Corporate governance and technological capability development

Three case studies in the Chinese auto industry

Jiajia Liu, Andrew Tylecote

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper examines how firms' technological capability development is affected by corporate governance, broadly understood: "how and by whom the firm is directed and controlled". Three state-owned companies are studied. Shanghai Auto Industry Corporation (SAIC) is a long-established "favoured" enterprise controlled on rather traditional lines. Chery is a small under-funded latecomer that receives exceptional "engagement" from its controlling local and provincial government. Guizhou Tyre (GTC) is long-established but also receives exceptional engagement. The firms' governance structures and their processes of technological capability building were tracked and compared. Data on SAIC and Chery was mainly from secondary sources; on GTC, from extensive interviewing of management and site observations. There were two main findings: first, it was the two with unusual engagement which were more successful in developing "endogenous" or "self-reliant" technological capability. Second, two alternative technological strategies could be distinguished: "bundled" or "unbundled" technology acquisition. Chery and GTC chose "unbundling". We show why it was more successful and why it followed from the corporate governance situation.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)525-544
Number of pages19
JournalIndustry and Innovation
Volume16
Issue number4-5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Industry
Tires
Technological capability
Auto industry
Corporate governance
Shanghai
Unbundling
Interviewing
Tire
Technology acquisition
Governance structure
Government

Cite this

@article{b8dc50987f0d47038e7773ba765acfa1,
title = "Corporate governance and technological capability development: Three case studies in the Chinese auto industry",
abstract = "This paper examines how firms' technological capability development is affected by corporate governance, broadly understood: {"}how and by whom the firm is directed and controlled{"}. Three state-owned companies are studied. Shanghai Auto Industry Corporation (SAIC) is a long-established {"}favoured{"} enterprise controlled on rather traditional lines. Chery is a small under-funded latecomer that receives exceptional {"}engagement{"} from its controlling local and provincial government. Guizhou Tyre (GTC) is long-established but also receives exceptional engagement. The firms' governance structures and their processes of technological capability building were tracked and compared. Data on SAIC and Chery was mainly from secondary sources; on GTC, from extensive interviewing of management and site observations. There were two main findings: first, it was the two with unusual engagement which were more successful in developing {"}endogenous{"} or {"}self-reliant{"} technological capability. Second, two alternative technological strategies could be distinguished: {"}bundled{"} or {"}unbundled{"} technology acquisition. Chery and GTC chose {"}unbundling{"}. We show why it was more successful and why it followed from the corporate governance situation.",
keywords = "technological capability, corporate governance, China, automotive industry",
author = "Jiajia Liu and Andrew Tylecote",
year = "2009",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/13662710903053805",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "525--544",
journal = "Industry and Innovation",
issn = "1366-2716",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "4-5",

}

Corporate governance and technological capability development : Three case studies in the Chinese auto industry. / Liu, Jiajia; Tylecote, Andrew.

In: Industry and Innovation, Vol. 16, No. 4-5, 01.10.2009, p. 525-544.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Corporate governance and technological capability development

T2 - Three case studies in the Chinese auto industry

AU - Liu, Jiajia

AU - Tylecote, Andrew

PY - 2009/10/1

Y1 - 2009/10/1

N2 - This paper examines how firms' technological capability development is affected by corporate governance, broadly understood: "how and by whom the firm is directed and controlled". Three state-owned companies are studied. Shanghai Auto Industry Corporation (SAIC) is a long-established "favoured" enterprise controlled on rather traditional lines. Chery is a small under-funded latecomer that receives exceptional "engagement" from its controlling local and provincial government. Guizhou Tyre (GTC) is long-established but also receives exceptional engagement. The firms' governance structures and their processes of technological capability building were tracked and compared. Data on SAIC and Chery was mainly from secondary sources; on GTC, from extensive interviewing of management and site observations. There were two main findings: first, it was the two with unusual engagement which were more successful in developing "endogenous" or "self-reliant" technological capability. Second, two alternative technological strategies could be distinguished: "bundled" or "unbundled" technology acquisition. Chery and GTC chose "unbundling". We show why it was more successful and why it followed from the corporate governance situation.

AB - This paper examines how firms' technological capability development is affected by corporate governance, broadly understood: "how and by whom the firm is directed and controlled". Three state-owned companies are studied. Shanghai Auto Industry Corporation (SAIC) is a long-established "favoured" enterprise controlled on rather traditional lines. Chery is a small under-funded latecomer that receives exceptional "engagement" from its controlling local and provincial government. Guizhou Tyre (GTC) is long-established but also receives exceptional engagement. The firms' governance structures and their processes of technological capability building were tracked and compared. Data on SAIC and Chery was mainly from secondary sources; on GTC, from extensive interviewing of management and site observations. There were two main findings: first, it was the two with unusual engagement which were more successful in developing "endogenous" or "self-reliant" technological capability. Second, two alternative technological strategies could be distinguished: "bundled" or "unbundled" technology acquisition. Chery and GTC chose "unbundling". We show why it was more successful and why it followed from the corporate governance situation.

KW - technological capability

KW - corporate governance

KW - China

KW - automotive industry

U2 - 10.1080/13662710903053805

DO - 10.1080/13662710903053805

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 525

EP - 544

JO - Industry and Innovation

JF - Industry and Innovation

SN - 1366-2716

IS - 4-5

ER -