Scholarlink

<p>We examine how home-country cultural institutions shape firms’ responses to political risk when choosing equity-based entry modes for international expansion. Prior research typically treats host-country political risk as a uniform deterrent, yet we contend that risk is cognitively filtered through national cultural frameworks that guide managerial perceptions and choices. We test this perspective with a meta-analysis of 154 studies (1976–2022), combining Hedges–Olkin models and meta-analytic regressions with Hofstede and GLOBE cultural dimensions and Lasso-based residualization of macro-institutional covariates. On average, we find that host-country political risk is associated with only a modest reduction in equity-based entry, and this relationship is highly heterogeneous. We show that cultural-cognitive institutions systematically account for this heterogeneity: power distance, individualism, and masculinity strengthen firms’ propensity to maintain or increase equity under political risk, whereas uncertainty avoidance weakens it, and long-term orientation shows no robust effect. These findings show that political risk is not simply an external constraint but a culturally interpreted phenomenon. By integrating internalization theory, neo-institutional perspectives, and insights from Institutional Anomie Theory, our study offers a more nuanced account of internationalization strategies and practical guidance for firms navigating political uncertainty across diverse cultural contexts.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

It’s Not What It Is; It’s What It Seems: The Moderating Role of Home-Country Cultural Institutions on Political Risk and Equity-Based Entry Decisions—A Meta-Analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月11日

查看全文
  • Paulo Buchuk,
  • Alfredo Jimenez

摘要

We examine how home-country cultural institutions shape firms’ responses to political risk when choosing equity-based entry modes for international expansion. Prior research typically treats host-country political risk as a uniform deterrent, yet we contend that risk is cognitively filtered through national cultural frameworks that guide managerial perceptions and choices. We test this perspective with a meta-analysis of 154 studies (1976–2022), combining Hedges–Olkin models and meta-analytic regressions with Hofstede and GLOBE cultural dimensions and Lasso-based residualization of macro-institutional covariates. On average, we find that host-country political risk is associated with only a modest reduction in equity-based entry, and this relationship is highly heterogeneous. We show that cultural-cognitive institutions systematically account for this heterogeneity: power distance, individualism, and masculinity strengthen firms’ propensity to maintain or increase equity under political risk, whereas uncertainty avoidance weakens it, and long-term orientation shows no robust effect. These findings show that political risk is not simply an external constraint but a culturally interpreted phenomenon. By integrating internalization theory, neo-institutional perspectives, and insights from Institutional Anomie Theory, our study offers a more nuanced account of internationalization strategies and practical guidance for firms navigating political uncertainty across diverse cultural contexts.