「文化距離」對多國企業（multinational enterprises, MNEs）海外進入模式的選擇難有一致性的結論，MNEs應採取高度直接控制（獨資模式），或是與當地夥伴合作（合資模式），其爭議性一直是受到關注的課題。「文化距離」雙重立論在於，MNEs 進入文化差異性大的地主國會同時產生環境適應(當地知識不足)與夥伴風險(合資夥伴間資訊不對稱)兩種成本。環境適應成本使廠商為快速取得當地知識以順利進入市場，而願意以合資的方式進入地主國。夥伴風險則因夥伴行為的不確定性可能導致高額的締約成本，使廠商傾向選擇獨資。本研究以台灣廠商海外投資為樣本，共2,451筆投資案，分佈於13個國家。實證結果顯示，MNEs 進入已開發國家時，由於當地制度環境完善，夥伴風險可以有效控制，因此與地主國文化背景差異性大的廠商，為了節約獨資成本與快速取得當地知識，則較不傾向採取獨資方式。反之，當廠商進入開發中國家時，由於制度系統不完備，加劇文化差異所產生的合作夥伴間行為不可預測，以致締約成本大幅上升，因此傾向採取獨資模式。

Past studies of the relationship between national cultural distance and entry mode choice are inconsistent results. Some findings propose cultural distance associated with choosing wholly owned modes; others propose cultural distance connected with choosing joint ventures. The dual arguments of cultural distance are produced from environmental adaptation and partner cooperation costs. For unlocking the cultural distance dilemma, this study considers the contingent element---institutional environment. We collect 2,451 investment projects invested in 13 countries by Taiwanese firms. Our findings show that the institutional environment moderates the relationship between the cultural distance and entry mode decision. When firms enter developing countries, poor institutional environments leads firms prefer to choosing wholly owned modes for avoiding partners’ cultural hazards. When entering developed countries, firms prefer to choosing join ventures because well-established institutions provide external governance instruments to reduce contracting costs.