Pro-market reforms and firm performance
Abstract
Empirical findings from prior research regarding the impact of pro-market reforms on firm performance have been mixed and ambiguous. The primary objective of this study is to conduct a systematic literature review to investigate how pro-market reforms affect firm performance. We summarize the possible factors that led to the mixed findings and provide suggestions for future research.
References
1. Banalieva ER, Cuervo-Cazurra A, Sarathy R. Dynamics of pro-market institutions and firm performance. Journal of International Business Studies 2018; 49: 858–880. doi: 10.1057/s41267-018-0155-7
2. Dau LA. Learning across geographic space: Pro-market reforms, multinationalization strategy, and profitability. Journal of International Business Studies 2013; 44: 235–262. doi: 10.1057/jibs.2013.5
3. Dau LA. Knowledge will set you free: Enhancing the firm’s responsiveness to institutional change. International Journal of Emerging Markets 2016; 11(2): 121–147. doi: 10.1108/IJoEM-02-2014-0019
4. Kouamé WAK, Tapsoba SJA. Structural reforms and firms’ productivity: Evidence from developing countries. World Development 2019; 113: 157–171. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.09.005
5. Park SH, Li S, Tse DK. Market liberalization and firm performance during China’s economic transition. Journal of International Business Studies 2006; 37: 127–147. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400178
6. Singh D, Pattnaik C, Gaur AS, Ketencioglu E. Corporate expansion during pro-market reforms in emerging markets: The contingent value of group affiliation and diversification. Journal of Business Research 2018; 82: 220–229. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.09.043
7. Cuervo-Cazurra A, Dau LA. Promarket reforms and firm profitability in developing countries. Academy of Management Journal 2009; 52(6): 1348–1368. doi: 10.5465/amj.2009.47085192
8. Kim H, Kim H, Hoskisson RE. Does market-oriented institutional change in an emerging economy make business-group-affiliated multinationals perform better? An institution-based view. Journal of International Business Studies 2010; 41: 1141–1160. doi: 10.1057/jibs.2010.17
9. Chari MDR, David P. Sustaining superior performance in an emerging economy: An empirical test in the Indian context. Strategic Management Journal 2012; 33(2): 217–229. doi: 10.1002/smj.949
10. Bennett DL, Nikolaev B. Individualism, pro-market institutions, and national innovation. Small Business Economics 2021; 57: 2085–2106. doi: 10.1007/s11187-020-00396-y
11. Xu D, Meyer KE. Linking theory and context: ‘Strategy research in emerging economies’ after Wright et al.(2005). Journal of Management Studies 2013; 50(7): 1322–1346. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01051.x
12. Okoroafo SC, Kotabe M. The IMF’s structural adjustment program and its impact on firm performance: A case of foreign and domestic firms in Nigeria. MIR: Management International Review 1993; 33(2): 139–156.
13. Howell A, He C, Yang R, Fan C. Technological relatedness and asymmetrical firm productivity gains under market reforms in China. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 2016; 9(3): 499–515. doi: 10.1093/cjres/rsw024
14. Paul DL, Wooster RB. Strategic investments by US firms in transition economies. Journal of International Business Studies 2008; 39: 249–266. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400334
15. Dau LA, Moore EM, Kostova T. The impact of market based institutional reforms on firm strategy and performance: Review and extension. Journal of World Business 2020; 55(4): 101073. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2020.101073
16. Powell KS. Profitability and speed of foreign market entry. Management International Review 2014; 54: 31–45. doi: 10.1007/s11575-013-0184-1
17. Elango B, Dhandapani K, Giachetti C. Impact of institutional reforms and industry structural factors on market returns of emerging market rivals during acquisitions by foreign firms. International Business Review 2019; 28(5): 101493. doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2018.03.008
18. Gorynia M, Nowak J, Trąpczyński P, et al. Friend or foe? On the role of institutional reforms in the investment development path of Central and East European economies. International Business Review 2019; 28(3): 575–587. doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2018.12.003
19. Khoury TA, Peng MW. Does institutional reform of intellectual property rights lead to more inbound FDI? Evidence from Latin America and the Caribbean. Journal of World Business 2011; 46(3): 337–345. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2010.07.015
20. Zelner BA, Henisz WJ, Holburn GLF. Contentious implementation and retrenchment in neoliberal policy reform: The global electric power industry, 1989–2001. Administrative Science Quarterly 2009; 54(3): 379–412. doi: 10.2189/asqu.2009.54.3.379
21. Del Sol P, Kogan J. Regional competitive advantage based on pioneering economic reforms: The case of Chilean FDI. Journal of International Business Studies 2007; 38: 901–927. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400299
22. Toulan ON. Measuring the impact of market liberalization on export behavior: The case of Argentina. The International Trade Journal 2002; 16(1): 105–128. doi: 10.1080/088539002753427151
23. Wooster RB. US companies in transition economies: Wealth effects from expansion between 1987 and 1999. Journal of International Business Studies 2006; 37: 179–195. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400187
24. Lauter GP. A study of the effects of the new Hungarian economic system upon management. Journal of International Business Studies 1971; 2(2): 1–10.
25. Chari MDR, Banalieva ER. How do pro-market reforms impact firm profitability? The case of India under reform. Journal of World Business 2015; 50(2): 357–367. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2014.05.004
Copyright (c) 2023 Bohao Deng, Qadeer Abdul, Xu Jiang
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Submit a Paper
