Lost in Translation - Empirical Evidence for Liability of Foreignness as Barriers to Knowledge Spillovers

Entering host country networks of knowledge flows (new competencies, innovative technologies, and lead-market knowledge) is a major rationale of multinational firms for investing abroad. Foreign firms find it difficult to overcome cultural and social barriers which make their foreign engagements more strenuous and error prone (liability of foreignness). In our analysis we break down the complex mechanisms behind knowledge spillovers and identify conceptual links with liability of foreignness. We hypothesise that liability of foreignness acts as a filter for foreign firms, restricting their access to host country knowledge. We use a broad sample of roughly 1,000 firms in Germany to empirically test the existence of liabilities of foreignness in leveraging knowledge spillovers. Our particular setting allows us to distinguish between upstream (suppliers, academia) and downstream (customers) liabilities of foreignness. We find that multinational firms can compete on an equal footing with host country rivals when it comes to generating impulses for innovations from suppliers and academia. They are significantly challenged by liabilities of foreignness, though, where customers are involved. We suggest that the frictional losses from a lack of social and cultural embeddedness (liability of foreignness) in the host country are especially relevant when promising lead customers have to be identified and their tacit and often unarticulated impulses have to be transferred, understood and prioritised.

Lost in Translation: Empirical Evidence for Liability of Foreignness as a Barrier to Knowledge Spillovers

Entering host country networks of knowledge flows (new competencies, innovative technologies, and lead-market knowledge) is a major rationale of multinational firms for investing abroad. Foreign firms find it difficult to overcome cultural and social barriers which make their foreign engagements more strenuous and error prone (liability of foreignness). In our analysis we break down the complex mechanisms behind knowledge spillovers and identify conceptual links with liability of foreignness. We hypothesise that liability of foreignness acts as a filter for foreign firms, restricting their access to host country knowledge. We use a broad sample of roughly 1,000 firms in Germany to empirically test the existence of liabilities of foreignness in leveraging knowledge spillovers. Our particular setting allows us to distinguish between upstream (suppliers, academia) and downstream (customers) liabilities of foreignness. We find that multinational firms can compete on an equal footing with host country rivals when it comes to generating impulses for innovations from suppliers and academia. They are significantly challenged by liabilities of foreignness, though, where customers are involved. We suggest that the frictional losses from a lack of social and cultural embeddedness (liability of foreignness) in the host country are especially relevant when promising lead customers have to be identified and their tacit and often unarticulated impulses have to be transferred, understood and prioritised. --Liability of foreignness,knowledge spillover,globalisation,trivariate probit

Ethics and taxation : a cross-national comparison of UK and Turkish firms

This paper investigates responses to tax related ethical issues facing busines

Prudential regulatory governance of the risks associated with IT multi-sourcing strategies within the Australian banking sector

Concerns about the adequacy of the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority (APRA) prudential standards to govern the risks associated with the Australian banks’ multi-sourcing IT service delivery strategies provided the motivation for conducting this study. Three research questions were developed to investigate prudential risk management in the banking sector of the Australian Financial Services Industry (AFSI). RQ1: Do the banks employ complex multi-sourcing solutions driven by business unit demands to deliver their IT services? RQ2: What are the risk and governance model/s used by the banks to manage risks associated with their IT services multi-sourcing strategy? RQ3: Is the AFSI IT operational risk exposure adequately covered by the current APRA risk framework and prudential standards? The two largest Australian banks, Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) and Westpac Banking Corporation (WBC) referred to as the ‘banks’ in this research are selected as the sample. CBA and WBC are the first and second largest banks when measured by capitalisation within the banking sector of the AFSI and represent 43 percent sample of the capitalisation value of the AFSI. Although profitable, the banks are under pressure from the market to reduce their cost-to-revenue ratio. One of the main strategies the banks employ to reduce IT costs is the outsourcing the delivery of IT services. Over the past five years a trend has evolved with the banks using offshore-outsourcing to deliver IT services and gain further IT savings. However little empirical research has investigated what impact this trend has had on the risk profile of the banks and the Australian banking sector as a whole. This research identified and investigated the different IT services delivery models adopted by the banks by analysing on the relevant literature and documentation available in the public domain in relation to the AFSI. The findings of this research developed a picture of the IT delivery landscape within the banking sector of the AFSI. Findings of this research also demonstrates the complexity of the banks operational environment which can be attributed to the banks’ introduction of their IT multi-sourcing strategies. Finally the findings of this research raise some questions about whether the risks associated with an increasing reliance on IT multi-sourcing to deliver IT services is adequately managed by Australian banking sector and the regulatory framework of APRA

ERP implementation methodologies and frameworks: a literature review

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementation is a complex and vibrant process, one that involves a combination of technological and organizational interactions. Often an ERP implementation project is the single largest IT project that an organization has ever launched and requires a mutual fit of system and organization. Also the concept of an ERP implementation supporting business processes across many different departments is not a generic, rigid and uniform concept and depends on variety of factors. As a result, the issues addressing the ERP implementation process have been one of the major concerns in industry. Therefore ERP implementation receives attention from practitioners and scholars and both, business as well as academic literature is abundant and not always very conclusive or coherent. However, research on ERP systems so far has been mainly focused on diffusion, use and impact issues. Less attention has been given to the methods used during the configuration and the implementation of ERP systems, even though they are commonly used in practice, they still remain largely unexplored and undocumented in Information Systems research. So, the academic relevance of this research is the contribution to the existing body of scientific knowledge. An annotated brief literature review is done in order to evaluate the current state of the existing academic literature. The purpose is to present a systematic overview of relevant ERP implementation methodologies and frameworks as a desire for achieving a better taxonomy of ERP implementation methodologies. This paper is useful to researchers who are interested in ERP implementation methodologies and frameworks. Results will serve as an input for a classification of the existing ERP implementation methodologies and frameworks. Also, this paper aims also at the professional ERP community involved in the process of ERP implementation by promoting a better understanding of ERP implementation methodologies and frameworks, its variety and history

Lost in Translation : Empirical Evidence for Liability of Foreignness as a Barrier to Knowledge Spillovers

Entering host country networks of knowledge flows (new competencies, innovative technologies, and lead-market knowledge) is a major rationale of multinational firms for investing abroad. Foreign firms find it difficult to overcome cultural and social barriers which make their foreign engagements more strenuous and error prone (liability of foreignness). In our analysis we break down the complex mechanisms behind knowledge spillovers and identify conceptual links with liability of foreignness. We hypothesise that liability of foreignness acts as a filter for foreign firms, restricting their access to host country knowledge. We use a broad sample of roughly 1,000 firms in Germany to empirically test the existence of liabilities of foreignness in leveraging knowledge spillovers. Our particular setting allows us to distinguish between upstream (suppliers, academia) and downstream (customers) liabilities of foreignness. We find that multinational firms can compete on an equal footing with host country rivals when it comes to generating impulses for innovations from suppliers and academia. They are significantly challenged by liabilities of foreignness, though, where customers are involved. We suggest that the frictional losses from a lack of social and cultural embeddedness (liability of foreignness) in the host country are especially relevant when promising lead customers have to be identified and their tacit and often unarticulated impulses have to be transferred, understood and prioritised

Systematic risk of CDOs and CDO arbitrage

“Arbitrage CDOs” have recorded an explosive growth during the years before the outbreak of the financial crisis. In the present paper we discuss potential sources of such arbitrage opportunities, in particular arbitrage gains due to mispricing. For this purpose we examine the risk profiles of Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs) in some detail. The analyses reveal significant differences in the risk profile between CDO tranches and corporate bonds, in particular concerning the considerably increased sensitivity to systematic risks. This has farreaching consequences for risk management, pricing and regulatory capital requirements. A simple analytical valuation model based on the CAPM and the single-factor Merton model is used in order to keep the model framework simple. Then, the conditional expected loss curve (EL profile) is studied in some detail. In the next step, the asset correlation associated with a CDO tranche is estimated treating the structured instrument as a single-name credit instrument (i.e., a loan equivalent). While tractable, the loan-equivalent approach requires appropriate parameterization to achieve a reasonable approximation of the tranche´s risk profile. We consider the tranche as a “virtual” borrower or bond for which a single-factor model holds. Then, the correlation parameter is calculated via a non-linear optimization. This “bond representation” allows to approximate the risk profile (expressed by the EL profile) using a single-factor model and to express the dependence on the systematic risk factor via the corresponding asset correlation. It turns out that the resulting asset correlation is many times higher than that of straight bonds. Then, the Merton type valuation model for the corresponding bond representations is applied for valuation of the CDO tranches. Using a sample CDO portfolio, some opportunities for “CDO arbitrage” are described where it is assumed that investors are guided solely by the tranches’ rating and ignore the increased systematic risk for pricing. In the next section we discuss how tranches with high systematic risk can be generated and how CDO arrangers can exploit this to their advantage. It comes as no surprise that precisely these types of structures featured in many of the CDOs issued prior to the outbreak of the financial crisis. --Collateralized debt obligations (CDO),arbitrage CDOs,credit rating,expected loss profile,bond representation,systematic risk of CDO tranches,CDO pricing