新兴市场企业出口战略对创新绩效的影响

熊名宁; 汪涛; 吴光胜

PDF(381 KB)

科研管理 ›› 2021, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (8) : 131-140.

论文

新兴市场企业出口战略对创新绩效的影响

熊名宁¹,汪涛^2,3,吴光胜²

作者信息 +

Impact of exporting strategy on innovation performance of emerging market enterprises

Xiong Mingning¹, Wang Tao^2,3, Wu Guangsheng²

Author information +

文章历史 +

摘要

出口是最为普遍的国际化扩张战略，是促进新兴市场企业成长的重要路径。现有研究基于组织学习理论，检验了“出口学习”效应，但较少关注新兴市场企业出口学习结果的差异。本研究通过整合组织学习和注意力基础观理论，基于世界银行2008—2012年对东欧和中亚地区企业经营环境的调查数据，运用Tobit回归，审查了出口战略对创新绩效的影响，并检验了注意力结构化分布对出口学习的调节效应。研究发现：组织注意力的结构化分布，导致了新兴市场企业出口学习结果的异质性。具体而言：（1）新兴市场企业出口战略能够提升其产品和流程创新绩效；（2）国有所有制、财务冗余会提升出口战略对流程创新绩效的正向影响；网络营销能力会提升出口战略对产品创新绩效的正向影响。

Abstract

Exporting is the most common international expansion strategy and an important path to promote the growth of emerging market enterprises. Existing researches on the relationship between exporting and innovation based on the situation of developed countries. However, few studies focus on the effects of “learning-by-exporting（LBE）” in the developing countries. Due to the different level of industrial development, whether the conclusions of advanced economies can be directly applied to emerging economies is worthy to be discussed further. Thus, in this article, we focus on the heterogeneous relationship between exporting and innovation based on the emerging economies perspective. It not only provide theoretical reference, but also provide practical guidance for emerging market enterprises.
The existing research on the impact of export strategies on innovation performance is relatively inadequate. On the one hand, the prior research pay more attention on the national or industrial level, yet little research focus on the firm level. The lack of research at the micro level may mislead the firm′s strategy in international practice. On the other hand, existing research focuses on the productivity. It has not test what kind of knowledge are the firms learned and how to learn in export markets. Meanwhile, previous studies pay less attention to the mechanism of exporting on production efficiency. Therefore, the question of why there are significant differences in the results of LBE is difficult to understand. Moreover, existing research implicit enterprises can automatically realize LBE by simply contact with external novel knowledge, thus neglecting the organization′s initiative in the learning process.
The LBE effect is rooted in organizational learning theory: learning occurs requires the firm to consciously absorb new knowledge in exporting activities rather than from the exporting activity itself. Knowledge is a multi-dimensional concept, including product innovation and process innovation. Existing research also shows that firms will selectively absorb external knowledge based on their own organizational strategy. Therefore, it is difficult to explain and understand the heterogeneity in LBE if researches ignore the selectivity of firms in the absorption of knowledge. Although organizational learning theory has recognized the selectivity of external knowledge absorption and application processes, it still cannot explain the difference in the accumulation of original knowledge when firms expand internationally through exporting. The attention-based review（ABV）is a good complement to the shortcomings of organizational learning theory. ABV considers that the organization′s selective absorption of knowledge depends on the organization′s attention on different issues. The organization′s attention structure controls the organization′s issues and the value and rationality of the answers to the questions, thus affecting the distribution of attention. At the organizational level, this structured distribution is primarily determined by the organization′s rules of the game and organizational resources. Therefore, this paper will integrates the organizational learning theory and ABV to explore the heterogeneous impact of exporting strategies on innovation performance for emerging market enterprise.
This study is based on Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey (BEEPS) panel data. From the fourth round (2008-2009), the independent variables, control variables, and moderator variables are extracted; and then the fifth round of dependent variable data is matched. According to the industry, the observations of non-manufacturing and foreign-invested shares accounted for more than 50%, and 1083 samples were obtained. On this basis, this study also deletes samples with missing values and outliers for some variables. Finally, 1015 sample data were obtained. Tobit regression was selected for data test.
The study found that the structural distribution of organizational attention led to the heterogeneity of the LBE outcomes for emerging market enterprise. Specifically: (1) Emerging market enterprise′s exporting strategy can enhance its product and process innovation performance; (2) State ownership and financial slack will enhance the positive effect of export strategy on process innovation performance; e-marketing ability will enhance the positive effect of export strategy on product innovation performance.
Our research contributes to existing literature in several ways. This study further examines the moderation mechanism of managers′ attention in LBE, indicating that it is not an international expansion activity itself; it is a strategic decision at the relevant organizational level, which is the key to achieve the value of resources and knowledge gained in the international market. By integrating the theory of organizational learning and ABV, it reveals the heterogeneity of LBE. It is confirmed that in different situations, emerging market firms have different needs and motivations for product and process innovation. Previous literature has emphasized that firms have different preferences for product and process innovation in the context of industry dynamics. This study further shows that the organization′s attentional structured distribution will affect the company′s preference for specific innovation knowledge in the international market, and then affect the relationship between exporting strategy and innovation performance. Therefore, it can be inferred that this learning difference is not only due to the impact of knowledge spillovers in the international market, but also depends on the decision-making of managers for the emerging market enterprises. The findings help to better understand the complex relationship between exporting strategy and innovation performance.
There are several implications that derive from this study. For international business managers: Firstly, it is necessary to pay attention to relevant innovation knowledge in the international market. Secondly, it is necessary to consciously absorb innovative knowledge that is more closely matched to strategic needs. Due to the complexity of information in the international market, managers′ attention is relatively scarce. In order to make better use of the new knowledge in the international market, on the one hand, it is necessary to rationally allocate attention resources; on the other hand, it is necessary to better understand the role of organizational game rules and organizational resources in the organization to enhance the innovation output.
Of course, the present research also has its limitations. First, limited to data availability, this article cannot make a more direct measurement of the organization′s learning process. Future research can be conducted through a survey method. Second, this study reveals the heterogeneity of LBE from the perspective of attention-based review. However, there may be other heterogeneity dimensions. Finally, this study can be further tested in other emerging economies such as China, India, and Brazil.

导出引用

熊名宁汪涛吴光胜. 新兴市场企业出口战略对创新绩效的影响[J]. 科研管理. 2021, 42(8): 131-140

Xiong Mingning, Wang Tao, Wu Guangsheng. Impact of exporting strategy on innovation performance of emerging market enterprises[J]. Science Research Management. 2021, 42(8): 131-140

参考文献

[1]SALOMON R M, SHAVER J M. Learning by exporting: New insights from examining firm innovation[J]. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 2005,14(2):431-460.

[2] CHEN J, SOUSA C M P, HE X. The determinants of export performance: A review of the literature 2006-2014[J]. International Marketing Review, 2016,33(5) : 626-670.

[3]王明成. 出口与创新能力的Granger因果关系检验——基于中国1985年～2008年的时间序列分析[J]. 经济经纬, 2011(1): 48-53.

WANG Mingcheng. Granger causality test of export and innovation capability——Based on the analysis of the time series data in China during 1985 ～ 2008[J]. Economic Survey, 2011(1): 48-53.

[4] 寇蔻, 史世伟. 德国创新体系对区域创新绩效的影响[J]. 欧洲研究, 2017,(4): 115-135. KOU kou, SHI Shiwei. Effects of Germanys exports on innovation: An analysis based on export enterprises’data[J]. Chinese Journal of European Studies, 2017,(4): 115-135.

[5]亢梅玲, 陈安筠, 李涛. 出口学习效应与企业创新[J].研究与发展管理, 2016, 28(2): 23-32. KANG Meiling, CHEN Anyun, LI Tao. Learning-by-exporting and firm innovation[J]. R&D Management, 2016, 28(2): 23-32.

[6]姚相如, 马荣康, 刘凤朝. 出口深广度是否影响了出口企业的创新能力?[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2016, 37(6): 55-65.

YAO Xiangru, MA Rongkang, LIU Fengchao. The effect of export breadth and depth on enterprises' innovation capability[J].Science of Science and Management of S. & T., 2016, 37(6): 55-65.

[7] 李长青, 李鑫，逯建. 出口影响企业绿色生产率的门槛效应[J]. 科研管理, 2018, 39(3): 59-68.

LI Changqing, LI Xin, LU Jian. Threshold effect of export on enterprises’ green productivity[J].Science Research Management, 2018, 39(3): 59-68.

[8] 耿强,吕大国. 出口学习、研发效应与企业生产率提升——来自中国制造业企业的经验证据[J]. 科研管理, 2015, 36(6): 137-144.

GENG Qiang, LYU Daguo. Learning by exporting,R&D effects and firm productivity upgrading—the evidence from Chinese manufacturing firms[J]. Science Research Management, 2015, 36(6): 137-144.

[9] 桑瑞聪, 范剑勇. 出口学习效应再验证——基于产品和市场的二维视角[J]. 国际贸易问题, 2017,(4): 38-48.

SANG Ruicong, FAN Jianyong. Retest of learning-by-exporting effect: An empirical analysis based on product and market perspective[J]. Journal of International Trade, 2017,(4): 38-48.

[10] 吕大国, 沈坤荣, 简泽. “出口学习效应”的再检验:基于贸易类型的实证分析[J]. 经济评论, 2016,(2): 124-136.

LYU Daguo, SHEN Kunrong, JIAN Ze. Retest of learning－by－exporting effect:An empirical analysis based on trade type[J]. Economic Review, 2016,(2): 124-136.

[11] 项松林, 马卫红. 出口企业具有学习效应吗?——基于中国企业微观数据的经验分析[J]. 世界经济研究, 2013,(10): 37-42.

XIANG Songlin, MA Weihong. Whether the export enterprises have learning-by-exporting effect: An empirical analysis based on China's microfirms data[J]. World Economy Study, 2013,(10): 37-42.

[12] SALOMON R, JIN B. Do leading or lagging firms learn more from exporting?[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2010,31(10):1088-1113.

[13] GOLOVKO E, VALENTINI G. Selective learning-by-exporting: Firm size and product versus process innovation[J]. Global Strategy Journal, 2014,4(3):161-180.

[14] TSE C H, YU L, ZHU J. A multimediation model of learning by exporting: Analysis of export-induced productivity gains[J]. Journal of Management, 2015,43(7):2118-2146.

[15]张杰, 李勇, 刘志彪. 出口促进中国企业生产率提高吗?——来自中国本土制造业企业的经验证据:1999～2003[J]. 管理世界, 2009,(12): 11-26.

ZHANG Jie, LI Yong, LIU Zhibiao. Does export promote the productivity of Chinese enterprises?——Evidence from Chinese local manufacturing enterprises: 1999~2003[J]. Management World, 2009,(12): 11-26.

[16] 王思文, 管新帅, 刘雪强. 出口、创新与生产率:基于异质性企业的联合决策模型[J]. 经济评论, 2018,(05): 75-89+105.

WANG Siwen, GUAN Xinshuai, LIU Xueqiang. Export,innovation and productivity:A joint decision model on heterogeneous firms[J]. Economic Review, 2018,(05): 75-89+105.

[17] ZAHRA S A, IRELAND R D, HITT M A. International expansion by new venture firms: International diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning, and performance[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2000,43(5):925-950.

[18] OCASIO W. Towards an attention-based view of the firm[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1997,18(S1):187-206.

[19] GROSSMAN G M, HELPMAN E. Innovation and growth in the global economy[M]. MIT Press Books, 1991,1(2):323-324.

[20]王方, 陈继勇. 跨国公司总部和海外子公司之间的知识转移——基于双缺口模型的构建[J]. 珞珈管理评论, 2018,26(3): 17-34.

WANG Fang, CHEN Jiyong. Knowledge transfer between MNC's headquarter and overseas subsidiaries:A two-gap model[J]. Luojia Management Review, 2018,26(3): 17-34.

[21] SILVA A, AFONSO O, AFRICANO A P. Learning-by-exporting: What we know and what we would like to know[J]. The International Trade Journal, 2012,26(3):255-288.

[22]余官胜. 我国出口贸易和技术创新关系实证研究——基于联立方程组[J]. 科学学研究, 2011, 29(2): 300-305.

YU Guansheng. An empirical study of the relationship between China's export trade and technological innovation——Based on simultaneous equations[J].Studies in Science of Science, 2011, 29(2): 300-305.

[23] HAMBRICK D C, MASON P A. Upper echelons:The organization as a reflection of its top managers[J]. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 1984,9(2):193-206.

[24] SIMON H A. A behavioral model of rational choice[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1955,69(1):99-118.

[25]张杰, 张帆, 陈志远. 出口与企业生产率关系的新检验:中国经验[J]. 世界经济, 2016, 39(6): 54-76.

ZHANG Jie, ZHANG Fan, CHEN Zhiyuan. A re-examination of the relationship between export and productivity:New micro evidence from China[J]. The Journal of World Economy, 2016, 39(6): 54-76.

[26] MACGARVIE M. Do firms learn from international trade[J]. Review of Economics & Statistics, 2006,88(1):46-60.

[27] BECHEIKH N, LANDRY R,AMARA N. Lessons from innovation empirical studies in the manufacturing sector: A systematic review of the literature from 1993–2003[J]. Technovation, 2006,26(5):644-664.

[28] MARZI G, DABIć M, DAIM T, et al. Product and process innovation in manufacturing firms: A 30-year bibliometric analysis[J]. Scientometrics, 2017,113(2):1-32.

[29] DAMANPOUR F. An integration of research findings of effects of firm size and market competition on product and process innovations[J]. British Journal of Management, 2010,21(4):996–1010.

[30] VERNON R. International investment and international trade in the product cycle[J]. International Executive, 1966,80(4):307-324.

[31] PACK H, WEATPHAL L E. Industrial strategy and technological change : Theory versus reality[J]. Journal of Development Economics, 1986,22(1):87-128.

[32] SALOMON R M. Spillovers to foreign market participants: Assessing the impact of export strategies on innovative productivity[J]. Strategic Organization, 2006,4(2):135-164.

[33] HITT M A, HOSKISSON R E, IRELAND R D. A mid-range theory of the interactive effects of international and product diversification on innovation and performance[J]. Journal of Management, 1994,20(2):297-326.

[34] HILL C, HOSKISSON R. Strategy and structure in the multiproduct firm[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1987, 12(2): 331-341.

[35] HITT M A, HOSKISSON R E, KIM H. International diversification: Effects on innovation and firm performance in product-diversified firms[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1997,40(4):767-798.

[36] SUGHEIR J, PHAN P H, HASAN I. Diversification and innovation revisited: An absorptive capacity view of technological knowledge creation[J]. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 2012,59(4):530-539.

[37] NONAKA I. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation[J]. Organization Science, 1994,5(1):14-37.

[38] CHEN V Z, LI J, SHAPIRO D M, et al. Ownership structure and innovation: An emerging market perspective[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 2014,31(1):1-24.

[39] ZHOU K Z, GAO G Y, ZHAO H. State ownership and firm innovation in China: An integrated view of institutional and efficiency logics[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2017, 62(2):375-404.

[40] CHILD J, RODRIGUES S B. The internationalization of Chinese firms: A case for theoretical extension?[J]. Management & Organization Review, 2005,1(3):381-410.

[41] LACHENMAIER S, ROTTMANN H. Effects of innovation on employment: A dynamic panel analysis[J]. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 2011,29(2):210-220.

[42] WANG C, HONG J, KAFOURS M, et al. Exploring the role of government involvement in outward FDI from emerging economies[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 2012,43(7):655-676.

[43] HUBER G P. Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures[J]. Organization Science, 1991,2(1):88-115.

[44] NOHRIA N,GULATI R. Is slack good or bad for innovation?[J]. Academy of Management Journal,1996,39(5):1245-1264.

[45] BOURGEOIS L J, SINGH J V. Organizational slack and political behavior among top management teams[J]. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 1983, (1):43-47.

[46] SINGH J V. Performance, slack, and risk taking in organizational decision making[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1986,29(3):562-585.

[47] KIM H, KIM H, LEE P M. Ownership structure and the relationship between financial slack and R&D Investments: Evidence from Korean firms[J]. Organization Science, 2008,19(3):404-418.

[48] LEVINTHAL D, MARCH J G. A model of adaptive organizational search[J]. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 1981,2(4):307-333.

[49] MAKADOK R. Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent creation[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2001,22(5):387-401.

[50] TRAINOR K J, RAPP A, BEITELSPACHER L S, et al. Integrating information technology and marketing: An examination of the drivers and outcomes of e-marketing capability[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2011,40(1):162-174.

[51] JAMES S D, LEIBLEIN M J, LU S. How firms capture value from their innovations[J]. Journal of Management, 2013,39(5):1123-1155.

[52] LUO Y, BU J. How valuable is information and communication technology? A study of emerging economy enterprises[J]. Journal of World Business, 2016,51(2):200-211.

[53] CHEN C J, HUANG Y F. Creative workforce density, organizational slack, and innovation performance[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2010,63(4):411-417.

[54] HOSKISSON R E, HiITT M A. Strategic control systems and relative R&D investment in large multiproduct firms[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1988,9(6):605-621.

[55] LUO Y, TUNG R L. International expansion of emerging market enterprises: A springboard perspective[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 2007,38(4):481-498.

[56] COHEN W M, KLEPPER S. A reprise of size and R & D[J]. Economic Journal, 1996,106(437):925-951.