İhracat Engellerinin Kurumsal Kuram Perspektifinden Değerlendirilmesi

Amaç – İşletmelerin karşılaştıkları ihracat engellerini ve bu engellerin ortadan kaldırılmasına yönelik önerileri konu alan zengin bir uluslararasılaşma literatürü 1980’lerden itibaren oluşmaya başlamıştır. Bununla birlikte farklı kurumsal çevrelerde faaliyet gösteren işletmelerin karşılaştıkları engellerin nedenlerine yönelik yeterli bir ilgi oluşmamıştır. Bu doğrultuda çalışmada, ihracat engellerinin arkasındaki nedenlerin kurumsal kuram perspektifinden ortaya çıkarılması amaçlanmaktadır. Bu amacı gerçekleştirmek için “İhracat engellerinin oluşmasına neden olan kurumlar hangileridir?” sorusu cevaplandırılmıştır. Yöntem – Çalışma ihracat deneyimine sahip ve ana faaliyetlerini Ankara’da yürüten 23 KOBİ’yi kapsamaktadır. Kelly’s Rep testi ve açık uçlu sorularla toplanan veriler içerik analizi ile değerlendirilmiştir. Böylece işletmelerin karşılaştıkları ihracat engelleri ve bu engellerin arkasındaki kurumlar tespit edilmiştir. Bulgular – Çalışmanın bulguları farklı düzeylerde de olsa hem düzenleyici hem de bilişsel ve normatif kurumların ihracat engellerinin (kaynak engelleri, bilgi ve deneyim engelleri, prosedür engelleri ve dış kaynaklı engeller) ortaya çıkmasında etkili olduğunu göstermektedir. Diğer bir ifade ile engellerin nedenlerinin somut boyutlarının yanında farkındalık ya da değer yargıları gibi soyut boyutları da vardır. Tartışma – Çalışma ile literatüre ihracatın önündeki engellerin nedeni olarak kurumların incelendiği bir bakış kazandırılmıştır. Çalışma sonuçları: i) engellerin kendilerini ortaya çıkaran kurumlara bağlı olarak dinamizm sergilediklerini, ii) engelleri ortadan kaldırmaya yönelik politikaların hem düzenleyici hem de bilişsel ve normatif kurumların etkilerini gözetecek şekilde kapsayıcı olması gerektiğini, iii) engelleri ortadan kaldırmaya yönelik jenerik politikaların üretilmesinin zor olduğunu ve vaka özelinde politika uygulamalarına gidilmesinin önemini ortaya koymaktadır.

Evaluation of Export Barriers from the Institutional Theory Perspective

Purpose – Since the 1980s, a rich literature on internationalization addressing the export barriers facing enterprises and recommendations for eliminating them has emerged. However, there is scarce information about the causes of the barriers faced by the enterprises operating in different institutional environments. In this respect, the study aims to reveal the reasons behind export barriers from institutional theory perspective. In order to achieve this aim, the question of "Which institutions cause export barriers?" was answered. Methodology – The study includes 23 SMEs which are located in Ankara and experienced in exporting. The data were collected by Kelly’s REP test then answers were analyzed by content analysis. Thus, the institutions behind the export barriers that enterprises are faced with were identified. Findings – The findings of the study show that all regulatory and cognitive and normative institutions are effective in the emergence of export barriers (resource barriers, knowledge and experience barriers, procedure barriers and exogenous barriers), albeit at different levels. In other words, the causes of the barriers have concrete dimensions as well as abstract dimensions such as awareness or value judgments. Discussion – The study provides a view about examining institutions as the cause of exports barriers to the literature. Results of this study reveal that i) the barriers exhibit dynamism depending on the institutions that cause them, ii) the policies aimed at eliminating the barriers should be inclusive of all regulatory and cognitive and normative institutions, iii) since it is difficult to execute generic policies to eliminate the barriers case-specific policies should be implemented.

___

  • Arteaga-Ortiz, J. and Fernández-Ortiz, R. (2010). Why don’t we use the same export barrier measurement scale? An empirical analysis in small and medium-sized enterprises. Journal of Small Business Management, 48(3), 395-420.
  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
  • Bazuchi, K. R., Zacharias, S. A., Broering, L. W., Arreola, M. F. and Bandeira-de-Mello, R. (2013). The role of home country political resources for Brazilian multinational companies. Brazilian Administration Review, 10(4), 415-438.
  • Bruton, G. D. and Ahlstrom, D. (2003). An institutional view of China’s venture capital industry: Explaining the differences between China and the West. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 233-259.
  • Boddy, C. R. (2016). Sample size for qualitative research. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 19(4), 426-432.
  • Cahen, F. R., Lahiri, S. and Borini, F. M. (2016). Managerial perceptions of barriers to internationalization: An examination of Brazil's new technology-based firms. Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 1973-1979.
  • Cardoza, G., Fornes, G. and Xu, N. (2012). Institutional determinants of Chinese SMEs’ internationalization: The case of Jiangsu Province. School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies University of Bristol Working Paper.
  • Francis, J. and Collins-Dodd, C. (2004). Impact of export promotion programs on firm competencies, strategies and performance: The case of Canadian high-technology SMEs. International Marketing Review, 21(4/5), 474-495.
  • Freixanet, J. (2012). Export promotion programs: Their impact on companies’ internationalization performance and competitiveness. International Business Review, 21, 1065-1086.
  • Gao, G., Murray, J. Y., Kotabe, M. and Lu, J. (2010). A "strategy tripod" perspective on export behaviors: Evidence from domestic and foreign firms based in an emerging economy. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(3), 377-396.
  • Garrido, E., Gomez, J., Maicas, J. P. and Orcos, R. (2014). The institution-based view of strategy: How to measure it. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 17(2), 82-101.
  • Guest, G., Bunce, A. and Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82.
  • Hitt, M. A., Ahlstrom, D., Dacin, M. T., Levitas, E. and Svobodina, L. (2004). The institutional effects on strategic alliance partner selection in transition economies: China vs. Russia. Organization Science, 15(2), 173-185.
  • Hwang, J.-A. and Boo, K.-J. (2018). Overseas expansion of South Korean renewable energy firms: Status and barriers. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81, 2862-2869.
  • İnan, H. ve Nakıboğlu, B. (2009). KOBİ’lerin ihracatta karşılaştıkları engellerin belirlenmesine yönelik mobilya sektöründe gerçekleştirilen bir araştırma. Ç.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 18(2), 228-246.
  • Johanson, J. and Vahlne, J. (1990). The mechanism of internationalisation. International Marketing Review, 7(4), 11-24.
  • Ju, M., Zhao, H. and Wang, T. (2014). The boundary conditions of export relational governance: A “strategy tripod” perspective. Journal of International Marketing, 22(2), 89-106.
  • Kahiya, E. T. (2013). Export barriers and path to internationalization: A comparison of conventional enterprises and international new ventures. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 3-29.
  • Kahiya, E. T. and Dean, D. L. (2016). Export stages and export barriers: Revisiting traditional export development. Thunderbird International Business Review, 58(1), 75-89.
  • Kahiya, E. T., Dean, D. L. and Heyl, J. (2014). Export barriers in a changing institutional environment: A quasi-longitudinal study of New Zealand’s manufacturing exporters. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 12(4), 331-364.
  • Kang, K. (2011). Overseas network of export promotion agency and export performance: The Korean case. Contemporary Economic Policy, 29(2), 274-283.
  • Kaprálová, B. (2017). Export barriers in Latin America according to companies. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice, 25(41), 55-66.
  • Katsikeas, C. S. and Morgan, R. E. (1994). Differences in perceptions of exporting problems based on firm size and export market experience. European Journal of Marketing, 28(5), 17-35.
  • Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. NY: Norton. Leonidou, L. C. (2000). Barriers to export management: An organizational and internationalization analysis. Journal of International Management, 6(2), 121-148.
  • Leonidou, L. C. (2004). An analysis of the barriers hindering small business export development. Journal of Small Business Management, 42(3), 279-302.
  • Luo, Y., Xue, Q. and Han, B. (2010). How emerging market governments promote outward FDI: Experience from China. Journal of World Business, 45(1), 68-79.
  • Mavrogiannis, M., Bourlakis, M. A., Dawson, P. J. and Ness, M. R. (2008). Assessing export performance in the Greek food and beverage industry: An integrated structural equation approach. British Food Journal, 110(7), 638-654.
  • Morgan, R. E. and Katsikeas, C. S. (1997). Obstacles to export initiation and expansion. The International Journal of Management Science, 25(6), 677-693.
  • Morschett, D., Schramm-Klein, H. and Zentes, J. (2010). Strategic international management: Text and cases. Netherlands: Gabler.
  • Morse, J. M. (1995). The significance of saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 5, 147-149.
  • Munir, K. A. (2002). Being different: How normative and cognitive aspects of institutional environments influence technology transfer. Human Relations, 55(12), 1403-1428.
  • Neupert, K. E., Baughn, C. C. and Dao, L. T. (2006). SME exporting challenges in transitional and developed economies. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 13(4), 535-545.
  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97-112.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. London: Sage Publications. Paul, J., Parthasarathy, S. and Gupta, P. (2017). Exporting challenges of SMEs: A review and future research agenda. Journal of World Business, 52(3), 327–342.
  • Peng, M. W. (2002). Towards an institution-based view of business strategy. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19(2-3), 251-267.
  • Peng, M. W., Sun, S. L., Pinkham, B. and Chen, H. (2009). The institution-based view as a third leg for a strategy tripod. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 63-81.
  • Peng, M. W., Wang, D. Y. and Jiang, Y. (2008). An institution-based view of international business strategy: A focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(5), 920-936.
  • Pinho, J. C. and Martins, L. (2010). Exporting barriers: Insights from Portuguese small- and medium-sized exporters and non-exporters. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 8(3), 254-272.
  • Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing. New York: The Free Press. Roy, A., Sekhar, C. and Vyas, V. (2016). Barriers to internationalization: A study of small and medium enterprises in India. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 14(4), 513-538.
  • Rutashobya, L. and Jaensson, J.‐E. (2004). Small firms' internationalization for development in Tanzania: Exploring the network phenomenon. International Journal of Social Economics, 31(1/2), 159-172.
  • Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
  • Shirokova, G. and Tsukanova, T. (2013). Impact of the domestic institutional environment on the degree of internationalization of SMEs in transition economies. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 14(3), 193-204.
  • Silva, J. R., Franco, M. and Magrinho, A. (2016). Empirical investigation of the effects of industry type and firm size on export barriers. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 17(6), 1052-1065.
  • Suàrez-Ortega, S. (2003). Export barriers: Insights from small and medium-sized firms. International Small Business Journal, 21(4), 403-419.
  • Sullivan, D. and Bauerschmidt, A. (1988). Common factors underlying incentive to export: Studies in the European forest products industry. European Journal of Marketing, 22(10), 41-55.
  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.
  • Wang, C., Hong, J., Kafouros, M. and Wright, M. (2012). Exploring the role of government involvement in outward FDI from emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(7), 655-676.
  • Wang, X., Chen, A., Wang, H. and Li, S. (2017). Effect of export promotion programs on export performance: Evidence from manufacturing SMEs. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 18(1), 131-145.
  • Yamakawa, Y., Peng, M. and Deeds, D. L. (2008). What drives new ventures to internationalize from emerging to developed economies?. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 59-82.
İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi-Cover
  • ISSN: 1309-0712
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 4 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 2009
  • Yayıncı: Melih Topaloğlu