Indian business groups: Evolution and transformation

By Ben L. Kedia, D. Mukherjee, Somnath Lahiri. 2007

145 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0dde221b8f22591a788817865905cae6594e9a38

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Finance

Citations in the corpus

What determines the scope of the firm over time and around the world? An Asia Pacific perspective (2007, background): “…and Lu (2005) Young et al. (1996) Hong Kong Young et al. (2001) Au et al. (2000) Wan (1998) India Bertrand et al. (2002), Chacar and Vissa (2005), Kedia et al. (2006), Khanna and Palepu (2000), Ramaswamy and Li (2001), Ramaswamy, Li, and Petitt (2004), Ramaswamy, Li, and Veliyath…”
Governance Structure, Innovation and Internationalization: Evidence from India (2013, unknown): “In the case of India, business groups present a quasi-governance arrangement, in the sense that even though different affiliated firms are legally separate entities, they are under a common, informal administrative control (Kedia et al., 2006).”
Knowledge management and innovation strategy in the Asia Pacific: Toward an institution-based view (2008, unknown): “…their counterparts in the United States, are usually organized in business groups rather than multidivisional firms (Carney, 2008; Chang, 2006; Kedia, Mukherjee, & Lahiri, 2006; Keister, 1998; Khanna & Rivkin, 2001; Li, Ramaswamy, & Petitt, 2006; Lu & Yao, 2006; Yiu, Bruton, & Lu, 2005; Yiu,…”
Institutions, Resources, and Entry Strategies in Emerging Economies (2020, unknown): “In such an environment, ﬁrms are typically controlled by a dominant stakeholder (individual or family), a business group, or the state (Khanna and Palepu, 2000; Kock and Gull´en, 2001; Kedia, Mukherjee, and Lahiri, 2006; Young et al ., 2008).”
From diversification premium to diversification discount during institutional transitions (2008, unknown): “…profitability than independent firms (Chang & Choi, 1988; Chang & Hong, 2000, 2002; Guillen, 2000; Hoskisson, Cannella, Tihanyi, & Faraci, 2004; Kedia, Mukherjee, & Lahiri, 2006; Keister, 2000; Khanna & Palepu, 2000a; Khanna & Palepu, 2000b; Khanna & Rivkin, 2001; Li & Wong, 2003; Ma K. Lee et…”
An institution-based view of international business strategy: a focus on emerging economies (2008, unknown): “…from Argentina (Guillen, 2000), Chile (Khanna & Palepu, 2000), the Czech Republic (Newman, 2000), Hungary (Rona-Tas, 1994; Stark, 1996), India (Kedia et al., 2006), Poland (Spicer, McDermott, & Kogut, 2000), Russia (Guriev & Rachinsky, 2005; Perotti & Gelfer, 2001; Puffer & An…”
The Institution-Based View as a Third Leg for a Strategy Tripod. (2009, unknown): “In October 2008, India’s Tata Group, developer of the critically acclaimed Tata Nano automobile that would retail for just $2,500 (the cheapest car in the world), painfully scratched its plans to manufacture the Nano in West Bengal ( Economist , 2008).”
The Performance of Group‐affiliated Firms during Institutional Transition: A Longitudinal Study of Indian Firms (2009, background): “However, only a few studies (e.g. Kedia et al., 2006; Khanna and Palepu, 2000) have investigated the persistence of the positive effect of business group affiliation on firm performance over a longitudinal time period (Khanna and Yafeh, 2007).”