The Kogut and Singh (1988) index is the most widely used construct to measure cultural distance in international business and management research. We show that this index is incorrectly specified and captures the squared cultural distance. This inaccuracy is problematic because it means that the empirical findings on the effects of cultural distance presented in different strands of international business research are likely to be misleading. We specify the correct form of the distance measure based on the Euclidean distance formula and demonstrate the implications of using the incorrectly specified Kogut and Singh (1988) index.

<p>Based on Hofstede's findings, this study breaks down Kogut and Singh's index of cultural distance, examining implications for acquisition performance of each individual dimension. Hypotheses are formulated, and based on deal data covering 488 acquisitions with American companies as acquirers, tested through linear regression. We find support for a positive relationship between cultural distance of power distance and performance, and an inverse relationship between cultural distance of masculinity and performance. Significant results are not obtained for the remaining dimensions.</p>

Distance is a central concept in international business research, yet there is debate about the construct as well as its operationalization. In this editorial, we address three of the most important recurring questions posed by authors, editors, and reviewers by examining the theory, methods, and data of distance research. We discuss (1) how to theorize on distance, and (2) what method and (3) what data to use when constructing a distance index. We develop practical recommendations grounded in theory, illustrating and supporting them by calculating cross-country distance indices for all available country pairs and two of the most used distance indices: cultural and institutional distance. We show that whereas a specific method to calculate distance may matter to some extent, the choice for a specific cultural or institutional framework to measure cultural or institutional distance has a major impact on country pair distances. Overall, this editorial highlights the importance of matching data and method to the theoretical argument.

Based on Hofstede's findings, this study breaks down Kogut and Singh's index of cultural distance, examining implications for acquisition performance of each individual dimension. Hypotheses are formulated, and based on deal data covering 488 acquisitions with American companies as acquirers, tested through linear regression. We find support for a positive relationship between cultural distance of power distance and performance, and an inverse relationship between cultural distance of masculinity and performance. Significant results are not obtained for the remaining dimensions.