Ключевые слова
технологический потенциал
исследования и разработки
инновации
политическая активность корпораций
корпоративные инвестиции
неопределенность
квантильная регрессия
Как цитировать
Аннотация
В стремлении добиться выхода на новые уровни развития компании применяют самые разные стратегии. Наряду с курсом на самодостаточность и работу с рисками, многие игроки рассматривают для себя приемлемой сложную комбинацию стратегических действий: инвестируют в политические инициативы, рассчитывая в перспективе на получение государственной поддержки, чтобы превратить ее в «бустер» собственной инвестиционной и инновационной активности.
В статье представлен детальный анализ влияния корпоративной политической активности (КПА) на формирование долгосрочных технологических и рыночных преимуществ для бизнеса. Основу исследования составила выборка американских компаний, котирующихся на бирже.
Эффекты рассматриваемой стратегии для повышения эффективности бизнеса выглядят неоднозначными. В развитие и уточнение результатов предыдущих исследований делается вывод, что КПА приносит компаниям ощутимые преимущества лишь до определенного предела. Наиболее значимые выгоды от применения данного инструмента, помимо небольших компаний, извлекают и крупные игроки, которые по тем или иным причинам оказались в уязвимом положении с точки зрения наращивания капитала. Напротив, самодостаточным и устойчивым субъектам бизнеса, сумевшим накопить солидную инвестиционную базу, целесообразно отказаться от КПА. Взамен следует сфокусироваться на расширении рыночного присутствия и вложениях в исследования и разработки, что обеспечит более ощутимую прибыльность в сравнении с КПА.
Литература
Alok S., Ayyagari M. (2020) Politics, state ownership, and corporate investments. The Review of Financial Studies, 33(7), 3031-3087. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhz102
An H., Chen Y., Luo D., Zhang T. (2016) Political uncertainty and corporate investment: Evidence from China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 36, 174-189. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2015.11.003
Anastasiadis S., Moon J., Humphreys M. (2018) Lobbying and the responsible firm: Agenda-setting for a freshly conceptualized field. Business Ethics, 27(3), 207-221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12180(2)
Ashyrov G., Lukason O. (2022) Political Connectedness and Financial Performance of SMEs. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 15(12), 600. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15120600
Barnett M.L., Salomon R.M. (2006) Beyond dichotomy: The curvilinear relationship between social responsibility and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27(11), 1101-1122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.557
Bertrand J., Perrin C. (2024) Does Corporate Political Activity (Really) Reduce Discouragement? The Paradox of Women-Led Firms (SSRN paper 4743152). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4743152
Beugelsdijk S., Cornet M. (2002) A Far Friend is Worth More than a Good Neighbour': Proximity and Innovation in a Small Country. Journal of Management & Governance, 6, 169-188. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015775321949.
Bhagat S., Bolton B. (2008) Firm size and the effectiveness of the market for corporate control. Journal of Corporate Finance, 14, 257-273. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2008.03.006
Bliss M.A., Gul F.A. (2012) Political connection and cost of debt: Some Malaysian evidence. Journal of Banking & Finance, 36(5), 1520-1527. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2011.12.011
Blundell R., Bond S. (1998) Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115-143. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00009-8
Blundell R., Bond S. (2000) GMM estimation with persistent panel data: An application to production functions. Econometric Reviews, 19(3), 321-340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07474930008800475
Bonardi J.P. (2003) Global and political strategies in deregulated industries: The asymmetric behaviors of former monopolies. Strategic Management Journal, 25(2), 101-120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.367
Brown L.W., Liou R.S., Hasija D. (2023) Emerging market multinational corporations' cross-border mergers and acquisitions and political distance: Does corporate political activity matter?. Thunderbird International Business Review, 65(5), 533-546. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.22355
Byrd R.C. (1991) The Senate, 1789-1989 (vol. II), Washington, D.C.: United States Senate.
Chernozhukov V., Hansen C. (2005) An IV model of quantile treatment effects. Econometrica, 73(1), 245-261. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3598944.
Child J. (1972) Organizational structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology, 6(1), 1-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/003803857200600101
Cooper M.J., Gulen H., Ovtchinnikov A.V. (2010) Corporate political contributions and stock returns. The Journal of Finance, 65(2), 687-724. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25656307.
Czarnitzki D., Toole A.A. (2007) Business R&D and the interplay of R&D subsidies and product market uncertainty. Review of Industrial Organization, 31(3), 169-181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-007-9152-x
Danaei A., Jabbari M., Omidifar L. (2013) Strategic planning and performance measurement using Fuzzy DEMATEL: A case study of Iran Kaolin and Barite company. Decision Science Letters, 2(4), 231-240. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5267/J.DSL.2013.05.003
Denisov D. (2010) Business lobbying and government relations in Russia: The need for new principles (Reuters Institute Fellowship Paper), Oxford: University of Oxford.
Faccio M. (2010) Differences between politically connected and nonconnected firms: A cross-country analysis. Financial Management, 39(3), 905-928. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-053X.2010.01099.x
Fan J.P., Wong T.J., Zhang T. (2007) Politically connected CEOs, corporate governance, and Post-IPO performance of China's newly partially privatized firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 84(2), 330-357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2006.03.008
Firpo S., Fortin N., Lemieux T. (2009) Unconditional quantile regressions. Econometrica, 77(3), 953-973. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40263848.
Fung S.Y., Gul F.A., Radhakrishnan S. (2015) Corporate political connections and the 2008 Malaysian election. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 43, 67-86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2015.04.001
Funk R.J., Hirschman D. (2017) Beyond nonmarket strategy: Market actions as corporate political activity. Academy of Management Review, 42(1), 32-52. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24906274.
Galvao A.F. (2011) Quantile regression for dynamic panel data with fixed effects. Journal of Econometrics, 164(1), 142-157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2011.02.016
Getz K.A. (1997) Research in corporate political action: Integration and assessment. Business & Society, 36(1), 32-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000765039703600103
Goldman E., Rocholl J., So J. (2009) Do politically connected boards affect firm value?. The Review of Financial Studies, 22(6), 2331-2360. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30225718.
Goldstraw-White J., Martin G. (2016) Tackling bribery and corruption in the Middle East: Perspectives from the front line. Journal of Financial Crime, 23(4), 843-854. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-08-2015-0040
Gomez E.T., Padmanabhan T., Kamaruddin N., Bhalla S., Fisal F. (2017) Minister of finance incorporated: Ownership and control of corporate Malaysia, Heidelberg, Dordrecht, London, New York: Springer.
Guedhami O., Pittman J.A., Saffar W. (2014) Auditor choice in politically connected firms. Journal of Accounting Research, 52(1), 107-162. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12032
Gulen H., Ion M. (2016) Policy uncertainty and corporate investment. The Review of Financial Studies, 29(3), 523-564. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhv050
Hadani M., Bonardi J.P., Dahan N.M. (2017) Corporate political activity, public policy uncertainty, and firm outcomes: A meta-analysis. Strategic Organization, 15(3), 338-366. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127016651001
Hart D.M. (2001) Why do some firms give? Why do some give a lot?: High-tech PACs, 1977-1996. Journal of Politics, 63(4), 1230-1249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00108
Hill C.W., Snell S.A. (1988) External control, corporate strategy, and firm performance in research-intensive industries. Strategic Management Journal, 9(6), 577-590. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250090605
Hill M.D., Kelly G.W., Lockhart G.B., Van Ness R.A. (2013) Determinants and Effects of Corporate Lobbying. Financial Management, 42(4), 931-957. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43280520.
Hillman A.J., Keim G.D. (2001) Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What's the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), 125-139. :2<125::AID-SMJ150>3.0.CO;2-H. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0266(200101)22
Hillman B. (2005) Monastic politics and the local state in China: Authority and autonomy in an ethnically Tibetan prefecture. The China Journal, (54), 29-51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/20066065
Hoskisson R.E., Hitt M.A., Johnson R.A., Moesel D.D. (1993) Construct validity of an objective (entropy) categorical measure of diversification strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 215-235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250140305
Houston J.F., Jiang L., Lin C., Ma Y. (2014) Political connections and the cost of bank loans. Journal of Accounting Research, 52(1), 193-243. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12038
Hyytinen A., Toivanen O. (2005) Do financial constraints hold back innovation and growth?: Evidence on the role of public policy. Research Policy, 34(9), 1385-1403. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.06.004
Jackowicz K., Kozłowski Ł., Mielcarz P. (2014) Political connections and operational performance of non-financial firms: New evidence from Poland. Emerging Markets Review, 20, 109-135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2014.06.005
Khaw K.L.H., Zainudin R., Rashid R.M. (2019) Cost of debt financing: Does political connection matter?. Emerging Markets Review, 41(C). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2019.100632
Koenker R., Bassett G. (1982) Robust tests for heteroscedasticity based on regression quantiles. Econometrica, 43-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1912528
Lawton T., McGuire S., Rajwani T. (2013) Corporate political activity: A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(1), 86-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2012.00337.x
Lee J.Y., Jiménez A., Choi S., Choi Y.H. (2022) Ideological polarization and corporate lobbying activity: The contingent impact of corruption distance. Journal of Business Research, 141, 448-461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.047
Lin J., Si S.X. (2010) Can guanxi be a problem? Contexts, ties, and some unfavorable consequences of social capital in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 27(3), 561-581. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-010-9198-4
Lin W.L. (2019) Do firm's organisational slacks influence the relationship between corporate lobbying and corporate financial performance? More is not always better. International Journal of Financial Studies, 7(1), 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs7010002
Lin W.L. (2020) Giving too much and paying too little? The effect of corporate social responsibility on corporate lobbying efficacy: Evidence of tax aggressiveness. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28(2), 908-924. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2098
Lin W.L., Sambasivan M., Ho J.A., Law S.H. (2019) Corporate Political Activity and Financial Performance: A Corporate Social Responsibility Perspective. In: Proceedings of the International Symposia in Economic Theory and Econometrics ‘Asia-Pacific Contemporary Finance and Development' (vol. 26), pp. 235-264. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S1571-038620190000026012
Liou R.-S., Brown L.W., Hasija D. (2021) Political animosity in cross-border acquisitions: EMNCs' market and nonmarket strategy in a developed market. Multinational Business Review, 29(4), 451-475. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MBR-02-2020-0034
Liu H., Yang J.Y., Augustine D. (2018) Political ties and firm performance: The effects of proself and prosocial engagement and institutional development. Global Strategy Journal, 8(3), 471-502. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1194
Lux S., Crook T.R., Woehr D.J. (2011) Mixing business with politics: A meta-analysis of the antecedents and outcomes of corporate political activity. Journal of Management, 37(1), 223-247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310392233
Ma Y., Xue L. (2024) Organizational legitimacy and firm nonmarket strategies as catalysts of alliance green management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 447, 141315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141315
Massaro M. (2019) Is business lobbying in the European Union context-dependent? Evidence from the policy field of radio spectrum. Telecommunications Policy, 43(10), 101827. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2019.101827
Mitnick B.M. (1993) Corporate political agency: The construction of competition in public affairs, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Ozer M., Markóczy L. (2010) Complementary or alternative? The effects of corporate political strategy on innovation. Journal of Strategy and Management, 3(3), 252-272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/17554251011064846
Piotroski J.D., Wong T.J., Zhang T. (2015) Political incentives to suppress negative information: Evidence from Chinese listed firms. Journal of Accounting Research, 53(2), 405-459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12071
Ramesh V.K. (2024) Does economic and policy uncertainty impact corporate policies? Evidence from India. Indian Growth and Development Review, 17(1), 43-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IGDR-09-2022-0107
Romann E. (2020) Nonmarket Strategy in Japan: How Foreign Firms Lobby Inside the Castle (1st ed.), New York: Macmillan.
Roodman D. (2006). How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. The Stata Journal, 9(1), 86-136.
Rudy B.C., Cavich J. (2020) Nonmarket signals: Investment in corporate political activity and the performance of initial public offerings. Business & Society, 59(3), 419-438. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650317717263
Shi W., Hoskisson R.E., Zhang Y. (2020) Corporate political activities and firm performance: Evidence from China. Management and Organization Review, 16(1), 107-137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2018.38
Shleifer A., Vishny R.W. (1994) Politicians and firms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(4), 995-1025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2118354
Slater S., Lawrence M., Wood B., Serodio P., Baker P. (2024) Corporate interest groups and their implications for global food governance: mapping and analysing the global corporate influence network of the transnational ultra-processed food industry. Globalization and Health, 20(16), 1-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-024-01020-4
Sutton T., Devine R.A., Lamont B.T., Holmes R.M. (2021) Resource dependence, uncertainty, and the allocation of corporate political activity across multiple jurisdictions. Academy of Management Journal, 64(1), 38-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.1258
Taylor C. (1997) The politics of recognition. In: New Contexts of Canadian Criticism (ed. A. Gutman), Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 25-73.
Tee C. (2018) The Gülen Movement in London and the politics of public engagement: Producing ‘good Islam' before and after 15 July. Politics, Religion & Ideology, 19(1), 109-122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21567689.2018.1453269
Tyler B., Lahneman B., Cerrato D., Cruz A.D., Beukel K., Spielmann N., Minciullo M. (2023) Environmental practice adoption in SMEs: The effects of firm proactive orientation and regulatory pressure, Journal of Small Business Management, 2218435. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2023.2218435
Wang D., Sutherland D., Ning L., Wang Y., Pan X. (2018) Exploring the influence of political connections and managerial overconfidence on R&D intensity in China's large-scale private sector firms. Technovation, 69, 40-53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2017.10.007
Wooldridge J.M. (2010) Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wu J., Li S., Li Z. (2013) The contingent value of CEO political connections: A study on IPO performance in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(4), 1087-1114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-012-9300-1
Xu X., Yan Y. (2020) Effect of political connection on corporate environmental investment: Evidence from Chinese private firms. Applied Economics Letters, 27(18), 1515-1521. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2019.1693692
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная.