R., & 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business AdministrationNational Central UniversityJhongli CityTaiwan

Personalised recommendations