Capturing the role of societal affinity in cross-border mergers with the Eurovision Song Contest

Abstract

This paper demonstrates the effectiveness of voting bias in the Eurovision Song Contest as a means of capturing societal affinity. More than 180 million viewers from more than 40 countries watch the Eurovision Song Contest every year and vote for their favorite songs. Societal affinity between participating countries leads to systematic bias in voting patterns as each song represents a country. Using cross-border mergers as a proxy for international business exchanges, we demonstrate how voting bias provides a simple, freely available, and dynamic means of capturing societal affinity between countries that complements other metrics of affinity and distance.

Resume

Cet article démontre l’efficacité du vote biaisé dans le Concours Eurovision de la chanson comme moyen de capturer les affinités sociétales. Plus de 180 millions de téléspectateurs de plus de 40 pays regardent le Concours Eurovision de la chanson chaque année et votent pour leurs chansons préférées. L’affinité sociétale entre les pays participants conduit à un biais systématique dans les modes de vote car chaque chanson représente un pays. En utilisant les fusions transfrontalières comme une approximation des échanges commerciaux internationaux, nous démontrons comment le vote biaisé constitue un moyen simple, gratuit et dynamique de saisir l’affinité sociétale entre les pays qui complète d’autres mesures d’affinité et de distance.

Resumen

Este artículo demuestra la efectividad del sesgo de votación en el Festival de la Canción de Eurovisión como un medio para capturar la afinidad social. Más de 180 millones espectadores de más de 40 países ven el Festival de la Canción de Eurovisión cada año y votan por sus canciones favoritas. La afinidad social entre los países participantes lleva a un sesgo sistemático en los patrones de votación ya que cada canción representa un país. Usando las fusiones transfronterizas como proxy para los intercambios de negocios internacionales, demostramos cómo el sesgo de votación provee un medio simple, de acceso gratuito, y dinámico de capturar la afinidad social entre los países que complementa otras métricas de afinidad y distancia.

Resumo

Este artigo demonstra a eficácia do viés de votação na competição de músicas Eurovision como um meio de capturar afinidade social. Mais de 180 milhões espectadores de mais de 40 países assistem à competição de músicas Eurovision todos os anos e votam em suas músicas favoritas. A afinidade social entre os países participantes leva a um viés sistemático nos padrões de votação, já que cada canção representa um país. Usando fusões transfronteiriças como proxy para trocas comerciais internacionais, demonstramos como o viés de votação fornece um meio simples, disponível gratuitamente e dinâmico de capturar a afinidade social entre países que complementa outras métricas de afinidade e distância.

摘要

本文展示了欧洲歌曲大赛中投票偏见作为捕捉社会亲和力的手段的有效性。来自40多个国家的超过1.8亿的观众每年观看欧洲歌曲大赛, 并投票选出他们喜爱的歌曲。由于每首歌代表一个国家, 参与国之间的社会亲和力导致投票模式的系统偏差。我们利用跨国并购作为国际商业交往的代理, 展示了投票偏见如何提供一种简单、免费和动态的方法来捕捉各国之间的社会亲和力, 从而补充其它亲和力和距离指标。

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Figure 1

References

  1. Ahern, K., Daminelli, D., & Fracassi, C. 2015. Lost in translation? The effect of cultural values on mergers around the world. Journal of Financial Economics, 117(1): 165–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Arikan, I., & Shenkar, O. 2013. National animosity and cross-border alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 56(6): 1516–1544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Barton, K., & McCully, A. 2005. History, identity, and the school curriculum in Northern Ireland: An empirical study of secondary. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(1): 85–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Beugelsdijk, S., Ambos, B., & Nell, P. 2018. Conceptualizing and measuring distance in international business research: Recurring questions and best practice guidelines. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(9): 1113–1137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Beugelsdijk, S., Kostova, T., & Roth, K. 2017. An overview of Hofstede-inspired country-level culture research in international business since 2006. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(1): 30–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Charron, N. 2013. Impartiality, friendship-networks and voting behaviour: Evidence from voting patterns in the Eurovision Song Contest. Social Networks, 35(3): 484–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chatman, J., & Flynn, F. 2001. The influence of demographic heterogeneity on the emergence and consequences of cooperative norms in work teams. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5): 956–974.

    Google Scholar 

  8. CIA. 2019. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/. Accessed 28 August 2019.

  9. Clark, D., Li, D., & Shepherd, D. 2018. Country familiarity in the initial stage of foreign market selection. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(4): 442–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Correlates of War. 2019. http://www.correlatesofwar.org/data-sets. Accessed 28 August 2019.

  11. Dinc, I., & Erel, I. 2013. Economics nationalism in mergers and acquisitions. Journal of Finance, 68(6): 2471–2514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dinner, I., Kushwaha, T., & Steenkamp, J.-B. 2019. Psychic distance and performance of MNCs during marketing crises. Journal of International Business Studies, 50(3): 339–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Erel, I., Liao, R., & Weisbach, M. 2012. Determinants of cross-border mergers and acquisitions. Journal of Finance, 67(3): 1045–1082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Eurovision Song Contest. 2019. https://eurovision.tv/events. Accessed 28 August 2019.

  15. Feito-Ruiz, I., & Menendez-Requejo, S. 2011. Cross-border mergers and acquisitions in different legal environments. International Review Law and Economics, 31(3): 169–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gartzke, E. 1998. Kant we all just get along? Opportunity, willingness and the origins of the Democratic Peace. American Journal of Political Science, 42(1): 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Google Trends. 2019. https://trends.google.com/trends/?geo=US. Accessed 28 August 2019.

  18. Harzing, A. 2006. Response styles in cross-national survey research: A 26-country study. International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 6(2): 243–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hofstede insights. 2019. https://www.hofstede-insights.com/product/compare-countries/. Accessed 28 August 2019.

  20. Huizinga, H., & Voget, J. 2009. International taxation and the direction and volume of cross-border M&As. Journal of Finance, 64(3): 1217–1249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. 2009. The Uppsala internationalization process model revisited: From liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(9): 1411–1431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kahneman, D. 2011. Thinking Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kogut, B., & Singh, H. 1988. The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3): 411–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lee, S., & Makhija, M. 2009. The effect of domestic uncertainty on the real options value of international investments. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(3): 405–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Nes, E., Yelkur, R., & Silkoset, R. 2014. Consumer affinity for foreign countries: Construct development, buying behavior consequences and animosity contrast. International Business Review, 23(4): 774–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Norton, M., Frost, I., Jeana, H., & Ariely, D. 2007. Less is more: The lure of ambiguity, or why familiarity breeds contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1): 97–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. 2013. Introduction to the Europe Volume. In Palgrave Macmillan Ltd (Ed), International Historical Statistics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Peterkin, T. 2008. Eurovision Song Contest: Sir Terry Wogan may resign over bloc voting row, Telegraph, 26th May 2008.

  29. Roth, M., & Romeo, J. 1992. Matching product category and country image perceptions: A framework for managing country-of-origin effects. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(3): 477–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sally, D. 2000. A general theory of sympathy, mind-reading, and social interaction, with an application to the prisoners’ dilemma. Theory and Methods, 39(4): 567–634.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Salomon, R., & Shaver, M. 2005. Export and domestic sales: Their interrelationship and determinants. Strategic Management Journal, 26(9): 855–871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Schwartz, S. 2008. The 7 Schwartz cultural value orientation scores for 80 countries. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304715744_The_7_Schwartz_cultural_value_orientation_scores_for_80_countries. Accessed 28 August 2019.

  33. Shenkar, O. 2012. Cultural distance revisited: Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(1): 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Stulz, R., & Williamson, R. 2003. Culture, openness, and finance. Journal of Financial Economics, 70(3): 313–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Tims, A., & Miller, M. 1986. Determinants of attitudes toward foreign countries. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10(4): 471–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. World Values Survey. 2019. http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/wvs.jsp. Accessed 28 August 2019.

  37. WorldBank. 2019. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IC.TAX.PRFT.CP.ZS. Accessed 28 August 2019.

  38. Yair, G. 2018. Douze point: Eurovisions and Euro-divisions in the Eurovision Song Contest—Review of two decades of research. European Journal of Cultural Studies. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1367549418776562.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Professor Mark Peterson (Area Editor) and to three anonymous reviewers for valuable comments on earlier drafts of this paper. We are thankful to Seth Armitage, Jay Dahya, Jo Danbolt, Mark Goergen, Iftekhar Hasan, Frank Hong Liu, Richard Taffler, Ioannis Tsalavoutas and Pauline Weetman for their helpful comments, and also to Gillian MacIver for the manual data collection from the Google Trends website.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antonios Siganos.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Accepted by Mark F. Peterson, Area Editor, 27 August 2019. This article has been with the authors for five revisions.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 42 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Siganos, A., Tabner, I.T. Capturing the role of societal affinity in cross-border mergers with the Eurovision Song Contest. J Int Bus Stud 51, 263–273 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-019-00271-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Eurovision Song Contest
  • societal affinity
  • cross-border mergers