Management International Review

, Volume 59, Issue 6, pp 1009–1033 | Cite as

Cross-Border Communication and Private Participation Projects: The Role of Genealogical Language Distance

  • Alfredo JimenezEmail author
  • Jonas Holmqvist
  • Diego Jimenez
Research Article


This paper investigates the impact of genealogical language distance in cross-border communication on private participation infrastructure projects. Our analysis of 5440 projects in 64 countries (1990–2004) shows that the probability of success of private participation projects is lower in countries characterized by a larger genealogical language distance. We also find that this effect is weaker when the project involves a local investor or the host country government. In contrast, the same effect is strengthened when the project is greenfield. Finally, including the host country government as an investor in the project has no moderating effect in the effect of genealogical language distance on private participation projects.


Cross-border communication Language Genealogical language distance Private participation projects 



  1. Ai, C., & Norton, E. C. (2003). Interaction terms in logit and probit models. Economics Letters,80(1), 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  3. Barner-Rasmussen, W., & Aarnio, C. (2011). Shifting the faultlines of language: A quantitative functional-level exploration of language use in MNC subsidiaries. Journal of World Business,46, 288–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barner-Rasmussen, W., & Björkman, I. (2007). Language fluency, socialization and inter-unit relationships in Chinese and Finnish subsidiaries. Management and Organization Review,3(1), 105–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barner-Rasmussen, W., Ehrnrooth, M., Koveshnikov, A., & Mäkelä, K. (2014). Cultural and language skills as resources for boundary spanning within the MNC. Journal of International Business Studies,45(7), 886–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boellis, A., Mariotti, S., Minichilli, A., & Piscitello, L. (2016). Family involvement and firms’ establishment mode choice in foreign markets. Journal of International Business Studies,47(8), 929–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brannen, M. Y., & Doz, Y. L. (2010). From a distance and detached to up close and personal: Bridging strategic and cross-cultural perspectives in international management research and practice. Scandinavian Journal of Management,26(3), 236–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brealey, R. A., Cooper, I. A., & Habib, M. A. (1996). Using project finance to fund infrastructure investments. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance,9(3), 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Conner, K., & Prahalad, C. K. (1996). A resource-based theory of the firm: Knowledge versus opportunism. Organization Science,7(5), 477–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Contractor, F., Foss, N. J., Kundu, S., & Lahiri, S. (2018). Viewing global strategy through a microfoundations lens. Global Strategy Journal,9(1), 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cuypers, R. P. I., Ertug, G., & Hennart, J. F. (2015). The effects of linguistic distance and lingua franca proficiency on stake taken by acquirers in cross-border acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies,46(4), 429–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Delmon, J. (2009). Private sector investment in infrastructure: Project finance, PPP projects and risks. Chicago: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  14. Dikova, D., & van Witteloostuijin, A. (2004). Foreign direct investment mode choice: Entry and establishment modes in transition economies. Journal of International Business Studies,38(6), 1013–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Djankov, S. (1999). Ownership structure and enterprise restructuring in six newly independent states. Comparative Economic Studies,41, 75–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Doh, J. P. (2000). Entrepreneurial privatization strategies. Academy of Management Review,25(3), 551–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doh, J. P., & Ramamurti, R. (2003). Reassessing risk in developing country infrastructure. Long Range Planning,36(4), 337–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Doh, J. P., Teegen, H., & Mudambi, R. (2004). Balancing private and state ownership in emerging markets’ telecommunications infrastructure: Country, industry, and firm influences. Journal of International Business Studies,35(3), 232–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dow, D., Cuypers, I. R. P., & Ertug, G. (2016). The effects of within-country linguistic and religious diversity on foreign acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies,47(3), 319–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dow, D., & Karunaratna, A. (2006). Developing a multidimensional instrument to measure psychic distance stimuli. Journal of International Business Studies,37(5), 575–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Evans, J., & Mavondo, F. T. (2002). Psychic distance and organizational performance: An empirical examination of international retailing operations. Journal of International Business Studies,33(3), 515–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fagre, N., & Wells, L. (1982). Bargaining power of multinationals and host governments. Journal of International Business Studies,13(2), 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Felin, T., Foss, N., Heimeriks, K., & Madsen, T. (2012). Microfoundations of routines and capabilities: Individuals, processes, and structure. Journal of Management Studies,49(8), 1351–1374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gao, C., Zuzul, T., Jones, G., & Khanna, T. (2017). Overcoming institutional voids: A reputation-based view of long-run survival. Strategic Management Journal,38(11), 2147–2167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gatti, S. (2013). Project finance in theory and practice: Designing, structuring, and financing private and public projects (2nd ed.). Waltham: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  26. Gilmartin, M., Wood, K. P., & O’Callaghan, C. (2018). Borders, mobility and belonging in the era of Brexit and Trump. Bristol and Chicago: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gooskens, C. (2010). The contribution of linguistic factors to the intelligibility of closely related languages. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development,28(6), 445–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grimes, J. E., & Grimes, B. F. (Eds.). (1996). Ethnologue language family index. Dalas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
  29. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analyses. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  30. Hammarström, H. (2015). Ethnologue 16/17/18th editions: A comprehensive review. Language,91(3), 723–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Harzing, A. W., Koster, K., & Magner, U. (2011). Babel in business: The language barrier and its solutions in the HQ-subsidiary relationship. Journal of World Business,46(3), 279–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Henisz, W. J. (2002). The institutional environment for infrastructure investment. Industrial and Corporate Change,11(2), 355–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Henisz, W. J., Zelner, B. A., & Guillen, M. (2005). The worldwide diffusion of market-oriented infrastructure reform, 1977–1999. American Sociological Review,70(6), 871–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hennart, J. F., & Park, Y. R. (1993). Greenfield vs acquisition. Management Science,39(9), 1054–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hodge, G. A., & Greve, C. (2007). Public–private partnerships: An international performance review. Public Administration Review,67(3), 545–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Holmqvist, J. (2009). Language influence in services: perceived importance of native language use in service encounters. Helsinki: Hanken School of Economics.Google Scholar
  37. Holmqvist, J. (2011). Consumer language preferences in service encounters: A cross-cultural perspective. Managing Service Quality,21(2), 178–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Holmqvist, J., & Grönroos, C. (2012). How does language matter for services? Challenges and propositions for service research. Journal of Service Research,15(4), 430–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Holmqvist, J., Van Vaerenbergh, Y., & Grönroos, C. (2014). Consumer willingness to communicate in a second language: communication in service settings. Management Decision,52(5), 950–966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Inoue, C., Lazzarini, S., & Musacchio, A. (2013). Leviathan as a minority shareholder: Firm-level implications of state equity purchases. Academy of Management Journal,56(6), 1775–1801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Itani, S., Järlström, M., & Piekkari, R. (2015). The meaning of language skills for career mobility in the new career landscape. Journal of World Business,50(2), 368–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Jiang, Y., Peng, M. W., Yang, X., & Mutlu, C. (2015). Privatization, governance, and survival: MNE investments in private participation projects in emerging economies. Journal of World Business,50(2), 294–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jiménez, A., Russo, M., Kraak, J. M., & Jiang, G. F. (2017). Corruption and private participation projects in Central and Eastern Europe. Management International Review,57(5), 775–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kafourus, M., & Aliyev, M. (2016). Institutional development and firm profitability in transition economies. Journal of World Business,51(3), 369–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kania, M. (1992). The process of privatization and structural changes in the Polish economy, July–September 1990. Scandinavian Journal of Management,8(3), 175–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Karhunen, P., Kankaanranta, A., Louhiala-Salminen, L., & Piekkari, R. (2018). Let’s talk about language: A review of language-sensitive research in international management. Journal of Management Studies,55(6), 980–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kedia, B. L., & Reddy, R. K. (2016). Language and cross-border acquisitions: An exploratory study. International Business Review,25(6), 1321–1332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kennedy, P. A. (1992). Guide to econometrics. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  49. Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. G. (1997). Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets. Harvard Business Review,75(4), 41–51.Google Scholar
  50. Khanna, T., & Rivkin, J. (2001). Estimating the performance effects of business groups in emerging markets. Strategic Management Journal,22(1), 45–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Klijn, E. H., Edelenbos, J., Kort, M., & van Twist, M. (2008). Facing management choices: An analysis of managerial choices in 18 complex environmental public–private partnership projects. International Review of Administrative Sciences,74(2), 251–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kuznetsov, A., & Kuznetsova, O. (2014). Building professional discourse in emerging markets: Language, context and the challenge of sensemaking. Journal of International Business Studies,45(5), 583–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lauring, J., & Klitmøller, A. (2015). Corporate language-based communication avoidance in MNCs: A multi-sited ethnography approach. Journal of World Business,50(1), 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lester, T. (1994). Pulling down the language barrier. International Management,49(6), 42–44.Google Scholar
  55. Li, D., & Ferreira, M. P. (2008). Partner selection for international strategic alliances in emerging economies. Scandinavian Journal of Management,24(4), 308–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Li, Y., Peng, M. W., & Macaulay, C. D. (2013). Market-political ambidexterity during institutional transitions. Strategic Organization,11(2), 205–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Liu, L. A., Adair, W. L., & Bello, D. C. (2015). Fit, misfit, and beyond fit: Relational metaphors and semantic fit in international joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies,46(7), 830–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Madhok, A. (1997). Cost, value and foreign market entry mode: The transaction and the firm. Strategic Management Journal,1(1), 39–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Major, I. (2003). Privatization in Hungary and its aftermath. In D. Parker, & D. Saal (Eds.), International handbook on privatization. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  60. Marschan, R., Welch, D., & Welch, L. (1997). Language: The forgotten factor in multinational management. European Management Journal,15(5), 591–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Marschan-Piekkari, R., Welch, D., & Welch, L. (1999). In the shadow: The impact of language on structure, power and communication in the multinational. International Business Review,8(4), 421–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Marschan-Piekkari, R., & Zander, L. (Eds.). (2005). Language and communication in international management. New York: ME Sharpe.Google Scholar
  63. Mudambi, R. (2018). Knowledge-intensive intangibles, spatial transaction costs, and the rise of populism. Journal of International Business Policy,1(1–2), 44–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Neeley, T. (2017). The language of global success: How a common tongue transforms multinational organizations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Neeley, T., & Kaplan, R. S. (2014). What’s your language strategy? It should bind your company’s global talent management and vision. Harvard Business Review,92(9), 70–76.Google Scholar
  66. Neter, J., Wasserman, W., & Kutner, M. H. (1985). Applied linear statistical models: Regression, analysis of variance and experimental designs (2nd ed.). Irwin: Homewood.Google Scholar
  67. Nevitt, P. K., & Fabozzi, F. J. (2000). Project financing (7th ed.). London: Euromoney Books.Google Scholar
  68. Newman, S. (2000). Nationalism in postindustrial societies: Why states still matter. Comparative Politics,33(1), 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. O’Grady, S., & Lane, H. W. (1996). The psychic distance paradox. Journal of International Business Studies,27(2), 309–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Peltokorpi, V. (2010). Intercultural communication in foreign subsidiaries: The influence of expatriates’ language and cultural competencies. Scandinavian Journal of Management,26(2), 176–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Peltokorpi, V., & Vaara, E. (2012). Language policies and practices in wholly owned foreign subsidiaries: A recontextualization perspective. Journal of International Business Studies,43(9), 808–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Peters, P. (2004). The Cambridge guide to english usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Piekkari, R., Oxelheim, L., & Randøy, T. (2015). The silent board: How language diversity may influence the work processes of corporate boards. Corporate Governance: An International Review,23(1), 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Piekkari, R., & Welch, C. (2010). The human dimension in multinational management: A way forward. Scandinavian Journal of Management,26(3), 467–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Piekkari, R., Welch, D. E., & Welch, L. S. (2014). Language in International business: The multilingual reality of global business expansion. Cheltenham: Edward Elger.Google Scholar
  76. Ramamurti, R. (2003). Can governments make credible promises? Journal of International Management,9(3), 253–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Ramamurti, R., & Doh, J. P. (2004). Rethinking foreign infrastructure investment in developing countries. Journal of World Business,39(2), 151–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Schleicher, A. (1853). Die ersten Spaltungen des indogermanischen Urvolkes. Allgemeine Monatsschrift für Sprachwissenschaft und Literatur (August), 786–787.Google Scholar
  79. Shi, W., Hoskisson, R. E., & Zhang, Y. A. (2016). A geopolitical perspective into the opposition to globalizing state-owned enterprises in target states. Global Strategy Journal,6(1), 13–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Slangen, A. L. (2011). A communication-based theory of the choice between greenfield and acquisition entry. Journal of Management Studies,48(8), 1699–1726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Stiglitz, J. E. (2018). Globalization and its discontents revisited: Anti-globalization in the era of Trump. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  82. Tietze, S. (2007). Language and international management: Emergent themes and new perspectives. In Proceedings of the 2007 critical management studies conference.Google Scholar
  83. Tushman, M. L. (1978). Technical communication in R&D laboratories: The impact of project work characteristics. Academy of Management Journal,21(4), 624–644.Google Scholar
  84. Vaara, E., Tienari, J., Piekkari, R., & Säntti, R. (2005). Language and the circuits of power in a merging multinational corporation. Journal of Management Studies,42(3), 595–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Van den Born, F., & Peltokorpi, V. (2010). Language policies and communication in multinational companies: Alignment with strategic orientation and human resource management practices. Journal of Business Communication,47(2), 97–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Van Vaerenbergh, Y., & Holmqvist, J. (2014). Examining the relationship between language divergence and word-of-mouth intentions. Journal of Business Research,67(8), 1601–1608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Welch, D. E., & Welch, L. S. (2008). The importance of language in international knowledge transfer. Management International Review,48(3), 339–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Wells, L. T., & Gleason, E. S. (1995). Is foreign infrastructure investment still risky? Long Range Planning,6(28), 130.Google Scholar
  89. Wieserma, M. F., & Bowen, H. P. (2009). The use of limited dependent variable techniques in strategy research: Issues and methods. Strategic Management Journal,30(6), 679–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction-cost economics: The governance of contractual relations. Journal of Law and Economics,22(2), 233–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Williamson, O. E. (1981). The economics of organization: The transaction cost approach. The American Journal of Sociology,87(2), 233.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alfredo Jimenez
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jonas Holmqvist
    • 2
  • Diego Jimenez
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of ManagementKedge Business SchoolTalenceFrance
  2. 2.Department of MarketingKedge Business SchoolTalenceFrance
  3. 3.Department of Spanish Language, Linguistics and Literary TheoryUniversity of SevillaSevilleSpain

Personalised recommendations