PARTNERSHIP
SUCCESS FACTORS: OVERCOMING CULTURAL MISFIT BETWEEN TUNISIAN SMES AND THEIR
FRENCH PARTNERS
Hanen
Khanchel
University
of Carthage, Tunisia
E-mail: Hanen.khanchel@gmail.com
Karim Ben Kahla
High Business
School, Campus of Manouba, Tunisia
E-mail:
Kbenkahla@gmail.com
Submission: 9/2/2020
Accept: 9/21/2020
ABSTRACT
This paper proposes a conceptual framework to shed light on cultural issues in health crisis between Tunisian Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and their French partners. The Critical Success Factors (CSF) of a formalized management of cultural misfit can be considerable for researchers and practitioners: the steps of turning the page of the paradigm of cultural distance and address cultural difference from the point of view of mutual enrichment are worthy of interest. Indeed, the multivariate analysis proposes to go beyond this cultural paradigm to approach the cross-cultural management. Its goal is to formulate paths for reflection and research that will enrich the understanding of the difficulties encountered during the COVID-19 period in the dynamics of bringing together two entities from different national cultures. In order to achieve this objective, the correlational research design by Fey and Denison (2003) was adopted in this survey, using revised measurement scales from this work. This is because correlational research is concerned with studying a problem in order to analyse the relationship between cultural variables. The active consideration of cultural characteristics has a double advantage: it helps to alleviate tensions related to cultural challenges and capitalize on the CSF derived from the diversity of approaches. It proceeds from a detailed study of the cultural characteristics of the two partners, which will serve as a basis for a possible rapprochement in the future.
Keywords: Culture; CSF; Partnership; Tunisian SMEs;
France; COVID-19
1.
INTRODUCTION
Since
January 2020, the health crisis has caused indefinable disruptions in transnational relations (Choi et al., 2020). WHO (2020) highlights that it is a
challenge to satisfy the needs of partners in the COVID-19 period. Likewise,
the crisis is jeopardizing the partnership relationship in the event of a
pandemic (Segal & Gerstel, 2020).
Some
partners are unable to honor their commitments because of the crisis, among
many others, the difficulty of ensuring minimum production capacity, a rapid
response to COVID-19, the bankruptcy of most companies triggering bullwhip
effects, as well as the fragility of alliances contributing to the global
economic chaos facing the world (Ivanov & Dolgui, 2020).
Therefore,
partnerships are facing more difficulties with the health crisis (Jenny, 2020). Companies must adapt their cultures to meet the
challenges of the health crisis. Thus, culture has been a challenge for
national entities in international settings (Zollo & Meier, 2008), many
studies have examined the influence of national culture on performance.
Somewhat conclusive results from
this work have strengthened researchers' interest in cultural issues, some
describing the benefits of partnership, others the cultural challenges of
transnational rapprochement. The concepts of "cultural fit" (Weber, Shenkar
& Raveh, 1996), "cultural compatibility" (Cartwright &
Cooper, 1993), "cultural distance" (Morosini, Shane & Singh,
1998) and "management style similarity" (Larsson & Finkelstein,
1999) have been various angles of approach to the link between culture and
performance that interests us today in its contrasting and ambiguous aspects
(Hofstede, 1991).
A meta-analysis by King et al.
(2004) of 93 studies confirms the hypothesis that the Critical
Success Factors (CSF) of
partnership between Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in crisis context deserve further attention:
"Our results
indicate that performance is moderated by variables unidentified by existing
research".
Indeed, Ellis (1996) has examined other factors that determine the
level of success of partnerships. The issues of structure, power sharing,
control and trust play a fundamental role in the success of partnership during
the COVID -19 period (Raflis and al., 2020). Similarly, Ellis (1996) advises CEO to create an environment of
trust, to maintain a broad strategic vision and to feel genuine empathy for
others, even those who are still competitors in other areas.
Moss (1994) and Rijamampiana and
colleagues
(2005) consider partnership success based on communication, the implementation
of the alliance contracted and the financial and strategic analysis. Therefore,
the ability of any partnership to deliver expected performance largely depends
on the structure created, the relationship management, and how the parent's
culture influences business integration.
Another meta-analysis conducted by
Scheppink (2018) of the impact of cultural misfit on partnership performance
concludes that most of the explanatory factors for cultural variance are not
resolved. Later analyses offer complementary lines of evidence. Very and Teerikangas (2006) suggest
that conceptual and methodological biases have altered the research results.
Finally, Scheppink (2018) questions whether the link between culture and
performance is moderated by cross-cultural differences and how these
differences are managed ?
The effective management of the Critical
Success Factors (CSF) of partnership between SMEs during the COVID-19 period deserves our attention: the
process of going beyond the cultural issues in health crisis have only been
touched by the research. This academic vacuum presumably arises from the
excessive emphasis on description, comparison and therefore to the extent of
cultural misfit, a field of research that has mobilized experts over the
last twenty years and has found its justification in a positivist
epistemological current of "reification" of culture, on the basis of Hofstede model of six
dimensions of national cultures (Hofstede, 1991): Power Distance, Uncertainty
Avoidance, Individualism/Collectivism, Masculinity/Femininity, Long/Short Term
Orientation, and Indulgence/Restraint.
In the case of the Tunisian SME,
they experienced a health crisis, which led to socio-economic changes in the country. Few French SMEs left Tunisia after the COVID-19. French FDI continued to
grow in 2020 and increased by more than 34%. According to this study (World Economic Forum, 2020), France is in the first place with 626.86
million dinars. Indeed, France, Italy and Germany are also ranked as 1st, 2nd
and 3rd country creators of partnerships respectively in Tunisia.
Its
geographic proximity to Europe is also
an advantage for Tunisia. The partnership is a close one
economically, culturally and socially. From January 2008, Tunisia was
the first country of the southern Mediterranean shore to join the Free Trade
Area of the E.U. How tight the fit between the Tunisian SMEs
and their French partners should be, basically depends not only on cultural misfit, but also on the success of the partnership.
CSF must be taken into account
to SMEs
partnership, according to Kogut (1988), the size of the partners, their
geographical origin, their level of experience in partnership, are all indicators of success described as asymmetrical.
The analysis of these criteria is of importance since it allows us to define
the level of asymmetry between the partners, and its evolution over time that
changes according to the contribution of each partner. Any form of asymmetry is
therefore a source of power in the negotiation for the dominant partner.
In a study of joint-ventures between
the U.S.A. and China, Yan and Gray
(1994) evaluate the bargaining power with regard to the strategic importance of
the partnership, expertise, technology and business knowledge. They argue that
the bargaining power increases the room for maneuvre of one of the partners,
giving it the ability to steer the joint venture.
This
paper addresses the issue of culture in health crisis. Differences in values are important in partnerships
because partners with
different cultural backgrounds come in close contact, negotiate and interact in
such activities (Hofstede, 1991).
However as alluded to above, partnerships are not without challenges and become
complicated due to cultural misfit in the
COVID-19 period (Waresame, 2020).
Against
this background, we therefore focus on the role of culture on the exchanged assets, and how it impacts the level
of alliance performance. Indeed, the following study proposes to examine the
practices associated with a repository that allows to use cross-cultural
management methods to understand the partnership. Rather than
talking about distance, similarity or compatibility between cultures, it seems
more appropriate to speak of convergence, transformation or transcending
cultural misfit.
Its
development is organized in three parts: the first part draws the conceptual
framework by highlighting the modes of cross-cultural
management; the second part identifies the CSF of partnership between Tunisian SMEs and their French partners; and
the third part presents the recommendations.
2.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
We will develop in this section a
conceptual framework by Fey and Denison (2003), using revised measurement scales from their work, through which we seek to justify the link
between the two concepts culture and CSF of partnership between
Tunisian SMEs and their French partners being given that, to our knowledge, there is little
research that has tried to treat this issue in such context
of health crisis,
and that it has been a little discarded because of the difficulty in
operationalizing the concept culture (Hofstede, 1991).
In the conceptualization of the
effects of cultural factors on the success of partnerships between Tunisian and French SMEs. Partnerships are
operationalized in terms of technological alliances which when forged by Franco-Tunisian
SMEs affects performance indicated by the exchanged assets, sales growth and market
share. The knowledge that SMEs can improve their performance in a number of ways
makes its
management seek to acquire those ways.
Therefore the motivation to enter
into partnership is guided by a SME’s perception of its chances to success
during the COVID-19 period. Indeed, this measurement is important because partners may
have expectations (Bouey, 2020). Realizing these outcomes may require adaptation, exercising
control, raising funding or extending cooperation (Hyder & Eriksson, 2005)
which may comprise tangible and intangible returns. How SMEs came to an agreement may not
be directly measured, but their impact can be felt and assessed from the
survival and growth of the alliance. As alliance is a dynamic process,
performance measured form a long-term perspective is therefore more appropriate.
This perspective is complemented by
the work of Tinlot and Mothe (2005) who also introduced contextual variables to determine
the bargaining power, related to the strategic importance of the partnership, in
addition to the
urgency and uncertainty about partner behavior during the
COVID-19 period.
In other words, it is a question of understanding if the partner adopts a controlled attitude
and resistance to change during the health crisis (Suraya et
al., 2020). It
is possible to say that the heterogeneity of cultures described previously
disappears in favor of homogeneity under the threat of a partnership. Cultural
identity is then brandished as a weapon against the invader: the organizational
identity is presented as the bridgehead of the resistance but behind it,
national identity is ready to intervene (Bjorkman et al., 2007).
The size of the SME is advanced as a first asymmetry
variable, presented in particular in the bargaining power of the partners.
So, a larger partner, in terms of results, will have more influence in the partnership.
In this type of situation, a partnership places the smallest partner in a
position of unilateral dependence on the larger partner.
However, according to Kalaignanam,
Shankar and Varadarajan (2007) quoted by Mani and others (2015), SMEs have an interest in forming
alliances with larger firms in order to have a critical size, for example, to increase
sales growth or to enter new markets. The strategic character of the
partnership is therefore more accentuated for the SME than for the large one,
which is manifested by an imbalance in strengths to the detriment of the
former.
The second factor of asymmetry lies
precisely in the nature of the exchanged assets by partners. The partnership is
based on pooling tangible and intangible assets. Some intangible assets, such as corporate culture,
experience of the human capital and reputation have a lasting competitive
advantage because they are protected by barriers of transfer (Fernandez, Montes
& Vazquez, 1999), due to their uniqueness and superiority. Customer
loyalty, know-how, skills and competences, and the location of the site are
examples of assets that are difficult to transfer at the least cost to
competitors (Fernandez, Montes & Vazquez, 1999).
The alliance then becomes the only
way to capitalize on being associated with the benefits that these assets provide. As a result, each
partner introduces a form of reciprocity in trade, and tangible and intangible
assets on which it depends (Prahalad & Hamel, 1994), access to which
would be more expensive, outside the cooperative climate of the alliance
(Kogut, 1988). In these conditions, there is a gap in the "relative
value" of the assets contributed by each partner. This introduces asymmetry into
the power negotiation and in the level of dependence of each partner. The
control of CSF non-imitable assets by SME in a given market gives it a
strong bargaining power within the alliance.
The third factor of asymmetry
focuses on the strategic importance of the alliance: the irreplaceability, the
non-substitutable nature of exchanged assets within the alliance, the level of performance (Abdullah & al., 2015).
Figure 1: Conceptual model
Source : Adapted from Fey and Denison
(2003)
3.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES
The purpose of our research is to
study the impact of culture on its level of partnership success during
the COVID-19 period, we will need to distinguish the cultural traits that characterize each
entity. Similarly, King et al. (2004) confirm the hypothesis that the CSF of partnership deserve
further attention in cultural issues.
From a questionnaire distributed
to CEO and
based on the index of culture of Fey and Denison (2003) adapted to the Tunisian
context, we plan to implement relief the cultural orientations of Franco-Tunisian SMEs
during the COVID-19 period. By focusing on the cultural misfit between Tunisia and France, we wanted to answer the
following research questions:
· Do the cultural factors influence the success of partnerships?
· What are the
barriers encountered in forming the partnership?
· What forms
do these partnerships take?
· What are
the expected results of partnerships?
· What are
the activities at the heart of the partnership in terms of added value?
In order to answer our questions, we have formulated the
following six hypotheses:
·
H1 The "Level of Uncertainty" influences the
success of partnerships.
·
H2 The "Degrees of Urgency" influences the success
of partnerships.
·
H3 The "Exchanged Assets" influences the success of
partnerships.
·
H4 The "Strategic Direction" influences the success
of partnerships.
·
H5 "Size of the SME" influences the success of partnerships.
· H6 The "Activity
Sector" influences the success of partnerships.
4.
METHODOLOGY
The study is based on the validation
phase of data extracted from a representative sample of SMEs in the ICT sector in Tunisia during
the COVID-19 period. Similarly, for this sample to be considered, we have systematically
sought to issue production and support function executives. The selection of SMEs is essentially based on
these two criteria. From a methodological point of view, this conceptualization
of cross-cultural management has been studied by Fey and Denison (2003), using revised measurement scales from this work. After that, it will be restructured from the
conceptual model presented in figure 1.
As
a result, we followed the above
steps :
· Construction of an evaluation grid that includes 43 items after a
detailed review of the literature and a thorough reading of the annual reports
of SMEs. Each item will be evaluated according to the four attributes:
"situation", "evolution", "comment" and "graph"
and will be marked 2 if it appears in the annual reports of SMEs, 1 otherwise.
· We then used the optimal coding method to represent each item with a single value.
· Calculation of the difference in the score per item obtained by each SME compared to a reference SME benchmark.
· Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to synthesize index items in axes.
· Estimation of the deviation from the efficiency frontier according to the model.
·
Test of the predictive validity of the index.
5.
RESEARCH DESIGN
Correlational research design by Fey
and Denison (2003) was adopted in this survey,
using revised measurement scales from this work. This is because correlational
research is concerned with studying a problem in order to analyse the
relationship between variables. Creswel (2008) notes that, correlational
research involves collecting data at one time as the focus is not based on
future or past performance of participants. When analyzing the findings,
researchers analyze respondents as a single group rather than creating
subcategories.
6.
SAMPLE SIZE
The target population of this study
is Tunisian SMEs and their French partners in ICT Sector. Multistage sampling was used
in this study. First, purposive sampling was used to select the 5 leading SMEs
in Tunisia, using secondary data from W.E.F. report (2020). CEO of each selected SMEs were the respondents.
Financial statements were also requested to assess the financial performance.
The strategic partners will be
selected from lists provided by the report of W.E.F. 100 respondents were
identified 20 from each of the selected SME. Simple random sampling was used to
attain a sample of twenty partners. The desired sample size was determined as
per formulation by Fisher et al
(1973) in Riungu et al (2013). Since there is no estimate available of the
proportion in the target population assumed to have the characteristics of
interest, 50% was used. In this survey the target proportion of the population
was assumed to have the characteristics of interest SMEs who are agreed
partners. To determine a sample size
from the population, the formula below was used:
n = (Z) ² p q / (d) ² Where:
n = the desired sample size.
Z - The standard normal deviate at the required confidence
level
p - The proportion in the target population estimated to have
characteristics being measured
q -
1- p
d- The level of statistical significance set (precision).
Since the proportion of the
population is not known p =0.5, q = (1-0.5) the Z statistics = 1.96 and a desired accuracy level at the 9.8%. This
results to a sample of 100 respondents.
7.
INSTRUMENTS
The research instrument that was
used was the questionnaire and the financial statements of the partners. A
structured questionnaire was used to collect the data from the CEO and their partners. The
questionnaire had four parts. Part A was made up mostly of close-ended
questions. The questions sought factual data such as gender, period the
respondent had worked in the SME and their level of education. This data helped validate the
information from the respondents. Part B had items on French partners, Part C Tunisin
partners, and lastly Part D Performance measures. A 4 point Likert scale has been
used to solicit
respondents’ information.
According to Pallant (2011) when
using the Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient value to test reliability, a value above
0.7 is considered acceptable; however, a value above 0.8 is preferable. In this
study, the Cronbach alpha coefficient was .72.
8.
RESULTS
We first present the results of the
revision of the measurement scales which allowed us to establish dimensionality
of the constructs and the internal coherence of these scales. Then, we report
the results of the multivariate analysis and their interpretation which allowed
us to visualize the effect of different cultural factors on our variable of
interest.
9.
SCALE MEASURING THE DEGREE OF
COMMITMENT
The analysis of the scale of the
commitment reveals a two-dimensional structure contrary to the results of Fey
and Denison (2003) who have noted three dimensions: authority, strategic
direction and partnership development capacity. In our sample, two dimensions
were identified: team orientation and development capacity. All items have a
good level of representation except that we had to eliminate some of them to
improve the quality of representation.
Consequently, from the 9 items
composing the commitment scale, we selected 6 items. Note also that only one
item reflecting the cultural values of authority is restored at the level of
the first dimension. The factors obtained account for 68.95% of the total
variance. Cronbach's alpha is satisfactory (0.738), which means that the 6
items share a common notion and contribute to the reliability of our
measurement.
Table 1: PCA results with varimax rotation and reliability
test of the "commitment degree" scale
|
1- Thank you to our
partners who are committed to our side! |
|||
|
2- We will
continue to lobby our partners to remain firmly engaged
in our mission during the COVID-19 period. |
|||
|
3- Partners engaged
in ad hoc alliances on individual pieces of work that enabled health
crisis action to respond quickly and effectively. |
|||
|
4- We thank our partners for their
commitment to getting this established. |
|||
|
5- We are engaged
with them during the COVID-19 period in the development of our
partnership. |
|||
|
6- Enlargement
will thereby have credibility in the eyes of those who want to develop
partnership with us in the future in the eyes of our partners
from this very moment. |
|||
|
Percentage
of variance explained by factor |
|||
|
Own
values |
|||
|
Reliability
of the scale |
|||
|
Correlation
of Pearson |
|||
|
Bartlett
specificity test |
|||
(**)Significant at the threshold of 5%
10.
SCALE MEASURING THE COHERENCE
ORIENTATION
The analysis of the coherence scale reveals
a two-dimensional structure contrary to that of the index of Fey and Denison
(2003) which revealed three dimensions: 1) the principal values, 2) the agreement and 3) the coordination and the
integration. In our sample, two dimensions have been selected: "the
agreement" and a second dimension which is a combination of the two
dimensions "principal values" and "coordination and integration"
and which explain 68.50% of the total variance.
From the 9 items of the
"agreement" scale developed by Fey and Denison (2003) we have
returned 7 and eliminated the following 2: “the leader follows and respects the
rules he has established in the SME”, and “the staff of the different hierarchical
levels share the same perspective”. Cronbach's alpha is satisfactory (0.800),
which means a strong internal consistency of our scale.
Table 2:
PCA results with varimax rotation and coherence scale reliability test
|
1- The association of our SME with
this partner is a success. |
|||
|
2- In general, we will say that
the results of our association with these partners far exceeded our
expectations. |
|||
|
3- If we were to conduct an
evaluation of the performance of our association with these partners during
the COVID-19 period, it would be very exceptional. |
|||
|
4- The partnership relationship
with these partners is very profitable. |
|||
|
5- This cooperation reduces
costs. |
|||
|
6- This cooperation improves the
quality of the service. |
|||
|
Percentage
of variance explained by factor |
|||
|
Own
values |
|||
|
Reliability
of the scale |
|||
|
Correlation
of Pearson |
|||
|
Bartlett
specificity test |
|||
11.
SCALE MEASURING ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
The varimax rotation resulted in a
factorization of all the variables that showed a significant degree of
representation, in three main components, according to Fey and Denison (2003):
"change", "customer orientation" and "organizational
learning". However, the distribution of items across these factors in our
sample has been slightly modified. The obtained axes restore (72.69%) of the
initial information. In addition, all items record a good level of
representation except for one item that we chose to eliminate: “the
recommendations of the SME's customers are often at the origin of the changes
in the work process.” Finally, the Cronbach's alpha obtained is 0.763, showing
strong internal consistency of our measurement scale.
Table 3:
Results of PCA with varimax rotation and reliability test of the "adaptive
capacity" scale
|
1- It should give the SME the
necessary flexibility to make progress towards achieving its objectives. |
|||||
|
2- It is differently depending
on their resilience, their
circumstances, as well as the availability of wider
sources. |
|||||
|
3- He feels reassured how
partners have the ability to adapt and with
a little guidance, take the right direction, even… |
|||||
|
4- He has
shown a remarkable capacity to
adapt in changing his priorities and its orientations during
the COVID-19 period. |
|||||
|
5- Comments about the
applicant's appearance, adaptability, or ability to be
trained. |
|||||
|
6- The Fund, however, rose to
the challenge, demonstrating
once again its capacity for receptiveness
and flexibility. |
|||||
|
7- I think the question of
adaptability will be partly answered by any specific learning. |
|||||
|
8- These include work that is
based on learning, supporting their
participation, and incorporating many value added activities. |
|||||
|
Percentage
of variance explained by factor |
|||||
|
Own
values |
|||||
|
Reliability
of the scale |
|||||
|
Correlation
of Pearson |
|||||
|
Bartlett
specificity test |
|||||
(***) the correlation is
significant at the 1% level
12.
SCALE MEASURING MISSION ORIENTATION
The analysis of the scale of mission
orientation
in our sample reveals a two-dimensional structure, unlike Fey and Denison
(2003) who identified three dimensions: "the strategy", "the
goals" and "the vision" presented in the following table: It
should also be noted that, despite the return of the 9 items, the
obtained
distribution in two factors has been modified compared to the structure of the
Fey &
Denison index (2003). We named the first factor "strategy and
visions" since it groups the items of the two axes, "strategy"
and, "vision".
We named the second factor
"goals" as it groups together two items relating to "goals"
factor: “The goals set by the leader are ambitious and achievable” and “The
goal the SME seeks to achieve is developed,.” and a third relating to the
"strategy" factor: “The SME aims for a long-term goal.” Cronbach's
alpha of this scale is satisfactory (0.890), so we conclude that the scale is
internally coherent.
Table 4:
PCA results with varimax rotation and mission orientation scale reliability
test
|
1- The SME aims for a long-term goal. |
|||
|
2- The purpose of the SME is clear and gives
meaning to the work of the staff. |
|||
|
3- The SME is developing a good and clear
strategy for the future. |
|||
|
4- All SME managers agree on the goals set by the management. |
|||
|
5- The goals set by the leader are
ambitious and achievable. |
|||
|
6- The goal that the SME seeks to achieve is
developed. |
|||
|
7- All staff share a common vision of the
future of the SME. |
|||
|
8- The CEO of the SME has a long-term
orientation. |
|||
|
9- The projection of the SME in the future
constitutes a factor of motivation for staff. |
|||
|
Percentage
of variance explained by factor |
|||
|
Own
values |
|||
|
Reliability
of the scale |
|||
|
Correlation
of Pearson |
|||
13.
INTERPRETATION
We test this link of
cause and effect between cultural factors and the success of partnerships.
The following model is presented:
· CSF
score = α 0 + α 1 team orientation + α 2
developmental capacity + α 3 agreement + α 4
change + α 5 organizational learning + α 6
customer orientation + α 7 strategy orientation + α 8
orientation
· goal
and vision + ɛi
The results obtained by the three models are
significant and have a good fit. The Fisher (F) statistics relating to the
overall significance of the models [1], [2] and [3] are 5.111, 5.184 and 5.455
respectively and they are significant at the 1% level. The values
of the coefficients of determination of the three R2 models are
high.
Table 5:
Results of Multivariate Regression
|
|
||||||
|
(***)significant at the 1% threshold, (**) significant at the 5% threshold,
(*) significant at the 10% threshold. |
||||||
We
interpret these tables as follows :
· H1
The " level of uncertainty " (L.U.): the "L.U." component
is not significant at the 10% threshold, although its coefficient shows the
expected sign. The development capacity component is important at the 10%
level. Also note that the coefficient is positive sign depending on the
anticipated sign. It therefore acts positively on the performance of
partnerships. Thus, we can validate hypothesis H1 and conclude that the
"level of uncertainty" is relevant to explain the development of the
partnership, but in one aspect. Highly engaged SMEs therefore tend to invest
more in partnerships because they have a greater ability to adapt to their
environment.
· H2
The "degrees of urgency" (D.U.): The "D.U." component is
not significant at the 10% threshold and has a positive sign coefficient in
accordance with the expected sign. Hence the rejection of H2. This factor does
not influence the level of success of the SMEs in our sample in a partnership,
although it is supposed to promote the coordination of actions in the
organization and communication.
· H3
"Exchanged assets" (E.A.): The 3 components related to this factor
are not significant at the 10% level. Thus, we can reject hypothesis H3 and
thus conclude that the "Exchanged assets" (E.A.) measured by these
three components have no influence on the level of performance.
· H4
"Strategic Direction" (S.D.): The results of model estimation [1]
show that two components of this factor are significant at the 10% level.
However, their coefficients are negative signs. Thus, we can validate
hypothesis H4 and conclude that "strategic orientation" (SD) is
measured by these two components: "strategy and horizon of vision"
and "orientation objectives" is relevant in the explanation of the
partnership development, according to: Its two facets and the face of our
hypothesis. SMEs are characterized by a strong mission orientation tend to
succeed more in their partnerships. This could be attributed to the fact that
they would be more specific and more likely to maintain their position in the
market.
· H5
"Size of the SME" (S.C.): The model regression results [2] show that
this variable is not significant at the 10% level. Thus, unlike the literature,
the size of the SME does not measure the level of success.
· H6
The "Activity Sector" (A.S.): this variable is not significant at the
10% level. Therefore, the fact that the SME belongs to the activity sector does
not influence the level of success.
14.
DISCUSSION
Partners were asked to overcome
cultural misfit
encountered during the COVID-19 period and filled in the open ended question
as to whether more problems had been perceived. The most important problem
found was that “ SMEs have appeared to alter the facts slightly in order to get
what they request”. This COVID-19 period created hostility (Bartos
and al., 2020). Partners did not protect the
interest of their SMEs. Furthermore, “culture and ethic gap created a misunderstanding” seem to be a barrier as well.
However, we noted some
misunderstandings between partners regarding the signs of power. The importance given to
responsibility, and were surprised and shocked by the benefits in kind required
by the Tunisian culture. These signs of recognition are important, because they
concern not only comfort, but also recognition needs. Also, the Human
Ressources Manager, if it is exerted by the foreign management, have to take into account these wishes of recognition in order to reduce the discomforts.
The formal structure of the Tunisian
SME is often
coupled with a relational organization. The identification of an influential leader and groups that support them is not
easy for French partners who rely mainly on a formal structure. Their efforts are
longer, and the paths they follow, to obtain data, cost them time and energy
for less results. In this sense, their transaction costs are increased.
The informal nature of the Tunisian
structure destabilizes the partnership, giving partners the impression that they
cannot control data in any way. In addition, when the relationship of trust is not
well established, they may be tempted to adopt opportunistic behavior
by playing on the vagueness of the data network, thus increasing the
transaction costs of their foreigners partners (Petruzzellis et al., 2016).
The
participants were asked by an open ended question whether other barriers have
been faced. Some SMEs had problems with their partners in transferring
knowledge during the COVID-19 period. The superiority of partners that are
geographically vulnerable to cultural diffusion in the stages of maturity stems
from the uninterrupted situation of cultural assimilation on the transmission
of human capital on the effects of cultural rigidity on the knowledge
development.
In
comparison, the earlier launch of businesses more vulnerable to cultural
diffusion reflects the predominance of beneficial effects of cultural diversity
and flexibility on the advancement of knowledge-intensive technology, and they
relative to its eroding effect on the accumulation of society-specific human
capital. Thus, contrary to cultural assumptions, which build a hierarchy of
cultural factors related to their ability to innovate and their applicability
to a successful structure, the proposed theory confirms that the estimable
level of relative prevalence of cultural assimilation as opposed to traditional
culture that differs according to the stage of maturity.
Enhanced
cultural assimilation is optimal at the technological stage, but hinders the
transition to successful partnership. Therefore, the cultural traits themselves
do not have an impact on the process of the cultural maturity, while the
variation in the relative strengths of the forces of cultural assimilation
determines the level of the diversity of these traits, which contributes to the
comparative development of business. The proposed theory confirms that the
cultural misfit may be explained by the historical reversals of its performance
during the transition phase and may in fact be applied more broadly to
understand transformations as a boundary (Quamrul & Galor, 2012).
Moreover,
the traditional culture of the Tunisian SMEs is based on the paternalistic
style. We have seen in particular in our study that French partners have
rejected this style, which they consider
unprofessional. However this attitude can also make them miss
opportunities in their efficiency in managing partnerships and increase their
transaction costs. Besides, the communication of data is essential.
However,
the difficulty encountered in interpreting the implicit context of Tunisian
communication increases the cost of finding relevant data, leadings them to
stop facing their counterparts and finally to become demotivated. This results
in higher transaction costs during the COVID-19 period (Antoldi & Cerrato,
2020). In addition, if trust is not established, Tunisian partners can even
play on the opacity of their communication, to increase their bargaining power
against their partners (Russol & Cesarani, 2017).
Likewise,
the communication between Tunisian and French SMEs and their
policy design, if the price policy was under control when selling to groups,
were other serious problems during the COVID-19 period. French SMEs complained
that the delivery delay did not meet their expectation. Methods, mainly from the
French partners, imposed a perception of time. Productivity is the objective of
any SME, and it is correlated to time, since it is defined by the ratio between
the results obtained and the time devoted to them. Furthermore, it was
difficult to plan with their partners because of the market changing barriers
during the COVID-19 period. In fact, Tunisian partners have learned to use time,
but their polychrome culture persists (Khanchel, 2020a).
Indeed,
the barriers encountered during the COVID-19 period by French partners are
related to the respect of deadlines. For their part, Tunisian partners consider
that their partners have a lack of flexibility in time. We noted during the
COVID-19 period that in a negotiation, Tunisian partners also knew how to play
on their polychrome dimension, by imposing on their partners drifts of
deadlines, in the name of the health crisis (Hall, 1990).
This survey also found that barriers
could occur when partners were different in sizes, if the production during
the COVID-19 period depended too much on systems, and when transformation
occurred, these would always create hostility. The last barrier identified was
that French partners
did not accept any guilt when error in quality occurred. In fact, the strategic choices for partnership development depends on the
size, only SMEs that cultivate a conception of the collective culture based on non-market values reconcile
our sample, opportunities and collective supports.
Of the five SMEs studied, only three fell under this scenario. Tunisian
membership in
collective and adherence to common values occupy the central place in the
strategy developed by these SMEs. But the values on which the
collective is based are contrasted. Thus, the three Tunisian SMEs studied develop a sense of
collective based on family, while the two French SMEs promote a sense of
collective based on loyalty and recognition in business, maintained by participative
cultural strategies.
The instillation of a sense of
belonging and the constitution of the collective therefore operate on different
bases in our survey. Indeed, the strategies developed by the Tunisian
partners play a
decisive role in the constitution of a collective philosophy that business wants to place under the
sign of a common attachment to the family. A corporate culture that refers to
tradition and continuity in Tunisia. A wedding contract (as a guarantee of long-term
commitment, loyalty, good morals and respect for tradition) is particularly appreciated.
Therefore, Tunisian
partners seek an emotional contact similar to that maintained by
members of the family.
However,
Tunisian partners were satisfied with their French partners, although some barriers exist during
the COVID-19 period, but they were already planning for the future. Their globalizing way of
belonging also leads them to be hampered by the compartmentalization they
perceive through the operation of departments within their SME. Operating
themselves in a more open and partnership, each one has "his"
responsibility, however, assistance is still in place depending on emergencies,
even if responsibilities do not directly meet their skills.
They expect a more paternalistic than
functional style in leadership from their superiors, and can be disconcerted by excessive
delegation of taskes. Then, their diffuse way of belonging leads those not to
understand that their appreciation is carried out solely on the criteria of
corporate performance, relational criteria often prevail over the functional
criteria. Conversely, the French CEO, that we have met sometimes has a tendency to make hasty
judgments on the competence of Tunisian partners by assimilating the importance
they give to the criteria related to relational factors to a lack of
professionalism; similarly, they are surprised by what they interpret as a lack
of clarity in the constituency of each other's taskes. When they neglect the
relationship quality, they have much time collecting data and not getting commitment
from their partners.
Indeed, a change at the top of
management during the COVID-19 period is accompanied by a reshuffling of
objectives: abandoning ongoing projects and engaging in new projects is a
recurring phenomenon among Tunisian partners. This change may result in conflicts
between the partners, as is the case of the SMEs surveyed that had a change of
CEOs during the
COVID-19 period.
The managers
interviewed felt a perceptible tension because of the changes introduced by the new CEO
during the COVID-19 period. These changes can affect partnership development (Khanchel & Ben Kahla,
2018).
The findings point towards the advantages
of hierarchical controls, in terms of lower transaction costs, over explicit
contracts when partnerships involve intense appropriability hazards, and when contracts
are not feasible. The potential costs of the hierarchy have been ignored,
because the transaction costs has not spelled them out properly beyond generic
references to “bureaucratic costs” (Fitriasari, 2020).
Moreover,
the costs of separated ownership may be superior to
its benefits which involve technological activities to fight
COVID-19. The evidence (Pisano, 1989;
Gulati, 1995; Oxley, 1997; Gulati & Singh, 1998) indicated that the
likelihood of introducing Joint ownership increased in partnerships related to
technological activities. This finding would also be consistent with the
arguments of Holmstrom and Roberts (1998) in the sense that the property rights
approach is not sufficient to explain the boundaries, and it has to be
complemented with contributions from the theories of incentive design and
efficient cooperation to overcome the crisis health (Baker et al., 2020).
This study also finds
evidence that trust, measured by the geographical origin of the partners,
influence the choice of the form. Proximity favors in Tunisia for separated
ownership. Therefore, partnerships may perceive Joint ownership as
a governance form which protects
against ex-post opportunism, and it will be preferred when SMEs are more
“distant” so implicit contracts are less feasible during the COVID-19 period (Bartik et al., 2020).
Thus, the survey finds evidence of
substitution between conditions which favor reputation effects and the use of
Joint ownership. The reason would be that such reputation effects increase the
benefits of separated ownership compared with Joint ownership, to the benefits
when these effects are absent. Moreover,
“trust” may reduce the need of hierarchical controls. However, the implicit contracts are expected to be more viable
when Tunisia has cultural proximity.
It
may also be argued that higher socio-cultural distance among partners may
create barriers that involve
strong interpersonal relations (Hofstede, 1991). So,
instead of introducing more hierarchical controls, partners choose to rely on more standardized contracts such as
licensing during the COVID-19 period. So,
socio- cultural distance may favor separated ownership.
Other interpretations have been found through the
analysis. Firstly, being in a disadvantageous situation in partnership leads to
a preference of separated ownership structures. When Tunisian SMEs expect low
levels of reciprocity it seems that they prefer not to be engaged with their partners.
Secondly, separated ownership structures are preferred over Joint ownership structures when
benefits are provided (Brown, 2020).
However, it is possible to point out
that complementarities exist between future value of the collaboration. As
explained before, when the model includes the interactive variable estimating this
success; the
coefficient of the interactive variable is negative and significant
(Lubetsky, 2008).
15.
CONCLUSION
The study has addressed an important
topic as transnational business partnerships are prone to failures due to
cultural misfit during the COVID-19 period, which seems to be affected
negatively when there are differences in national and corporate culture. Not
only "hard facts" such as market share or the annual turnover should
be considered in partner selection processes, but also "soft facts"
such as cultural elements (Travkina et al., 2020).
Tunisian SMEs and their French partners could be trained to
act upon this effectively, in order to avoid failures due to cultural misfit in both
directions: SAs initiated by French and Tunisian SMEs towards each other’s
respective partners. There are several partnership tools which can be used to enhance their performance (Remer &
Schaetzlein, 2002). Implementing the SME strategy for Tunisia: Overall, Tunisia has taken major steps in
implementing the partnership principles during the COVID-19 period.
Progress has been moderate across
the board, with the most significant progress during the reference period being
achieved through policy initiatives in the fields of internationalisation,
access to finance and skills and Innovation. While Tunisia performs in line with France average on access to finance
to fulfil the requirements, its performance on skills and innovation and
internationalisation is still very weak. In the fields of ICT, ‘responsive administration,’
state aid and public procurement, environment and single market, Tunisia has introduced measures to
overcome the health crisis but there is still room for improvement.
Administrative burden is still a
considerable challenge for Tunisian SMEs during the
health crisis,
in particular given the complexity of the tax system, which has a multitude of
tax regimes. Consultations with French partners on regulatory changes are not always
effective and transparent. Policy initiatives were instrumental in improving
access to finance for Tunisian SMEs during the COVID-19 period.
The successful funding for growth
scheme was replaced by a new market-based lending scheme designed to boost Tunisian
SME financing during
the health crisis.
Tunisian SMEs’
limited capacity to innovate and adopt new technologies and processes reduces
the scope for technology to spill over (Khanchel, 2020b).
Too few Tunisian SMEs innovate in-house,
often because they lack the necessary skills. Together with a need for more skills,
SMEs in Tunisia need to improve their productivity by increasing their
capacity to innovate. Moreover, the uptake of ICT and web-based technologies by
Tunisian SMEs
is below the France average. Tunisian SMEs should take more advantage of
e-commerce and online selling. One of the major constraints is, however, the
lack of a skilled and qualified workforce (Khanchel, 2020c). Indeed, the
main recommendations are stated as follows:
· When
developing partnership, Tunisian SMEs must evaluate the cultural context of
their health crisis action. The unique challenges of organizational behavior in
the cross-national context are to ensure the construct validity of the culture
concept, to include other national differentiators for improving the internal
validity, and to strengthen the research design by leveraging on the knowledge
of the partners. This could enhance the external validity. If we may borrow a
quote from Smith and Hitt (2005), cross-cultural research is “not for the
faint-hearted” because of the need to clear many intellectual barriers. Similar
to creating any influential work, achieving success in cross-cultural surveys
of behavior requires “an unshakable sense of efficacy and a SME belief in the
worth of what they are doing” (Smith & Hitt, 2005: 30).
· The
cultural auditing can channel efforts towards harnessing the benefits of
diversity, as well as preventing cultural barriers that could compromise the
maintenance of the partnership. Subsequently, the participation of
partners in the resolution of conflicts, the sensitization of the latter to
interculturality and cultural training are conducive to a mobilization in the
common activity, and thus the maintenance of the alliance on the long
term. On a more level, the application of parity at the level of the
team and the creation of a transversal function "HRM" are to give
confidence to all staff.
The
juxtaposition of these methods aims at bringing together the conditions for a
cultural rapprochement and at promoting the conversion of cultural diversity
into a force for action and value creation. To impose one's own artifacts
and system of representation in a logic of ideological conformity or cultural
homogeneity can not, in the light of the experiences of the leaders
questioned, lead to increased connivance and even less to a significant
exploitation of the "positive externalities" of
interculturality. Cross-cultural management practices
presented in this way could serve as a model for partnerships.
· Then, we
recommend a code of conduct, in which Tunisian and French partners attempt to
bring together all staff around common values and to foster a common culture
where social responsibility can play an important role. These codes cannot be
imposed but have to be in harmony to the
reality of the business under. It is difficult to fill the gap between the
speeches and the reality, leading to the de-involvement of partners.
· As
globalization gathers pace resulting in continuous rise in partnerships,
decisions in general, and effectiveness of strategic alliances in particular,
are increasingly influenced by cultural misfit (Suraya et al., 2020).
Managerial implications based on findings from this study are noted
below :
· Assets,
technical and competencies, superiority in technology, quality may not
guarantee success. Cultural awareness and the ability to deal with cultural
misfit is essential to overcome the health crisis (Alves et al., 2020).
· Countries
from a particular region such as Tunisia must not be treated homogenous as
impact of culture may vary during the COVID-19 period.
· The size
of the market may be a factor in determining the geographical location of the
partnership, but the context of health crisis is even important. If the
prevailing environmental conditions within the host country are not conducive
to partnership building, the latter may constrain any benefits that accrue from
the former (Boissay et al., 2020).
· The health
context of partnerships may changes over time, therefore a long term view has
to be taken in decision making (Gilson et al., 2020).
· No
immediate returns may accrue as trial and mistakes will be more common than
creating success stories, at least in the short term (Liuhto, 2020).
Despite
the managerial contributions of our research, it faces
three limitations that it should be emphasized. The first of these concerns the
risk of perceptual bias due to subjective measures collected during our study.
The second limit, of order methodology, relates to the characteristics of our
sample. Since this is exclusively composed of dyadic and asymmetrical
Franco-Tunisian partnerships, the scope of the results obtained is limited. The
number of partners and their nationalities are indeed variables that have a
significant impact and the impacts of cultural dissimilarity as well as
managerial practices and social integration.
Longitudinal
study over a long COVID-19 period would also likely to evaluate the level of progressive influence of
the cross-cultural management processes in the integration of partners and
their exploitation.
In
the end, one last avenue for promising research would be to explore the
practices of cross-cultural
management to put in place during each phase of
decision-making process to ensure the sustainability of the partnership. It
would be a question of making the link between initial conditions of
cooperation and the profiles of the partners, the determinants of management of
alliances, throughout their life cycle and strategic issues.
Abdullah,
A. H., Abdullah, A. N. G., & Noor, H. A. G. (2015). The Degree of Cooperation in International Strategic Alliances and Value
Creation Outcomes: Empirical Study on Service firms in Yemen. Asian
Social Science. 11(28).
Alhejji,
H., Garavan, T. (2016). Human
Resource Development in North Africa. in
Garavan, T. N., McCarthy, A. M., &
Morley, M. J. (eds.) Global Human
Resource Development: Regional and Country Perspectives. London: Routledge.
Alves, J., Lok, T., Luo, Y-B. & Hao, W. (2020). Crisis
Management for Small Business during the COVID-19 Outbreak: Survival, Resilience and Renewal Strategies of Firms
in Macau. 10.21203/rs.3.rs-34541/v1.
Antoldi, F., & Cerrato,
D. (2020), Trust, Control, and Value Creation in Strategic
Networks of SMEs, Sustainability,
12, 1873. doi:10.3390/su12051873 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Agrawal, A., & Jeffrey F. J.
(2000). The Post-Merger Performance Puzzle. Finance Contrôle Stratégie, 10(2), 37-62. SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=199671
Badillo, E. R., Galera, F. L., & Serrano,
R. M. (2017) Cooperation in R&D, SME size and type of partnership: Evidence
for the Spanish automotive industry, European Journal of Management and Business
Economics, 26(1), 123-143.
Baker, S. R., Bloom, N., Davis, S. J., & Terry, S. J. (2020). Covid-induced economic uncertainty (No. w26983). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Barmeyer, C. I.,
& Mayrhofer, U. (2008). Management interculturel et
processus d’intégration : Une analyse de l’alliance Renault-Nissan, Revue Management & Avenir, 22, 109-131.
Bartik, A. W., Bertrand, M., Cullen, Z. B., Glaeser, E. L., Luca, M., & Stanton, C. T. (2020). How are small businesses adjusting to COVID-19? Early evidence from a survey (No. w26989). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Bartos, V., Bauer, M., Cahlikova, J., & Chytilová, J. (2020).
COVID-19 Crisis Fuels Hostility against Foreigners. SSRN Electronic Journal. 10.2139/ssrn.3593411.
Binon, J., & Claes, T. M. (1995). Intercultural communication and
negotiation in a business environment. Intercultural competence. A new challenge for
language teachers and trainers in Europe. Vol. II : The adult learner. Aalborg
University.
Bjorkman,
I., Stahl, G. K., & Vaara, E. (2007). Cultural differences and capability
transfer in cross-border acquisitions: The mediating roles of capability complementarity,
absorptive capacity and social integration, Journal of International
Business Studies, 38,
658-672
Boirie,
V. (2014), L’interculturel
franco-allemand en entreprise: l’influence du management américain:
l’exemple du management franco-allemand chez Total, Thèse de Doctorat, Université Michel de Montaigne Bordeaux 3. Buono, Anthony F., and James L.
Boissay, F., Rees, D., & Rungcharoenkitkul, P. (2020). Dealing
with Covid-19: understanding the policy choices. BIS Bulletins, www.bis.org
Bouayad, A., & Legris, P.-Y. (2007). Les alliances stratégiques:
Maîtriser les facteurs clés de succès, Collection Progrès du Management, Dunod, 2ème
édition
Bouey, J. (2020). Assessment of COVID-19’s Impact on
Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (Testimony
presented before the House Small Business Committee on March 10, 2020). RAND
coporation , 15 pages. Journal
of International of travel medicine , 2 pages.
Bowditch. (1989). The human side of mergers and acquisitions, Managing collisions between people, cultures, and organizations. San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.
Brown,
Ross. (2020). The Impact of Covid-19 on Scottish Small and Medium- Sized
Enterprises (SMEs): Prognosis and Policy Prescription. Economic Commentary, June 2020
Cartwright Susan, and Richard Schoenberg. (2006). 30 Years of Mergers and Acquisitions. Research. British Journal of
Management, 15, 51-55.
Child, J., David, F., & Robert, P. (2001).
Organisational change processes in international acquisitions. Advances in
Mergers and Acquisitions.
2, 59-80
Choi, T. Y., Rogers, D., Vakil, B. (2020) Coronavirus is a wake-up call for supply chain management, Harvard Business Review, https://hbr.org/2020/03/coronavirus-is-a-wake-up-call-for-supply-chain-management
Creswell, J. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research.
New Jersey: Pearson: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Ebrahim,
S. H., & Memish, Z. A. (2020). Saudi Arabia's drastic measures to curb the COVID-19
outbreak: temporary suspension of the Umrah pilgrimage. J Travel Med., 27(3),
taaa029. doi: 10.1093/jtm/taaa029
Ellis, C. (1996). Making strategic alliances succeed: The
importance of trust. Harvard Business Review, 1(2), 7-8.
Fernández, E., José M. Montes, J. M., & Vázquez, C.
J.
(1999). Typology and Strategic analysis of intangible resources: A resource-based approach, University of Oviedo, Department of Business Administration and
Accountancy, Faculty of Economics, Avenida del Cristo S/N, Oviedo- 33006.
Fey, C. F., & Denison, D. R. (2003). Organizational
Culture, Effectiveness, Russia, Transition Economies. William Davidson
Institute Working Paper No. 598.
Fisher,
R. A. (1973). Statistical Methods and Scientific Inference, (3rd ed.), London:
Hafner Press.
Fitriasari, F. (2020). How do
Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SME) survive the COVID-19 outbreak?. Jurnal Inovasi
Ekonomi., 5. DOI: 10.22219/jiko.v5i3.11838.
Gilson, L., Marchal, B., & Ayepong, I., Barasa, E., Dossou, J.-P.,
George, A., Guinaran, R., Maceira, D., Molyneux, S., Prashanth, N., Schneider,
H., Shawar, Y., Shiffman, J., Sheikh, K., Spicer, N., Van Belle, S., &
Whyle, E. (2020). What role can health policy and systems research play in
supporting responses to COVID-19 that strengthen socially just health systems?.
Health
Policy and Planning.
10.1093/heapol/czaa112.
Gulati, R. (1995). Does familiarity breed trust? The Implications of
Repeated Ties for Contractual Choice in Alliances, Academy of Management Journal, 38, 85–112.
Gulati, R., & Singh, H. (1998). The Architecture of Cooperation:
Managing Coordination Costs and Appropriation Concerns in Strategic Alliances, Administrative
Science Quarterly, 43(4),
781-814.
Hall, E. T., & Mildred,
R. H. (1990). Understanding cultural
differences. Germans, French and Americans. Maine, Interultural Press. Propensity, Power, Persistence, Journal of Management Studies,
27, 417-431.
Hamel G., & Prahalad,
C. K. (1994). Competing for the Future. Harvard Business Review.
Haspeslagh P. C., & Jemison D. B. (1991). Managing acquisitions:
creating value through corporate renewal. The Free Press, a division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
Hyder, A. S., & Eriksson, L. T. (2005)
Success Is not Enough: The Spectacular Rise and Fall of a Strategic Alliance
between Two Multinationals, Industrial Marketing Management, 34,
783-796.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations. Software of the mind. Londres,
McGraw-Hill.
Holmstrom, B., & Roberts, J. (1998). Boundaries of the SME Revisited,
Journal Perspectives, 12, p.73-94.
Hyder A., et al. (2006). Cultural Differences and
Strategic Alliances: Lessons from Swedish SMEs in Eastern and Central Europe. Conference:
Academy of International Business (AIB), At Beijing -- China
Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. (2020). Viability of intertwined supply
networks: extending the supply chain resilience angles towards survivability. A
position paper motivated by COVID-19 outbreak, International Journal of
Production Research, 58(10), 2904-2915.
Jenny, F. (2020), Economic Resilience,
Globalization and Market
Governance: Facing the COVID-19
Test (March
28, 2020). Available
at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3563076
or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3563076
Khanchel, H. (2020a). Regulation of
Social Times during the COVID-19 Period: A Replication and Extension of the
Work Activity Regulation Model, Business and Management Research, Business
and Management Research, Sciedu Press, 9(3), 4-24.
Khanchel, H. (2020b). How The COVID-19 Pandemic is Fast-Tracking Digital
Transformation in Tunisia?. London Journal of Research in
Managment and Business.
Khanchel, H. (2020c). Intertwining Practices and Uses of ICT: A
Cultural Digital Analysis. Journal of Business Administration
Research. 9(1), 21. Doi: 10.5430/jbar.v9n1p21.
Khanchel, H., & Kahla, K. B. (2018). Intercultural Management between Tunisia and Europe, Journal of Business
Administration Research, ISSN 1927-9507
(Print) ISSN 1927-9515 (Online), 7(2).
King, M. D. R., Dan
R. D., Daily, C. M.,
& Covin, J. G. (2004).
Meta-analyses of
Post-acquisition Performance: Identification of unidentified moderators, Strategic Management Journal, 25(2), 101-200.
Kogut, B. (1988). Joint Ventures:
Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives.
Strategic Management Journal, 9(4), 319-332.
Lambert, W. E. (1972). Developmental aspects of second
language acquisition. In Lambert W. E.
Language, psychology, and culture.
Essays. Selected and introduced by Anwar S. Stanford CA, Stanford University
Press, 9-31.
Larsson, R., & Finkelstein, S.
(1999). Integrating
Strategic, Organizational, and Human Resource Perspectives on Mergers and
Acquisitions: A Case Study of Synergy Realization. Organization Science, 10(1), 1-26.
Lubetsky,
M. H. (2008). Cultural Differences and Corporate Gouvernance, Transnational
law and contemporary problems,
17, 187.
Liuhto, K. (2020). Baltic Rim Economies (BRE 2/2020) - A special issue on trade policy.
Mani, S., & Luo, X. (2015). Product alliances,
alliance networks, and shareholder value: Evidence from the biopharmaceutical
industry. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32, 9–22.
Mirvis P., & Marks M. L.(1986). Merger syndrome:
management by crisis (Part. II), Mergers and Acquisitions, 70-76
Morosini, P., Shane, S., & Singh,
H. (1998). National
Cultural Distance and Cross-Border Acquisition Performance. Journal of International
Business Studies, 29(1), 137–158.
Doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490029
Moss, R. (1994). Collaborative
Advantage: The Art of Alliances. Harvard Business Review. 4(4), 96 – 108.
Oxley, J. E. (1997), Appropriability Hazards and Governance
in Strategic Alliances: a Transaction Cost Approach, Journal of Law, Economics and
Organization, 13 (2), 387-
409.
Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS
Survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS (4th
Ed.). Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Petruzzellis, L., Gurrieri, A. R., Pezzi, A., & Lenoci,
M. (2016). Strategic Alliances between Japanese-Western SMEs: A Win-Win or
Win-Lose Relationship? The Case of the Automobile Industry, International
Journal of Business and Management, 11(11). ISSN 1833-3850 E-ISSN 1833-8119 Published by Canadian Center
of Science and Education
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G.(1978). The External Control
of Organizations : A Resource Dependence Perspective, New York: Harper &
Row. Pfeffer J., 1981, Power in the organizations, Pitman Pub. Schelling T.C.,
1956, An essay on Bargaining, The American Economic Review, XL(VI), 281-306.
Pisano, G. P. (1989). Using Equity
Participation to Support Exchange: Evidence from the Biotechnology Industry, Journal
of Law, Economics and Organization, 5(1), p.109-126.
Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1994).
Strategy as a Field of Study: Why Search for a New Paradigm? Strategic
Management Journal, 15,
5-16.
Quamrul.
H., & Ashraf, O. G. (2012). Cultural Diversity, Geographical Isolation, and
the Origin of the Wealth of Nations, SSRN
Electronic Journal, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1969070
Raflis,
A., Ishak, S., & Jusoh, M. (2020). The impact of Covid-19 Movement Control
Order on SMEs’ businesses and survival strategies. Malaysian Journal of Society
and Space. 16.
10.17576/geo-2020-1602-11.
Remer,
S., & Schätzlein, R. (2002). How to
negotiate the best cultural fit between Dutch and German partners in strategic
alliances: The Dutch and the German perception combined. Darmstadt University of Technology. Small
Thesis.
Rijammpianina, R., &
Carmichael, T. (2005). A framework for effective cross-cultural co- opetition
between organisations. Problems and perspectives in Management, 4(5), 92-103.
Riungu C., Njehia B.,
& Mutai B. (2013). Effects of supermarkets on fresh fruit and vegetables small-scale farmers in central Kenya. Sky Journal of Business Administration and Management, 1(5), 47-58
Russo M., & Cesarani,
M.(2017). Strategic Alliance Success Factors: A Literature Review on Alliance
Lifecycle, International Journal of Business Administration, ISSN 1923-4007 E-ISSN 1923-4015
Segal, S.,
& Gerstel, D.
(2020). The Global Economic
Impacts of COVID-19,
Critical Questions, Center
for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS).
Retrieved from
https://www.csis.org/analysis.
Si,
S. X., & Bruton, G. D. (1999). Knowledge transfer in international joint
transfer in international joint ventures in transitional economies: The China
experience. The AOM Executive, 13(1),
83-90.
Smith, P. B., Bond, M.
H., Trompenaars, F. (1993). Riding the waves of culture. Paris, Laurent Du
Mesnil, Collection institut du management d’EDF et de GDF.
Smith, R. D. (2009), Strategic
planning for public relations, APR
Buffalo State College, Taylor & Francis e-Library.
Scheppink, A. A. J. (2018). Board
Gender Diversity and SME Performance:
The Effect of National Culture, Independent thesis Advanced level.
Smith, K. G., & Hitt, M. A. (2005). Great minds in management: The process of theory development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Suraya, E., Azis, N., Majid, A., & Shabri, M. (2020). Does Performance Matter for Business Survival Based on the Enhancement of Locus of Control and Business Competence? The Case of Micro Small and Medium Enterprises. 3, 97-106.
Teerikangas, S., & Very, P. (2006).
The Culture–Performance Relationship in M&A: From Yes/No to How. British Journal of
Management, 17(S1),
S31-S48. Doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00477.x
Travkina,
E., Sacco, P., & Morari, B. (2020). Culture
shock: COVID-19 and the cultural and creative sectors. http://www.oecd.org/termsandconditions
Ulijn, J., Wynstra, F., & A. Lincke, (2004). The effect of Dutch and German cultures: An exploratory study comparing operations and innovation contexts, contribution to a special issue of International Negotiation, 9(2), on Innovation and Negotiation: The Content (edited by J. Ulijn & Tjosvold)
Warsame, A. (2020). The Impacts of COVID 19 on Small and Medium
Enterprises. 12(10).
10.7176/EJBM/12-25-11.
Wolfgang, O., & Smith, T. (1998). Doing effective presentations in an intercultural setting. Vienne, Ueberreuter.
Weber,
Y., Oded, S., & Raveh, A.
(1996). National and Corporate Cultural Fit in Mergers/Acquisitions: An
Exploratory Study. Management Science, 42, 1215-1227. Doi: 10.1287/mnsc.42.8.1215
Word Economic Forum. (W.E.F.). 2020. https://www.weforum.org
World Health Organization (WHO). Situation report - 18. Feb 7 2020. [EB/OL] https://www.who. int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/transcript-coronavirus-press-conference-full-07feb2020-final.pdf?sfvrsn=3beba1c0_2
Zollo, M., & Meier, D. (2008).What is
M&A performance? Academy of Management Executive, 22(3).