The decision to undertake investment in innovative activities is an important strategic choice made by firms. This study investigates the relationship between business group (BG) affiliation and research & development (R&D) activities of Indian firms. Using an empirical approach that accounts for endogeneity and selection bias, we observe that BG affiliation has significant positive influence on the sample firms’ R&D activities. Employing various proxies for institutional development, we show that the effect of BG affiliation on R&D declines with the improvements in institutional and regulatory mechanisms. Further, this study explores the linkages between diversification strategies at the group level and R&D investments by firms affiliated with BGs. Results show that degree of related diversification is positively associated with the affiliates’ innovation efforts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
For a summary of empirical results, see Fig. 1 of Guzzini and Iacobucci (2014a).
See Khanna and Palepu (2000a) for a detailed discussion on the suitability of analyzing performance measures of affiliates to understand the impact of group level diversification.
BGs in India are often characterized by majority shareholders with under-diversified portfolio due to their unwillingness to dilute ownership in controlling firms.
Bankruptcy of one of the affiliates affects reputation of the BG and may impact its capital market interactions.
The basic tenant of stewardship theory is that there is no inherent conflict of interest between managers and owners as hypothesized by Jensen and Meckling (1976). Managers under this theory want to do a good job and like to act as a good steward of corporate assets. Further it argues that organization structure that empowers senior management and provide clarity on expectations from top management will lead to superior performance (see Donaldson & Davis, 1991).
For example, the major business houses in India like Tata, Hero group share managerial personnel and distribution network across affiliates (Ramaswamy et al., 2012).
Unlike the present study, Chang et al. (2006) measured innovativeness by the number of successful US patent applications. However, we posit that effect of institutions will be the same on R&D and patenting given the strong contemporaneous positive relationship between the two variables (Pakes & Griliches, 1980).
Under conglomerate diversification, a single firm operates in different industries whereas Indian business groups are an agglomeration of independent firms operating in different industries with or without cross-holding among them (Ramachandran et al., 2013). However, there is considerable empirical evidence of resource sharing among BG affiliates (Khanna & Rivkin, 2001).
This final sample is after deleting 6603 firm-year observations with missing lagged scaling variable and/or information on independent variables.
We measure R&D expenditure as the sum of both capital and current expenditure. Prowess database obtains this information from the annexure to the board of director’s report. Information on R&D expenses is normally reported by manufacturing companies as per section 217 of the Indian Companies Act 1956.
The data is taken from http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/gfdr/data/financial-structure-database.
See: http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#reports. The two governance measures are available from 1996 onwards. Since data is available for alternate years till 2002, we used linear interpolation to estimate values for the missing years.
See Greene (2003) for further details.
In our data set, missing values of R&D cannot be treated as zero investment in R&D, since firms need to report R&D expenses only if it is greater than 1% of sales revenue. Therefore, including only sample firms with non-zero R&D values will lead to biased estimates due to sample selection.
Quality test: χ 2(1) = 58.18; p = .000.
We thank an anonymous referee for suggesting this.
As given in Table, only 23.6% of firm-year observations of the dependent variable are non-zeros.
Estimated using PROWESS database for the year 2013.
We consider a sample firm as public if it is listed on one of the two major exchanges in India viz. Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and National Stock Exchange (NSE)
In comparison to stand-alone firms, ownership concentration is high in Indian BG firms (Sarkar, 2013).
Indian BGs popularly known as business houses are known for strong relational ties (Carney et al., 2011) and centrality in decision making.
See Ramachandran et al. (2013) for a detailed account of how three independent companies within Tata group pooled their resources to develop “swach”—a low-cost water purifier.
Abadie, A., & Imbens, G. W. 2006. Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects. Econometrica, 74(1): 235–267.
Abadie, A., Drukker, D., Herr, J. L., & Imbens, G. W. 2004. Implementing matching estimators for average treatment effects in Stata. Stata Journal, 4(3): 290–311.
Aghion, P., Reenen, J. V., & Zingales, L. 2013. Innovation and institutional ownership. American Economic Review, 103(1): 277–304.
Alonso-Borrego, C., & Forcadell, F. J. 2010. Related diversification and R&D intensity dynamics. Research Policy, 39(4): 537–548.
Aoki, M. 1984. Risk sharing in the corporate group. In M. Aoki (Ed.). The economic analysis of the Japanese firm. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Barney, J. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1): 99–120.
Baysinger, B., & Hoskisson, R. E. 1989. Diversification strategy and R&D intensity in multiproduct firms. Academy of Management Journal, 32(2): 310–332.
Baysinger, B. D., Kosnik, R. D., & Turk, T. A. 1991. Effects of board and ownership structure on corporate R&D strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 34(1): 205–214.
Becker-Blease, J. R. 2011. Governance and innovation. Journal of Corporate Finance, 17(4): 947–958.
Beena, P. L. 2014. Mergers and acquisitions: India under globalization. New Delhi: Routledge.
Belenzon, S., & Berkovitz, T. 2010. Innovation in business groups. Management Science, 56(3): 519–535.
Belloc, F. 2012. Corporate governance and innovation: A survey. Journal of Economic Surveys, 26(5): 835–864.
Bernstein, S. 2015. Does going public affect innovation?. Journal of Finance, 70(4): 1365–1403.
Bertrand, M., Mehta, P., & Mullianathan, S. 2002. Ferreting out tunneling: An application to Indian business groups. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(1): 121–148.
Blundell, R., & Bond, S. 1998. Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1): 115–143.
Bradley, M., Jarrel, G., & Kim, E. H. 1984. On the existence of an optimal capital structure: Theory and evidence. Journal of Finance, 39(3): 857–878.
Brossard, O., Lavigne, S., & Sakinç, M. E. 2013. Ownership structures and R&D in Europe: The good institutional investors, the bad and ugly impatient shareholders. Industrial and Corporate Change, 22(4): 1031–1068.
Carney, M., Gedajlovic, E. R., Heugens, P. P. M. A. R., van Essen, M., & van Oosterhout, J. H. 2011. Business group affiliation, performance, context, and strategy: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3): 437–460.
Castellacci, F. 2015. Institutional voids or organizational resilience? Business groups, innovation, and market development in Latin America. World Development, 70(6): 43–58.
Cefis, E., Rosenkranz, S., & Weitzel, U. 2009. Effects of coordinated strategies on product and process R&D. Journal of Economics, 96(3): 193–222.
Chakrabarti, R., Megginson, W., & Yadav, P. K. 2008. Corporate governance in India. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 20(1): 59–72.
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.
Chang, S. J., & Shim, J. 2015. When does transitioning from family to professional management improve firm performance?. Strategic Management Journal, 36(9): 1297–1316.
Chang, S. J., Chung, C. N., & Mahmood, I. P. 2006. When and how does business group affiliation promote firm innovation? A tale of two emerging economies. Organization Science, 17(5): 637–656.
Chari, M. D., & David, P. 2012. Sustaining superior performance in an emerging economy: An empirical test in the Indian context. Strategic Management Journal, 33(2): 217–229.
Chen, V. Z., Li, J., Shapiro, D. M., & Zhang, X. 2014. Ownership structure and innovation: An emerging market perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31(1): 1–24.
Chittoor, R., Kale, P., & Puranam, P. 2015. Business groups in developing capital markets: Towards a complementary perspective. Strategic Management Journal., 36(9): 1277–1296.
Čihák, M., Demirgüç-Kunt, A., Feyen, E., & Levine, R. 2012. Benchmarking financial systems around the world. Policy research working paper no. 6175, World Bank, Washington, DC.
Cohen, W., & Levin, R. C. 1989. Empirical studies of innovation and market structure. In R. Schmalensee, & R. D. Wilig (Eds.). Handbook of industrial organization, Vol 2. New York: Elsevier.
Czarnitzki, D., Hanel, P., & Rosa, J. M. 2011. Evaluating the impact of R&D tax credits on innovation: A microeconometric study on Canadian firms. Research Policy, 40(2): 217–229.
Davis, R., & Thomas, L. G. 1993. Direct estimation of synergy: A new approach to the diversity-performance debate. Management Science, 39(11): 1334–1346.
Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. 1997. Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1): 20–47.
Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. 1991. Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16(1): 49–64.
Douma, S., George, R., & Kabir, R. 2006. Foreign and domestic ownership, business groups, and firm performance: Evidence from a large emerging market. Strategic Management Journal, 27(7): 637–657.
Fang, V. W., Tian, X., & Tice, S. 2014. Does stock liquidity enhance or impede firm innovation?. Journal of Finance, 69(5): 2085–2125.
Filatotchev, I., Piga, C., & Dyomina, N. 2003. Network positioning and R&D activity: A study of Italian groups. R&D Management, 33(1): 37–48.
Gedajlovic, E., & Carney, M. 2010. Markets, hierarchies, and families: Toward a transaction cost theory of the family firm. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34(6): 1145–1117.
Gopalan, R., & Gormley, T. A. 2012. Do public equity markets matter in emerging economies? Evidence from India. Review of Finance, 17(5): 1571–1615.
Gopalan, R., Nanda, V., & Seru, A. 2007. Affliated firms and financial support: Evidence from indian business groups. Journal of Financial Economics, 86(3): 759–795.
Greene, W. H. 2003. Econometric analysis. New Jersey: Pearson.
Griliches, Z. 1986. Productivity, R&D, and the basic research at the firm level in the 1970s. American Economic Review, 76(1): 141–154.
Guariglia, A., & Liu, P. 2014. To what extent do financing constraints affect Chinese firms’ innovation activities?. International Review of Financial Analysis, 36: 223–240.
Gugler, K. 2001. Corporate governance and economic performance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Guillén, M. F. 2000. Business groups in emerging economies: A resource-based view. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3): 362–380.
Guzzini, E., & Iacobucci, D. 2014a. Business group affiliation and R&D. Industry and Innovaton, 21(1): 20–42.
Guzzini, E., & Iacobucci, D. 2014b. Ownership as R&D incentive in business groups. Small Business Economics, 43(1): 119–135.
Hall, B. H., & Lerner, J. 2010. The financing of R&D and innovation. In: B. H. Hall, & N. Rosenberg (Eds.). Handbook of the economics of innovation. North Holland: Elsevier.
Hansen, G. S., & Hill, C. W. 1991. Are institutional investors myopic? A time-series study of four technology-driven industries. Strategic management journal, 12(1): 1–16.
Heckman, J. J. 1979. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47(1): 153–161.
Hill, C. W., & Snell, S. A. 1988. External control, corporate strategy, and firm performance in research-intensive industries. Strategic Management Journal, 9(6): 577–590.
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.
Hobday, M., & Coplan, A. M. 2010. Technological innovation and business groups. In A. M. Colpan, T. Hikino, & J. R. Lincoln. The Oxford handbook of business groups. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Honore, B. E. 1992. Trimmed LAD and least squares estimation of truncated and censored regression models with fixed effects. Econometrica, 60(3): 533–565.
Hoskisson, R. E., Hitt, M. A., Johnson, R. A., & Grossman, W. 2002. Conflicting voices: The effects of institutional ownership heterogeneity and internal governance on corporate innovation strategies. Academy of Management Journal, 45(4): 697–716.
Hsieh, T., Yeh, R., & Chen, Y. 2010. Business group characteristics and affiliated firm innovation: The case of Taiwan. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(4): 560–570.
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.
Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. 1997. Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets?. Harvard Business Review, 75(4): 41–51.
Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. 2000a. Is group affiliation profitable in emerging markets? An analysis of diversified Indian business groups. Journal of Finance, 55(2): 867–891.
Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. 2000b. The future of business groups in emerging markets: Long-run evidence from Chile. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3): 268–285.
Khanna, T., & Rivkin, J. W. 2001. Estimating the performance effects of business groups in emerging markets. Strategic Management Journal, 22(1): 45–74.
Khanna, T., & Yafeh, Y. 2007. Business groups in emerging markets: Paragons or parasites?. Journal of Economic Literature, 45(2): 331–372.
Kim, H., Kim, H., & Lee, P. M. 2008. Ownership structure and the relationship between financial slack and R&D investments. Organization Science, 19(3): 404–418.
Kim, H., Kim, H., & Hoskisson, R. 2010. Does market-oriented institutional change in an emerging economy make business-group-affiliated multinationals perform better? An institution-based view. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(7): 1141–1160.
Kochhar, R., & David, P. 1996. Institutional investors and firm innovation: A test of competing hypotheses. Strategic Management Journal, 17(1): 73–84.
Komera, S., Jijo Lukose, P. J., Sasidharan, S. 2016. Business group affiliation and innovation in medium and high-technology industries in India. In N. S. Siddharthan, & K. Narayanan (Eds.). Indian studies in business and economics: Technology: Corporate and social dimensions: 43–56. Singapore: Springer.
Kumar, N., & Aggarwal, A. 2005. Liberalization, outward orientation and in-house R&D activity of multinational and local firms. Research Policy, 34(4): 441–460.
Kumar, N., & Saqib, M. 1996. Firm size, opportunities for adaptation, and in-house R&D activity in developing countries: The case of Indian manufacturing. Research Policy, 25(5): 712–722.
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. 1999. The quality of government. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 15(1): 222–279.
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.
Long, M., & Malitz, I. 1985. The investment-financing nexus: Some empirical evidence. Midland Corporate Finance Journal, 3(1): 53–59.
Mahmood, I. P., & Mitchell, W. 2004. Two faces: Effects of business groups on innovation in emerging economies. Management Science, 50(10): 1348–1365.
Mahmood, I. P., & Rufin, C. 2005. Government’s dilemma: The role of government in imitation and innovation. Academy of Management Review, 30(2): 338–360.
Mahmood, I., Chung, C.-N., & Mitchell, W. 2012. The evolving impact of combinatorial opportunities and exhaustion on innovation by business groups as market development increases: The case of Taiwan. Management Science, 59(5): 1142–1161.
Manikandan, K. S., & Ramachandran, J. 2015. Beyond institutional voids: Business groups, incomplete markets, and organizational form. Strategic Management Journal, 36(4): 598–617.
Markides, C. 1995. Diversification, restructuring and economic performance. Strategic Management Journal, 16(2): 101–118.
Miller, D. J. 2006. Technological diversity, related diversification, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27(7): 601–619.
Morck, R., & Yeung, B. 2003. Agency problems in large family business groups. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 27(4): 367–382.
Nair, A., Guldiken, O., Fainshmidt, S., & Pezeshkan, A. 2015. Innovation in India: A review of past research and future directions. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(4): 925–958.
Nelson, R., & Winter, S. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Nieto, M., & Quevedo, P. 2005. Absorptive capacity, technological opportunity, knowledge spillovers, and innovative effort. Technovation, 25(10): 1141–1157.
Pakes, A., & Griliches, Z. 1980. Patents and R&D at the firm level: A first report. Economics Letters, 5(4): 377–381.
Palepu, K. 1985. Diversification strategy, profit performance and the entropy measure. Strategic Management Journal, 6(3): 239–255.
Palich, L. E., Carini, G. R., & Seaman, S. L. 2000. The impact of internationalization on the diversification–performance relationship: A replication and extension of prior research. Journal of Business Research, 48(1): 43–54.
Peteraf, M. A., & Barney, J. B. 2003. Unraveling the resource-based tangle. Managerial and Decision Economics, 24(4): 309–323.
Ramachandran J., Manikandan, K. S., & Pant, A. 2013. Why conglomerates thrive (outside the US). Harvard Business Review, Dec.
Ramaswamy, K., Li, M., & Petitt, B. S. 2012. Why do business groups continue to matter? A study of market failure and performance among Indian manufacturers. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(3): 643–658.
Roberts, M. R. & Whited, T. M. 2013. Endogeneity in empirical corporate finance. In . M. Constantinides, M. Harris, & R. M. Stulz. (Eds.). Handbook of the economics of finance, Vol. 2(A): 493–572. North Holland: Elsevier.
Rumelt, R. P. 1974. Strategy, structure, and economic performance. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.
Santarelli, E., & Tran, H. T. 2016. Diversification strategies and firm performance in Vietnam. Economics of Transition, 24(1): 31–68.
Sarkar, J. 2010. Business groups in India. In A. M. Colpan, T. Hikino, & J. R. Lincoln. (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of business groups. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sarkar, J. 2013. Ownership and corporate governance in Indian firms. In National Stock Exchange (Eds.). Corporate governance: An emerging scenario: Ch. 9: 217–267.
Sarkar, J., & Sarkar, S. 2000. Large shareholder activism in corporate governance in developing countries: Evidence from India. International Journal Review of Finance, 1(3): 161–194.
Schneider, B. R. 2008. Economic liberalization and corporate governance: The resilience of business groups in Latin America. Comparative Politics, 40(4): 379–397.
Semykina, A., & Wooldridge, J. M. 2010. Estimating panel data models in the presence of endogeneity and selection. Journal of Econometrics, 157(2): 375–380.
Seru, A. 2014. Firm boundaries matter: Evidence from conglomerates and R&D activity. Journal of Financial Economics, 111(2): 381–405.
Sheffi, Y. 2005. The resilient enterprise: Overcoming vulnerability for competitive Enterprise. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. 1988. Value maximization and the acquisition process. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2(1): 7–20.
Siddharthan, N. S. 1988. In-House R&D, imported technology and firm size: Lessons from Indian experience. Developing Economies, 26(3): 212–221.
Siegel, J., & Choudhury, P. 2012. A re-examination of tunneling and business groups: New data and new methods. Review of Financial Studies, 25(6): 1763–1798.
Stein, J. C. 1988. Takeover threats and managerial myopia. Journal of Political Economy, 96(1): 61–80.
Tanriverdi, H., & Venkatraman, N. 2005. Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multi-business firms. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2): 97–119.
Teece, D. J. 1980. The diffusion of an administrative innovation. Management Science, 26(5): 464–470.
Teece, D. J. 1982. Towards an economic theory of the multiproduct firm. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 3(1): 39–63.
Tsang, E. W. K., Yip, P. S. L., & Toh, M. H. 2008. The impact of R&D on value added for domestic and foreign firms in a newly industrialized economy. International Business Review, 17(4): 423–441.
Varma, J. R. 1997. Corporate governance in India: Disciplining the dominant shareholder. IIMB Management Review, 9(4): 5–18.
Williamson, O. E. 1975. Markets and hierarchies. New York: Free Press.
Xavier, W. G., Bandeita-de-Mello, R., & Marcon, R. 2014. Institutional environment and business groups’ resilience in Brazil. Journal of Business Research, 67(5): 900–907.
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.
We are grateful to two anonymous referees, Senior Editor Professor Anil Nair, and Professors T. N. Srinivasan and Satish Krishnan for insightful comments and suggestions. We thank seminar participants at IIM Kozhikode, IFMR Chennai, IISc Bangalore and participants of the annual Conference of Forum for Global Knowledge Sharing, Bangalore, 2014; Conference on Micro Evidence on Innovation and Development, New Delhi, 2015; and Academy of Management, Anaheim, 2016 for valuable comments. We take the complete responsibility for any remaining errors or omissions.
About this article
Cite this article
Komera, S., Jijo Lukose, P.J. & Sasidharan, S. Does business group affiliation encourage R&D activities? Evidence from India. Asia Pac J Manag 35, 887–917 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-017-9530-3
- R&D investment
- Business groups