Türkiye’den Dışarıya Yapılan DYY’ların Giriş Stratejilerinin Belirleyicileri Üzerine Bir Araştırma: Uluslararasılaşma Kuramları Bakış Açısı

Year 2020, Volume: 11 Issue: 3, 592 - 614, 25.10.2020

Tülay İlhan-nas , Tarhan Okan , Ayşegül Düzgün , Handan Çam

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Dunning’in OLI Modeli, Uppsala Modeli ve Mathews’in LLL Modelinin temel varsayımlarından hareket ederek ve Türkiye bağlamını dikkate alarak Türkiye kökenli çokuluslu işletmelerin yabancı pazarlara giriş stratejilerinin belirleyicilerini ortaya koymaktır. BİST’de işlem gören işletmelerden oluşan evrenden, kasıtlı örnekleme yöntemi ile seçilen örneklem, 72 ana işletmeye dair 53 farklı ev sahibi ülkede faaliyet gösteren 388 bağlı kuruluştan oluşmaktadır. Regresyon analizi bulgularına göre genel olarak, söz konusu kuramlar çerçevesinde tanımlanan değişkenlerin birçoğunun Türkiye kökenli çokuluslu işletmelerin giriş stratejileri üzerinde çeşitli düzeylerde etkili olduğu görülmektedir.

Keywords

Çokuluslu İşletmeler, Giriş Stratejileri, Uluslararasılaşma Teorileri

Supporting Institution

Gümüşhane Üniversitesi BAP Koordinatörlüğü

Project Number

Proje No: 16.F2911.02.05

Thanks

Çalışmanın genişletilmiş özeti, 10 – 12 Mayıs 2018 tarihleri arasında Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi ev sahipliğinde düzenlenen 26. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresinde sunulmuş ve Bildiriler Kitabında yayımlanmıştır.

A Research on Determinants of The Entry Strategies of The FDI’s From Turkey to Abroad: Internationalization Theories Perspective

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to reveal the determinants of foreign market entry strategies of Turkey-based multinational enterprises by taking into account of the context of Turkey, based on the basic assumptions of Dunning's OLI Model, Uppsala Model and Mathews' LLL Model. The sample is selected by intentional sampling method from the research universe that is consisting of businesses traded in the BIST. It is formed by 388 affiliates of 72 major companies operating in 53 different host countries. According to the findings of regression analysis, generally, many of the variables within the framework of the theories are effective at various levels on the entry strategies of the Turkey-based multinational enterprises.

Keywords

Multinational Companies, Entry Strategies, Internationalization Theories

Project Number

Proje No: 16.F2911.02.05

References

• Agarwal, S., & Ramaswami, S. N. (1992). Choice of foreign market entry mode: impact of ownership, location and internalization factors. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(1), 1-27.
• Akçaoğlu, E. (2013). Yabancı doğrudan yatırım (foreign direct investment). İçinde Doç. Dr. Çağrı Bulut ve Prof. Dr. İge Pırnar (Eds.), Uluslararası işletmecilik: temel kavramlar (ss. 553-563). Ankara: Nobel.
• Albayrak, A. S. (2005). Çoklu doğrusal bağlantı halinde enküçük kareler tekniğinin alternatifi yanlı tahmin teknikleri ve bir uygulama. ZKÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1(1), 105-126.
• Anıl., İ., Cakir, O., Canel, C., & Porterfield, R. (2011). A comparison of inward and outward foreign direct investment determinants in Turkey. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(20), 141-155.
• Arora, A., & Fosfuri, A. (2000). Wholly owned subsidiary versus technology licensing in the worldwide chemical industry. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(4), 555-572.
• Berry, H., Guillén, M. F., & Zhou, N. (2010). An institutional approach to cross-national distance. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(9), 1460-1480.
• Benito, R. G., & Gripsrud, G. (1992). The expansion of foreign direct investments: discrete rational location choices or a cultural learning process? Journal of International Business Studies, 23(3), 461-476.
• Bevan, A. A., & Estrin, S. (2004). The determinants of foreign direct investment into European transition economies. Journal of Comparative Economics, 32(4), 775-787.
• Brouthers, K. D. (1995). The influence of international risk on entry mode strategy in the computer software industry. Management International Review, 35(1), 7-28.
• Brouthers, K. D., Brouthers, L. E., & Werner, S. (1996). Dunning's eclectic theory and the smaller firm: the impact of ownership and locational advantages on the choice of entry-modes in the computer software industry. International Business Review, 5(4), 377-394.
• Brouthers, L. E., Brouthers, K. D., & Werner, S. (1999). Is Dunning's eclectic framework descriptive or normative? Journal of International Business Studies, 30(4), 831-844.
• Brouthers, K. D., & Brouthers, L. E. (2001). Explaining the national cultural distance paradox. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(1), 177-189.
• Brouthers, K. D., Brouthers, L. E., & Werner, S. (2003). Transaction cost-enhanced entry mode choices and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1239 – 1248.
• Brouthers, K. D., & Hennart, J-F. (2007). Boundaries of the firm: insights from international entry mode research. Journal of Management, 33(3), 395-425.
• Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (1997). Quantitative data analysis with SPSS for windows. London, New York: Routledge.
• Buğra, A. (2007). Devlet ve işadamları (5. Baskı). İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Buğra, A. ve Savaşkan O. (2015). Türkiye’de yeni kapitalizm: siyaset, din ve iş dünyası (3. Baskı). İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Burböck, B., Macek, A., Podhovnik, E., & Zirgoi, C. (2018). Asymmetric influence of corruption distance on FDI. Journal of Financial Crime, 25(3), 845-858.
• Can, E. ve Utlu, N. (2018). Gelişmekte olan ülkelerin çokuluslu işletmelerinin uluslararasılaşma teorileri: bir literatür taraması. Yıldız Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2(2), 50-69.
• Can, E. ve Utlu, N. (2017). Gelişmekte olan ülke çokuluslu işletmelerin uluslararasılaşma süreci: Türkiye üzerinden teorik ve kavramsal bir inceleme. Global Business Research Congress (GBRC), May 24-25, 2017, Istanbul, Turkey. DOI:10.17261/Pressacademia.2017.391.
• Cantwell, J., Dunning, J.H., & Lundan, S. M. (2010). An evolutionary approach to understanding international business activity: the co-evolution of MNEs and the institutional environment. Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 567-586.
• Chan, C. M., & Makino, S. (2007). Legitimacy and multi-level institutional environments: implications for foreign subsidiary ownership structure. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 621-638.
• Chang, S-J., & Rosenzweig, P. M. (2001). The choice of entry mode in sequential foreign direct investment. Strategic Management Journal, 22(8), 747-776.
• Chung, H.F.L., & Enderwick, P. (2001). An investigation of market entry strategy selection: exporting vs foreign direct investment modes – a home-host country scenario. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 18, 443-460.
• Contractor, F., Yang, Y., & Gaur, A. S. (2016). Firm-specific intangible assets and subsidiary profitability: the moderating role of distance, ownership strategy and subsidiary experience. Journal of World Business, 51(6), 950-964.
• Cuervo-Cazurra, A. (2016). Corruption in international business. Journal of World Business, 51(1), 35-49.
• Cuervo-Cazurra, A. (2008). Better the devil you don’t know: types of corruption and FDI in transition economies. Journal of International Management, 14(1), 12-27.
• Çakmak, G. (2017). Türkiye’de yerli ve doğrudan yabancı yatırımların güvenlik harcamaları ile kıyaslanması. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Doğuş Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
• Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. (1999). Ownership strategy of Japanese firms: transactional, institutional, and experience influences. Strategic Management Journal, 20(10), 915-933.
• Demirbag, M., Glaister, K. W., & Tatoglu, E. (2007). Institutional and transaction cost influences on MNEs’ ownership strategies of their affiliates: evidence from an emerging market. Journal of World Business, 42(4), 418-434.
• Demirbag, M., Tatoglu, E., & Glaister, K. W. (2008). Factors affecting perceptions of the choice between acquisition and greenfield entry: the case of western FDI in an emerging market. Management International Review, 48(1), 5-38.
• Demirbag, M., Tatoglu, E., & Glaister, K. W. (2009). Equity-based entry modes of emerging country multinationals: lessons from Turkey. Journal of World Business, 44(4), 445-462.
• Demirbag, M., McGuinness, M., & Altay, H. (2010). Perceptions of institutional environment and entry mode: FDI from an emerging country. Management International Review, 50(2), 207-240.
• Dunning, J.H. (1980). Toward an eclectic theory of international production: some empirical tests. Journal of International Business Studies, 11(1), 9-31.
• Dunning, J.H. (1988). The eclectic paradigm of international production: a restatement and some possible extensions. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1), 1-31.
• Dunning, J. H. (2001). The eclectic (OLI) paradigm of international production: past, present and future. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 8(2), 173-190.
• Eden, L., & Miller, S. R. (2004). Distance matters: liability of foreignness, institutional distance and ownership strategy. In Michael A. Hitt, & Joseph L.C. Cheng (Eds.), Theories of the multinational enterprise: diversity, complexity and relevance (advances in international management, volume 16) (pp. 187-221). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
• Ekeledo, I., & Sivakumar, K. (1998). Foreign market entry mode choice of service firms: a contingency perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(4), 274-292.
• Elango, B., & Sambharya, R. B. (2004). The influence of industry structure on the entry mode choice of overseas entrants in manufacturing industries. Journal of International Management, 10(1),107-124.
• Erdal, F., & Tatoglu, E. (2002). Locational determinants of foreign direct investment in an emerging market economy: evidence from Turkey. Multinational Business Review, 10(1), 21-27.
• Erdilek, A. (2008). Internationalization of Turkish MNEs. Journal of Management Development, 27(7), 744-760.
• Erramilli, M. K., & Rao, C. P. (1993). Service firms' international entry-mode choice: a modified transaction-cost analysis approach. The Journal of Marketing, 57(3), 19-38.
• Filatotchev, I., Strange, R., Piesse, J., & Lien, Y-C. (2007). FDI by firms from newly industrialized economies in emerging markets: corporate governance, entry mode and location. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 556-572.
• Fung, K. C., Iizaka, H., Lee, J., & Parker, S. (1999). Determinants of U.S. and Japanese foreign direct investment in China. University of California Santa Cruz, Working Paper – 456, December 1999 (https://people.ucsc.edu/~kcfung/fdidet.pdf).
• Fung, K. C., Iizaka, H., & Parker, S. (2002). Determinants of U.S. and Japanese direct investment in China. Journal of Comparative Economics, 30, 567-578.
• Gaba, V., Pan, Y., & Ungson, G. R. (2002). Timing of Entry in International Market: An Empirical Study of U.S. Fortune 500 Firms in China. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(1), 39-55.
• Gatignon, H., & Anderson, E. (1988). The Multinational Corporation's Degree of Control over Foreign Subsidiaries: An Empirical Test of a Transaction Cost Explanation. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 4(2), 305-336.
• Godinez, J. (2014). The effect of corruption distance on FDI flows to Latin America. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Edinburgh.
• Godinez, J. R., & Liu, L. (2015). Corruption distance and FDI flows into Latin America. International Business Review, 24(1), 33-42.
• Gomes-Casseres, B. (1989). Ownership structures of foreign subsidiaries, theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 11(1), 1-25.
• Gomes-Casseres, B. (1990). Firm ownership preferences and host government restrictions: an integrated approach. Journal of International Business Studies, 21(1), 1-22.
• Goodnow, J. D., & Hansz, J. E. (1972). Environmental determinants of overseas market entry strategies. Journal of International Business Studies, 3(1), 33-50.
• Gökşen, N. S., & Üsdiken, B. (2001). Uniformity and diversity in Turkish business groups: effects of scale and time of founding. British Journal of Management, 12(4), 325-340.
• Gökşen, N. S. (2015). Makrokurumsal bakış açısı: bir değerlendirme. İçinde A. Selami Sargut ve Şükrü Özen (Eds.), Örgüt kuramları (ss. 331-378). Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.
• Güngördü, A. ve Yılmaz, K.G. (2016). Uluslararası ticaret ve yatırım teorisi olarak eklektik paradigma: geçmişten günümüze bir bakış. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 20(3), 1003-1020.
• Habib, M., & Zurawicki, L. (2001). Country-level investments and the effect of corruption - some empirical evidence. International Business Review, 10(6), 687-700.
• Habib, M., & Zurawicki, L. (2002). Corruption and foreign direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(2), 291-307.
• Håkanson, L., & Ambos, B. (2010). The antecedents of psychic distance. Journal of International Management, 16(3), 195-210.
• Hofstede, G. J. (1980). Culture’s consequences, international differences in work-related values. London: Sage Publication.
• Isobe, T., Makino, S., & Montgomery, D. B. (2000). Resource commitment, entry timing, and market performance of foreign direct investments in emerging economies: the case of Japanese international joint ventures in China. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 468-484.
• İlhan, T. (2006). Kültürel farklılıkların doğrudan yabancı yatırımcıların giriş stratejileri üzerindeki etkileri: Türkiye örneği. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 20(1), 211-232.
• İlhan, T. (2007). Uluslararası ortak girişimlerde mülkiyet yapısı: yönetsel kontrol düzeyinin ve kültürel farklılıkların etkisi. Akdeniz İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 13, 122-148.
• Ilhan-Nas, T. (2012). Institutional distance influences on the multinational enterprises (MNEs') ownership strategies of their affiliates operating in an emerging market. African Journal of Business Management, 6(20), 6276-6290.
• İlhan-Nas, T., Şahin, K. T. ve Okan, T. (2013). Kurumsal yönetim ve çokuluslu işletmelerin strateji tercihleri. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 27(4), 210-228.
• Ilhan-Nas, T., Okan, T., Tatoglu, E., Demirbag, M., & Glaister, K.W. (2018a). The effects of ownership concentration and institutional distance on the foreign entry ownership strategy of Turkish MNEs. Journal of Business Research, 93, 173-183.
• Ilhan-Nas, T., Okan, T., Tatoglu, E., Demirbag, M., Wood, G., & Glaister, K.W. (2018b). Board composition, family ownership, institutional distance and the foreign equity ownership strategies of Turkish MNEs. Journal of World Business, 53, 862-879.
• İlhan-Nas, T. ve Şahin, F. (2018). Doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımı kaynaklı teknolojik yayılımların yerel firmaların uluslararasılaşma faaliyetleri üzerindeki etkileri. IX. Örgüt Kuramı Sempozyumu, Ankara Sosyal Bilimler Üniversitesi, Ankara. (Erişim: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322626749).
• Ionascu, D., Meyer, K. E., & Erstin, S. (2004). Institutional distance and international business strategies in emerging economies. William Davidson Institute Working Paper, Number 728.
• Javorcik, B. S., & Wei, S-J. (2009). Corruption and cross-border investment in emerging markets: firm level evidence. Journal of International Money and Finance, 28(4), 605-624.
• Johanson, J., & Wiedersheim-Paul, F. (1975). The internationalization of the firm – four Swedish cases. The Journal of Management Studies, 12(3), 305-323.
• Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J-E. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm-a model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1), 23-32.
• Karademir, B. (2018). İşletme grupları ve devlet: eleştirel bir yazın incelemesi. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, 23(89), 77-99.
• Karoğlu, E. (2018). The effect of corruption distance on Turkey’s inward foreign direct investment”, 2nd international conference on new approaches in social science and humanities, Book of Proceedings & Abstracts, October 26-28, İstanbul-Turkey, 130-131.
• Karlsen, T., Silseth, P. R., Benito, G. R.G., & Welch, L. S. (2003). Knowledge, internationalization of the firm, and inward–outward connections. Industrial Marketing Management, 32(5), 385-396.
• Kogut, B. ve Singh, H. (1988). The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 411-432.
• Korhonen, H., Luostarinen, R., & Welch, L. (1996). Internationalization of SMEs: inward-outward patterns and government policy. MIR: Management International Review, 36(4), 315-329.
• Kostova, T. (1996). Success of transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices within multinational companies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
• Kostova, T. (1999). Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: a contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 308-324.
• Kumar, V., Gaur, A. S., & Pattnaik, C. (2012). Product Diversification and International Expansion of Business Groups. Management International Review, 52, 175-192.
• Kumar, M. V. S. (2009). The relationship between product and international diversification: the effects of short‐run constraints and endogeneity. Strategic Management Journal, 30(1), 99-116.
• Kuo, A., Kao, M-S., Chang, Y.C., & Chiu, C-F. (2012). The influence of international experience on entry mode choice: difference between family and non-family firms. European Management Journal, 30(3), 248-263.
• Kwon, Y-C., & Konopa, L.J. (1993). Impact of host country market characteristics on the choice of foreign market entry mode. International Marketing Review, 10(2), 60-76.
• Larimo, J. (2003). Form of investment by Nordic firms in world markets. Journal of Business Research, 56(10), 791-803.
• Larimo, J., & Arslan, A. (2013). Determinants of foreign direct investment ownership mode choice: evidence from Nordic investments in Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of East European Management Studies, 18(2), 232-263.
• Lee, Y., Hemmert, M., & Kim, J. (2014). What drives the international ownership strategies of Chinese firms? The role of distance and home-country institutional factors in outward acquisitions. Asian Business & Management, 13(3), 197-225.
• Liou, R-S., Chao, M.C-H., & Ellstrand, A. (2017). Unpacking institutional distance: addressing human capital development and emerging-market firms’ ownership strategy in an advanced economy. Thunderbird International Review, 59(3), 281-295.
• Lu, J. W. (2002). Intra-and inter-organizational imitative behavior: institutional influences on Japanese firms’ entry mode choice. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(1), 19-37.
• Mathews, J. A. (2002). Competitive advantages of the latecomer firm: a resource-based account of industrial catch-up strategies. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19(4), 467-488.
• Mathews, J. A. (2006). Dragon multinationals: new players in 21st century globalization. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(1), 5-27.
• McCarthy, D.J., & Puffer, S. M. (1997). Strategic investment flexibility for MNE success in Russia: evolving beyond entry modes. Journal of World Business, 32(4), 293-319.
• Mudambi, R., & Mudambi, S.M. (2002). Diversification and market entry choices in the context of foreign direct investment. International Business Review, 11(1), 35-55.
• Mutinelli, M., & Piscitello, L. (1998). The entry mode choice of MNEs: an evolutionary approach. Research Policy, 27(5), 491-506.
• Nakos, G., & Brouthers, K. D. (2002). Entry mode choice of SMEs in Central and Eastern Europe. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(1), 47-63.
• Ojala, A., & Tyrväinen, P. (2007). Market entry and priority of small and medium-sized enterprises in the software industry: an empirical analysis of cultural distance, geographic distance, and market size. Journal of International Marketing, 15(3), 123-149.
• Okan, T. (2012). Kurumsal yönetimin ve kurumsal mesafenin gelişmekte olan ülke kökenli çokuluslu işletmelerin strateji tercihleri üzerindeki etkileri: Türkiye örneği. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Trabzon.
• Okan, T., Sarı, S. ve Nas, T. İ. (2014). Yönetim kurulu yapısı ile finansal performans arasındaki ilişkide uluslararası çeşitlenmenin aracı ve kurumsal mesafenin biçimleyici etkileri: “moderated mediation” model. V. Örgüt Kuramı Çalıştayı Bildiriler Kitabı, 131-167.
• Okan, T., Koparan, E. ve İlhan-Nas, T. (2016). Yönetim kurulu çeşitliliği ve kurumsal sosyal sorumluluk söylemleri arasındaki ilişki: kurumsal çevrenin moderatör etkisi. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 71(2), 465-516.
• Özgen, H. ve Özseven, M. (2012). İşletmelerin uluslararası pazarlara giriş biçiminin seçiminde yerel pazar faktörlerinin etkisi üzerine Adana ilinde bir araştırma. Ç. Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21(1), 1-20.
• Özkara, B., Kurt, M. ve Karayormuk, K. (2008). Türkiye’de işletme grupları: eskiler ve yeniler. Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 8(1-2), 59-83.
• Palepu, K. (1985). Diversification strategy, profit performance and the entropy measure. Strategic Management Journal, 6(3), 239-255.
• Pedersen, T., & Petersen, B. (2004). Learning about foreign markets: are entrant firms exposed to a ‘shock effect’? Journal of International Marketing, 12(1), 103-123.
• Popli, M., Akbar, M., Kumar, V., & Gaur, A. (2016). Reconceptualizing cultural distance: the role of cultural experience reserve in cross-border acquisitions. Journal of World Business, 51, 404-412.
• Rodriguez, P., Uhlenbruck, K., & Eden, L. (2005). Government corruption and the entry strategies of multinationals. Academy of Management Review, 30(2), 383-396.
• Sarkar, M., & Çavuşgil, S.T. (1996). Trends in international business thought and literature: a review of international market entry mode research: integration and synthesis. The International Executive, 38(6), 825-847.
• Sezgili, K. (2017). Türk işletme gruplarının uluslararasılaşması: kurumlar ve kaynaklar. Organizasyon ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 9(1), 80-104.
• Shenkar, O. (2012). Cultural distance revisited towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(1), 1-11.
• Surdu, I., Mellahi, K., & Glaister, K. (2018). Emerging market multinationals’ international equity-based entry mode strategies. International Marketing Review, 35(2), 342-359.
• Tatoglu, E., Demirbag, M., Glaister, K., Ilhan-Nas, T., & Okan, T. (2015). Determinants of the foreign entry strategies of Turkish MNEs. Academy of Management Proceedings, Vol. 2015, No. 1 (https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2015.11073abstract).
• Tatoglu, E., & Glaister, K. W. (1998a). Determinants of foreign direct investment in Turkey. Thunderbird International Business Review, 40(3), 279-314.
• Tatoglu, E., & Glaister, K. W. (1998b). Western MNCs’ FDI in Turkey: an analysis of location specific factors. Management International Review, 38(2), 133-159.
• Tatoglu, E., Glaister, K. W., & Erdal, F. (2003). Determinants of foreign ownership in Turkish manufacturing. Eastern European Economics, 41(2), 5-41.
• Terpstra, V., & Yu, C-M. (1988). Determinants of foreign investment of U.S. advertising agencies. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1), 33-46.
• Te Velde, D. W., & Bezemer, D. (2006). Regional integration and foreign direct investment in developing countries. Transnational Corporations, 15(2), 41-70.
• Tihanyi, L., Griffith, D. A., & Russell, C. J. (2005). The effect of cultural distance on entry mode choice, international diversification, and MNE performance: a meta-analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 36, 270-283.
• Türken, S. (2018). Gelişmekte olan piyasalarda çeşitlendirme ve uluslararasılaşma stratejilerinin işletme grubu düzeyinde incelenmesi: Doğuş grubu örneği. Stratejik Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(1), 7-43.
• Ulaş, D. (2009). Küreselleşme sürecinde dışa açılma stratejileri. Ankara: Nobel.
• Ülgen, H. ve Mirze, S. K. (2010). İşletmelerde Stratejik Yönetim (5. Baskı). İstanbul: Beta.
• Whitley, R. (2000). Divergent capitalisms: the social structuring and change of business systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• World Economic Forum (2015-2016). The global competitiveness report, Klaus Schwab (Ed.), Geneva.
• Xu, D., & Shenkar, O. (2002). Institutional distance and the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 27(4), 608-618.
• Xu, D., Pan, Y., & Beamish, P. W. (2004). The effect of regulative and normative distances on MNE ownership and expatriate strategies. Management International Review, 44(3), 285-307.
• Yu, C-M. J., & Ito, K. (1988). Oligopolistic reaction and foreign direct investment: the case of the U.S. tire and textiles industries. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 449-460.
• https://geert-hofstede.com/countries.html, Erişim Tarihi: 10.08.2016 – 09.08.2017.
• www.isyatirim.com.tr, Erişim Tarihi: 10.08.2016 – 09.08.2017.
• https://www.kap.org.tr/, Erişim Tarihi: 10.08.2016 – 09.08.2017.
• https://www.transparency.org/what-is-corruption#define, Erişim Tarihi: 04.03.2019
• https://www.transparency.org/cpi2015#results-table, Erişim Tarihi: 10.08.2016 – 09.08.2017.
• http://databank.worldbank.org/data/home.aspx, Erişim Tarihi: 10.08.2016 – 09.08.2017.
• http://tr.mesafe-hesaplama.himmera.com, Erişim Tarihi: 10.08.2016 – 09.08.2017.
• http://yatirim24.com/, Erişim Tarihi: 10.08.2016 – 09.08.2017.