International Business in Emerging Economies

We certify that this assignment is the result of our own work and does not
exceed the word count noted below.

Number of words: 2952

UB Number:

10006436
10026575
09034786
10026897
10025280
10027418
The concept of emerging economies has evolved in recent times as a result of the business case to
identify and delineate economies that have recently experienced rapid economic development with
significant investment potential. Several academic investigations have been undertaken to provide
an in-depth understanding of this scenario taking into consideration their various characteristics and
evolutionary trends. This study provides a critical review of existing literature on emerging
economies with specific emphasis on entry modes into these pre-identified economies by multi-
national enterprises.
This essay focuses on published theories, concepts and opinions on the subject matter by first
exploring entry modes employed by multi-national enterprises and the rationale for selecting
specific modes based on prevailing circumstances. It goes on to give an update on emerging
economies and their basic characteristics, the attractiveness of these economies to global
corporations and limitations of existing literature on them. In conclusion, the entry modes employed
by entrants to these economies will be highlighted with a view to establishing past and current
trends and strategies employed by global corporations to achieve strategic and operational
efficiency. It will be argued that despite extensive literature on the subject topic, existing literature
focus on the individual characteristics of Multi-national Corporations and external circumstances
without consideration of the features of the emerging economies themselves. It also identifies
majority of the literature employing a few countries to assess emerging economies which is not a
true representation of the totality of occurrences and features of all emerging economies.
The phenomenon of globalisation with its resultant effects has facilitated extensive research to
assess the entry mode options available to multi-national corporations in their bid to expand and
achieve competitive advantage in the global market. According to Zhang et al. (2007), firms are not
only concerned about which foreign markets to enter and when, but also about learning how to
enter foreign markets providing a rationale and justification for major studies on entry mode choice
(Werner, 2002, p. 281). Sharma and Erramilli (2004, p. 2) define an entry mode as ‘‘A structural
agreement that allows a firm to implement its product market strategy in a host country either by
carrying out only the marketing operations (i.e., via export modes), or both production and
marketing operations there by itself or in partnership with others (contractual modes, joint ventures,
wholly owned operations)’’.
Root (1994) describes an entry mode as an institutional plan an organization executes as a means to
market it products in a foreign market which is usually within three to five years. He further
explained that an organization’s performance and fruition in a foreign market would significantly
depend on its ability to adopt an applicable entry mode into that market. Hence, an unsuitable entry
mode may hinder opportunities and considerably restrict the extent of strategic options available to
the organization (Ekeledo and Sivakumar, 2004). This train of thought places emphasis on the entry
mode as an indicator of success and performance but this affirmation isn’t established in majority of
the literature and can be identified as an existing research gap in the literature on entry mode choice
in international business.
There has been considerable focus on the various factors which influence entry mode choice in
existing literature on the subject topic. Each entry mode has implications for the level of control the
firm will enjoy over its foreign operations, the amount of investment required, and the degree of risk
the firm faces in venturing into a foreign market. A certain school of thought asserts that entry
mode choice is influenced by both micro-level factors which include the size of the firm, asset values
and contractual risk as well as macro-level factors such as country-specific risks and market
potentials (Agarwal and Ramaswami, 1992). Cultural distance, international experience, market
knowledge and international joint venture size are other factors that are evident in the existing body
of knowledge on entry mode choice influences (Kim and Hwang, 1992; Gatignon and Anderson,
1988; Erramilli, 1991). It is generally acknowledged that as a firm moves from a non-integrated entry
mode (joint venture) to an integrated one (green-field investment), control investment and risk will
all increase (Luo, 2001). As such, a multinational-corporation is expected to select an entry mode
that offers the highest risk-adjust return on investment (Hennart, 1989; Madhok, 1997).
Numerous studies basically seek to explore the patterns and determinants of entry mode choice in
an international organisation’s expansion drive. In general, they are divided into three main research
streams. Firstly is the approach which involves the theoretical interpretations of the entry behaviour
of the firm (Zhao et al., 2004; Hill, 1990; Meyer and Estrin, 1998). They include the transaction cost
theory which will be discussed in greater detail in this paper, the bargaining power theory and the
Dunnings eclectic theory amongst others. The second approach seeks to explain other factors which
determine entry mode choice. These are factors such as cultural distance as earlier highlighted
(Tihanyi et al., 2005), the investing firm’s country of origin (Delios and Henisz, 2003) and level of
economic development of the host country (Sun et al., 2002). The third stream of literature on entry
mode choice seeks to compare and contrast different patterns of entry modes such as joint
ventures, acquisitions and greenfield investments in specific contexts (Jiang, 2003; Guillen, 2003;
Erramilli et al., 2002; Hennart and Reddy, 1997).
The most prominent of theories applied to explain the entry mode choice decision faced by multi-
national corporations by scholars is the transaction cost theory. The rationale for this approach was
that prior to the establishment of the theory, existing studies failed to incorporate deliberate
cost/benefit analysis in the entry mode choice decision. Entry mode considerations in literature on
the subject topic have over time evolved from transaction cost and economic based theories to
organisational based and institutional theories. The general assumption behind the transaction cost
theory is that global corporations select the entry mode choice that provides the least cost solution
(Shelanski and Klein, 1995; Williamson, 1991). According to Chiles and McMackin (1996),
“Transaction cost economics focuses attention on the attributes of the transaction, with
economizing on transaction costs viewed as the main purpose of economic institutions.” Transaction
costs going on to affect performance after successful entry into foreign markets is an area that
requires further exploration in research on the relationship between transaction cost, entry mode
choice and international business. According to the transaction cost theory, a low control entry
mode is likely to be selected if transaction costs are low (Hill et al., 1990; Madhok, 1997). If
transaction costs are high, international organisations will opt for a high control mode (Luo, 2001).
As is so evidently highlighted in major literature on entry mode choice, different entry modes are
recommended and preferable in different circumstances. For the purpose of this review, the entry
modes considered are greenfield investments, joint ventures and acquisitions. Many studies view
greenfield investments and acquisitions as alternative entry modes with joint ventures being a
question of ownership (Kogut and Singh, 1988). This implies that entry and ownership involve two
simultaneous decisions; deciding whether to invest in new facilities or to acquire new ones and how
ownership of the business venture should be structured. As such, joint ventures are most times
referred to as a choice made simultaneously with other modes of entry (Kogut, 1988; Geringer and
Hebert, 1989).
The concept of psychic distance is used predominantly to explain specific entry mode choice by
multi-national corporations (Barkema and Vermeulen, 1998; Peng, 2000; Shan 1991; Luo, 2001). The
general assumption takes it to mean the degree to which a firm is uncertain of the characteristics of
a foreign market. Based on this established ideology, the greater the psychic distance an
organisation is exposed to in terms of a particular foreign market, the more likely that global
corporation will choose a joint venture or green field investment over an acquisition (Kogut and
Singh, 1988). This is premised on the fact that greater psychic distance will result in greater
transaction costs in acquisitions which either joint ventures or greenfield investments could possibly
reduce.
As this report reviews the literature on entry modes in emerging economies, it is important to
identify what has been established to be emerging economies according to scholars and research
studies. In exploring the various definitions for the term emerging economies, it became obvious
that a single definition is inadequate in fully identifying the terminology and its basic features.
Various authors have attributed the different definitions of emerging markets to its recent
classification. The need to classify economies under emerging became imperative as studies
identified different characteristics and features which distinguished these economies from both
developing markets which was its initial classification and developed economies (Luo, 2002).
Nakata and Sivakumar (1997) defined emerging markets as “less developed countries with
indications of healthy economic advancement”. Rahman and Bhattacharyya (2003), quoting Arnold
and Quelch (1998), defined emerging markets as third world countries which fulfil certain criteria
such as prospects of economic growth, economies recently exposed to foreign direct investment and
trade liberalization, and the presence of institutional infrastructure that facilitates market
transaction. Similarly, Luo (2002, pg 5) summarized emerging markets as “those developing
economies characterized by rapidly growing and structurally changing economies”. A common
denominator in the various definitions presented is the fact that these economies were originally
developing countries that went on to achieve rapid political, economic and institutional
development, hence the need to categorize them differently.
Cavusgil et al (2002) explained in their book how the shift from developing markets to emerging
markets has generated a lot of confusion and attributed the trend to the growth of most of these
developing economies over the years. The transition process involved progressing from economically
and technologically backward environments with high risk potentials and few opportunities for
business expansion to an operating scenario of manageable risks, significantly higher economic
growth than developed economies and the availability of largely untapped markets comprising of
relatively low entry costs and high quality sources (Cavusgil et al. (2002).
Despite the apparent identification and recognition of these selected economies, the classification of
specific economies as emerging poses considerable confusion to scholars and research on entry
mode choice into these economies. The question usually asked in such classification attempts is
what level of economic and infrastructural development is deemed appropriate for a developing
economy to be termed as emerging and the specific units of measurements employed at arriving at
such a conclusion. There is a lot of inconsistency in classification and as such various texts and
authors arrive at different conclusions on countries which fall under this classification. Eden et al.
(2000) advocates for clarification on why certain countries are classified as emerging, and goes on to
assert that the non-uniformity can be attributed to the recent evolution of the term “emerging
economies” or the different level or stages of growth of the various economies. A categorization of
emerging economies is provided according to the FTSE group (2009) (see appendix 1).
Hoskisson et al (2000) pointed out that most literature on emerging markets and strategies
employed by MNCs focuses primarily on China and some countries of Central and Eastern Europe.
Therefore, there is a need to broaden research to embrace all countries listed as emerging markets
before considering if existing theories of MNCs strategies actually apply to all the emerging markets.
Also, there is a need to develop theoretical and empirical understanding of the factors promoting
and restricting the emergence of new market economies.
Firms entering emerging markets seek high returns while avoiding unaffordable risks. It’s in
addressing such risks that scholars seek to assess the conditions experienced in these economies. In
other words, any entry mode decision must consider risk, return, control, and resource effects in an
integrated structure. Each of these factors is interconnected with and has an impact on the others
(Luo, 2001) and subsequent research on entry mode strategies in emerging economies have focused
on the development of theoretical frameworks which accommodate these variables. Risks inherent
in international business and expansion activities in emerging economies are often difficult to hedge
during operations (Oxley, 1997), thus necessitating an appropriate entry mode as a preventive
mechanism. Initially, literature on entry mode failed to acknowledge dynamic, transitional
perspectives and overlooked the context of emerging markets. This has since been addressed as a
result of the growing importance of emerging markets and studies of entry mode in these markets
provide practical implications for foreign firms interested in emerging economies.
Entry mode selection in an emerging economy is influenced by situational contingencies at four
levels: nation, industry, firm, and project (Luo, 2001). Nation specific factors include issues such as
governmental intervention, property rights protection and environmental uncertainty. These
circumstances vary in different emerging economies which makes it important to review emerging
economies in country-specific contexts. Most emerging economies in general are characterized by
constantly changing regulatory frameworks and direct government interference which emphasize
the evaluation by research studies of the impact these characteristics have on global corporation’s
entry mode decision. Industrial structure in emerging economies remain one of the bottlenecks
hampering economic development (Roman, 1986) and industry specific factors such as sales growth,
asset intensity and growth of the number of firms are amongst key issues which are prevalent in
entry mode decision influences.
Most research carried out on determining the entry mode to be employed in emerging market entry
strategy focus on the characteristics of the entering firm, in particular its resources and capabilities
(Barney, 1991; Anand and Delios, 2002), with firm specific factors dominating existing literature.
These factors include but are not limited to the following; knowledge protection, global integration,
managerial capability, financial resources, risk exposure and host-country experience (Luo, 2001).
The fourth level identified as project specific factors encompasses operational elements such as
project size, orientation and location (Xin and Pearce, 1996). These four contingencies provide a
foundation for evaluating and selecting specific entry modes which are most suitable for entry into
emerging economies and all factors which lead to the entry mode decision employed as identified in
existing literature fall into one or more of these categories.
Studies on entry mode in emerging economies advocate a series of sequential decisions that
determine the volume and direction of resources of multi-national corporations as they seek to
access emerging markets (Zhang et al., 2007). This entry mode approach allows for a smooth
transition to another mode of operation as necessitated by future strategic objectives and expansion
activities (Ekeledo and Sivakumar, 1998). This is consistent with the Uppsala stage model developed
by Johanson and Vahlne (1977) which considers international expansion as a process consisting of a
series of step by step decisions.
The model maintains that with incremental experience and knowledge in foreign markets comes
increased confidence and investment commitment in similar markets. As learning in international
operations is an inherently incremental process, it can be more effective in a series of sequential
steps (Delios and Henisz, 2003). This provides justification for this approach of entry strategy in
emerging economies and explains the scenario of multi-national corporations in emerging
economies closing down existing modes of operations and entering new arrangements (Welch et al.,
2007). Few empirical studies however fail to investigate why companies switch entry and operating
modes and the outcomes of the switching process.
The timing of market entry is another critical issue that has come up as scholars seek to investigate
and explain the circumstances that occur as a result of international entry and expansion into
emerging economies. Multi-national corporations with intentions of international expansion into
emerging markets are faced with the decision to either be first movers in such economies or to learn
from the experience of other investors and become later entrants. A first mover is defined as a firm
that is first to produce a new product, use a new process or enter a new market (Lieberman and
Montgomery, 1990). There are constructive arguments that have been presented for both first
movers and late entrants in existing literature (Owens, 2011) with both perspectives affirming the
critical role the timing of market entry plays in shaping a multi-national corporation’s behaviour
which can be used as a source of competitive advantage in emerging economies.
The decision to invest in a particular market and the suitable entry mode based on prevailing
circumstances is deemed to be incomplete without consideration of resources commitment. The
level of investment is directly related to the entry mode decision and the degree and timing of
resource commitment is usually determined by market-based conditions and specific circumstances
of individual firms (Isobe et al., 2000). Specific issues as regards resource commitment which
dominate studies on emerging economies include the commitment to technology transfer (Teece,
1977; Isobe et al., 2000), Local market uncertainty and performance (Luo, 2002; Yan, 1998) and
cultural distance (Hofstede, 1980; Curtin, 1984).
In conclusion, there are potential areas for further exploration on entry mode strategies in emerging
economies. Firstly, majority of studies on emerging economies are restricted to China and a select
number of European countries and do not provide a basis for critically understanding all
characteristics of emerging economies. It is thus suggested that future studies employ country-
specific contexts in identifying applicable features and indicators in these varying economies. The
investigation of the linkages between entry mode choice and performance is crucial in assessing the
long term effects of entry mode selections and provides justification for studies on how the various
entry mode choices guarantee success for multinational corporations interested in emerging
economies. Finally, the decision to focus on the reasons multinational corporations are forced to
terminate initial entry arrangements and in some cases, switch entry modes based on experiential
learning in emerging economies is considered a significant contribution to the consistently growing
body of knowledge on a key segment of international business research.
 APPENDIX – Emerging economies classification
Advanced Emerging Secondary Emerging Frontier economies

Taiwan Chile Argentina

China Bahrain
Hungary
Colombia Bangladesh
Brazil Czech Republic Botswana
Egypt Bulgaria
Mexico
India Côte d’Ivoire
Poland Indonesia Croatia
Malaysia Cyprus
South Africa
Morocco Estonia
Pakistan Jordan
Peru Kenya
Philippines Lithuania
Russia Macedonia
Thailand Malta
Turkey Mauritius
UAE Nigeria
Oman
Qatar
Romania
Serbia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Sri Lanka
Tunisia
Vietnam

*Czech Republic, Malaysia and Turkey will be promoted to Advanced Emerging market status from
June 2011
Source: FTSE Global Equity Index Series country classification.

REFERENCES
Agarwal, S. and Ramaswami, S. (1992).Choice of Foreign Market Entry Mode: Impact of Ownership,
Location, and Internalization Factors. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 23, No.1, pp.1–
27.

Anand, J. and Delios, A. (2002). Absolute and Relative Resources as Determinants of International
Acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 119-134.

Arnold, A. and Quelch, J. (1998). New strategies in emerging markets. Sloan Management Review,
Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 7–20.

Barkema, H. and Vermeulen, F. (1998). International Expansion Through Start-up or Acquisition: A

Learning Perspective. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 7-26.

Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management,
Vol.17, pp.99- 120.

Cavusgil, S., Ghauri, P. and Agarwal, R. (2002). Doing Business in Emerging Markets: Entry and
Negotiation Strategies. London: Sage Publications.

Chiles, T. and McMackin, J. (1996). Integrating Variable Risk Preferences, Trust and Transaction Cost
Economics. Academy of Management Review, Vol.21, pp.73-99.

Curtin, P. (1984). Cross-cultural Trade in World History. London: Cambridge University Press.

Delios, A. and Henisz, W. (2003). Political Hazards, Experience, and Sequential Entry Strategies: the
International Expansion of Japanese Firms, 1980–1998. Strategic Management Journal, Vol.24, No.
11, pp.1153–1164.

Eden, L., Hoskisson, R., Chung, M. and Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in Emerging Economies. The
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 249-267.

Ekeledo, I. and Sivakumar, K. (1998). Foreign Market Entry Mode Choice of Service Firms: A
Contingency Perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 274-92.
Ekeledo, I. and Sivakumar, K. (2004). International Market Entry Mode Strategies of Manufacturing
Firms and Service Firms. International Marketing Review, Vol.21.No.1, pp. 68-101.

Erramilli, K. (1991). The Experience Factor in Foreign Market Entry Behavior of Service Firm. Journal
of International Business Studies, Vol.22, Fall, pp. 479–501.

Erramilli, M., Agarwal, S. and Dev, C. (2002). Choice between Non-equity Entry Modes: An
Organizational Capability Perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp.
223-42.

FTSE,(2009). Available at
http://www.ftse.com/Indices/Country_Classification/Downloads/FTSE_Country_Classification_Sept_
09_update.pdf. [Assessed 11/03/2011].

Gatignon, H. and Anderson, E. (1988). The Multinational Corporation’s Degree of Control over
Subsidiaries: An Empirical Test of Transaction Cost Explanation. Journal of Law, Economics and
Organization. Vol.4, No.2, pp.305-336.

Geringer, M. and Hebert, L. (1989). Control and Performance of International Joint Ventures.
Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 235-254.

Guillen, M. (2003). Experience, Imitation and the Sequence of Foreign Entry: Wholly-owned and
Joint venture Manufacturing South Korean Firms and Business Groups in China 1987-1995. “Journal
of International Business Studies”, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 185-98.

Hennart, J. (1989). Can the “New Forms of Investment” Substitute For the “Old Forms”? A
Transaction Costs Perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp.211–34.

Hennart, J. and Reddy, S. (1997).The Choice between Mergers and Acquisitions and Joint Venture:
The Case of Japanese Investors in the United States. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18, No. 1,
pp. 1-12.

Hill, C., Hwang, P. and Kim, W. (1990). An Eclectic Theory of The Choice of International Entry Mode.
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11, 117–28.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-related Values.
Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Hoskisson, R., Eden, C. Lau, T and Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in Emerging Economies. Academy of
Management Journal, Vol.43, pp. 249-267.

Isobe, T. Makino, S. and Montgomery, D. B., (2000). Resource Commitment, Entry Timing and
Market Performance of Foreign Direct Investment in Emerging Economies: The Case of Japanese
International Joint Ventures in China. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 468 –
484.

Jiang, F. (2003). Choice between Joint Venture and Sole Venture: The Experience of International
Pharmaceutical Firm’s Entry Mode Decisions into China. Paper presented at the Hawaii International
Conference on Business, University of Hawaii, West Oahu, June.

Johanson, J. and Vahlne, J. (1977). The internationalization Process of the Firm - A Model of
Knowledge Development and Increasing Foreign Market Commitments. Journal of International
Business Studies, Vol.8 (Spring/Summer), pp.22-32.

Kim,W. and Hwang, P. (1992). Global Strategy and Multinationals Entry Mode Choice. Journal of
International Business Studies, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 29–53.

Kogut, B. (1988). Joint Ventures: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives. Strategic Management
Journal, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 319-32.

Kogut, B. and Singh, H. (1988). The Effect of National Culture on The Choice of Entry Mode. Journal
of International Business Studies, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 411-432.

Lieberman, M. and Montgomery, D. (1988). First-mover Advantages. Strategic Management Journal,

No. 9, pp. 41-58.

Luo, Y. (2001). Determinants of Entry in an Emerging Economy: A Multilevel Approach. Journal of

Management Studies, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp.
Luo, Y. (2002). Multinational Enterprises in Emerging Markets. Copenhagen Business School,
Denmark.

Madhok, A. (1997). Cost, Value and Foreign Market Entry Mode: The Transaction and the Firm.
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18, pp. 39–61.

Meyer, K. and Estrin, S. (1998), “Entry Mode Choice in Emerging Markets: Greenfield, Acquisition,
and Brownfield”, CEES Working Papers Series No. 18, Center for East European Studies, Copenhagen
Business School, Copenhagen.

Nakata, C. and Sivakumar, K. (1997).Emerging Market Conditions and Their Impact on First Mover
Advantages : An Integrative Review. International Marketing Review, Vol. 14, No. 6, pp. 461-485.

Owens, M. (2011). International Business in Emerging Economies, from MSc course manual,
2010/2011, lecture 3, University of Bradford, School of Management.

Oxley, J. (1997). Appropriability Hazards and Governance in Strategic Alliances: A Transaction Cost
Approach. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol. 13, No.2, pp. 387–409.

Peng, M. (2000). Business Strategies in Transition Economies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Rahman, Z and Bhattacharyya, S.K. (2003). First Mover Advantages in Emerging Economies: A
Discussion. Management Decision, Vol. 41, No.2, pp.141-147.

Roman, Z. (1986). ‘Competition and industrial organization in the centrally planned economies’. In
Stiglitz, J. and Mathewson, G. F. (Eds), New Developments in the Analysis of Market Structure.
London: Macmillan.

Root, F.R., (1994). Entry Strategies for International Markets, D.C. Heath: Lexington, MA.

Shan, W. (1991). Environmental Risks and Joint Venture Sharing Arrangements. Journal of
International Business Studies, Fourth Quarter, pp.555–78.
Sharma, V. and Erramilli, M. (2004). Resource-based Explanation of Entry Mode Choice. Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 12, pp. 1-18.

Shelanski, H. and Klein, P. (1995). Empirical Research on Transaction Cost Assessment: A Review and
Assessment. Journal of Law, Economics and Organisation, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 335-361.

Sun, Q., Tong, W. and Yu, Q. (2002), Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment Across China.
Journal of International Money and Finance, Vol. 21, pp. 79-113.

Teece, D. (1977). Technology Transfer by Multinational Firms: The Resource Cost of Transferring
Technological Know-how. Economic Journal, Vol.87, pp. 242-261.

Tihanyi, L., Griffith, D. and Russell, C. (2005) The effect of Cultural Distance on Entry Mode Choice,
International Diversification, and MNE Performance: A Meta-analysis. “Journal of International
Business Studies”, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 270-283.

Werner, S. (2002). Recent Developments in International Management Research: A Review of 20 Top

Management Journals. “Journal of Management”, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 277-305.

Williamson, O. (1991). Comparative Economic Organisations: The Analysis of Discrete Structural

Alternatives. London: Routledge.

Xin, K. and Pearce, J. (1996). Guanxi: Connections as Substitutes for Formal institutional
Support. Academy of Management Journal, Vol.39, pp. 1641–58.

Yan, R. (1998.) Short-Term Results: The Litmus Test for Success in China. Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 76, No.5, pp. 61-69.

Zhang, Y., Zhang, Z. and Liu, Z. (2007). Choice of Entry Modes in Sequential FDI in an Emerging
Economy. Management Decision, Vol. 45, No. 40, pp. 749-772.

Zhao, X., Luo, Y. and Suh, T. (2004), Transaction Cost Determinants and Ownership-based Entry
Mode Choice: A Meta-Analytical Review. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 35,
pp. 524-44.