Search

Despite being a key feature of the globalising world since the 1980s, the patterns and relationships between acquirer and target firms in cross‐border mergers and acquisitions (M&As) have only gained attention in recent years. By examining the data between 1998 and 2018 through multinomial logistic regression models, this paper investigates the goodness of match on technological intensity (the closeness of technological capabilities) between acquirer and target firms and the effects of geographical, cultural and institutional proximity in global cross‐border M&As in manufacturing sectors. Our results suggest that firms are more likely to acquire overseas counterparts with similar levels of technological intensity in manufacturing. Moreover, geographical proximity is significant in the M&As of target firms in low‐tech and medium‐low‐tech sectors, while cultural and institutional proximity matter for cross‐border M&As among medium‐high‐tech and high‐tech firms. High‐tech acquirer firms in advanced economies tend to acquire their high‐tech counterparts located in larger economies, while technological intensity is more important for high‐tech acquirer firms based in non‐advanced economies, as the closeness of technological knowledge with potential target firms allows them to generate potential synergies and overcome cultural gaps and foreignness in distant host countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines how latecomer firms manage to achieve industrial upgrading through strategic coupling with global lead firms in automotive production networks. Drawing upon the example of the Guangzhou Automotive Corporation in southern China, this paper theorizes 'cross‐scalar tension' as a key factor to explain why the four cases of strategic coupling between lead firms, the same domestic firm and state ended in different results, from decoupling to a sustainable coupling with local upgrading. This paper contributes to the pertinent literature by demonstrating that cross‐scalar tension is inherent to the nature of global production networks, and unreconciled tension concerning different corporate strategies on technological transfer, localization and product development could lead to decoupling. Importantly, good coordination and matching on corporate strategies between lead and domestic firms could relieve cross‐scalar tensions, thus fostering local industrial upgrading and sustainable strategic coupling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lead firms play a dominant role in the governance structure of conventional global production network (GPN) analyses but this framework is not fully applicable in sectors where (new) regulations, technologies and subsequent market changes have a disruptive effect on its governance structure. This paper proposes an analytical framework to examine how disruptive effects of industrial megatrends in forms of new regulations and technologies and the subsequent market changes could alter the competitive dynamics between lead firms and their tier-I suppliers. Although lead firms are becoming more specialized and highly efficient in specific product segments, they may not always have inter-firm control over their tier-I suppliers. GPN boundaries become more permeable when there is an external shock, such as new regulations or massive shifts in consumer demand, or the entrance of an entirely new lead firm, possibly due to a technological breakthrough or innovative use of existing technologies in a product. This external shock could have disruptive effects on the GPN, from the exit of current lead firms to the entrance of new tier-I suppliers or lead firms. Consequently, a reconstituted GPN with a newly established boundary is then produced. Applying the analytical framework to the automotive industry, it is argued that selected (and new) systems suppliers with expertise in micro-electronics are not only in a prime position to capture the value generated by the increasingly stringent regulatory environment on safety and environmental standards, but also more resilient than the incumbent automakers to three emerging megatrends: electrification, digitalization and autonomous driving. JEL: F23, L14, L20, L62 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conventional approach to examining firm-to-firm governance is unable to disentangle the complexity of strategies and the interplay between different actors with their corresponding rules and routines embedded within an institutional environment where the state plays as a key equity partner in joint ventures (JVs) in transitional economies. This paper proposes an analytical framework of hybrid governance to explain how an alignment of mutual interests between three groups of heterogeneous multi-scalar actors (states, local and foreign firms) facilitates technological upgrading in JVs and the establishment of local production networks in transitional economies. The case of Guangzhou Automobile Group (GAC) demonstrates how the divergent interests of various actors do not necessarily constrain the development of the JV. Under such hybrid governance, whereby the boundaries between public and private property are blurred, GAC's senior managers have been able to navigate and align the multifaceted agendas of various actors: from the profit-maximization demanded by foreign JV partners and industrial development commanded by the central state, to the development of the local capacity and capability for large-scale production and product development and setting up local automotive supply chains required by the local state. Three necessary conditions for technological upgrading in JVs are identified: a 50-50 equity structure, a latecomer in a big market, and the financial imperative of local firm actors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To contribute to the debate on the importance of state vis-à-vis inter-firm competition in regional development, this paper examines a representative dataset of the relocation of manufacturing firms in Guangdong province of China with multinomial logistic regression models. To improve the competitiveness of manufacturing in the Pearl River Delta, the Guangdong government implemented pro-active policies to encourage the relocation of existing manufacturing firms to their designated industrial parks during the 2000s. Although the initial results appear to support the usefulness of relocation policy, further examination reveals its effectiveness depends on the industrial sector and profiles of the relocated firms. In fact, the relocation of large-scale labor-intensive firms is not driven by local government initiatives. The physical proximity of high-technology parks to airports/ports has a bigger impact on the relocation of small-scale locally-funded high-technology firms into designated parks. In the case of locally-funded firms in polluting sectors, they are expanding rather than relocating to designated industrial parks. The empirical evidence indicates the non-binary nature of the industrial relocation policy. The nuances of relocation policy and its multi-scalar effects on relocated firms rejects any simplistic generalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]