基于二次创新理论的吉利跨国并购案例研究
|
摘要
后发企业技术寻求型跨国并购发展迅速,但成功实现并后整合且获得技术升级的并不多见。本研究基于二次创新理论构建全球二次创新动态模型,采用单案例纵向研究方法,深度剖析了后发企业是如何在高度不确定的国际制度环境中利用组织学习打破已有技术范式和固有经验惯例实现技术追赶与超越的。研究发现:吉利集团凭借三次互补资产寻求型跨国并购,利用组织内外部合法性的杠杆效应保障且撬动了并后组织学习效率,成功实现了后发者的追赶与超越追赶。
Faced with the rapid development of global economy,diversified customer needs and rapid changes in technology,it is not enough for latecomer firms of developing countries to rely solely on technology introduction to improve their competitiveness and narrow their technological gap between leader firms of developed countries. Through cross-border mergers and acquisitions( M&A) leader firms from develop countries to overcome industry entry barriers,conducting the globally secondary innovation has increasingly become the only way for latecomer firms to participate in international competition. However,integration road for latecomer firms is not smooth,because of the existence of difference in management manners,institutions and cultures. McKinsey statistics show that the rate of cross-border M&A failures of Chinese firms in the past 20 years is as high as 67%. For instance,Lenovo did not acquire key technologies after acquiring IBM's PC business and Motorola,leading to its economic performance falls sharply. TCL acquisition of Germany Schneider and France Thomson has not achieved good integration,with a loss of 4 billion yuan in three years. SAIC acquisition of South Korea's Ssangyong lost more than 3 billion yuan after 5 years and was forced to file for bankruptcy protection. While a group of Chinese firms represented by Geely Group via successfully cross-border M&A integration achieve a win-win. How these latecomer firms break the failure curse of cross-border M&A is not only a new hot spot in existing literature,but also a difficult issue for firms' managerial practice,and also a core issue of this research.The technological catch-up of latecomer firms is one of the important issues in the international business field. Mathews' LLL( Linkage-Leverage-Learning) theory emphasizes that latecomer firms can accelerate their internationalization processes through organizational changes,and can obtain a dominant position in the international market through strategic changes,but it ignores the importance of technological change. Springboard perspective thinks that latecomer firms can gain the strategic resources needed for their own developments through the pre-set global strategic springboard,and can reduce the restrictions from home institution and home market,but these springboard activities have obvious revolving and recursive characteristics,making the overseas operations of latecomer firms difficultly. Compared with the LLL theory and the springboard perspective,although the existing technological catch-upliterature for latecomer firms,to the extent that can explain technological catch-up issues of latecomer firms,there are still two limitations. First,the extant technological catch-up literature is based on newly industrialized countries,whose business development paths are different from those in developing countries. Second,existing literature rarely involve the context for the cross-border M&A of latecomer firms.While the secondary innovation theory has more explanatory for the organizational learning models and technological catch-up of latecomer firms. Although previous studies based on home country context's technology-introduction have been widely recognized,researches focused on the cross-border M&A of latecomer firms need to be further expanded. Technology-seeking cross-border M&A of latecomer firms develops rapidly,but it is rare for latecomer firms to successfully achieve integration and access the upgrading of technology. Therefore,this study based on thesecondary innovation theory builds the dynamic model of global secondary innovation,and employing the single case longitudinal research approach,deeply explores how does the latecomer firm under highly uncertain international institution environment utilize organizational learning to break through the extant technological paradigms and inherent experience and inertia further achieving the technological catch-up even surpassing catch-up.This study finds that Geely Group based on three complementary asset-seeking cross-border M&As,exploiting the leverage effect of internal and external organizational legitimacy to lever and ensure the efficiency of organizational learning,successfully achieves the technological catch-up and surpassing catch-up of the latecomer firm.
Faced with the rapid development of global economy,diversified customer needs and rapid changes in technology,it is not enough for latecomer firms of developing countries to rely solely on technology introduction to improve their competitiveness and narrow their technological gap between leader firms of developed countries. Through cross-border mergers and acquisitions( M&A) leader firms from develop countries to overcome industry entry barriers,conducting the globally secondary innovation has increasingly become the only way for latecomer firms to participate in international competition. However,integration road for latecomer firms is not smooth,because of the existence of difference in management manners,institutions and cultures. McKinsey statistics show that the rate of cross-border M&A failures of Chinese firms in the past 20 years is as high as 67%. For instance,Lenovo did not acquire key technologies after acquiring IBM's PC business and Motorola,leading to its economic performance falls sharply. TCL acquisition of Germany Schneider and France Thomson has not achieved good integration,with a loss of 4 billion yuan in three years. SAIC acquisition of South Korea's Ssangyong lost more than 3 billion yuan after 5 years and was forced to file for bankruptcy protection. While a group of Chinese firms represented by Geely Group via successfully cross-border M&A integration achieve a win-win. How these latecomer firms break the failure curse of cross-border M&A is not only a new hot spot in existing literature,but also a difficult issue for firms' managerial practice,and also a core issue of this research.The technological catch-up of latecomer firms is one of the important issues in the international business field. Mathews' LLL( Linkage-Leverage-Learning) theory emphasizes that latecomer firms can accelerate their internationalization processes through organizational changes,and can obtain a dominant position in the international market through strategic changes,but it ignores the importance of technological change. Springboard perspective thinks that latecomer firms can gain the strategic resources needed for their own developments through the pre-set global strategic springboard,and can reduce the restrictions from home institution and home market,but these springboard activities have obvious revolving and recursive characteristics,making the overseas operations of latecomer firms difficultly. Compared with the LLL theory and the springboard perspective,although the existing technological catch-upliterature for latecomer firms,to the extent that can explain technological catch-up issues of latecomer firms,there are still two limitations. First,the extant technological catch-up literature is based on newly industrialized countries,whose business development paths are different from those in developing countries. Second,existing literature rarely involve the context for the cross-border M&A of latecomer firms.While the secondary innovation theory has more explanatory for the organizational learning models and technological catch-up of latecomer firms. Although previous studies based on home country context's technology-introduction have been widely recognized,researches focused on the cross-border M&A of latecomer firms need to be further expanded. Technology-seeking cross-border M&A of latecomer firms develops rapidly,but it is rare for latecomer firms to successfully achieve integration and access the upgrading of technology. Therefore,this study based on thesecondary innovation theory builds the dynamic model of global secondary innovation,and employing the single case longitudinal research approach,deeply explores how does the latecomer firm under highly uncertain international institution environment utilize organizational learning to break through the extant technological paradigms and inherent experience and inertia further achieving the technological catch-up even surpassing catch-up.This study finds that Geely Group based on three complementary asset-seeking cross-border M&As,exploiting the leverage effect of internal and external organizational legitimacy to lever and ensure the efficiency of organizational learning,successfully achieves the technological catch-up and surpassing catch-up of the latecomer firm.
引文
[1]吴晓波.二次创新的进化过程[J].科研管理,1995,16(2):27-36.Wu Xiaobo. The evolutionary process of secondary innovation[J]. Science Research Management,1995,16(2):27-36.
[2] Wu,Xiaobo,Rufei Ma,Yongjiang Shi. How do latecomer firms capture value from disruptive technologies? A secondary business-model innovation perspective[J]. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,2010,57(1):51-62.
[3]钟昌标,刘伟.企业国际化与绩效关系:一个文献综述[J].国际商务研究,2016,37(3):87-96.Zhong Changbiao,Liu Wei. Firm’s internationalization and performance relationship:A review[J]. International Business Research,2016,37(3):87-96.
[4] Mathews,John A. Dragon multinationals:New players in21st century globalization[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,2006,23(1):05-27.
[5] Luo,Yadong,Rosalie L. Tung. International expansion of emerging market enterprises:A spring board perspective[J]. Journal of International Business Studies,2007,38(4):481-498.
[6] Kim,Linsu. Stages of development of industrial technology in a developing country:A model[J]. Research Policy,1980,9(3):254-277.
[7] Mathews,John A.,Dong-Sung Cho. Combinative capabilities and organizational learning in latecomer firms:The case of the Korean semiconductor industry[J]. Journal of World Business,1999,34:139-156.
[8] Mathews,John A. Competitive advantages of the latecomer firm:A resource-based account of industrial catch up strategies[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,2002,19(4):467-488.
[9] Chang Sea-Jin,Chi-Nien Chung,Ishtiaq P. Mahmood.When and how does business group affiliation promote firm innovation? A tale of two emerging economies[J]. Organization Science,2006,17(5):637-656.
[10]吴晓波.二次创新的周期与企业组织学习模式[J].管理世界,1995(3):168-173.Wu Xiaobo. The cycle of secondary innovation and firm’s innovational learning model[J]. Management World,1995(3):168-173.
[11] Forstenlechner,Ingo,Kamel Mellahi. Gaining legitimacy through hiring local workforce at a premium[J]. Journal of World Business,2011,46:455-461.
[12] Marano,Valentina,Pete Tashman. MNE/NGO partnerships and the legitimacy of the firm[J]. International Business Review,2012,21:1122-1130.
[13] Henisz,Witold J.,Sinziana Dorobantu,Lite J. Nartey.Spinning gold:The financial returns to stakeholder engagement[J]. Strategic Management Journal,2014,35(12):1727-1748.
[14] Ashforth Blake E.,Barrie W. Gibbs. The double-edge of organizational legitimation[J]. Organization Science,1990,1(2):177-194.
[15] Zimmerman,Monica A.,Gerald J. Zeitz. Beyond survival:Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy[J]. Academy of Management Review,2002,27(3):414-431.
[16] Rao,Raghunath Singh,Rajesh K. Chandy,Jaideep C. Prabhu. The fruits of legitimacy:Why some new ventures gain more from innovation than others[J]. Journal of Marketing,2008,72(4):58-75.
[17] Dyer Jr,W. Gibb,Alan L. Wilkins. Better stories,not better constructs,To generate better theory:A rejoinder to Eisenhardt[J]. Academy of Management Review,1991,16(3):613-619.
[18] Yin,Robert K. Case study research:Design and methods(3rd ed)[M]. Thousand Oaks,CA:Sage,2003.
[19] Pettigrew,Andrew M. Longitudinal field research on change:Theory and practice[J]. Organization Science,1990,1(3):267-292.
[20] Yin,Robert K. Case study research:Design and methods(2nd ed)[M],Beverly Hills,CA:Sage Publishing,1994.
[21]吴晓波,马如飞,毛茜敏.基于二次创新动态过程的组织学习模式演进—杭氧1996-2008纵向案例研究[J].管理世界,2009(2):152-163.Wu Xiaobo,Ma Rufei,Mao Ximin. The organizational learning model evolution based on the dynamic process of secondary innovation-A longitudinal case study on Hangyang in 1996-2008[J]. Management World,2009(2):152-163.
[22]彭新敏,吴晓波,吴东.基于二次创新动态过程的企业网络与组织学习平衡模式演化[J].管理世界,2011(4):138-149.Peng Xinmin,Wu Xiaobo,Wu Dong. The evolution of enterprise networks based on the dynamic process of the second innovation and the evolution of the balance model of the organizational learning-A case study on Haitian in 1971-2010[J]. Management World,2011(4):138-149.
[23] Meyer,Klaus E.,Yuan Ding,Jing Li,Hua Zhang. Overcoming distrust:How state owned enterprises adapt their foreign entries to institutional pressures abroad[J]. Journal of International Business Studies,2014,45:1005-1028.
[24] Glaser,Barney G.,Anselm L. Strauss,Elizabeth Strutzel.The discovery of grounded theory[M], Weidenfeld and Nicholson,London,1968.
[25] Eisenhardt,Kathleen M. Building theories from case study research[J]. Academy of Management Review,1989,14:532-550.
[26] Eisenhardt,Kathleen M.,Melissa E. Graebner. Theory building from cases:Opportunities and challenges[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2007,50:25-32.
[27] Rodrigues,Suzana,John Child. Co-evolution in an institutionalized environment[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2003,40:2137-2162.
[28] Dieleman,Marleen,Wladimir M. Sachs. Co-evolution of institutions and corporations in emerging economies:How the Salim Group morphed into an institution of Suharto’s crony regime[J].Journal of Management Studies,2008,45:1274-1300.
[29] Laamanen,Tomi,Johan Wallin. Cognitive dynamics of capability development paths[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2009,46:950-981.
[30] Ozcan,Pinar,Kathleen M. Eisenhardt. Origin of alliance portfolios:Entrepreneurs,network strategies and firm performance[J]. The Academy of Management Journal,2009,52:246-279.
[31] Elsbach,Kimberly D. Managing organizational legitimacy in the California cattle industry:The construction and effectiveness of verbal accounts[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1994,39(1):57-88.
[32] Henderson,Rebecca,Iain Cockburn. Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research[J].Strategic Management Journal,1994,15:63-84.
[33] Henderson,Rebecca M.,Kim B. Clark. Architectural innovation:The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1990,35:9-30.
[34] Lee,Keun,and Chaisung Lim. Technological regimes,Catchingup and leapfrogging:Findings from the Korean industries[J].Research Policy,2001,30(3):459-483.
[35] Narula,Rajneesh,Bert M. Sadowski. Technological catchup and strategic technology partnering in developing countries[J]. International Journal of Technology Management,2002,23(6):599-617.
[36] Mu Qing,Keun Lee. Knowledge diffusion,market segmentation and technological catch-up:The case of the telecommunication industry in China[J]. Research Policy,2005,34(6):759-783.
[37]吴先明,苏志文.将跨国并购作为技术追赶的杠杆:动态能力视角[J].管理世界,2014(4):146-163.Wu Xianming,Su Zhiwen. M&A as the leverage of technological catch-up:The dynamic capability perspective[J].Management World,2014(4):146-163.
[2] Wu,Xiaobo,Rufei Ma,Yongjiang Shi. How do latecomer firms capture value from disruptive technologies? A secondary business-model innovation perspective[J]. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,2010,57(1):51-62.
[3]钟昌标,刘伟.企业国际化与绩效关系:一个文献综述[J].国际商务研究,2016,37(3):87-96.Zhong Changbiao,Liu Wei. Firm’s internationalization and performance relationship:A review[J]. International Business Research,2016,37(3):87-96.
[4] Mathews,John A. Dragon multinationals:New players in21st century globalization[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,2006,23(1):05-27.
[5] Luo,Yadong,Rosalie L. Tung. International expansion of emerging market enterprises:A spring board perspective[J]. Journal of International Business Studies,2007,38(4):481-498.
[6] Kim,Linsu. Stages of development of industrial technology in a developing country:A model[J]. Research Policy,1980,9(3):254-277.
[7] Mathews,John A.,Dong-Sung Cho. Combinative capabilities and organizational learning in latecomer firms:The case of the Korean semiconductor industry[J]. Journal of World Business,1999,34:139-156.
[8] Mathews,John A. Competitive advantages of the latecomer firm:A resource-based account of industrial catch up strategies[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,2002,19(4):467-488.
[9] Chang Sea-Jin,Chi-Nien Chung,Ishtiaq P. Mahmood.When and how does business group affiliation promote firm innovation? A tale of two emerging economies[J]. Organization Science,2006,17(5):637-656.
[10]吴晓波.二次创新的周期与企业组织学习模式[J].管理世界,1995(3):168-173.Wu Xiaobo. The cycle of secondary innovation and firm’s innovational learning model[J]. Management World,1995(3):168-173.
[11] Forstenlechner,Ingo,Kamel Mellahi. Gaining legitimacy through hiring local workforce at a premium[J]. Journal of World Business,2011,46:455-461.
[12] Marano,Valentina,Pete Tashman. MNE/NGO partnerships and the legitimacy of the firm[J]. International Business Review,2012,21:1122-1130.
[13] Henisz,Witold J.,Sinziana Dorobantu,Lite J. Nartey.Spinning gold:The financial returns to stakeholder engagement[J]. Strategic Management Journal,2014,35(12):1727-1748.
[14] Ashforth Blake E.,Barrie W. Gibbs. The double-edge of organizational legitimation[J]. Organization Science,1990,1(2):177-194.
[15] Zimmerman,Monica A.,Gerald J. Zeitz. Beyond survival:Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy[J]. Academy of Management Review,2002,27(3):414-431.
[16] Rao,Raghunath Singh,Rajesh K. Chandy,Jaideep C. Prabhu. The fruits of legitimacy:Why some new ventures gain more from innovation than others[J]. Journal of Marketing,2008,72(4):58-75.
[17] Dyer Jr,W. Gibb,Alan L. Wilkins. Better stories,not better constructs,To generate better theory:A rejoinder to Eisenhardt[J]. Academy of Management Review,1991,16(3):613-619.
[18] Yin,Robert K. Case study research:Design and methods(3rd ed)[M]. Thousand Oaks,CA:Sage,2003.
[19] Pettigrew,Andrew M. Longitudinal field research on change:Theory and practice[J]. Organization Science,1990,1(3):267-292.
[20] Yin,Robert K. Case study research:Design and methods(2nd ed)[M],Beverly Hills,CA:Sage Publishing,1994.
[21]吴晓波,马如飞,毛茜敏.基于二次创新动态过程的组织学习模式演进—杭氧1996-2008纵向案例研究[J].管理世界,2009(2):152-163.Wu Xiaobo,Ma Rufei,Mao Ximin. The organizational learning model evolution based on the dynamic process of secondary innovation-A longitudinal case study on Hangyang in 1996-2008[J]. Management World,2009(2):152-163.
[22]彭新敏,吴晓波,吴东.基于二次创新动态过程的企业网络与组织学习平衡模式演化[J].管理世界,2011(4):138-149.Peng Xinmin,Wu Xiaobo,Wu Dong. The evolution of enterprise networks based on the dynamic process of the second innovation and the evolution of the balance model of the organizational learning-A case study on Haitian in 1971-2010[J]. Management World,2011(4):138-149.
[23] Meyer,Klaus E.,Yuan Ding,Jing Li,Hua Zhang. Overcoming distrust:How state owned enterprises adapt their foreign entries to institutional pressures abroad[J]. Journal of International Business Studies,2014,45:1005-1028.
[24] Glaser,Barney G.,Anselm L. Strauss,Elizabeth Strutzel.The discovery of grounded theory[M], Weidenfeld and Nicholson,London,1968.
[25] Eisenhardt,Kathleen M. Building theories from case study research[J]. Academy of Management Review,1989,14:532-550.
[26] Eisenhardt,Kathleen M.,Melissa E. Graebner. Theory building from cases:Opportunities and challenges[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2007,50:25-32.
[27] Rodrigues,Suzana,John Child. Co-evolution in an institutionalized environment[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2003,40:2137-2162.
[28] Dieleman,Marleen,Wladimir M. Sachs. Co-evolution of institutions and corporations in emerging economies:How the Salim Group morphed into an institution of Suharto’s crony regime[J].Journal of Management Studies,2008,45:1274-1300.
[29] Laamanen,Tomi,Johan Wallin. Cognitive dynamics of capability development paths[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2009,46:950-981.
[30] Ozcan,Pinar,Kathleen M. Eisenhardt. Origin of alliance portfolios:Entrepreneurs,network strategies and firm performance[J]. The Academy of Management Journal,2009,52:246-279.
[31] Elsbach,Kimberly D. Managing organizational legitimacy in the California cattle industry:The construction and effectiveness of verbal accounts[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1994,39(1):57-88.
[32] Henderson,Rebecca,Iain Cockburn. Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research[J].Strategic Management Journal,1994,15:63-84.
[33] Henderson,Rebecca M.,Kim B. Clark. Architectural innovation:The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1990,35:9-30.
[34] Lee,Keun,and Chaisung Lim. Technological regimes,Catchingup and leapfrogging:Findings from the Korean industries[J].Research Policy,2001,30(3):459-483.
[35] Narula,Rajneesh,Bert M. Sadowski. Technological catchup and strategic technology partnering in developing countries[J]. International Journal of Technology Management,2002,23(6):599-617.
[36] Mu Qing,Keun Lee. Knowledge diffusion,market segmentation and technological catch-up:The case of the telecommunication industry in China[J]. Research Policy,2005,34(6):759-783.
[37]吴先明,苏志文.将跨国并购作为技术追赶的杠杆:动态能力视角[J].管理世界,2014(4):146-163.Wu Xianming,Su Zhiwen. M&A as the leverage of technological catch-up:The dynamic capability perspective[J].Management World,2014(4):146-163.