A fresh look at decision making in international investment choices: Firm international coherence and home-host country relatedness

Understanding how decisions for international investments are made and how this affects the overall pattern of investments and firm’s performance is of particular importance both in strategy and international business research. This dissertation introduced first home-host country relatedness (HHCR) as the degree to which countries are efficiently combined within the investment portfolios of firms. It theorized and demonstrated that HHCR will vary with the motivation for investments along at least two key dimensions: the nature of foreign investments and the connectedness of potential host countries to the rest of the world. Drawing on cognitive psychology and decision-making research, it developed a theory of strategic decision making proposing that strategic solutions are chosen close to a convenient anchor. Building on research on memory imprinting, it also proposed that managers tend to rely on older knowledge representation. In the context of international investment decisions, managers use their home countries as an anchor and are more likely to choose as a site for foreign investments host countries that are ‘close’ to the home country. These decisions are also likely to rely more strongly on closeness to time invariant country factors of historic and geographic nature rather than time-variant institutions. Empirical tests using comprehensive investments data by all public multinational companies (MNC) worldwide, or over 15,000 MNCs with over half a million subsidiaries, support the claims. Finally, the dissertation introduced the concept of International Coherence (IC) defined as the degree to which an MNE’s network comprises countries that are related. It was hypothesized that maintaining a high level of coherence is important for firm performance and will enhance it. Also, the presence of international coherence mitigates some of the negative effects of unrelated product diversification. Empirical tests using data on foreign investments of over 20,000 public firms, while also developing a home-host country relatedness index for up to 24,300 home-host pairs, provided support for the theory advanced.

Three empirical essays on startups' survival using the Kauffman Firm Survey

This dissertation studies newly founded U.S. firms' survival using three different releases of the Kauffman Firm Survey. I study firms' survival from a different perspective in each chapter. ^ The first essay studies firms' survival through an analysis of their initial state at startup and the current state of the firms as they gain maturity. The probability of survival is determined using three probit models, using both firm-specific variables and an industry scale variable to control for the environment of operation. The firm's specific variables include size, experience and leverage as a debt-to-value ratio. The results indicate that size and relevant experience are both positive predictors for the initial and current states. Debt appears to be a predictor of exit if not justified wisely by acquiring assets. As suggested previously in the literature, entering a smaller-scale industry is a positive predictor of survival from birth. Finally, a smaller-scale industry diminishes the negative effects of debt. ^ The second essay makes use of a hazard model to confirm that new service-providing (SP) firms are more likely to survive than new product providers (PPs). I investigate the possible explanations for the higher survival rate of SPs using a Cox proportional hazard model. I examine six hypotheses (variations in capital per worker, expenses per worker, owners' experience, industry wages, assets and size), none of which appear to explain why SPs are more likely than PPs to survive. Two other possibilities are discussed: tax evasion and human/social relations, but these could not be tested due to lack of data. ^ The third essay investigates women-owned firms' higher failure rates using a Cox proportional hazard on two models. I make use of a never-before used variable that proxies for owners' confidence. This variable represents the owners' self-evaluated competitive advantage. ^ The first empirical model allows me to compare women's and men's hazard rates for each variable. In the second model I successively add the variables that could potentially explain why women have a higher failure rate. Unfortunately, I am not able to fully explain the gender effect on the firms' survival. Nonetheless, the second empirical approach allows me to confirm that social and psychological differences among genders are important in explaining the higher likelihood to fail in women-owned firms.^