What Determines the Scope of the Firm Over Time? A Focus on Institutional Relatedness
By Mike W. Peng, Seung-Hyun Lee, Denis Y. L. Wang. 2005
230 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Accounting, Strategy and Management
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2893ec45f92fb13b20b0c5850b090943cef0a4ea
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 Strategy and Management
Citations in the corpus
- Business group affiliation and firm performance in a transition economy: A focus on ownership voids (2007, background): “The benefits of group affiliation An affiliated firm can share a group’s reputation capital simply by being associated with a prestigious business group (Chang & Hong, 2000; Peng, Lee, & Wang, 2005 ).”
- Indian business groups: Evolution and transformation (2007, background): “The concepts of product relatedness and institutional relatedness ( Peng, Lee, & Wang, 2005; Peng, 2006) provide relatively new but novel perspectives to understand institution-”
- Does the Diversification–Firm Performance Relationship Change Over Time? A Meta‐Analytical Review (2018, unknown): “Lee et al. (2008) and Peng et al. (2005) argued that with increasing institutional development, the relative benefits of diversification have decreased, and its relative costs increased.”
- Business groups' outward FDI: A managerial resources perspective (2010, background): “Second, BGs emerge to overcome market imperfections by internalizing the pertinent markets (Khanna and Palepu, 2000; Peng et al., 2005).”
- Globalfocusing: From Domestic Conglomerates to Global Specialists* (2006, unknown): “If high levels of government involvement encourage diversification, then alterations in policy may reverse this effect (Kock and Guillén, 2000; Peng et al., 2005).”
- Outward internationalization of private enterprises in China: The effect of competitive advantages and disadvantages compared to home market rivals (2012, background): “Others have argued that firms in emerging markets (as compared with firms in developed markets) have some special ownership advantages including flexibility, relational assets, and networking skills (Dunning, 2001; Peng et al., 2005).”
- Asian Management Research: Status Today and Future Outlook (2008, unknown): “In a similar vein, Peng et al. (2005) suggested institutional relatedness to explaining the scope of firms in emerging economies.”