Skip to main content
Log in

What makes and what does not make a real option? A study of equity shares in international joint ventures

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of International Business Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines the boundaries of real options logic, with an application to joint ventures (JVs). We distinguish between forms of uncertainty that are resolved endogenously and those that are resolved exogenously, and theorize that only exogenous uncertainty will have the impact predicted by real options theory on a foreign investor's choice of how large an equity share to take in a JV. We theorize that macroeconomic and institutional variables generate exogenous uncertainty whereas, by contrast, cultural distance and choices pertaining to corporate scope and product or process development activities involve endogenous sources of uncertainty that investors can both assess and act upon without having to “wait and see”. Using a sample of 6472 Sino-foreign JVs, we find support for our predictions. We discuss and implement proper methods to test for the existence of null effects, as is relevant to establish the boundaries of a theory such as real options theory. We draw implications for research and practice on JVs – specifically equity share decisions, which deserve more attention – and real options, including suitable uses and desirable extensions of the concept.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The approaches that have been used in the few existing studies investigating the distribution of JV ownership among partners are transaction cost economics (Chen et al., 2002; Delios & Beamish, 1999; Gatignon & Anderson, 1988), agency theory (Chi & Roehl, 1997; Nakamura & Yeung, 1994) and the bargaining perspective (Blodgett, 1991; Fagre and Wells, 1982). However, these studies have yielded mixed results regarding the role of (behavioral) uncertainty in the equity distribution of JVs. For a detailed review of this literature, see Cuypers and Martin (2007).

  2. The concept of uncertainty used in option theory is actually one of risk in the sense of Knight (1921), in that options pricing models assume that it is possible to specify the probability distribution of future asset values. Nevertheless, we follow the extant use of terminology in referring to this as “uncertainty”.

  3. In the case of exogenous uncertainty the firm will wait for information about how the exogenous source of uncertainty has evolved and subsequently take action, that is, decide whether to strike, hold onto or abandon the option. In a broad sense this can also be seen as learning. However, contrary to learning in the case of endogenously resolved uncertainty, the firm cannot determine the pace of information revelation, nor can it influence its outcomes. “Learning” amidst exogenous uncertainty thus simply represents the passive receipt of updated information. It does not represent the systematic, forward-looking accumulation of experience or the proactive development of causal insight that is normally associated with organizational learning (Fiol & Lyles, 1985).

  4. For simplicity of exposition, we treat the foreign partner as the call option holder. This is consistent with the existing literature (e.g., Reuer & Tong, 2005). We will discuss why this assumption is all the more valid in our empirical setting, that is, China, when we describe our sample below. In some other empirical settings it may be less clear who is the call option holder.

  5. MOFTEC was formerly known as the Ministry of Foreign Economic Relations and Trade (MOFERT), and is currently known as the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China (MOFCOM).

  6. Pan (2002) also looks at JVs established between 1979 and 1996. Other studies use a subset of our sample. Pan's (1996) sample covers the 1979–1992 period; Chadee and Qiu (2001) look at 1992–1995; and Chadee et al. (2003) study JVs established between 1984 and 1996.

  7. Deng Xiaoping's reforms were summed up in the “Four Modernizations” of agriculture, industry, science and technology and the military. The focus was on knowledge transfer from the West. The CCP's initial view was that this could best be achieved by setting up joint ventures with foreign partners. Therefore all alternative investment modes were prohibited except for a few exceptions (Almanac of Foreign Economic Relations and Trade of China, various issues).

  8. Whatever the letter of the law, contracts may be imperfectly enforceable in the presence of weak institutions. For instance, in the context of the Brazilian telecommunication industry, Perkins, Morck, and Yeung (2008) found that local partners may use pyramidal ownership schemes, and used local institutions to take advantage of foreign partners. Our fieldwork does not suggest that this is as much of an issue in China. This may partly explain why China has been so successful at attracting foreign direct investment, including Sino-foreign JVs. As Fan, Morck, Xu, and Yeung (2007: 25) put it: “Ultimately, China may well provide a better institutional environment for FDI operations than for domestic operations – large or small, state controlled or privately run. If China, more than other countries, favors FDI in this way, it might well receive an elevated FDI inflow”.

  9. The Euromoney index is available in its current format only from 1982 onwards. An alternative format, albeit with similar interpretation, was reported for the earlier years in our study period. We transformed the index for the earlier of our sample years to get consistent scores that go back to 1979. Excluding the observations from 1979 to 1981 or using alternative methods to extrapolate does not materially change our results. We opted to keep these observations to have a more complete and representative sample.

  10. Shenzhen, Zhuhai and Shantou in Guangdong Province, Xiamen in Fujian Province, and all of Hainan province.

  11. Dalian, Qinhuangdao, Tianjin, Yantai, Qingdao, Lianyungang, Nantong, Shanghai, Ningbo, Wenzhou, Fuzhou, Guangzhou, Zhanjiang and Beihai.

  12. As an alternative measure of institutional uncertainty, we used the component of the Economic Freedom of the World index that captures the level of uncertainty resulting from a country's institutional framework. This measure is published annually by the Fraser Institute, and varies over time rather than between different geographical areas within China. Our results remain robust. However, using this alternative measure resulted in moderate levels of collinearity, which is especially undesirable when testing multiple hypotheses. Therefore we used the location-based variable described above instead.

  13. Exchange rate data are from various annual issues of the World Currency Yearbook, Pick's Currency Yearbook and the IMF's Annual Report on Exchange Rate Arrangements and Exchange Restrictions.

  14. To test the robustness of our results, we used the 18-month volatility of the parallel rate (again the common time frame) as an alternative measure of exchange rate uncertainty. The results were consistent with those reported below.

  15. Our sample covers (parts of) the fifth (1976–1980), sixth (1981–1985), seventh (1986–1990) and eighth (1991–1996) plans. The period effects are lagged by one year because these plans were usually announced at the end of the year. Thus fixed effects represent the periods 1979–1981, 1982–1986 and so on.

  16. Our model comprises two levels: JV and home country. Such a model is also referred to as a tobit model with double censoring and random effects. Here, the random effects are for home countries.

  17. Several scholars have argued that JVs in which one partner has a very dominant controlling stake can be better considered as wholly owned subsidiaries (e.g., Hennart, 1991). Therefore, to test the robustness of our results, we also specified several models with different limit values of ownership – such as upper limits of 90% (e.g., Hennart, 1991) and 95% (e.g., Hennart & Larimo, 1998; Lu, 2002) ownership. Our results were robust to these alternative tobit specifications.

  18. We are grateful to an anonymous reviewer and the Associate Editor for pointing out this issue and putting us on the path towards using the alternatives below.

  19. In the language of power analysis, α is the significance criterion, that is, the “level of significance” as commonly used to evaluate (non-null) hypotheses. β is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when it is in fact false, that is, of making a type II error. The value we set for these parameters is more conservative than those used by Lane et al. (1998), for example. Note that β as referred to in this paragraph is a parameter for the power calculations, not to be confused with the β coefficient estimates from regression analyses as discussed elsewhere in the paper.

  20. A stepwise approach adding each hypothesized variable separately does not substantively change the results.

  21. We generated the posterior distributions using uninformative priors and the Gibbs sampler. This involves sampling sequentially from all relevant conditional distributions over a large number of iterations. We made 100,000 draws from a single continuous Gibbs chain, of which the first 20,000 draws are used as a “burn in” period and subsequently discarded. Unfortunately, existing Bayesian software is limited in that it does not allow for random effects and cannot incorporate left-censoring and right-censoring simultaneously. The replication is therefore imperfect. Nevertheless, our results are very similar to those obtained using the conventional (non-Bayesian) tobit model.

  22. In addition, we replicated the commonly used if statistically problematic use of post hoc power analysis to test the null Hypotheses 4–6. The results, available from the authors, again show that the effects of the endogenously resolved variables do not differ from zero.

  23. We are grateful to an anonymous reviewer and the Associate Editor for pointing out these research opportunities.

References

  • Adner, R., & Levinthal, D. A. 2004a. What is not a real option: Considering boundaries for the application of real options to business strategy. Academy of Management Review, 29 (1): 74–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adner, R., & Levinthal, D. A. 2004b. Real options and real tradeoffs. Academy of Management Review, 29 (1): 120–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aharoni, Y. 1966. The foreign investment decision process. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, E., & Gatignon, H. 1986. Modes of foreign entry: A transaction cost analysis and propositions. Journal of International Business Studies, 17 (1): 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balakrishnan, S., & Koza, M. P. 1993. Information asymmetry, adverse selection and joint-ventures: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 20 (1): 99–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkema, H. G., Bell, J. H. J., & Pennings, J. M. 1996. Foreign entry, cultural barriers, and learning. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (2): 151–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beamish, P. W. 1993. The characteristics of joint ventures in the People's Republic of China. Journal of International Marketing, 1 (2): 29–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beamish, P. W., & Banks, J. C. 1987. Equity joint ventures and the theory of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 18 (2): 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, G. K. 1995. Volatile exchange rates and the multinational firm: Entry, exit and capacity options. In L. Trigeorgis (Ed.), Real options in capital investment: Models, strategies, and applications: 163–184. Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, F., & Scholes, M. 1973. The pricing of options and corporate liabilities. Journal of Political Economy, 81 (3): 637–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, J. S., & Mendenhall, M. 1990. Cross-cultural training effectiveness: A review and a theoretical framework for future research. Academy of Management Review, 15 (1): 113–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, J. S., Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. 1991. Toward a comprehensive model of international adjustment: An integration of multiple theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 16 (2): 291–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blodgett, L. L. 1991. Partner contributions as predictors of equity share in international joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 22 (1): 63–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boisot, M., & Child, J. 1999. Organizations as adaptive systems in complex environments: The case of China. Organization Science, 10 (3): 237–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, N. P. B. 1999. Real options and product life cycles. Management Science, 45 (5): 670–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, E. H., & Hurry, D. 1993. Strategy through the options lens: An integrated view of resource investments and the incremental-choice process. Academy of Management Review, 18 (4): 760–782.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brock, J. K.-U. 2003. The “power” of international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (1): 90–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campa, J. M. 1994. Multinational investment under uncertainty in the chemical processing industries. Journal of International Business Studies, 25 (3): 557–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashen, L. H., & Geiger, S. W. 2004. Statistical power and the testing of null hypotheses: A review of contemporary management research and recommendations for future studies. Organizational Research Methods, 7 (2): 151–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chadee, D. D., & Qiu, F. 2001. Foreign ownership of equity joint ventures in China: A pooled cross-section–time series analysis. Journal of Business Research, 52 (2): 123–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chadee, D. D., Qiu, F., & Rose, E. L. 2003. FDI location at the subnational level: A study of EJVs in China. Journal of Business Research, 56 (10): 835–845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, S. H., Kensinger, J. W., Keown, A. J., & Martin, J. D. 1997. Do strategic alliances create value? Journal of Financial Economics, 46 (2): 199–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., Hu, M. Y., & Hu, P. S. 2002. Ownership strategy of multinationals from ASEAN: The case of their investments in Sino-foreign joint ventures. Management International Review, 42 (3): 309–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, T. L. 2000. Option to acquire or divest a joint venture. Strategic Management Journal, 21 (6): 665–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, T. L., & McGuire, D. J. 1996. Collaborative ventures and value of learning: Integrating the transaction costs and strategic option perspectives on the choice of market entry modes. Journal of International Business Studies, 27 (2): 285–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, T. L., & Roehl, T. W. 1997. The structuring of interfirm exchanges in business know-how: Evidence from international collaborative ventures. Managerial and Decision Economics, 18 (4): 279–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, T. L., & Seth, A. 2001. Joint ventures through a real options lens: New insights and future directions, Paper presented at the Cooperative Strategies and Alliances Conference, Lausanne. June.

  • Chi, T. L., & Seth, A. 2009. A dynamic model of the choice of mode for exploiting complementary capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies, 40 (3): 365–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. 1977. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist, 45 (12): 1304–1312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (1): 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colegrave, N., & Ruxton, G. D. 2003. Confidence intervals are a more useful complement to nonsignificant tests than are power calculations. Behavioral Ecology, 14 (3): 446–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colegrave, N., & Ruxton, G. D. 2005. What hypothesis tests are not: A reply to Johnson. Behavioral Ecology, 16 (1): 325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Contractor, F. J., & Lorange, P. 2002. Cooperative strategies and alliances. Amsterdam: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52 (4): 281–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuypers, I. R. P. 2009. Essays on equity joint ventures: The roles of uncertainty and experience, PhD dissertation, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.

  • Cuypers, I. R. P., & Martin, X. 2007. Joint ventures and real options: An integrated perspective. Advances in Strategic Management, 24: 107–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, L. E., North, D. C., & Smorodin, C. 1971. Institutional change and American economic growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Delacroix, J., & Swaminathan, A. 1991. Cosmetic, speculative, and adaptive organizational change in the wine industry: A longitudinal-study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36 (4): 631–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. 1999. Ownership strategy of Japanese firms: transactional, institutional, and experience influences. Strategic Management Journal, 20 (10): 915–933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixit, A., & Pindyck, R. S. 1994. Investment under uncertainty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eiteman, D. K., Stonehill, A. I., & Moffett, M. H. 1998. Multinational business finance, (8th ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagre, N., & Wells, L. T. 1982. Bargaining power of multinationals and host governments. Journal of International Business Studies, 13 (2): 9–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, J. P. H., Morck, R., Xu, L. C., & Yeung, B. 2007. Does ‘good government’ draw foreign capital? Explaining China's exceptional foreign direct investment inflow, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 4206.

  • Financial Times. 2005. Fortis lifts stake in Chinese joint venture. 21 December: 18.

  • Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. A. 1985. Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 10 (4): 803–813.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folta, T. B. 1998. Governance and uncertainty: The trade-off between administrative control and commitment. Strategic Management Journal, 19 (11): 1007–1028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folta, T. B., & Miller, K. D. 2002. Real options in equity partnerships. Strategic Management Journal, 23 (1): 77–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaba, V., Pan, Y. G., & Ungson, G. R. 2002. Timing of entry in international market: An empirical study of US Fortune 500 firms in China. Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (1): 39–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, and Organization, 1 (2): 305–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W. H. 2003. Econometric analysis, (5th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R. 1995. Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 38 (1): 85–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henisz, W. J., & Delios, A. 2001. Uncertainty, imitation, and plant location: Japanese multinational corporations, 1990–1996. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46 (3): 443–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennart, J. F. 1988. A transaction costs theory of equity joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 9 (4): 361–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennart, J. F. 1991. The transaction costs theory of joint ventures: An empirical study of Japanese subsidiaries in the United States. Management Science, 37 (4): 483–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennart, J. F., & Larimo, J. 1998. The impact of culture on the strategy of multinational enterprises: Does national origin affect ownership decisions? Journal of International Business Studies, 29 (3): 515–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoenig, J. M., & Heisey, D. M. 2001. The abuse of power: The pervasive fallacy of power calculations for data analysis. The American Statistician, 55 (1): 19–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. 2001. Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations, (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hox, J. J. 1995. Applied multilevel analysis, (2nd ed.). Amsterdam: TT-Publikaties.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huchzermeier, A., & Cohen, M. A. 1996. Valuing operational flexibility under exchange rate risk. Operations Research, 44 (1): 100–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Currency Analysis. Various years. World currency yearbook. Brooklyn: International Currency Analysis.

  • International Monetary Fund. Various years. Annual report on exchange rate arrangements and exchange restrictions. Washington, DC: IMF.

  • Jarrow, R., & Turnbull, S. 2000. Derivative securities, (2nd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. H. 2005. What hypothesis tests are not: A response to Colegrave and Ruxton. Behavioral Ecology, 16 (1): 204–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, S. I. 1972. Exchange risk under fixed and flexible exchange rates. New York: New York University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kester, W. C. 1981. Growth options and investment: A dynamic perspective on the firm's allocation of resources, Unpublished PhD dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

  • Knight, F. H. 1921. Risk, uncertainty and profit. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobrin, S. J. 1987. Testing the bargaining hypothesis in the manufacturing sector in developing countries. International Organization, 41 (4): 609–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B. 1988. Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. Strategic Management Journal, 9 (4): 319–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B. 1991. Joint ventures and the option to expand and acquire. Management Science, 37 (1): 19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Singh, H. 1988. The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19 (3): 411–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotabe, M., Martin, X., & Domoto, H. 2003. Gaining from vertical partnerships: Knowledge transfer, relationship duration and supplier performance improvement in the US and Japanese automotive industries. Strategic Management Journal, 24 (4): 293–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koussis, N., Martzoukos, S. H., & Trigeorgis, L. 2007. Real R&D options with time-to-learn and learning-by-doing. Annals of Operations Research, 151 (1): 29–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnan, R., Martin, X., & Noorderhaven, N. G. 2006. When does trust matter to alliance performance? Academy of Management Journal, 49 (5): 894–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulatilaka, N. 1995. The value of flexibility: A general model of real options. In L. Trigeorgis (Ed.), Real options in capital investment: Models, strategies, and applications: 89–108. Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulatilaka, N., & Perotti, E. C. 1998. Strategic growth options. Management Science, 44 (8): 1021–1031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, S. 2005. Value from acquiring and divesting a joint venture: A real options approach. Strategic Management Journal, 26 (4): 321–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, P. J., Cannella, A. A., & Lubatkin, M. H. 1998. Agency problems as antecedents to unrelated mergers and diversification: Amihud and Lev reconsidered. Strategic Management Journal, 19 (6): 555–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, J. 2007. Real options theory and international strategy: A critical review. Advances in Strategic Management, 24: 71–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, Y. 2005. Transactional characteristics, institutional environment and joint venture contracts. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (2): 209–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, X., & Salomon, R. 2003. Knowledge transfer capacity and its implications for the theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (4): 356–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, X., Swaminathan, A., & Mitchell, W. 1998. Organizational evolution in the interorganizational environment: Incentives and constraints on international expansion strategy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43 (3): 566–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. C. 1973. Theory of rational option pricing. Bell Journal of Economics, 4 (1): 141–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. D. 1992. A framework for integrated risk management in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 23 (2): 311–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. D., & Folta, T. B. 2002. Option value and entry timing. Strategic Management Journal, 23 (7): 655–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, W., & Singh, K. 1992. Incumbents' use of pre-entry alliances before expansion into new technical subfields of an industry. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 18 (3): 347–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mody, A. 1993. Learning through alliances. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 20 (2): 151–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MOFERT. Various years. Almanac of foreign economic relations and trade of China. Hong Kong: China Resource Trade Consultancy.

  • MOFTEC. Various years. Almanac of foreign economic relations and trade of China. Hong Kong: China Resource Trade Consultancy.

  • Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. 1996. Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (Winter Special Issue): 77–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, K. R., & Myors, B. 2004. Statistical power analysis: A simple and general model for traditional and modern hypothesis tests, (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, S. C. 1977. Determinants of corporate borrowing. Journal of Financial Economics, 5 (2): 147–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura, M., & Yeung, B. 1994. On the determinants of foreign ownership shares: Evidence from US firms’ joint ventures in Japan. Managerial and Decision Economics, 15 (2): 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura, M., Shaver, J. M., & Yeung, B. 1996. An empirical investigation of joint venture dynamics: Evidence from US–Japan joint ventures. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 14 (4): 521–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oriani, R., & Sobrero, M. 2008. Uncertainty and the market valuation of R&D within a real options logic. Strategic Management Journal, 29 (4): 343–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxelheim, L., & Wihlborg, C. G. 1987. Macroeconomic uncertainty: International risks and opportunities for the corporation. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxelheim, L., & Wihlborg, C. G. 1991. Corporate strategies in a turbulent world economy. Management International Review, 31 (4): 293–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxley, J. E. 1997. Appropriability hazards and governance in strategic alliances: A transaction cost approach. Journal of Law Economics & Organization, 13 (2): 387–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxley, J. E. 1999. Institutional environment and the mechanisms of governance: The impact of intellectual property protection on the structure of inter-firm alliances. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 38 (3): 283–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxley, J. E., & Sampson, R. C. 2004. The scope and governance of international R&D alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 25 (8–9): 723–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan, Y. G. 1996. Influences on foreign equity ownership level in joint ventures in China. Journal of International Business Studies, 27 (1): 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan, Y. G. 2002. Equity ownership in international joint ventures: The impact of source country factors. Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (2): 375–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawlina, G., & Kort, P. M. 2006. Real options in an asymmetric duopoly: Who benefits from your competitive advantage? Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 15 (1): 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, S., Morck, R., & Yeung, B. 2008. Innocents abroad: The hazards of international joint ventures with pyramidal group firms, Working paper, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1097265.

  • Pick, F. Various years. Pick's currency yearbook. New York: Pick Publishing Corporation.

  • Pindyck, R. S. 1988. Irreversible commitment, capacity choice, and the value of the firm. American Economic Review, 78 (5): 967–985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisano, G. 1989. Using equity participations to support exchange: Evidence from the biotechnology industry. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 5 (1): 109–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisano, G. 1990. The R&D boundaries of the firm: An empirical analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (1): 153–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, M. C., & Rogoff, K. S. 2004. The modern history of exchange rate arrangements: A reinterpretation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119 (1): 1–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuer, J. J. 2000. Parent firm performance across international joint venture life-cycle stages. Journal of International Business Studies, 29 (1): 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuer, J. J. 2002. How real are real options? The case of international joint ventures. In M. A. Hitt, R. Amit & R. D. Nixon (Eds), Creating value: Winners in the new business environment: 61–84. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reuer, J. J., & Koza, M. P. 2000. On lemons and indigestibility: Resource assembly through joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 21 (2): 195–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuer, J. J., & Leiblein, M. J. 2000. Downside risk implications of multinationality and international joint ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 43 (2): 203–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuer, J. J., & Tong, T. W. 2005. Real options in international joint ventures. Journal of Management, 31 (3): 403–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuer, J. J., Zollo, M., & Singh, H. 2002. Post-formation dynamics in strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 23 (2): 135–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, K., & Weitzman, M. L. 1981. Funding criteria for research, development, and exploration projects. Econometrica, 49 (5): 1261–1287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royall, R. M. 1997. Statistical evidence: A likelihood paradigm. New York: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R. C. 2004. The cost of misaligned governance in R&D alliances. Journal of Law Economics & Organization, 20 (2): 484–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seth, A., & Chi, T. L. 2002. Joint ventures through a real options lens. In F. J. Contractor & P. Lorange (Eds), Cooperative strategies and alliances: 101–116. Amsterdam: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seth, A., & Kim, S.-M. 2001. Valuation of international joint ventures: A real options approach. In F. Contractor (Ed.), Valuation of intangible assets in international operations. 147–170. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shan, W. 1991. Environmental risks and joint venture sharing arrangements. Journal of International Business Studies, 22 (4): 555–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaver, J. M. 2008. Organizational significance. Strategic Organization, 6 (2): 185–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tong, T. W., Reuer, J. J., & Peng, M. W. 2008. International joint ventures and the value of growth options. Academy of Management Journal, 51 (5): 1014–1029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trigeorgis, L. 1993. Real options and interactions with financial flexibility. Financial Management, 22 (3): 202–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trigeorgis, L. 1995. Real options: An overview. In L. Trigeorgis (Ed.), Real options in capital investment: Models, strategies, and applications: 1–30. Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tse, D. K., Pan, Y. G., & Au, K. Y. 1997. How MNCs choose entry modes and form alliances: The China experience. Journal of International Business Studies, 28 (4): 779–805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNCTAD. Various years. World investment report. Geneva: UNCTAD.

  • Van Mieghem, J. A. 1999. Coordinating investment, production, and subcontracting. Management Science, 45 (7): 954–971.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vassolo, R. S., Anand, J., & Folta, T. B. 2004. Non-additivity in portfolios of exploration activities: A real options-based analysis of equity alliances in biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal, 25 (11): 1045–1061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Y., Shenkar, O., & Raveh, A. 1996. National and corporate cultural fit in mergers/acquisitions: An exploratory study. Management Science, 42 (8): 1215–1227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wholey, D. R., & Brittain, J. 1989. Characterizing environmental variation. Academy of Management Journal, 32 (4): 867–882.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. 1985. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Jérémie Lefebvre, Kent Miller, Jeff Reuer, Anju Seth, and the Associate Editor Anand Swaminathan and three anonymous reviewers for insightful comments. We are especially grateful to Youtha Cuypers for her many helpful suggestions. The paper also benefited from presentations at City University of Hong Kong, EM Lyon, ESMT Berlin, Georgia Tech, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Michigan State University, National University of Singapore, Singapore Management University, SUNY Buffalo, University of Queensland, University of Amsterdam, Warwick Business School, and Western Washington University, and at conferences at IESE, LBS and Radboud University Nijmegen. Any remaining errors are solely ours.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ilya RP Cuypers.

Additional information

Accepted by Anand Swaminathan, Area Editor, 15 December 2008. This paper has been with the authors for two revisions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cuypers, I., Martin, X. What makes and what does not make a real option? A study of equity shares in international joint ventures. J Int Bus Stud 41, 47–69 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.17

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.17

Keywords

Navigation