Voinea Cosmina Lelia, van Kranenburg Hans
1Open University, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
2Institute for Management Research (IMR), Nijmegen School of Management, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Manag Int Rev. 2018;58(5):705-741. doi: 10.1007/s11575-018-0355-1. Epub 2018 Jul 3.
This study investigates the drivers of pressures from various institutions in the nonmarket environment and the responses of MNEs to these pressures in a host country. By taking a broad institutional perspective, this study pairs and integrates the economic perspective of new institutionalism and the sociological perspective of neo institutionalism with the corporate political strategy perspective. This research provides a systematic review of the drivers underlying pressures from various types of nonmarket institutions that explain the preference of firms to use a transactional or relational strategy to deal with these pressures. The evidence is based on research involving MNEs in the Netherlands. The nonmarket institutions that exert the greatest pressures at the national level pushing MNEs to use transactional more than relational strategies and tactics are regulatory and standards agencies. The pressures of political institutions, interest groups, and the media, in contrast, trigger MNEs to employ relational rather than transactional strategies and tactics.
本研究调查了非市场环境中来自各种机构的压力驱动因素以及跨国公司在东道国对这些压力的反应。通过采用广泛的制度视角，本研究将新制度主义的经济视角、新制度主义的社会学视角与公司政治战略视角进行了配对和整合。本研究对来自各类非市场机构的压力背后的驱动因素进行了系统回顾，这些驱动因素解释了企业倾向于使用交易性或关系性策略来应对这些压力的原因。证据基于对荷兰跨国公司的研究。在国家层面施加最大压力促使跨国公司更多地使用交易性而非关系性策略和战术的非市场机构是监管机构和标准机构。相比之下，政治机构、利益集团和媒体的压力促使跨国公司采用关系性而非交易性策略和战术。
