Call for Papers

Special Issue Editors:

Jiatao Li (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, mnjtli@ust.hk)

Gongming Qian (The Chinese University of Hong Kong, qian@baf.cuhk.edu.hk)

Kevin Zhou (The University of Hong Kong, kevinz@ hku.hk)

Jane Lu (CEIBS, janelu@ceibs.edu)

Submission deadline:  September 1, 2019

First author notification:  October 1, 2019

Special issue workshop:  December 18-19, 2019

Tentative publication date:      2020

Introduction

In recent years, the world economy has witnessed repeated trials of strength between globalization and de-globalization (e.g., Cuervo-Cazurra, Mudambi & Pedersen, 2017; Prashantham, Eranova & Couper, 2018). On the one hand, the Trump administration launched the United States on a protectionist course by stating that “Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength.” On the other hand, China leader Xi Jinping called for globalization; he declared: “Pursuing protectionism is like locking oneself in a dark room. While wind and rain may be kept outside, that dark room will also block light and air” (World Economic Forum, 2017). Ironically, China has long been known as a protectionist and isolationist economy even after it joined WTO in early 2000s while the US as a free and open one following its victory in the Second World War. It seems the US and China, the two largest economies in the world, changed their position on global economic order. Actually, China launched its new national policy on economic globalization known as the “Belt and Road Initiative” (BRI) in 2013, which is different from the “go out” policy adopted in China by the end of 1990s. Although this initiative has a short history, it has provided fertile soil for observing how it facilitates and promotes the new wave of globalization (Li, Liu & Qian, 2019).

Trials of Strength between Globalization and De-globalization

Globalization can be both a description and a prescription (Chehade, 2016). As a description, “globalization” refers to the widening and deepening of the international flows of technology, capital, trade and information within a single integrated global market. As a prescription, “globalization” entails the liberalization of national and international markets in the belief that the free flow of goods, capital and information will lead to economic growth and increased human welfare. Trump has argued for protectionism and asserted that decades of free-trade policies were responsible for the collapse of the American manufacturing industry by, for example, bringing cheap consumer goods into the country, costing domestic jobs and depressing wages (Allen, 2016). Similarly, support for Brexit came in large part from those worried about their jobs and the entry of immigrants. To roll back economic globalization, Trump signed an executive order to withdraw from Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a U.S.-led free trade pact. He also signed an executive order to renegotiate, or even scrap, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Other global trade deals are also now very much in doubt, notably the agreement being negotiated between the US and Europe, known as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) (Allen, 2016). Further, the Trump administration threatened to slap taxes on U.S. companies (MNEs) investing overseas, raise tariffs to discourage companies from offshoring production and jobs, and introduce border taxes that penalize imports relative to exports, or both (Smith, 2017).

With a parallel development, the Trump administration’s withdrawal from the TPP gives China the opportunity to strengthen its position in the region (Smith, 2017). Beijing has been positively pushing its own regional free-trade pacts which include both the Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific (FTAAP) and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which some observers see as competitors to the TPP. At the same time, China has been advocating its development strategy and framework known as “BRI” which focuses on connectivity and cooperation among countries primarily between itself and the rest of Eurasia (Li, Liu & Qian, 2019). The BRI has already attracted over 100 countries and international organizations to join, and enjoyed wider support from Beijing-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

These changes derived in this new international business environment will affect many parameters of strategy, institution, new venture creation, and supporting business activities such as resource allocation and investment selection. The new environment challenges how businesses are organized and governed. Academic research, however, has yet to explain how firms can navigate the new international business environment. MNEs and entrepreneurs alike must account for these developments in terms of their plans and strategies in the coming years.

The APJM Special Issue seeks to provide an assessment of new challenges under rapidly changing international environments, and firm’s strategic responses toward the coexistence of globalization (e.g., BRI) and de-globalization (e.g., protectionism). We want to generate new insights on the change in the new business landscape and what new theory and evidence are needed to better elucidate this new environment. New theoretical perspectives, empirical evidences, and novel case studies can help identify the driving and inhibiting forces behind strategic responses in the new business landscape, and how firms and industries can adapt to and benefit from this dynamic environment.

We welcome both theoretical and empirical contributions, and papers that address the FDI and international strategy issues relating to the new global business landscape. We offer a few questions below to provide a sense of what the SI seeks to address. These questions are illustrative at best and not intended to set boundaries in terms of the key themes of interest.

Sample Topics

1. How do national strategies, for example, the Belt and Road Initiative of China, help their firms open up new avenues and adapt to rapidly changing international environments?
2. How could Asian firms utilize institutional or government-specific factors (at the country level) to deal with the coexistence of globalization and de-globalization challenges?
3. What strategic options are available for Asian firms to maintain sustainable development within the highly dynamic institutional environment?
4. In a new environment of world-wide protectionism, both domestic firms and MNEs will be confronted with fierce industrial competition and/or even “industrial wars”. How could firms address such challenges? 
5. How could developed economy MNEs manage their operations in Asia? How would such strategic moves or decisions (e.g., harvesting and divestment) affect their competitive advantage in the host countries? What strategies can help them sustain the scale and scope in Asia?
6. How could Asian MNEs deal with the institutional pressure from the Trump administration? Should they move directly into the U.S. market to create new demand and increase sales? For firms that already operate there, should they continue their investment (reinvestment) even though it may not produce profits?
7. How could Asian firms use M&A and/or strategic alliances to collaborate with Chinese counterparts in jointly developing their business operations along the “Belt and Road” routes?

______________________________________________________________________________

Submission Process and Deadlines

* All manuscripts will be reviewed as a cohort for this special issue. Manuscripts must be submitted by September 1, 2019.

* For informal inquires related to the Special Issue, proposed topics and potential fit with the Special Issue objectives, please contact the guest editors.

* For those authors who have submitted the papers to the normal manuscript issues, one option is to remove your prior submission and then submit the paper again selecting the Special Issue on the author system. If you do not want to do so, please send a message to the editor office to indicate your intention for this SI.

APJM Special Issue Workshop

All authors who are invited to revise and resubmit their manuscripts are expected to present their papers at an APJM Special Issue workshop to be held at Xiamen University, China, in December 18-19, 2019. The special issue editors and APJM editorial board members will provide developmental feedback to paper presentations during the workshop to enhance the quality and contribution of papers in order to maximize the impact of the SI. But presentation at the workshop does not guarantee acceptance of a paper for publication in APJM and attending the workshop is not a precondition for acceptance into the Special Issue.

References

Allen, K. 2016. Trump’s economic policies: protectionism, low taxes and coal mines https://www.theguardian.com/.../trumps-economic-policies-protectionism-low-taxes-and-coal-mines

Chehade, G. (2016). Could Trump be the end of economic globalization? Asian Times, (November 18, 2016). www.atimes.com/trump-end-economic-globalization/

Cuervo-Cazurra, A., Mudambi, R., & Pedersen, T. 2017. Globalization: Rising skepticism. Global Strategy Journal, 7: 155-158.

Li, J., Liu, B., & Qian, G. 2019. The belt and road initiative, cultural friction and ethnicity: Their effects on the export performance of SMEs in China. Journal of World Business, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2019.04.004.

Prashantham, S., Eranova, M., & Couper, C. 2018. Globalization, entrepreneurship and paradox thinking. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 35(1): 1-9.

Smith, D. 2017. Trump withdraws from Trans-Pacific partnership amid flurry of orders. The Guardian.

World Economic Forum. (2017). President Xi’s speech to Davos in full. Global Agenda, China, Economy. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/full-text-of-xi-jinping-keynote-at-the-world-economic-forum.

Special Issue Editors:

Jiatao Li

Prof. Li is the Lee Quo Wei Professor of Business, and Chair Professor of Management, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. He is an elected Fellow of the Academy of International Business (AIB). Prof. Li is a leading expert on global business strategy. His current research interests are in the area of organizational learning, strategic alliances, corporate governance, innovation, and entrepreneurship, with a focus on issues related to global firms and those from emerging economies. His work has appeared in leading academic journals such as Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Organization Science, Strategic Management Journal, Journal of Management, and Journal of International Business Studies. He has served as an Associate Editor of the Strategic Management Journal from 2009 to 2016. He currently serves as Editor of the Journal of International Business Studies for 2016-2022, responsible for research related to strategy and policy in emerging economies. He is also on the editorial boards of the Academy of Management Journal, Strategic Management Journal, Global Strategy Journal, Journal of Management, and Long Range Planning. He served as Program Chair of the 2018 Academy of International Business annual conference in the US. 

Gongming Qian

(The Chinese University of Hong Kong, qian@baf.cuhk.edu.hk)

Prof. Qian is full professor and department chair, Southern University of Science and Technology, and former Chair of the Department of Management at The Chinese University of Hong Kong. He received his Ph.D. in International Business/Management from Lancaster University, England. His research interests include the financial economics of multinational enterprises and foreign direct investment, international strategy, and entrepreneurship. He has published widely in peer reviewed academic journals including Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Journal of Business Venturing, Journal of International Business Studies, and Strategic Management Journal. He has co-edited and is co-editing a Journal of International Business Studies special issue, a Journal of Management Studies special issue, an Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice special issue, and a Journal of International Business Policy special issue published and to be published in 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021, respectively. He serves on the editorial board of Journal of International Business Studies.

Kevin Zhou

(The University of Hong Kong, kevinz@hku.hk)

Prof. Kevin Zhou is Chang-Jiang Scholar Chair Professor, Chair Professor of Strategy/International Business at Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Hong Kong. Prof. Zhou’s research interests include capabilities and innovation, trust and relational ties, and strategic issues in emerging economies. Prof. Zhou has published numerous papers in prestigious journals such as Administrative Science Quarterly, Academy of Management Journal, Strategic Management Journal, Journal of Marketing, Journal of International Business Studies, Organization Science, and among others. His work is highly influential and well cited: He has been the World’s Top 1% cited scholars based on ISI's Essential Science Indicators (ESI) since 2011 and has been the World’s Highly Cited Scientific Researchers since 2016.

Jane Lu

(China Europe International Business School, janelu@ceibs.edu)

Prof. Jane Lu is Parkland Chair Professor of Strategy at China Europe International Business School, while on leave from her role as James Riady Chair in Asian Business and Economics in the Department of Management and Marketing, the University of Melbourne. She is currently the Editor-in-Chief of Asia Pacific Journal of Management. Jane’s research centers on international strategy such as internationalization, entry mode choice and alliance partner selection. Her recent research continues this line of research but with a focus on emerging market firms and their internationalization. Jane Lu has published in leading academic journals such as Administrative Science Quarterly, Academy of Management Journal, Strategic Management Journal, Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of Management and Journal of Business Venturing, among other journals.

Chinese culture has profoundly influenced the way a firm does business in contemporary China. With China’s growing economic power and international status, multinational corporations have been increasing their presence in China. Yet, it is truly challenging for practitioners and researchers to fully grasp the unique aspects and diversity of regional business cultures throughout China. Moreover, rapid globalization and development of information technology have enabled increasing numbers of Chinese companies to go international. Understanding foreign business cultural environments is an essential element in ensuring their successful entry into a foreign market.

The main purpose of the 2011 China Business Culture Research Conference, which will be held from 21 Oct. to 24 Oct. 2011 in Jinan, Shangdong, China, is to promote the development of business culture research and practice. The conference will provide a high-level academic exchange platform for scholars in business culture to facilitate their communication and discussion of the latest research output.

Organizer:
Shandong University
The Journal of China Business Culture Research
Jinan Management Science Institution

Sponsors:
MAG Scholar
Asian Journal of Business Research

Conference topics:
The conference will include, but not be limited to, discussion of the following research topics:

• The Domain of Chinese business culture;
• International and Chinese business culture development and progress;
• International business cultural diversity;
• Comparisons between Chinese business culture and other business cultures;
• Confucian entrepreneurial culture;
• Business group culture;
• Entrepreneurial culture;
• Regional business culture;
• Commodity culture;
• Brand culture;
• Business etiquette;
• Guanxi in business;
• Advertising culture;
• Corporate culture;
• Consumer culture;
• Currency culture;
• Bazaar culture;
• Business luck culture;
• Tourism and culture;
• Corporate culture;
• China business culture innovation;
• Business culture and Chinese management style;
• Business culture and economic development;
• Business culture and social development.

Authors are encouraged to submit their full papers via internet to the conference email address: sywh2011@163.com.

A paper review committee, formed by distinguished scholars, will review the submitted papers, and the results will be announced before 15 September 2011.

The conference accepts normative, empirical and practical papers. Selected papers will be published in academic journals such as China Business Culture Research, Journal of China Business Culture Research, and Asian Journal of Business Research.

Conference schedule:
21 Oct. Registration
22 Oct., 2011, Morning, – Conference opening ceremony and keynote speech
22 Oct., 2011, Afternoon – Panel discussion
23 Oct 2011, Panel discussion
24 Oc. 2011, Tour to Qufu, Mount Tai or Ancient Capital Qi (cultures of Qi and Lu)

Important days:
22 Aug 2011 – Deadline of call for papers
22 Sep 2011 – Notification of paper acceptance
22-23 Oct 2011 – China Business Culture Research Conference

Conference Organization:
Organizing Committee:
Chairmen:         Professor Xingyuan Wang (Shandong University)
Professor Zhilin Yang (City University of Hong Kong)
Committee members:
Professor Guoqun Fu (Peking University)
Professor Jiang Wei (Zhejiang University)
Professor Congdong Li (Jinan University)
Professor Dongjin Li (Nankai University)
Professor Jing Huang (Wuhan University)
Professor Xudong Gao (Tsinghua University)
Professor Yuhuang Zheng (Tsinghua University)
Professor Mingli Zhang (Beihang University)
Professor Zhaohua Wang (Beijing Institute of Technology)
Professor Yunqi Zhang (Central University of Finance and Economics)
Professor Ya Sheng (Zhejiang Gongshang University)
Professor Youjin Liu (Xiangtan University)
Professor Yonggui Wang (University of International Business and Economics)
Professor Tao Wang (Wuhan University)
Professor Haizhong Wang (Sun Yat-Sen University)
Professor Fasheng Zhao (Confucianism Research Centre, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences)
Professor Zhiying Liu (University of Science and Technology of China)
Professor Jinlan Liu (Tianjin University)
Professor Hongwei Liu (Shandong University)
Professor Zhijun Chen (Shandong University)
Professor Zuohao Hu (Tsinghua University)
Professor Yongqiang Li (Southwest University of Finance & Economics)
Professor Zhou Meihua (China University of Mining & Technology)
Professor Lu Yudong (Dalian University of Technology)
Professor Chenting Su (City University of Hong Kong)
Professor Alan Cai (Carletin University, Canada)
Professor Kim-Shyan Fam (Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand）
Professor Michael R. Hyman (New Mexico State University. USA)
Professor Thomas Madden (South Carolina University. USA)
Professor Chenglu Wang (New Heaven University, USA)
Professor Florian Wangenheim (Technical University of Munich, Germany)

Committee Secretariat:
sywh2011@163.com
 

2013 INFORMS/Organization Science Dissertation Proposal Competition Call for Submissions

Submission Deadline: July 1, 2013

We invite you to submit your dissertation proposal to the INFORMS/Organization Science Dissertation Proposal Competition. Now in its 21st year, this competition is one of the most prestigious available to doctoral students studying organizations. Eight finalists will be chosen, based on reviews by experienced referees. Finalists will present their dissertation proposals in a workshop on Saturday, October 5, 2013 at the fall INFORMS Conference held in Minneapolis, MN. During the workshop finalists will receive detailed feedback from a panel of respected organizational scholars who act as final judges for the competition. The all-day workshop also provides a wonderful opportunity to interact with a small group of future colleagues.

At the workshop, the judges will select a winner and a runner up. In order for their dissertation proposals to be considered for this competition, students must meet the following eligibility criteria:

1. Students must have defended their dissertation proposal between August 1, 2012, and August 1, 2013, but not yet defended their dissertation.

2. The expected completion date for students’ dissertations should be on or before July 1, 2014.

3. No part of the dissertation or dissertation proposal may be accepted for publication, provisionally or otherwise, at an academic journal prior to submission for this competition.

We encourage all eligible doctoral students who are studying topics related to organization science to submit summaries of their dissertation proposals. Dissertation proposals addressing issues related to any aspect of organization theory, organizational behavior, strategy, business ethics, or entrepreneurship are welcome.

Submissions should meet the following formatting criteria:

1. Proposal summaries must be no longer than 15 double-spaced pages in 12-point Times font with 1-inch margins. Up to 7 additional pages containing references and exhibits may be included.

2. Because this is a dissertation proposal competition, empirical results should not appear in the dissertation proposal summary or appendices.

Dissertation proposals will be judged based on soundness of theory, methodological rigor, and contribution to the field of organization science. In keeping with the mission of the INFORMS College on Organization Science, boldness and innovation of the dissertation will be important criteria in the judging process. The competition is being coordinated this year by Emily Block of the University of Notre Dame’s Mendoza College of Business.

We are fortunate to again be using Organization Science's ScholarOne Manuscripts submission system to manage dissertation proposal submissions and reviews. The web address for submissions is http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/orgsci. If you do not already have an account you will have to create one. This is a quick and easy process. Applications must be received by July 1, 2013. Dissertation proposal summaries that do not meet the formatting criteria will be returned to students without review. In addition to the proposal summary, each application must include a nomination letter from the applicant’s adviser certifying that the student is likely to complete the dissertation by July 1, 2014 and the date when the student advanced to candidacy – there is no need for a detailed recommendation letter. Please follow Organization Science's instructions for submitting your proposal.

A couple of important things to note:

• In step 1, select the manuscript type "Proposal."
• In step 2, Attributes, please select a few key words to aid in assigning reviewers.
• In step 4, Reviewers and Editors, do not recommend any reviewers. However, you should indicate Emily Block as your preferred SENIOR EDITOR.
• In step 5, Details and Comments, paste your cover letter into the window and use the browse attachment function to attach your COVER PAGE as well as YOUR ADVISER'S NOMINATION LETTER.
• In step 6, Upload Files, upload a copy of your proposal WITHOUT ITS COVER PAGE OR OTHER IDENTIFYING INFORMATION. The first page should include only your dissertation title and abstract.

Please direct any inquiries to: Emily Block, eblock1@nd.edu

Guest Editors

 Omrane Guedhami

University of South Carolina

 Sofia Johan

College of Business, Florida Atlantic University

Tilburg Law and Economics Center (TILEC)

 Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes

SKEMA Business School

National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

 Siri Terjesen

Kogod School of Business, American University & Norwegian School of Economics

Keynote Speaker

Sanjai Bhagat (University of Colorado at Boulder)

Submission deadline: December 1, 2019

Background of the Special Issue

Corporate governance is in a state of flux.  Changes are brimming in both developed and developing economies around the world.  There are considerable regulatory adjustments at national levels as well as transformations in internal governance at the firm level. 

            The sources of internal governance changes are wide and varied.  Structural changes to the economy have changed the nature of entrepreneurial firm formation, where the boundaries of the firm are evolving, maybe even disappearing, in many industries.  Many functions that used to be within firms are now outsourced.  Managing these outsourced relations has become more complex, giving rise to new governance problems. 

            Modes of finance have likewise evolved, giving rise to more complex governance solutions. Donations, rewards, and equity crowdfunding, as well as marketplace lending, also known as alternative finance, have become much more common in recent years.  These new modes of alternative finance give rise to new challenges in securing other forms of more traditional finance for scaling up, and failure to establish proper governance suitable to the context can give rise to success or failure.  At the IPO stage, many firms now seek dual class listing structures, which puts pressure on regulators to facilitate such structure or risk losing business, such as the case of Alibaba listing in New York instead of Hong Kong.

            International integration of firms, business, and trade along with evolving cultural norms in different regions around the world create different needs for governance solutions.  
Corporate policies, including risk-taking, are increasingly recognized to be significantly affected by political systems, religion, culture, gender, race, and legal conditions, among other factors.  Governance solutions vary widely depending on the legal, ethical, and cultural conditions in different regions around the world.  Changes that have been widespread at the national level, including but not limited to changes in political environments, bankruptcy laws, regulations governing diversity on boards, and labor laws should therefore logically take into account these factors.

            This special issue seeks papers that investigate the causes and ensuing consequences of these changes.  A key interest here is for new work that examines the risks associated with these governance changes.  Also, we seek papers that investigate skewness effects of these governance changes, or ‘tipping points’, giving rise to success versus failure.  New corporate governance research is needed to address these questions.  To this end, new research papers could be developed around the following themes:

1.      What is the societal role of the modern corporation and the role of corporate governance in facilitating it?

2.      Do dual-class shares add or create value, and what is the role of founders and ownership type in corporate governance?

3.      Should corporate governance be tied to sustainability, and if so, how?  How should governance solutions balance between the different ESG elements?

4.      What are the new agency problems and governance solutions associated with evolving new economy firms and outsourced functions?

5.      How are corporate polices, risk taking, and ethics affected by evolving political climates, and how does this interaction depend on culture, religion, legal institutions, gender, and race? 

6.      What are the governance implications associated with the new innovations in fintech?

7.      How do legal changes such as quotas for diversity on boards, bankruptcy laws, and labor laws affect entrepreneurial risk taking and skewness in entrepreneurial outcomes?

Papers addressing other related current governance questions are of course welcome.

Submissions and Review Process

A paper development workshop will be held at Florida Atlantic University (Boca Raton, Florida), on February 28, 2020.  Attendance is encouraged but optional. Keynote speaker will be Sanjai Bhagat, Provost Professor of Finance, University of Colorado at Boulder.  The guest editors will be available at this conference to assist in the development of research.  Another workshop held with the Journal of Corporate Finance on Corporate Governance Failures will follow on the subsequent day February 29, 2020, whereby authors are also encouraged, but not required to attend.

The deadline for submission of full papers to the workshop is December 1, 2019.  Submissions have to follow the CGIR style guide to authors and should be sent to Sofia Johan (sjohan@fau.edu) and Siri Terjesen (terjesen@american.edu) with the subject line “CGIR Special Issue Conference”.  Notifications about acceptance to the workshop will be sent by December 31, 2019.

Fully developed manuscripts should be submitted to CGIR by June 15, 2020 through the CGIR Manuscript Central website http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/CGIR. Contributors should follow the CGIR Author Guidelines (which can be found at www.cgir.org).

Final decisions on papers for the CGIR Special Issue will be made later in 2020 following the journal’s standard procedures. Please note that acceptance to the workshop does not necessarily guarantee acceptance to the CGIR Special Issue. Similarly, acceptance to the workshop is not a condition for submission to the CGIR Special Issue.

Contacts

Omrane Guedhami, University of South Carolina, omrane.guedhami@moore.sc.edu

Sofia Johan, College of Business, Florida Atlantic University and TILEC, sjohan@fau.edu

Florencio Lopez de Silanes, SKEMA Business School and NBER, florencio.lopezdesilanes@skema.edu,

Siri Terjesen, Kogod School of Business, American University, and Norwegian School of Economics, terjesen@american.edu

Special Issue Co-Editors:

Special Issue Description

Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) have become ubiquitous in current debates about trade and globalization, and have emerged as a key issue of contention in global trade and investment negotiations. The 'Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights' (TRIPS), signed in 1994 as a founding element of the World Trade Organization, represents the most important attempt to establish a global harmonization of Intellectual Property protection, creating international standards for the protection of patents, copyrights, trademarks and designs. As part of the World Trade Organization, it also is subject to that organization’s dispute settlement system, and thus, unlike previous international agreements on IPRs, includes enforcement procedures at the intergovernmental level.

Protecting IPRs of course means different things for firms, who most profit from them, and for governments, who bear the burden of creating the infrastructure for the enforcement of IPRs (and, in some areas, are among the major consumers of goods protected by IPRs). The processes of IP legislation and enforcement can thus be difficult and controversial.  In designing IP polices governments need to mindful of balancing the reward for innovative activity with the incentives for diffusion of that innovation.  Put differently, the interests of the producers must be arrayed against the interests of the consumer. Even within a national economy, this may be difficult as producers are much better organized to lobby policy than are consumers (Olsen 1962).  In an international context this can be almost impossible to achieve without some supra-national intervention. Thus the adoption of TRIPS at the multilateral level and its implementation at national levels has been fraught with conflicts, as many political scientists (e.g. May and Sell, 2006; Ryan, 1998; Sell, 2003; Matthews 2002; Deere 2008) and economists (e.g., Archibugi and Filippetti, 2010; Maskus, 2000; Maskus and Reichman, 2005) have shown.

Nearly two and a half decades after TRIPS came into effect, much has changed in the global innovation landscape.  Technology trade has flourished and more technology has been transferred to emerging market subsidiaries by MNEs. China has emerged as a major power making huge strides in patenting in both domestic, European and US jurisdictions (Hu et al 2017; Li 2012).  Indian public research institutes like CSIR have found patenting has helped them become more self-reliant for funds.  New institutional forms of Intellectual Property which pool patents have also emerged in response to the global challenges.  Examples include the Medicines Patent Pool (MPP) to tackle AIDS (WIPO 2011), the GAVI alliance to improve childhood immunization (Kremer and Grennerster, 2004) and the EcoPatent Commons, GreenXchange and Canada’s Oil Sands Alliance (COSIA) to control carbon emissions (Awad, 2015).   

Although IB theories emphasize the role of innovation and technological change in originating and strengthening the competitive advantages of the MNE, IB scholarship has focused mostly on  considering IPR regulations as a location advantage/disadvantage (e.g. Ivus, Park, Saggi, 2017), or an institutional factor (e.g., Peng, Ahlstrom, Carraher, Shi, 2017a, b; Peng, 2013) interacting with MNE  strategies.  This is a narrow view and one that does not address the emerging new institutional developments around intellectual property policy and the effects of these on trade, investment and multinational behavior.

TRIPS also generated new political configurations between governments and business (and other social actors) and, importantly, the use of non-market strategies to influence IPR policy. Understanding these new patterns of organization and political mobilization, traditionally the domain of political economy, is exceedingly important in the context of emerging markets where implementing TRIPS implied substantial changes to national laws and policies. The most studied sector in this regard has been pharmaceuticals, as TRIPS required countries to allow drugs to be patented when many countries previously did not do so. National debates are no longer about whether drug firms should get patents, but how strong the associated rights should be, and how long these rights of exclusion should last for. Shadlen (2017) shows that national approaches to both introducing pharmaceutical patent systems and reforming these new patent systems have been driven by constellations of interests in society (rather than, for example, the ideology of incumbent presidents or the nature of political institutions). These issues, namely how the focal points of debate have changed and the search for drivers of cross-national and within-country variation, are common to a range of global challenges, beyond pharmaceuticals, such as clean technologies and global warming.

As regional trading blocs run into political problems it may be worth reassessing the TRIPS experience once again to highlight what has worked well and what has not. The proposed special issue aims at stimulating a wider discussion on the international patenting landscape, its use by emerging markets and the influence on trade and MNE strategies.  This is a two-way interaction where firm behaviors can help/influence the design of better IP policies, but whose successful implementation in turn requires cooperation from firms (Lundan, 2018). This special issue is aimed at an inter-disciplinary audience in a genuine effort to bring together research that wants to understand the experience of TRIPS and what it offers in terms of IPR policy as the world heads towards de-globalisation.  Related contributions have gradually begun to appear in the IB literature (Journal of World Business, Transnational Corporations and Journal of International Business Policy).  Relevant research has also appeared in other disciplines such as Journal of Law and Economics, Journal of Development Studies and Journal of Development Economics. They provide some stepping stones and research agendas for this special issue.

The Journal of International Business Policy (JIBP) aims to be a leader in publishing high quality research analyzing emerging public policy trends and their impact on international firms.  Through this Special Issue call, JIBP aims specifically to champion research analyzing the contribution of IP harmonization to processes of technology transfer, policy making, capability building and challenges to governance.  This special issue is intended to be a first – but certainly not last - focal point triggering IB scholarly attention to this area. For that reason, this special issue will also be accompanied by a Paper Development Workshop in December 2019.

The following is an indicative (but not exhaustive) list of topics to guide potential authors:

1. The effect of IPR  policies on technology-related trade and investment

• Home- and host-country IPR policy effects on technology trade and choice of partners, before and after TRIPS
• How the spread of global value chains (GVCs) and countries’ and firms’ integration into GVCs affects national IP strategy
• How TRIPS has affected the internationalization and “off-shoring” of research and development

2.            Domestic and foreign firms and the political economy of IPR policies

• MNE influence on regional and/or global IP harmonization.
• MNE lobbying strategies to change IPR policies in host and home countries.
• The internationalization of trademarks
• Case studies of national politics around joining the Patent Cooperation Treaty

3.            IPR policies: Trends and effects at the country level

• Home- and host-country IPR regulatory effects on domestic technological capability and economic development
• Home- and host-country IPR policy effects on inward and outward FDI
• IPR and patenting patterns in home- and host-countries
• The emergence of competition and antitrust institutions as important actors in countries and sectors where patenting is new
• Understanding the changing demands for stronger IP rules by local actors in industries where imitation and reverse-engineering are difficult

4.            IP implementation and its effect on economic outcomes

• Understanding the differences between de jure and de facto levels of IP protection and the effect of divergence on technology investment and trade
• How TRIPS has affected the role of technology transfer offices in public (and private) universities and research institutions
• IP infringement and its effect on MNE investment and domestic inventiveness
• Effectiveness of new IPR regimes (patent pooling) for solving the technology needs of global challenges
• New forms of property right protection (in the digital age); open models for patents

We welcome extended proposals from research in all relevant scientific fields (researchers in IB, economics, political science, sociology, law, geography, innovation, development studies, public policy, and international relations) and especially welcome proposals bridging various scientific disciplines. A paper can be aimed at theory development, but can also be empirical (aimed at collecting and interpreting larger data samples or specific case studies).  To give us a wider choice of papers, our call is for extended proposals which should be submitted to the Editors by 15 December 2018.  Selected proposals will be expected to submit full papers by 15 July 2019.

Special Issue Proposals

Proposals should be written in English and not exceed a total of seven (7) pages and 4000 words – five (5) pages for the body which can include charts, graphs, diagrams, and up to two (2) pages of references. The 4000-word count includes all text in the charts, graphs, diagrams, and references.

Only electronic submissions of proposal(s) will be accepted, submitted via the Manuscript Central portal for JIBP: https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jibp. A maximum of two (2) proposals, either as an author or a co-author, may be submitted.

We seek original, unpublished work to move the scholarly conversation on TRIPS forward. Proposals may be rooted in or derived from prior work, but the submitted proposal must reflect significant development. Any proposal submitted that is judged to be identical or substantially similar to work already published, presented or under review for another conference or publication, will not be considered for invitation to develop a full manuscript.

Proposals are easiest to handle if submitted in PDF format. MS Word (or equivalent) will also be accepted. The title should be listed in the header of each page. Please use single spacing and 10-point font or larger. All proposals received by the deadline date (December 15, 2018) are deemed as original and final.

Proposals are reviewed by the special issue editors, so they are not anonymous. Proposals should include name and institutional affiliation of all authors. Authors who submit full manuscripts can expect a standard double-blind peer review process after submission.

Timeline from Proposal to Publication

• December 15, 2018: Deadline for submission of extended proposals
• January 20, 2019:  Notification of acceptance or rejection of proposals for development as full manuscripts for submission
• June 24-27, 2019 (AIB 2019 Copenhagen): Editors participate in a panel that highlights the current JIBP special issues
• July 15, 2019: Deadline for submission of full papers via Manuscript Central portal for JIBP (https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jibp)
• September 15, 2019: First round of double-blind peer review of submitted papers concluded
• December 2019: Revised papers to be presented at a Paper Development Workshop
• Jan 15, 2020: Editorial notification of conditional acceptance or rejection for inclusion in the JIBP special issue
• March 1, 2020: Final manuscripts submitted for the special issue
• June 2020:  Special issue publication

Selected bibliography

Archibugi D., Filippetti A. (2010), The Globalisation of Intellectual Property Rights: Four Learned Lessons and Four Theses, Global Policy, 1(2): 137- 149. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1758-5899.2010.00019.x

Awad, B. (2015), Global Patent Pledges A Collaborative Mechanism For Climate Change Technology, CIGI  papers #81, Canada.  [ last accessed 04/08/2018 from https://www.cigionline.org/sites/default/files/no.81.pdf]

Albert G.Z. Hu, Peng Zhang , Lijing Zhao (2017) China as number one? Evidence from China's most recent patenting surge, Journal of Development Economics, 124,  107–119.

Deere, C. (2008) The Implementation Game: The TRIPS Agreement and the Global Politics of Intellectual Property Reform in Developing Countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ivus, O., Park, W.G. & Saggi, K. (2017), Patent protection and the composition of multinational activity: Evidence from US multinational firms, Journal of International Business Studies, 48(7): 808-836.

Kremer, M., & Glennerster, R. (2004). Strong Medicine - Creating incentives for pharmaceutical research on neglected diseases. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Li, Xibao  (2012).  Behind the recent surge of Chinese patenting: An institutional view, Research Policy 41 236–249.

Maskus, K. E. (2000) Intellectual Property Rights in the Global Economy. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.

Maskus, K. E. and Reichman, J. H. (2005) International Public Goods and Transfer of Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Matthews, D (2002) Globalising Intellectual Property Rights: The TRIPS Agreement. Routledge.

May, C. and Sell, S. (2006) Intellectual Property Rights: A Critical History. London: Lynne Rienner.

Peng, M. W. (2013). An institution-based view of IPR protection. Business Horizons, 56: 135–139.

Peng, M. W., Ahlstrom, D., Carraher, S. M., & Shi, W. (2017a). History and the debate over intellectual property. Management and Organization Review, 13(1): 15-38.

Peng, M. W., Ahlstrom, D., Carraher, S. M., & Shi, W. (2017b). An institution-based view of global IPR history, Journal of International Business Studies, 48(7): 893-907.

Ryan, M. R. (1998) Knowledge Diplomacy: Global Competition and the Politics of Intellectual Property. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Sell, S. K. (2003) Private Power, Public Law: The Globalization of Intellectual Property Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shadlen, K.C (2017) Coalitions and Compliance: The Political Economy of Pharmaceutical Patents in Latin America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

WIPO (2011) Medicines Patent Pool: Facilitating Access to HIV Treatment.  Wipo magazine ( last accessed 04/08/18 from http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2011/03/article_0005.html

CONFERENCE OUTLINE:

The 31st International Conference on Pacific Rim Management, co-organized by the Association for Chinese Management Educators (ACME) and The City University of Macau (CityU Macau), will be held from June 29 to July 1, 2024, in Macau, China. The conference provides a forum for business educators and practitioners to exchange information and stimulate cooperation with academic and professional organizations in the Pacific Rim region.

PROGRAM TRACKS:

SUBMISSION AND REVIEW OF PAPERS:

An abstract or full paper, written in English and MS Word, should be submitted to https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=icprmacme2024  by April 30, 2024.

Papers for the meeting will be reviewed anonymously, and authors will be notified of the decision by May 15, 2024. We also invite volunteers to participate as discussants and track chairs. Further information about submission instructions and the conference is available at http://myacme.org.

Quality papers will be suggested to the following journals for possible publication after further formal reviews.

• Contemporary Management Research
• Electronic Commerce Studies
• International Journal of Business
• International Journal of Business System Research
• International Journal of Cyber Society and Education
• International Journal of Electronic Commerce Studies
• International Journal of Revenue Management
• Journal of Integrated Enterprise Systems
• International Journal of Management Theory and Practices

REGISTRATION FEE:

Early bird registration: $150.00 (End on June 5, 2024, at 11:50 PM US PST);

Regular registration: $180.00 (End on June 29, 2024);

Student and retiree: $100.00 (End on June 29, 2024). Please see the Eventbrite registration link for details: https://acme2024.eventbrite.com

Conference Program Chair:

           Dr. José Alves, Faculty of Business, City University of Macau    

Conference Program Co-Chairs:

           Dr. William Chen, Faculty of Business, City University of Macau    

           Dr. Harry Xia, Craig School of Business, California State University, Fresno  

The handbook will be published as part of the World Scientific Series in Management Strategies, Policies and Implementation. Series Editor-in-Chief: Prof. Gideon Markman

Book Description:

Africa is a fascinating and increasingly relevant context for management research and practice.  Recent estimates indicate that Africa has the youngest and fastest-growing population, with the overall population expected to increase to 2.5 billion by 2050. Recent forecasts also show that Africa’s youth population will rise as a share of the world’s youth population from 19 percent to 33 percent between 2015 and 2050 (Dews, 2019). Consequently, the workforce in Africa is expected to grow by nearly 450 million people between 2010 and 2035 (George, Corbishley, Khayesi, Haas & Tihanyi, 2016). This population boom has the potential to unlock more than $3 trillion in consumer spending, according to a McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) report (2023). In addition to this vast human capital potential, the increasing proliferation of information and communication technologies (George et al., 2016) and surge in global value chains in Africa implies significant opportunities for firms participating in growing, global sectors such as agriculture, energy, financial services, and information technology. These factors in the environment along with the human capital potential in Africa implies that African countries are uniquely positioned to be hubs for innovation and global business. Thus, businesses that misunderstand Africa run the risk of missing one of the 21st century’s great growth opportunities. 

Despite the impending growth unfolding on the continent, the existing management literature often suggests that Africa’s businesses have tended to focus on short-term operational issues at the expense of long-term strategic imperatives and opportunities (e.g., Mellahi & Mol, 2015). Similarly, the literature points to underdevelopment in the inputs and outputs of the innovation process among organizations in Africa (e.g. Allard & Williams, 2020). These are fair criticisms considering limited evidence to the contrary. Indeed, the management literature on strategies (e.g., Pierce & Snyder, 2020; Uzuegbunam & Uzuegbunam, 2018) and innovations (e.g., Allard & Williams, 2020) in Africa is nascent. This limited perspective on the strategic and innovative activities of African based organizations overlooks the rich nuance and eclecticism of strategic and innovative activity on the continent. Africa’s 54 countries present a rich, complex but underexamined background for management scholars (Nachum et al., 2023; Pierce & Snyder, 2020).

This handbook calls for a cross-sectoral and cross-national collection of perspectives and evidence regarding strategic initiatives and innovations that are stimulating and supporting businesses as they seek to grow and capitalize on opportunities in Africa in the 21st century.   The book will focus on strategies and innovations across different types of organizations, including, but not limited to small, medium, or large firms, family firms, professional service firms, entrepreneurial start-ups, social enterprises, multinational enterprises, and public-private partnerships.  We are open to strategies and innovations across a myriad of industries and sectors, such as agriculture, sports, film, finance, technology, manufacturing, retail, etc.  

We are seeking chapter submissions that include, but are not limited to the following topics:

• What resource combinations and orchestration strategies are African firms employing to capitalize on human, financial or natural resources on the continent?           
• What forms of intellectual property strategies are employed to protect firms’ assets in Africa?
• What alliance and merger and acquisition strategies between African firms and international firms are being used to stimulate organizational growth and opportunity? 
• What innovative interorganizational partnerships/collaborations (e.g., public-private partnerships) are being developed or used to capitalize on the continent’s resources or geography?
• How do business accelerator/incubator programs on the continent shape strategy in entrepreneurial firms?
• What business model strategies and innovations support the birth and growth of African firms?
• What are the ecosystem strategies and innovations that foster entrepreneurial activity and success in Africa?
• How do African firms leverage or deploy platform strategies?
• What are the effects of frugal innovations and strategies in new or established African firms?
• What are the approaches and effects of value innovations and blue ocean strategies in Africa?
• What strategies and innovations contribute to the formation, survival, and growth of social enterprises in Africa?
• How do formal or informal institutional forces affect strategies and innovations on the continent?
• Comparative analysis related to firm strategies and innovations: Within and across African countries, cities, and rural areas. Between firms in Africa and firms in other parts of the African diaspora (i.e., the Caribbean; Afro-Latino sectors and markets). Between firms in Africa and firms in other parts of the world.
• What are the economic geography dimensions of strategy in Africa?
• How does national or organizational culture inhibit or encourage strategic and innovative activities in Africa?
• How do African firms construe performance and success (e.g., social performance, environmental performance)?

Chapter submissions should be uploaded to the online submission system by September 1, 2024. Contributions must be original, unpublished work. Though contributions may be empirical or conceptual, conceptual works (such as essays, etc.) should strive to leverage anecdotal or practical evidence to substantiate critical claims in the chapter. We welcome different empirical approaches including qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods.  We especially encourage submissions from African scholars. 

All chapter submissions should include a concrete analysis of implications for practice or / and public policy. Manuscripts should be submitted either in Microsoft Word or PDF formats with a maximum length of 30 pages (double-spaced). Authors are encouraged to follow the Academy of Management Journal Style Guide in preparing their submissions Academy of Management Journal STYLE GUIDE FOR AUTHORS.

Important Dates:

Deadline for chapter submissions – September 1, 2024

1st round reviews of papers completed – November 30, 2024

2nd round reviews of selected papers – May 31, 2025 

If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Dykes (bdykes@su.edu) or Dr. Uzuegbunam (ikenna.uzuegbunam@howard.edu).

Call for chapters for the upcoming book "A Strategic Negotiator’s Handbook: From Local to Global Perspectives". Following chapters needed:

• Chapter: Negotiation as an Optimal Dispute Resolution Alternative
• Chapter: Negotiating with Managers from Europe: The French Style
• Chapter: Negotiating with Managers from Europe: The British Way
• Chapter: Negotiating with Managers from Europe: The Italian Way
• Chapter: Negotiating with Managers from Asia: The Chinese Approach
• Chapter: Negotiating with Managers from Asia: The Japanese Approach
• Chapter: Negotiating with Managers from Latin America: The Brazilian Style
• Chapter: Negotiating with Managers from North America: The US Way
• Chapter: Negotiating with Managers from North America: The Canadian Way

In addition to the above, any other chapter proposals in the field of global negotiation and business/organizational conflict resolution & management are welcome. 

Mohammad Ayub Khan, PhD.

Full-Professor & Director

Marketing & International Business Department

Business School, North Region,

Tecnológico de Monterrey, Campus Monterrey

Ave. Eugenio Garza Sada 2501, Monterrey, N.L., México, 64849.

mkhan@itesm.mx

+52-81-8358-2000 ext. 4340

http://www.itesm.mx/

Management International Review Management International Review publishes research-based articles that reflect significant advances in the key areas of International Management.

Its target audience includes scholars in International Business Administration. MIR is a double-blind refereed journal that aims at the advancement and dissemination of applied research in the fields of International Management. The scope of the journal comprises International Business, Cross-cultural Management, and Comparative Management. The journal publishes research that builds or extends International Management Theory so that it can contribute to International Management Practice.

About the Focused Issue

Research on the internationalisation of the firm gained momentum in the 1970s. The dominant explanations from this period conceptualised internationalisation as a process that occurs over a period of time. Since then, internationalisation has received considerable scholarly attention.

However, while it is agreed to be a process, internationalisation of the firm is infrequently studied processually. Cross-sectional research designs dominate research in this area, and studies that pose process-based questions (i.e., in the form of ‘How does firm internationalisation evolve over time?’) are rare. Calls for longitudinal research and the inclusion of temporal dimensions are made regularly, but have not been taken up.

This inattention to process persists even though there has been considerable progress in process methods and theorising. Within the field of management, Andrew Pettigrew, Ann Langley and Andrew Van de Ven, among others, have articulated the difference between process- and variance-based research and provided a vocabulary and roadmap for process researchers.

Our aim with this focused issue is to advance understanding of how to study internationalisation as a process. We welcome conceptual and empirical papers that question mainstream variance-based assumptions, propose novel approaches and methods, and use process research to develop, challenge and extend theory in the area of firm internationalisation. We are open to qualitative submissions as well as quantitative papers based on longitudinal data.

Contributions are sought that address the following process-related questions:

1)      What process/es does internationalisation involve? This could include issues such as:

-         understanding specific phases as part of the firm’s overall internationalisation process, e.g. pre-, de- and re-internationalisation;

-         post-entry trajectories of firms (i.e. going beyond the focus on entry mode and locational choices);

-         conceiving internationalisation as a learning process, a process of organisational change, etc;

-         studying operation modes over time, e.g. franchising and foreign direct investment as a process;

-         Considering different units of analysis: not just the firm but e.g. product, business unit or business model.

2)      What methodological innovations are needed to advance understanding?

Possibilities include:

-         business history and historical methods, and other interdisciplinary approaches;

-         methodologies for studying the future;

-         quantitative approaches to longitudinal analysis;

-         ethnographic methods for studying the micro-processes of internationalisation;

-         options for studying internationalisation as a non-linear process.

3)      Once we study internationalisation as a process, what new insights do we gain? Possibilities for theoretical advances might include:

-         Applying complexity theory, co-evolutionary theory and other theories that allow for dynamic explanations;

-         Developing process theories that explain change over time;

-         Taking account of context and its changes in the internationalisation process;

-         Taking a process approach to research on (so-called) ‘Born Globals’ and INVs, the early and accelerated internationalisers;

-         (Even perhaps) rethinking the concept of internationalisation itself.

Submission Information

-         All papers will be subject to MIR’s blind review process

-         Authors should follow MIR guidelines, http://www.mir-online.de/Guideline-for-Authors.html

-         Contributions should be submitted in English, in a Microsoft Word or compatible format via e-mail attachment to catherine.welch@sydney.edu.au<mailto:catherine.welch@sydney.edu.au>

-         Questions can be addressed to any of the co-editors: Peter Liesch (p.liesch@business.uq.edu.au<mailto:p.liesch@business.uq.edu.au>), Niina Nummela (niina.nummela@utu.fi<mailto:niina.nummela@utu.fi>), Catherine Welch (catherine.welch@sydney.edu.au<mailto:catherine.welch@sydney.edu.au>)

-          For further information, see

http://www.internationalisationprocess.com<http://www.internationalisationprocess.com/>

-         Submission deadline: 31 October 2013

About the Guest Editors

Peter W. Liesch is Professor of International Business in the UQ Business School at The University of Queensland, Australia. His research interests include the facilitators and inhibitors of the internationalisation of the firm, particularly the smaller firm.

Niina Nummela is Professor of International Business at the University of Turku, Finland. Her research interests include SME internationalisation, cross-border acquisitions and mixed-methods research strategies.

Catherine Welch is Associate Professor in the Discipline of International Business at The University of Sydney, Australia. Her current research interests focus on qualitative research methodology and firm internationalisation processes.

The competitive landscape has been shifting in recent years more than ever. Globalization, rapid technological changes, codification of knowledge, the Internet, talent and employee mobility, increased rates of knowledge transfer, imitation, changes in customer tastes, the obsolescence of products and business models – have all caused a turbulent environment and accelerated changes and disruptions. These trends are expected to continue in the future, producing ever more rapid and unpredictable changes. Current concepts such as sustained competitive advantage, resource-based view, and strategic planning have been deemed vague, tautological, and inadequate for companies to cope with the rate and complexity of environmental and market changes (e.g., Kraaijenbrink, Spender and Groen, 2010; Lado, Boyd, Wright and Kroll, 2006).

In a chaotic environment in which markets emerge, collide, split, evolve, and die one of the primary determinants of a firm’s success is strategic agility, the ability to remain flexible in facing new developments, to continuously adjust the company’s strategic direction, and to develop innovative ways to create value. There is a tension between formal processes of strategic planning that require strategic commitments for a course of action and opportunistic strategic agility. Strategic planning has been criticized for preparing plans for tomorrow based on yesterday’s actions, concepts, and tools. Although strategic planning can help in specific situations, it usually creates an inertia that prevents fast adaptation when circumstances change or market discontinuities occur. Strategic agility requires inventing new business models and new categories rather than rearranging old products and categories. To cope with growing strategic discontinuities and disruptions, scholars have suggested the creation of strategically agile companies, including new ways for managing business transformation and renewal, developing dynamic capabilities, creating imitation abilities, maintain a high level of organizational flexibility, developing learning and knowledge transfer skills, using adaptive corporate culture, optimizing human resource scalability, and more (e.g., Doz and Kosonen, 2010; Dyer and Ericksen, 2005; Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000; Shenkar, 2010a; Weber, Tarba, and Reichel, 2011; Wilson and Doz, 2011).

The goal of this special issue is to stimulate authors to redefine the spectrum of means and processes available to create and use strategic agility. The issue challenges authors to provide the frameworks that managers can use to integrate, develop, and reconfigure competences and resources required to deal with hypercompetitive markets. Given markets discontinuities and the rapidly increasing pace of change, companies need new and agile paradigms.

We invite papers that focus on strategic agility in both the national and international arenas. We encourage contributions that address but are not limited to the following topics:

What are the origins, components, and outcomes of strategic agility?

What are the roles of early warning systems, communication, learning, scanning, knowledge transfer, training, managerial rotation, and rewarding in the development of strategically agile companies?

What is the relationship between strategic agility on one hand and organizational flexibility, modular organizational forms, conflicts and confrontations, dynamic capabilities (Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000), imitation (Shenkar, 2010b), cultural characteristics (Weber, Tarba, and Reichel, 2011), human resource management (Shafer, Dyer, Kilty, Amos, and Ericksen, 2001) and other existing and emerging concepts?

What insights can perspectives from strategy, economics, organizational behavior, international management, psychology, sociology, anthropology, and other disciplines provide into the nature, antecedents, processes, and effects of strategic agility?

Do strategic sensitivity and resource fluidity (Doz and Kosonen, 2008; 2010) create only a temporary advantage or can they improve performance in both short and the long term?

What is the role of strategic agility in mergers and acquisitions, given their high failure rate? For example, what is the importance of strategic agility components at the pre-merger planning stage (e.g., due diligence, scanning, and screening), the negotiation stage (Weber, Belkin, and Tarba, 2011), and during post-merger integration? What is the effect of various practices (communication, training) within the context of different national cultures (Weber, Rachman-Moore, and Tarba, 2011), and of integration approaches such as symbiosis (Weber, Tarba, and Rozen Bachar, 2011) and hybrid integration (Schweizer, 2005) on strategic agility?

What are the profiles of strategically agile multinational corporations?

Do changes in partners' resources and capabilities cause loss of flexibility to joint ventures, resulting in a high rate of failure? When and how should new modular organization forms be applied in the creation of strategic alliances?

When should management embrace intuitive, improvisational, and action-oriented forms of decision making for the sake of effectiveness?

Please bear in mind that CMR publishes primarily original articles that are research based and address issues of current concern to managers.

SUBMISSION

To consider your manuscript for publication in this special issue, submit your paper by February 29, 2012 to the official CMR website, indicating the title of the special issue.
All papers should meet the submission requirements of CMR: http://cmr.berkeley.edu/submission_guidelines.html . 
The papers will be sent for review following CMR’s standard review process, coordinated by the guest editors. The final decisions about publications will be made by the CMR editor.
Please indicate in your text why and how your paper will appeal not only to scholars but also, and especially, to managers.
For further information, please contact the CMR co-guest editor for this special issue, Prof. Yaakov Weber yaakovw@colman.ac.il .

REFERENCES
Doz, Y.L and Kosonen, M. 2008. The dynamics of strategic agility: Nokia's rollercoaster experience. California Management Review, 50 (3), 95-118.
Doz, Y.L and Kosonen, M. 2010. Embedding strategic agility. Long Range Planning, 43, 370-382.
Dyer, L. and Ericksen, J. (2005). In pursuit of marketplace agility: Applying precepts of self-organizing systems to optimize human resource scalability. Human Resource Management, 44 (2), 183–188.

Eisenhardt, K. M. and Martin, J. A. 2000. Dynamic capabilities: What are they?  Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1105-1121.
Goldman, S. L., Nagel, R. N., and Preiss, K. 1995. Agile Competitors and Virtual Organizations: Strategies for Enriching the Customer. van Nostrand Reinhold.
Kraaijenbrink, J., Spender, J.-C., and Groen, A. J. 2010. The resource-based view: A review and assessment of its critiques. Journal of Management, 36 (1), 349-372.
Lado, A. A., Boyd, N. G., Wright, P., and Kroll, M. 2006. Paradox and theorizing within the resource-based view. Academy of Management Review, 31 (1), 115-131.
Shafer, R. A., Dyer, L., Kilty, J., Amos, J., and Ericksen, J. (2001). Crafting a human resource strategy to foster organizational agility: A case study. Human Resource Management, 40 (3), 197–211.
Shenkar, O. 2010a. Copycats: How Smart Companies Use Imitation to Gain a Strategic Edge. Harvard Business Press.
Shenkar, O. 2010b. Imitation is more valuable than innovation. Harvard Business Review (April), 1-3.
Schweizer, L. 2006. Organizational integration of acquired biotech companies into pharmaceutical companies: The need for a hybrid approach. Academy of Management Journal, 48 (6), 1051–1074.
Weber, Y., Belkin, T., and Tarba, S.Y. 2011. Negotiation, cultural differences, and planning in mergers and acquisitions. Proceedings of the EuroMed Academy of Management 2010 Annual Conference, 1249-1257. Nicosia, Cyprus, November 2010.
Weber, Y., Rachman-Moore, D., and Tarba, S.Y. 2011. Human resource practices during post-merger conflict and merger performance. International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management. Forthcoming.
Weber, Y., Tarba, S.Y., and Reichel, A. 2011. International mergers and acquisitions performance: Acquirer nationality and integration approaches. International Studies of Management & Organization, 41 (3), 9 - 24.
Weber, Y., Tarba, S. Y., and Rozen Bachar, Z. 2011. Mergers and acquisitions performance paradox: The mediating role of integration approach. European Journal of International Management. 5 (4), 373 - 393.
Wilson, K. and Doz, Y. L. 2011. Agile innovation. California Management Review, 53 (2), 6 - 26.

The United Nations (UN) set the agenda to achieve sustainable development by securing the commitment of 193 countries to adopt the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGS). The SDGS represent an ambitious challenge to end all forms of poverty, tackle climate change while promoting economic prosperity and inclusion by the end of year 2030. The 17 goals put forward are: 1) No poverty; 2) Zero hunger; 3) Good health and well-being; 4) Quality education; 5) Gender equality; 6) Clean water and sanitation; 7) Affordable and clean energy; 8) Decent work and economic growth; 9) Industry, innovation, and infrastructure; 10) Raise your voice against discrimination; 11) Sustainable cities and communities; 12) Responsible production and consumption; 13) Climate action; 14) Life below water; 15) Life on land; 16) Peace, justice, and strong institutions; and 17) Partnerships for the goals. Detailed information on the 17 goals can be found here: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/

States and non-state organizations are called to work together and collaboratively and contribute with financial resources, knowledge, and expertise. In this context, this Special Issue focuses on the role of colleges and universities in achieving sustainable development.

Submissions for the Special Issue could relate, but are not limited, to the following topics:

• Innovative pedagogical approaches to teaching and learning toward sustainable development
• Administrative, academic, and student-led initiatives in sustainability
• Inclusion of sustainable development topics in the curriculum: stand-alone, cross-disciplinary and trans-disciplinary programs
• Campus design for sustainability
• Partnerships between universities and stakeholders to achieve sustainable development
• Overcoming resistance and skepticism among students and staff
• Teacher competencies in sustainable development
• Assessment of student learning in sustainable development

Comprehensive reviews, case studies, and research articles that focus on statistical analyses are invited for submission to this Special Issue. Please contact Patricia Kanashiro (pkanashiro@loyola.edu) with questions.

Manuscript submission information

Deadline for submissions: March 30, 2019

Manuscripts should be submitted online at https://raep.emnuvens.com.br/raep and can be written in English, Spanish, or Portuguese. Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the instructions author page.

About RAEP

Administração: Ensino e Pesquisa (RAEP) (ISSN 2358-0917) is the first academic publication in Brazil aimed at disseminating the very latest research in Administration/Management teaching and research. It is published 3 times a year by the Brazilian National Association of Undergraduate Courses in Administration (ANGRAD) for the academic community: students, professors, researchers and academic managers of courses and programs in Administration.

The journal is classified in stratum B1 of the Administration, Accounting and Tourism Qualis-CAPES. The journal is Abstracted/Indexed in Cengage, Ulrich's, EBSCO, ProQuest, Web of Science, Spell, Cengage Learning, DOAJ, DIADORIM, LatinREV and it is published 3 times a year.

Editors

Patricia Kanashiro, Ph.D. (Loyola University Maryland, United States)

Cristiane Benetti, Ph.D. (ICN Business School, France)

Janette Brunstein, Ph.D. (Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil)

Eric Talavera Campbell, MRe (Education Quality Accreditation Agency-EQUAA, Peru)

Friedemann Schulze-Fielitz, M.A. (EFMD GN Americas, United States)

Institutional theory has become one of the most important perspectives in international business in recent years. Researchers have applied theories from neoinstitutional economics and sociology to study how characteristics of the global, regional, country, and industry environments influence the strategies and performance of multinational enterprises. Studies have illustrated the importance of institutional variation for a wide range of constructs, including diversification, foreign direct investment, governance, innovation, organizational learning, and social networks. 

Whereas institutional theory has been helpful in highlighting why and how the rules of the international business game may change in different contexts, many studies have relied on constructs, frameworks, and mechanisms developed outside of the international business field. Our goal with this volume is threefold. First, we would like to encourage international business and management scholars to design new theoretical frameworks of institutions for the different levels of the business environment. Second, we would like to invite institutional theorists to outline potential new theoretical directions for international business researchers. Third, we wish to publish a collection of original ideas that will provide the foundation for future doctoral dissertations and other research projects in international business.

We hope the volume will provide a forum for thought-provoking theoretical ideas, discussions, reviews, and methodological advances owing to its format and our review process. Although we expect to receive mostly theoretical papers, we are open to empirical submissions using different methodological approaches with institutional theory as their main theoretical lens. Furthermore, we welcome papers that are aimed at improving measures of institutions and proposing suitable methods for testing institutional effects.

Information on past AIM volumes and contributors can be found at this link:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/books.htm?issn=1571-5027.

Submission Information
• Authors should submit an electronic copy of their proposal (5 single-spaced pages) to Laszlo Tihanyi (ltihanyi@tamu.edu) by September 15, 2011.
• Authors with selected proposals will be encouraged to attend a session at the Strategic Management Society Annual Conference in Miami on November 6, 2011.
• Submission deadline for full papers: December 15, 2011.
• Submission deadline for revised papers: February 20, 2012.
• Publication date of AIM volume: July 1, 2012.

For additional information, please contact:
Laszlo Tihanyi
B. Marie Oth Associate Professor in Business
Department of Management
Mays Business School
Texas A&M University
College Station, Texas 77843-4221
Tel: 1-979-845-2825
E-mail: ltihanyi@tamu.edu
http://people.tamu.edu/~ltihanyi/
 

 Guest editors

1. Valentina De Marchi (ESADE)
2. Mehmet Demirbag (University of Essex)
3. Ismail Gölgeci (Aarhus University)
4. Ans Kolk (University of Amsterdam)
5. Sven Kunisch (Aarhus University)

Background

The global business landscape is undergoing profound shifts as the challenges posed by environmental degradation and climate change become increasingly prominent. Businesses operating across borders impact environmental sustainability in profound ways, ranging from resource extraction (Ghauri et al., 2021) to greenhouse gas emissions (Patnaik, 2019), in their own operations and through their supply chains (Kim & Davis, 2016). The role of international business (IB) in shaping and responding to these challenges, while definitely not new to the academic field (Kolk, 2016), has come into sharper focus in recent years (Yu et al., 2023).

Concerns about planetary boundaries have entered the management literature (e.g., Howard-Grenville & Lahneman, 2021; Whiteman et al., 2013), and growing societal pressures are starting to be reflected in policymaking and corporate intentions and practices. Despite earlier insights on the interaction between institutions and multinational enterprises (MNEs) – be it home- and host-country contexts and or international rule-setting on green issues (e.g. Pinkse & Kolk, 2012; Pisani et al., 2019) – in-depth studies on the complexities relevant to this day and age are relatively scarce and incremental. Existing paradigms and approaches to environmental sustainability fall short of recognizing and addressing the profound challenges that exist (Nadeau, 2008) and there is thus a need for a fundamental reconsideration, with the natural environment being at the top of the agenda.

Such scholarly work is particularly important given the mounting evidence that business activities profoundly impact the natural environment. Various literatures have drawn attention to the loss of biodiversity, potable water, and clean air and soils (e.g., George et al., 2015; Howard-Grenville & Lahneman, 2021; Müller et al., 2016), and how the changing climate threatens the survival of humankind (Rockström et al., 2023; Rockström et al., 2009; Steffen et al., 2015). There are tremendous challenges associated with the creation and implementation of clean energy supply chains (Aflaki & Netessine, 2017), especially concerning the use of critical materials/minerals, requiring circularity (Ciulli et al., 2020) and careful, forward-looking planning considering the environmental implications (Aflaki & Netessine, 2017). The introduction of digital technologies to smoothen international operations offers the potential for addressing environmental concerns but also has shortcomings, which are often unforeseen (Ciulli & Kolk, 2023).

Overall, there is a profound and high-priority imperative for a paradigm shift away from “sustainable” efficiency measures and toward the transformational approaches required to establish equitable and restorative IB policies and practices. Such a paradigm shift and transformational approaches to the connection between the natural environment and IB require profound knowledge about the complex interactions between MNE activity and the natural environment, as well as to provide advice to practicing managers and policymakers.

Aim of the Special Issue

This special issue seeks to turn the spotlight on the ‘natural environment’ so that scholars in IB and cognate fields can inform practice and policymaking while advancing and moving the research frontier to include societal relevance. For example, instead of viewing the natural environment as exogenous, there is a need to study externalities, endogenize the natural environment, and understand how adverse effects can be avoided.

            Recent years have seen the launch of several policy proposals to reverse incentives for the better, but how and what MNEs are responding to and/or anticipating such changes and dealing with trade-offs is largely unknown. MNEs may also have contradictory and unexpected influences on the natural environment worldwide, especially when accounting also for their value chains, and must often make difficult choices to address pressing issues in the natural environment. While traditionally the so-called “pollution haven effect”, which threatens the natural environment in emerging markets and around the globe (Berry et al., 2021), has received most attention, more recent insights point at not just a ‘race to the bottom’ but also ‘race to the top’ effects (Bu & Wagner, 2016; Pisani et al., 2019). It is crucial to better understand the dynamics for replacing incentives to evade by solutions for truly addressing environmental problems as desired by policy professionals (e.g., how carbon credits can truly help reduce emissions, pollution, and environmental harm rather than just creating a market for offsetting).

            We strongly encourage empirical studies and exploratory inductive work with clear relevance for current and future policymaking, considering that a range of countries are taking steps to further environmental sustainability and net-zero technology development.

The objectives of this special issue include:

• Advancing new perspectives and evidence on IB and the natural environment, including protection, potential restoration, circularity, and redesign towards greener global value chains (GVCs);
• Developing and extending theories with policy implications that bridge natural and social sciences or fundamentally embed legal insights to advance IB research on environmental sustainability;
• Developing the connection between IB and public policy by critically examining the impact of policies on MNEs and vice versa.

Prospective authors should note that the purpose of JIBP is to publish policy-relevant research related to IB issues. Work submitted to the special issue is expected to build on the existing body of knowledge as built up in the journal since its creation in 2018, and we also direct attention to the editorials, commentaries, and perspective pieces published as guidance. The guest editorial team will work with the newly established Policy Impact Advisory Committee to optimize the consolidation and extension of scholarly debates on IB and the natural environment that are informative for policy professionals.

Examples of Topic Areas of Interest

1)      Actors (stakeholders and institutions):

• How do international sustainability standards (e.g., by ISSB) influence MNEs’ policies and activities? How do regulatory frameworks in relation to environmental concerns influence MNEs and their GVCs? How do these approaches come about considering societal pressures and business lobbying?
• What is the role of supra-national institutions in monitoring and influencing MNEs’ natural resource strategies? What are the interactions between trade policies, environmental regulations, and IB strategies?
• How do new trends, such as sustainable consumption and citizens resorting to courts, influence global markets and MNEs? What is the role of different stakeholders in policymaking to further environmental sustainability, and what are the differential effects across countries and regions?

2)      Strategies:

• What are the strategic approaches of MNEs towards environmental stewardship? How do MNE innovation and technology transfer contribute to environmental sustainability? What are MNE strategies for climate change adaptation and mitigation in global markets?
• Given the level of urbanization and changing global demographics, how do MNEs contribute to the scarcity and distribution of resources such as water, land, air, and food? How do the paradoxes MNEs face in relation to the use and depletion of critical materials, as well as the implications of their extraction on biodiversity and communities, relate to their design and governance of IB activities?
• What is the potential of nearshoring, onshoring, local production, and geographic route optimization in global supply chains in supporting the natural environment? What are the dynamics of cross-border collaboration for environmental protection in the context of IB?

3)      Governance and GVCs:

• What policy instruments can help countries capture an externality (such as technology spillovers) from GVCs? How can countries coordinate FDI to prevent rent-seeking and misallocating capital and increase environmental benefits from GVCs?
• How might an increase in the use of Industry 4.0 type of advanced/digital technologies (e.g., artificial intelligence) affect GVCs from the point of view of the natural environment and different actors/stakeholders in society? What will be the environmental effects of further digitalization in general and specific technologies in particular?
• How do justice, power asymmetry, inclusion, engagement, and empowerment between supply chain partners from different countries influence the natural environment? When and where do GVC governance choices enable environmental upgrading in GVCs?

4)      Complexities and dynamics:

• For example, what are the consequences of supply chain tensions in the natural environment and planetary restoration? How do the paradoxes associated with the use and depletion of critical minerals and their policy implications relate to GVC design and governance?
• What are the temporal dynamics in the interactions between IB and the natural environment? For example, what is the connection between temporal scaling, temporal non-stationarity, and the natural environment in IB? What is the role of MNEs’ time horizons in preserving and restoring the natural environment?

Envisioned Impact

The special issue directly relates to a range of policy initiatives taken in recent years (or still in the works) to promote sustainability and reduce the impact of governments, citizens, and firms on the natural environment while promoting innovation. Examples include the EU’s Green Deal and Net-Zero Industry Act and the Inflation Reduction Act in the US. International organizations as well as standard setters are also considering the best ways to promote sustainability (sometimes under the ESG heading).

Submission and Review Process

Submitted manuscripts must adhere to the scope, standards, format, and editorial policy of the Journal of International Business Policy (JIBP). “Author Guidelines” and the JIBP Style Guide for Authors must be followed. Full paper submissions to the special issue will be reviewed as soon as they are received – the submission system opens 4 months before the SI deadline. As papers are accepted, they will be published on the JIBP Online First page on a rolling basis, irrespective of the timing of the other papers of the SI, to ensure quick publication process. Published SI papers will all be part of the same SI electronic collection, but might be published in different issues.

15 May 2024               JIBP’s Manuscript Central portal opens for full paper submissions

15 September 2024     Final deadline for submission of full papers via JIBP’s MC portal

September 2025          Expected publication of SI articles (published online on a rolling basis)

Special Issue Call for Papers:

Advancing Sustainable Development Goals and the Business Connection

Suggested Topics: Sustainable Business Practices, Corporate Social Responsibility, Inclusion and Diversity, Ethics, Impact of Business related to Global Development Goals.

Send manuscripts to editor@journalofbusinessleadership.online NLT May 31, 2021

Make sure to consult the JBL Author Guidelines and Manuscript Formatting Information (http://journalofbusinessleadership.online/)  prior to submitting your manuscript.

The Journal of Business Leadership is listed in Cabell’s and indexed in the Library of Congress (ISSN ISSN 2164-4454 (online) ISSN 2164-4462 (print).  It is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes quality research related to business and leadership.

The Journal of Business Leadership provides an ongoing forum for academic researchers to exchange information and research on both theoretical development and empirical analysis related to business and leadership issues. It publishes academic research articles that contribute to the advancement in business and leadership studies.

There is little doubt of the growing importance of China in the global economy.  Getting access to the large consumer markets in China is an increasingly pressing issue for global advertisers. Advertising in China has developed at a rapid pace as China has evolved from a limited central-planned economy to a globally-focused economic superpower.  This massive change in the advertising industry and supporting infrastructure along with the growing consumer affluence makes China a prime target for global advertisers.  The rapid changes being experienced within China argue for cutting-edge research into the nature of advertising in China and the impact of advertising on Chinese consumers.

Therefore the Journal of Advertising Research (JAR) editorial team is calling for research into advertising and its place and role in Chinese society.  The deadline for submissions is January 31, 2017.

The following list is an indicative, but not exhaustive, list of possible areas for submissions:

• Chinese consumer reactions to advertising content and media
• Cultural issues and their impact on advertising/promotions in China
• Insight into the infrastructural facilitators/impediments to advertising industry development in China
• Neuroscience insights and Chinese viewer behavior
• The use of celebrity endorsements in Chinese advertising
• Efficacy of different media in reaching various Chinese audiences
• The explosion of mobile in China and advertising strategies
• Ethical issues in Chinese advertisements
• Corporate social responsibility and advertising in China
• Social media use in China
• The impact of e-commerce on advertising media and creative

A preference is for empirical papers, but theoretical/conceptual papers will be considered if they provide a major advancement of understanding.  Papers should be about building advertising theory and improving advertising practice.  Given our strong practitioner readership, please place particular emphasis on practitioner implications of the research findings.

Optimal length for papers is 6,000 words, with shorter papers encouraged.  Authors can use appendices for material useful, but not central, to the paper. 

Any questions or to submit abstracts for feedback – please contact the Executive Editors:  Professor John B.  Ford for North American submissions (jbford@odu.edu) and Professor Jenni Romaniuk for submissions from other locations (Jenni@MarketingScience.info).

The emerging demographic context for the research and practice of human resource management (HRM) is unprecedented. Demographic shift in the form of ‘ageing societies’ has become recognized among academics and policy-makers as a growing economic challenge to organizations globally and to those operating from within so-called ‘developed’ economies in particular. Whereas some emerging economies and, by extension, some nationally-defined labor markets such as Turkey and Indonesia are experiencing rapid population growth and lower average ages among their populations, others such as Germany and Japan are experiencing a sharp fall in indigenous birth rates and simultaneously a rapidly ageing working population. In short, demographic shift in the form of ageing societies has become a key challenge to HRM policy-makers and practitioners across organizational, sectoral, regional, and national boundaries. 

In this Special Issue we focus attention on two leading global economies, each giving context to historically comparable HRM systems: Germany and Japan. Each nationally defined system is under pressure to maintain equilibrium by seeking alternative working conditions or end-of-career pathways for older employees. At the national level, the response in each case might translate into policies for targeted immigration, increasing employment and career opportunities for women, or the raising of retirement ages in certain sectors. At an organizational level, HRM responses might become manifest in the re-negotiation of company pension and other compensation and benefit systems or the re-designing of work conditions and / or career pathways for older employees. 

The emerging situation is both dynamic and, as stated previously, unprecedented. Consequently, organizations in both Germany and Japan are under pressure to formulate and implement innovative HRM strategies in response to the opportunities and threats to productivity that current global demographic trends are creating. 

Call for Contributions

In the broader demographic context of ‘ageing societies’, this Management Revue Special Issue represents an attempt to identify and compare patterns of responses among HRM practitioners and policy-makers in German and Japanese organizations operating and competing across a range of business sectors. For the purpose of continuity across contributions we interpret ‘ageing societies’ as segments of nationally defined labor markets comprising current or potential employees at the age of fifty and over. In the specific context of markets for employment and career development so defined in Germany and Japan, we are looking for contributions on the following themes:

• Responding to the employment and career expectations of employees aged fifty and over in the German manufacturing sector 
• Responding to the employment and career expectations of employees aged fifty and over in the Japanese manufacturing sector
• Responding to the employment and career expectations of employees aged fifty and over in German public sector organizations
• Responding to the employment and career expectations of employees aged fifty and over in Japanese public sector organizations
• Responding to the employment and career expectations of employees aged fifty and over in German service sector organizations 
• Responding to the employment and career expectations of employees aged fifty and over in Japanese service sector organizations

Notes:

The Editors also welcome expressions of interest from potential contributors offering to write on themes that connect generally with those specified above.  

The Editors especially welcome contributions in the form of joint collaborations between German and Japanese HRM researchers and practitioners.

Final contributions will be around 5,000 words in length.

The Editors undertake to provide full editorial support to contributors who are relatively new to preparing contributions for publication in a quality management journal through the medium of international English: initial offers to contribute can be submitted in English, German or Japanese.

Regardless of each contributor’s language of preference, the Editors undertake to engage all contributors in a cross-national dialogue that should both strengthen the cohesion of the discussion across contributions and establish a global network of HRM scholars and practitioners that endures beyond the publication of this Special Issue.

Deadline

Full papers for this Special Edition of ‘Management Revue’ must be with the editors by February 28th, 2015. All submissions will be subject to a double blind review process. Please submit your papers electronically via the online submission system at http://www.management-revue.org/submission/ ‘SI Ageing Societies – HRM’ as article section.

Hoping to hear from you!

Keith Jackson (keith.jackson@soas.ac.uk), SOAS, University of London and Doshisha University, Japan

Philippe Debroux, Soka University and Chuo University, Japan

Special Issue Editors

Xianghua Lu, Fudan University (lxhua@fudan.edu.cn)

Noman Shaheer, The University of Sydney (noman.shaheer@sydney.edu.au)

Weiguo Zhong, Peking University (zwg@gsm.pku.edu.cn) 

Lin Tian, Fudan University (tianlin@fudan.edu.cn)

Jianyu Zhao, Harbin Engineering University (zjy@hrbeu.edu.cn)

Supervising Editor: Chinmay Pattnaik, University of Sydney (chinmay.pattnaik@sydney.edu.au)  

In today’s era marked by rapid technological advancements, the confluence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and organizational change emerges as a pivotal area for academic inquiry. AI, characterized as the pinnacle of computational progress reflecting human cognitive abilities, has evolved from an ambitious concept to a tangible reality. This evolution is reshaping business operations, strategic management, organization management and innovation management significantly (Berente, Gu, Recker, & Santhanam, 2021, p. 1435; Chen, Li, & Zhang, 2022; Fountaine, McCarthy, & Saleh, 2019). The adoption of AI technologies, including Large Language Model (LLM), machine learning, robotics, image recognition algorithms, and natural language processing, is not only augmenting decision-making processes but also fostering the creation of innovative products and services (Agrawal, Gans, & Goldfarb, 2018; Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2014). This paper’s call to action is to examine the diverse effects of AI on organizational management and processes, emphasizing the necessity for extensive and cross-disciplinary studies in this rapidly changing and complex area (Bughin et al., 2018; Hirschberg & Manning, 2015).

 AI’s widespread application in various organizational sectors has brought about a paradigm shift in strategic management and decision-making (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2019; Krakowski, Luger, & Raisch, 2023). AI’s capacity to analyze large datasets and predict trends is revolutionizing strategic planning, steering companies toward more data-driven and well-informed decisions (Davenport, Guha, Grewal, & Bressgott, 2020). This revolution is transforming not just conventional planning techniques but also establishing a new framework that incorporates AI insights for effective, long-term strategy and risk management (Fountaine, McCarthy, & Saleh, 2019). Concurrently, AI is driving a transformation in leadership and managerial approaches. Decision-making processes are becoming increasingly data-dependent, necessitating leaders to enhance their comprehension of AI’s potential and its broader implications (Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2017). This change is spurring a shift in organizational culture, with a growing focus on innovation and adaptability (Iansiti & Lakhani, 2020; Sarwar, Gao, & Khan, 2023).

AI’s influence in organizational frameworks extends well beyond mere technological innovation and integration, impacting every aspect of business operations. AI presents vast opportunities for streamlining efficiency, innovating products and services, and securing a competitive advantage (Agrawal, Gans, & Goldfarb, 2018). Its role in automating routine tasks liberates valuable resources for operational initiatives (Brynjolfsson, Mitchell, & Rock, 2018) but also enhances decision-making accuracy through predictive analytics (Waller & Fawcett, 2013). In customer service, AI's presence is notable with the implementation of AI-driven chatbots and virtual assistants (Huang & Rust, 2018), and within human resources, it plays a crucial role in streamlining talent acquisition and management processes (Raisch & Krakowski, 2020). Nonetheless, while AI offers these benefits, it also introduces complex challenges, such as ethical issue, privacy concerns the implications of automation on operations management (Bughin et al., 2018). Consequently, organizations are tasked with the crucial responsibility of striking a balance between leveraging AI’s advantages and its responsible, ethical deployment, ensuring adept navigation in this new era of technology (Dignum, 2019).

AI technologies, such as machine learning, deep learning, and natural language processing, are reshaping the landscape of entrepreneurship (Chalmers, Shaw, & Carter, 2020). They provide novel tools for entrepreneurs to innovate, automate, and optimize various aspects of their ventures, from idea generation to scaling operations. For instance, AI can automate routine tasks, enhancing efficiency and freeing resources for innovations initiatives. The entrepreneurial landscape is changing due to AI's ability to predict trends and automate decision-making processes. This shift requires entrepreneurs to adapt their business models and strategies to harness AI's full potential. Future research in entrepreneurship should focus on understanding these changes, particularly how AI influences venture formation, decision-making processes within firms, and the overall outcomes of entrepreneurship, including financial returns and societal impacts.

 AI is also rapidly transforming the landscape of international business, reshaping trade theories and policy implications. The burgeoning role of AI in global trade emphasizes the significance of economies of scale and knowledge creation (Olan et al., 2022). Firms with extensive datasets can generate more accurate predictions, leading to a competitive edge in the international market (Goldfarb & Trefler, 2018). This advantage is further augmented by the economies of scope, where AI's application across various domains within a company enhances its market position. However, the process of knowledge diffusion in AI exhibits a dual nature: while academic research and publications facilitate global knowledge sharing, the concentration of AI expertise in specific global tech hubs like Silicon Valley and Berlin indicates that much of AI's tacit knowledge remains regionally clustered. The strategic trade policy landscape is also being redefined by AI, with economies of scale, knowledge externalities, and the prominence of superstar scientists taking center stage. Privacy regulations have emerged as a critical factor in the AI-driven international business realm. Stricter privacy laws can constrain firms' innovative capabilities by limiting data accessibility, potentially leading to a competitive disadvantage in the global AI market. This scenario raises concerns about a potential "race to the bottom" in privacy standards, where countries might compete for AI industry investment through more lenient data usage policies.

Moreover, the advancement of AI signifies a shift from the industrial era to the information age, markedly improving data processing, business intelligence, and operational efficiencies across various industries (Bharadwaj, El Sawy, Pavlou, & Venkatraman, 2013). The integration of AI is particularly revolutionary, redefining organizational approaches to problem-solving and decision-making (Leonardi & Treem, 2020). As AI technologies continue to mature, they present new theoretical challenges, particularly in complex fields like neural networks and managing data uncertainty (Jordan & Mitchell, 2015). This dynamic environment underscores a range of emerging topics, including the application of machine learning in the expanding role of data science, and the deployment of deep learning in diverse sectors such as healthcare and environmental sciences (Agrawal, Gans, & Goldfarb, 2019).

Despite these technological strides, the assimilation of AI into existing systems necessitates significant investments, the upskilling of employees, and addressing critical issues around data privacy and security (Martin, 2019). Implementing AI effectively requires comprehensive change management strategies. This involves preparing the workforce for AI-driven alterations, promoting an innovative and learning-centric culture, and updating employee skills to match new technological requisites (Kane, Palmer, Phillips, Kiron, & Buckley, 2017). Therefore, the integration of AI into the business is significantly altering the employment landscape, presenting a mix of challenges and opportunities in workforce management (Chowdhury, Budhwar, Dey, Joel-Edgar, & Abadie, 2022). AI is transforming workplace functions, evident in its use in AI-enabled recruitment processes utilizing facial recognition and in automating sales operations (Tambe, Cappelli, & Yakubovich, 2019). While these innovations are remarkable, they also raise concerns about employee privacy and the potential adverse effects of labor optimization on the workforce (De Stefano, 2020). AI's application in tasks requiring complex reasoning, such as those involving advanced language models, prompts critical reflections on its influence on human involvement in judgment, decision-making, and creative endeavors (Daugherty & Wilson, 2018). The key challenge for organizations is to adapt to these transformations, fostering effective human-AIcollaboration, and addressing the ramifications of AI-driven decisions on organizational learning and individual career trajectories (Boudreau & Lakhani, 2017).

Comprehending the dynamics of how AI catalyzes organizational change is imperative for leaders and policymakers. The Asia pacific region provides an excellent context to explore and extend the organizational change research considering the substantial and intensive application of AI in this region. In addition, the Asia pacific region differs from other geographical regions in terms of political and socio-cultural contexts, which provides an opportunity for alternative conceptualizations of AI and organizational change.     

In this special issue of Asia Pacific Journal of Management (APJM), we provide an opportunity for scholars to address both under-researched areas and unresolved issues related to a shared understanding of AI and organizational change. We welcome manuscripts on a large variety of topics, especially seeks contributions that deepen the understanding of AI’s role in organizational innovation and transformation, particularly emphasizing its impact on management. This invitation is extended to authors to engage in and enrich the ongoing conversation on the intricate relationship between AI and organizational change. Studies that provide unique insights of AI and organizational change in the contexts of Asia Pacific region with innovative methodologies are especially encouraged. A representative, but by no means exhaustive, listing of topics includes:

1.  Strategic Management in an AI-Driven Era: How is AI redefining competitive advantage in various industries, and what implications does this have for strategic planning and execution? Studies in this domain could provide valuable insights into strategically leveraging AI for business growth and competitive advantages.

2. AI-Driven Innovation, Strategic Innovation Management in New Technology Context: How does AI contribute to organizational learning and innovation? What role does AI play in enhancing the production and service innovation process within organizations? How does AI enable organizations to capitalize on open innovation and collaborative ecosystems? How can AI drive disruptive innovation in established industries?

3. Entrepreneurship in the Age of AI: How does AI empower entrepreneurs in identifying and capitalizing on new market opportunities? In what ways can startups leverage AI to gain a competitive edge in rapidly evolving markets? What are the challenges and opportunities for entrepreneurs in building AI-driven business models?

4. Navigating Global Markets with AI and Strategies for International Business Expansion and Adaptation:How can AI assist companies in navigating the complexities of international markets and global competition? In what ways does AI enable businesses to adapt their products and services for diverse international markets? How does AI influence the decision-making process in international mergers, acquisitions, and partnerships?

5. AI Integration in Organizational Systems: How does the strategic incorporation of AI redefine organizational goals and competitive dynamics? What strategic planning is required to synchronize AI initiatives with long-term business strategies and objectives? How can AI integration ensure agility and adaptability in a rapidly evolving business environment?

6.  AI and the Evolution of Organization Management: What impact does AI have on organizational structures, cultures, and processes? This line of inquiry aims to explore how AI-induced changes are reshaping organizational dynamics, redefining employee roles, and transforming the overall workplace environment. The goal is to understand AI's transformative potential for organizational design and culture (Zuboff, 2019) , the new skill sets required in AI-enhanced work environments, and strategies to nurture effective collaboration between humans and AI systems (Kellogg et al., 2020).

7. AI-Driven Decision Making in Organizations: How does AI influence decision-making processes at various organizational levels? This area of study should investigate the impact of AI on different tiers of decision-making, exploring how AI tools can enhance human judgment and decision-making abilities.

8. AI as a Strategic Tool in Enhancing Business Operations: How can AI-driven analytics strategically enhance the operations management in modern organization? What are the strategies for leveraging AI in streamlining operational processes and improving productivity? In what ways can AI contribute to the development of long-term relationships with business partners and improve value creation among ecosystems?

9. Ethical Dimensions of AI in Organizations: What ethical considerations arise from the deployment of AI in organizational contexts, and how can these be effectively managed? Investigations in this field should examine the ethical implications of AI, focusing on issues such as data privacy, algorithmic bias, and the formulation of ethical AIframeworks (Martin, 2019).

Further Details are available at: https://link.springer.com/journal/10490/updates/26984326

Annals in Social Responsibility is a new journal published once annually.  We are currently seeking proposals for manuscripts to be included in the second volume or to be published in subsequent editions.

Journal Description & What Do We Publish?

Annals in Social Responsibility (ASR) publishes articles covering the significant developments in the area of Social Responsibility.  ASR is a multi-disciplinary journal that publishes work arising from traditions in management, operations & supply chain management, marketing, economics, accounting & finance, sociology, psychology, political science, law, philosophy and other social and physical sciences that relate to the role that individuals, groups and institutions play in understanding of responsibilities and roles in society. Topics covered in the journal include major theoretical and methodological developments as well as current research in the aforementioned disciplines. Articles typically pertain to issues of corporate social responsibility, environmental and organizational sustainability, economic, corporate, social and political development, corporate, institutional and societal governance, property rights, social institutions and NGOs, and global issues of peace, conflict and human rights.  Articles published appeal to a broad intellectual audience in their respective fields.

To be accepted for publication a paper must make a significant contribution to advancing knowledge about social responsibility through new theoretical insights, managerial application, methodology/data—or some combination thereof.

ASR has a particular interest in publishing the following types of manuscripts:

1. Comprehensive, state-of-the-art literature reviews that integrate diverse research streams and identify promising directions for future investigations
2. Analytical essays that offer new conceptual models or theoretical perspectives and use these frameworks as a foundation for developing research propositions
3. Empirical articles that report results from exploratory or hypothesis-testing studies based on quantitative and/or qualitative methodologies
4. Methodological papers that refine existing methodologies or develop new ones for investigating particular issues or topics central to the fields of inquiry listed above.

ASR Editorial Review Board

Herman Aguinis (Indiana, USA) – Human Resources, Modelling

Ruth Aguilera (Illinois, USA) – Governance, Intl Business

Pat Auger (Melbourne, AUSTRALIA) – Marketing, Modelling

Pratima Bansal (Ivey-UWO, CANADA) – Management, Sustainability

Michael Barnett (Rutgers, USA) – Management, Sustainability

Russell Belk (York, CANADA) – Marketing, Consumer Behaviour

Gordon Clark (Oxford, UK) – Earth Sciences, Sustainability

Jonathan Doh (Villanova, USA) – Politics, NGOs, Intl Business

Giana Eckhardt (London, Royal Holloway, UK) – Marketing, Consumer Behaviour

Jeffrey Harrison (Richmond, USA) – Strategy, Law

Stuart Hart (Cornell, USA) – Management, Innovation

Michael Hiscox (Harvard, USA) – Politics, Intl Relations

Ans Kolk (Amsterdam, NETHERLANDS) – NGOs, Development, Intl Business

Ted London (Michigan, USA) – NGOs, Development, Intl Business

Jeffrey Malpas (Tasmania, AUSTRALIA) – Ethics, Philosophy

Anita McGahan (Toronto, CANADA) – Strategy, Management

Joachim Schwalbach (Humboldt U-Berlin, GERMANY)

Donald Siegel (SUNY Albany, USA) – Strategy, Management, Governance

N. Craig Smith (Insead, FRANCE) – Strategy, Marketing

Tom Sorrell (Warwick, UK) – Philosophy, Politics

David Vogel (Berkeley, USA) – Economics, Politics

Richard Wilk (Indiana, USA) – Culture, Anthropology

Cynthia Williams (York, CANADA) – Law, Governance

Maurizio Zollo (Bocconi, ITALY) – Strategy, Sustainability

Submission Process

ASR does not accept article submissions without the initial submission of a proposal. The objective of the proposal process is to be efficient in the processing of articles. We want to know "what" you are going to say, "to whom" you are going to say it, "why" what you are saying is important, and "how" you are going to convince your audience of the veracity of your argument. This allows the editorial team to provide author(s) with information that facilitates the review process, while allowing us to be proactive in working with authors.

Proposals should be no longer than 5 pages single-spaced with standard 1-inch margins and in a 12-point font. The proposal must include the following information with the following headings.

The idea: The specific important and innovative idea that is going to be the focus of the article.  This should not be long-winded literal description but be a clear and concise statement of the big/new idea that is at the core of what you are doing.

To whom is the article speaking:  While ASR is clearly speaking to other scholars interested in issues of social responsibility, it is important to frame your paper in a specific topical and disciplinary area in the first instance.  Hence, you need to outline who might be the primary audience for your article.  For instance, is it the legal community, anthropologists, or marketing scholars (i.e., to what extent is it disciplinary?)?  Is it those interested in human rights, CSR performance, or social innovation (i.e., to what extent is it phenomenon or topic based?)?

The importance of the idea: Why is your paper important? This needs to be understood as you address how you are going to take your specific knowledge and frame it in a way that resonates with your audience.  In other words, why is it important to your readership and not just to you?

How are you going to justify, defend and communicate your idea: What is the theoretical and/or empirical evidence the article will be presenting in order to convince your audience of the veracity and importance of your idea? If you have specific data sources, outline what these are.  If you are building a theoretical argument, then outline how you are going to logically justify and defend that argument.  If your paper is empirical, provide a brief overview of your methods (e.g., experimental design, econometric model, statistical testing, etc.).

More information is available at: http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/asr.htm and submissions are done via manuscript central.

Volume 1 of the journal can be seen here: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/toc/asr/1/1

You can read an editorial discussing the philosophy of the journal here: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/ASR-06-2015-0005

Over time we will be holding a series of workshops on topics of specific interest.  We plan to hold these workshops in conjunction with conferences plus also independently.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the editors.

Inviting researchers to contribute to individual chapters in a book titled “Apparel retailing in emerging markets”.

I am specifically looking for researchers who can contribute to information regarding organization of apparel retail markets, international retailers in the market, buying for these markets, and consumers in these markets. The countries for which I am looking for contribution are:

China, Vietnam, Poland, Turkey, Chile, Romania, Argentina, Thailand, Russia, Spain, Brazil, and UAE.

Contributors will be included as co-authors for the chapter.

Please contact me for further details.

Best Wishes,
Jaya Halepete

Jaya Halepete, PhD
Assistant Professor
Fashion Merchandising
School of Arts and Sciences
Marymount University
2807 N. Glebe Road
Arlington, VA 22207
Office: 703 284 5752

Special Issue Editors:

• Christian Geisler Asmussen (Copenhagen Business School, Denmark, cga.smg@cbs.dk)
• Tailan Chi (University of Kansas, USA, chi@ku.edu)
• Sumit Kundu (Florida International University, USA, kundus@fiu.edu)
• Rajneesh Narula (University of Reading, UK, r.narula@reading.ac.uk)

Introduction

Forty years ago, Buckley and Casson (1976) published The Future of the Multinational Enterprise.. Following the intellectual legacy of Coase’s (1937) transaction cost economics, Buckley and Casson (1976: 33) argued that the multinational enterprise (MNE) internalizes activities across national boundaries “when markets in intermediate products are imperfect [because] there is an incentive to bypass them creating an internal market.” Hennart (1977, 1982), in parallel to Buckley and Casson (1976), contributed to the theory of the MNE by considering perspectives of transaction costs such as measurement and enforcement costs arising due to bounded rationality and opportunistic behavior in markets. Bringing an early resource-based perspective to internalization theory (before the notion of resource based view or RBV had even been coined in the field of strategy), Rugman (1981) explained internalization decisions made by the firm on the basis of firm specific advantages (FSAs) and country specific advantages (CSAs), while Rugman and Verbeke (1992, 2003, 2004) expanded on the geographic reach of these FSAs, thereby making the critical distinction between location-bound and non-location bound FSAs. Rugman and Verbeke (2001) also uncovered 10 distinct patterns of competence building across borders in MNEs that resulted from particular interactions between FSAs and CSAs, thereby acknowledging the joint importance of entrepreneurial action, transaction cost economizing and requisite resource combination inside the MNE. In parallel, the Eclectic Paradigm (Dunning, 1977, 1988, 1993; Dunning & Lundan, 2008) stressed the joint impact of ownership, location, and internalization advantages to explain the existence and functioning of the MNE.  In combination, these theoretical advances have contributed to the establishment of internalization theory as a generally accepted theory of the MNE – and as an analytical framework that has explicitly or implicitly underlined much of the progress being made in International Business (IB) research over the last four decades. Internalization theory allows predicting a great number of organizational regularities in IB. These range from entry mode choices – and more generally the governance of international transactions, including the rise of international new ventures (INVs) – to internal organizational design in terms of structural and strategic governance, as well as the structuring of the interface with external economic actors. Yet, a number of issues still remain unresolved, and new questions have emerged—in particular, about the continued applicability of internalization theory in a rapidly changing world, and about the foundations of the theory in light of new developments in other fields and disciplines. This special issue on Applying and Advancing Internalization Theory invites original research that addresses these questions.

As noted by Rugman and Verbeke (2003: 125), The Future of the Multinational Enterprise was “a superb starting point for the study of the MNE, even if the complexity of this governance structure has grown far beyond what any international business scholar … could have predicted 25 years ago”. This is even more evident today as the nature of the global economy has changed and continues to change. Novel types of cross-border transactions and forms of MNEs have arisen, raising questions about the universal applicability of the theory. It is now time to revisit the theory of the MNE and to challenge its underlying assumptions. More advanced theoretical and empirical approaches promise to identify and explain better the little explored causal mechanisms leading to the existence or absence of MNEs. Analysis of these mechanisms will highlight not only the “why” but also the “how” of internalization theory. To advance this research agenda, we invite manuscripts from a variety of disciplines, including management and organizational studies, strategy, economics, economic geography, marketing, etc. Ideally, submitted manuscripts should improve upon the current state of internalization theory and its implications for managerial practice, by criticizing or extending the conventional thinking embedded within it. We welcome diverse approaches to this topic, including (but not limited to) conceptual models, formal models, simulations, experimental designs, and empirical studies (both qualitative and quantitative ones). Specifically, we invite submissions falling within one or both of the two themes described below.

Theme 1. Applying Internalization Theory to New Realities: Firms and Markets in the Contemporary Global Economy

Building upon general economic principles, applicable across a wide range of empirical phenomena, many scholars have credibly used internalization theory as an analytical tool in different institutional contexts. The theory has allowed explaining the presence of a variety of governance forms for managing international transactions (Casson, 1995, 2015; Narula & Verbeke, 2015). At the same time, few will dispute the fact that the world looks dramatically different today than it did when internalization theory first emerged. IB scholars therefore need to pay special attention to the new realities of the international economy and their influence on the evolution of MNEs.

A key tenet of internalization is that MNEs arise to exploit imperfections in markets, imperfections that are influenced by the myriad changes often referred to under the conceptual umbrella of “globalization”. These include political developments pertaining to economic integration, trade agreements, currency regimes, and other supra-national institutions that transform both the cost of managing firms across borders and of transacting in international markets (Rugman & Verbeke, 2005). They also include technological advances such as internet-based collaboration tools, virtual communities of practice, and online market exchanges, which have equally strong transaction cost implications (Bakos, 1998; Ardichvili, 2008). In combination, these developments have paved ways for new types of firms and novel business models. Firms are also geographically more dispersed than ever, engage in coopetition, have diffused innovation, and deploy global teams as well as virtual organizational structures (Axinn & Matthyssens, 2002).

Accordingly, two issues that loom large in this new world economic system are the growth of the service sector and the advent of the digital economy. The interactions that e-commerce firms have with their customers tend to possess different attributes and thus alter the cost-benefit calculus of various governance modes, as compared to the manufacturing sector (Singh & Kundu, 2002). Increasingly, new ventures aim to internationalize, right from inception, by leveraging advances in information technology. Widening geographic spread, alternative governance structures to access and control unique resources, and internalization of the core of value chain have strong theoretical implications (Oviatt & McDougall 1994; Verbeke, Zargarzadeh, & Osiyevskyy, 2014). In this process, the role of the subsidiary has become more vital, reflected in the growing importance of subsidiary specific advantage (Rugman and Verbeke, 2001; Mudambi and Navarra, 2004; Meyer, Mudambi, & Narula, 2011) and reverse innovation in MNEs (Mudambi, Piscitello, & Rabbiosi, 2014). As reflected in the concept of “meta-MNEs” (Lessard, Teece, & Leih, 2016), the existence of which can be explained by internalization theory (Verbeke & Kenworthy, 2008), the ability to earn economic rents from the creation of knowledge assets in subsidiaries around the world depends upon advantages of common governance. Yet there are also substantial costs of managing increasingly complex organizations and combining external and internal embeddedness in dispersed subsidiaries (Narula, 2014).

The same technological developments, in parallel with managerial and organizational developments, have also enabled MNEs to operate with increasingly porous boundaries (Regan & Heenan, 2010). The twenty-first century has witnessed the growth of networks and coalitions between firms (Dunning & Boyd, 2003), while the importance of relational assets and social capital has increased over time to as firms aim to access new knowledge (Dunning, 2003). The phenomenon of “quasi-internalization” has thus become increasingly relevant in today’s competitive landscape as organizations seek to utilize a middle-of-the-road approach to organize their activities – via both hierarchy and markets. Since the seminal paper of Hennart (1993) on the “swollen middle”, there has been a growing interest on MNEs’ minimization of organizational cost by looking at shirking, cheating, monitoring and other costs, recognizing that the choice is not one between internalization and externalization, but of a contextually contingent combination including outsourcing and alliances (Dunning, 2015).

These developments, which are often closely interlinked, present unique opportunities for theory development as they reveal the diverse strategies, challenges, and imperatives of the modern MNE. For example, does internalization theory apply, or perhaps apply differently, to alternative governance forms and structures, such as service firms, e-commerce firms, conglomerate businesses, state-owned enterprises, born global firms, family-owned MNEs, and Bottom-of-the-Pyramid MNEs? Does the rise of new business models based on new technologies or management principles influence the choice between internalization and externalization? How do MNEs mitigate opportunism, moral hazard, free riding, and other associated costs when generating and leveraging relational assets for productive gains? Is it even meaningful to continue to talk about the choice between firms and markets when the nature of contemporary economic exchange is often approaching one of quasi-internalization? Application of the theory to new and evolving contexts may bring new insights into subtle mechanisms, and ultimately inform the structure of the theory itself. With this theme, we welcome contributions that reflect the applicability (or partial applicability or even inapplicability) of internalization theory to the new realities of the contemporary global economy.

Theme 2. Advancing Internalization Theory by Rethinking its Foundations: Rationality, Learning, and Evolutionary Dynamics

Just as the context of internalization theory has changed, so has the way in which academics within and outside IB think and theorize about this context. With these changes, there is a so far largely untapped opportunity to integrate theoretical advances and empirical approaches from other disciplines into research on the MNE. Such integration has only recently and partially begun to take place, with various perspectives making excursions into the realm of IB. These include different disciplines, such as political economy (Henderson, Dicken, Hess, Coe, & Yeung 2002) and economic geography (Baldwin & Venables, 2013), as well as different approaches to theorizing, such as those related to microfoundations (Foss & Pedersen, 2004), general equilibrium modeling (Buckley & Hashai, 2009), co-evolutionary economics (Pitelis & Teece, 2010), equifinality (Raymond & St. Pierre, 2013), and agent-based simulation (Asmussen, Larsen, and Pedersen, 2016). However, uncharted territory still abounds and it is an open question how these perspectives can be subsumed into internalization theory, and in what ways they extend, refine, and challenge this theory. With this theme, we therefore aim to “open up the black box” of internalization theory and revisit its foundations.

One issue that sits squarely in this black box is the issue of behavioral assumptions. Internalization theory mostly predicts that effective governance forms will prevail, thereby implicitly or explicitly deriving its predictions from a profit-maximizing (or cost minimizing) paradigm (reflecting its roots in economic theory). Empirical evidence, in turn, mostly supports the predictions emerging from this paradigm, including predictions of foreign entry modes (e.g., Anderson & Gatignon, 1986; Agarwal & Ramaswami, 1992), location choices (e.g., Friedman, Gerlowski, & Silberman 1992; Mariotti & Piscitello, 1995), and performance (e.g., Kirca et al., 2011; Kirca, Fernandez, & Kundu 2016). However, we know surprisingly little about how these outcomes actually emerge. At the same time, economists themselves have continued to refine and challenge the notion of rationality. More precise concepts developed within the Coasean paradigm, such as adverse selection, moral hazard, holdup, have further enriched the analysis using the basic internalization approach (Chi, 1994), and imperfections such as bounded rationality and bounded reliability have been more completely developed (Verbeke & Greidanus, 2009; Kano & Verbeke, 2015). Even more radical departures from orthodoxy have come from new perspectives such as behavioral game theory (Camerer, 1997) and fairness equilibrium (Rabin, 1993). In this process, the barriers between economics and the other social science disciplines have become more porous and alternatives to economic rationality concepts, for example altruism (McWilliams, Siegel, & Wright, 2006) and collective identification (Cooper & Thatcher, 2010), have been applied to organizations and business settings.

These observations raise a number of related questions pertaining to internalization theory. For example, who makes the decisions about internalization and externalization? What guides these decision processes in terms of expectations, learning, and feedback loops, and how are those influenced by bounded rationality and by the challenges of measuring transaction costs? Which selection mechanisms (for example, competition in the markets for managers, capital, labor, or products) ensure efficient outcomes and under which conditions? What are the dynamic implications in terms of the evolution of firms and markets in a global context, and the performance of firms in the short and long term? To answer these questions, we need a better understanding of the causal mechanisms underlying the theory of the MNE, the scope of predictions supported by its assumptions, and the consequences of relaxing these assumptions. Obviously, any modifications to the assumptions and analytical logic of internalization need to be explicitly spelled out to ensure commensurability and logical consistency.

In rethinking the foundations of internalization theory along the above lines, new theoretical developments in adjacent research fields may provide leverage. These include, for example, the considerable research efforts on the governance of global value chains that have been undertaken since the 1990s in the fields of sociology, economic geography, development studies, and political economy. Scholars in these fields have examined issues such as sourcing (Gereffi 1999; Kaplinsky 1998; Dolan & Humphrey 2000) and contract manufacturing (Schmitz & Knorringa, 2010). Since the early 1990s, various frameworks have been put forward in attempting to explain how global industries are organized and governed (Coe, Dicken, & Hess, 2008). In their discussion of the organization of economic activities, these studies implicitly relate to the issue of global markets versus hierarchies that internalization theory also addresses, but so far very little cross-fertilization has occurred between these research streams.

Finally, similar to the governance aspects, the spatial aspects of internalization theory arguably remain equally underdeveloped, leaving ample opportunities to further integrate geographic aspects into studies of the MNE (Dunning, 1998). The ongoing analyses of semi-globalization (Ghemawat, 2003) and discontinuities in geographic space (Beugelsdijk and Mudambi, 2013) suggest the need to revisit accepted IB theories with the added insight of supra-national geographic levels, such as regions (Rugman and Verbeke, 2004; Arregle, Miller, Hitt, & Beamish, 2013; Verbeke & Asmussen, 2016), and of sub-national geographic levels, such as cities (Goerzen, Asmussen, & Nielsen, 2013). With this theme, we aim to integrate insights from the above-mentioned disciplines (and potentially other ones)  outside of IB, into our understanding of the existence and boundaries of the MNE.

Conclusion

Of the two themes, the first has an emphasis on phenomena and the second on theory, but both themes have in common their focus on the MNE. Importantly, the two themes are not independent—for example, it is possible that the application of internalization theory to new contexts requires a re-specification of its assumptions, or that the change of assumptions leads to new predictions that require specific context for empirical testing. Overall, the aim of the special issue is to encourage academic research that develops more fine-grained analysis of how the MNE decides on its boundaries and on the organizational forms it takes. On particularly important, “intelligently controversial” questions, the editors may decide to foster debate using a point-counterpoint format. We hope that the collection of papers in our special issue will contribute to the evolving research on MNEs so as to create a more formative unified theory and a common epistemology for comprehending the evolution of MNEs within the ongoing progression of international business activities.                 

Submission Process

All manuscripts will be reviewed as a cohort for this special issue. Manuscripts must be submitted in the window between May 15, 2017, and June 1, 2017, at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jibs. Please indicate in the cover letter which theme(s) of the two described above the submitted manuscript addresses. All submissions will go through the JIBS regular double-blind review process and follow the standard norms and processes.

For more information about this call for papers, please contact the Special Issue Editors or the JIBS Managing Editor (managing-editor@jibs.net).

References

Agarwal, S. & Ramaswami, S. 1992. Choice of foreign market entry: impact of ownership, location and internationalization factors. Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (1), 517-551.

Anderson, E., & Gatignon, H. 1986. Modes of foreign entry: A transaction cost analysis and proposition. Journal of International Business Studies, 17(3), 1–26.

Ardichvili, A. 2008. Learning and Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Communities of Practice: Motivators, Barriers, and Enablers. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10: 541–54.

Arregle, J.L., Miller, T.L., Hitt, M.A. & Beamish, P.W. 2013. Do regions matter? An integrated institutional and semiglobalization perspective on the internationalization of MNEs. Strategic Management Journal, 34(8), 910-934.

Asmussen, C.G., Larsen, M.M., & Pedersen, T. 2016. Organizational Adaptation in Offshoring: The Relative Performance of Home- and Host-based Learning Strategies. Organization Science, 27(4): 911-928.

Axinn, C. N. & Matthyssens, P. 2002. Limits on internationalization theories in an unlimited world. International Marketing Review 19(5), 436–449.

Bakos, Y. 1998. The emerging role of electronic marketplaces on the Internet. Communications of the ACM, 41(8): 35-42.

Baldwin, R. & Venables, A. 2013. Spiders and snakes: Offshoring and agglomeration in the global economy. Journal of International Economics, 90(2): 245–254.

Beugelsdijk, S., & Mudambi, R. 2013. MNEs as border-crossing multi-location enterprises: The role of discontinuities in geographic space. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(5), 413–426.

Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. C. 1976. The future of the multinational enterprise. London: Macmillan

Buckley, P. J., & Hashai, N. 2009. Formalizing internationalization in the eclectic paradigm. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(1), 58–70.

Camerer, C. 1997. Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. New York, USA: Princeton University Press.

Casson, M. 1995. Enterprise and competitiveness: A systems view of international business: Oxford University Press.

Casson, M. C. 2015. Coase and International Business: The Origin and Development of Internalisation Theory. Managerial and Decision Economics, 36(1), 55-66.

Chi, T. 1994. Trading in strategic resources: Necessary conditions, transaction cost problems, and choice of exchange structure. Strategic Management Journal, 15 (4): 271-290.

Coase, R. H. 1937. The Nature of the Firm. Economica, 4(16), 386-405.

Coe, N.M., Dicken, P. & Hess, M. G. 2008. Introduction: global production networks – debates and challenges. Journal of Economic Geography, 8(3): 267-269.

Cooper, D., & Thatcher, S. M. B. 2010. Identification in organizations: The role of self-concept orientations and identification motives. Academy of Management Review, 35: 516–538.

Dolan, C. & Humphrey, J. 2000. Governance and trade in fresh vegetables: the impact of UK supermarkets on the African horticulture industry. Journal of Development Studies, 37(2): 147-76.

Dunning, J. H. 1977. Trade, location of economic activity and the multinational enterprise: A search for an eclectic approach In B. Ohlin, P. O. Hesselborn, & P. J. Wijkmann (Eds.), The International Allocation of Economic Activity, London: McMillan, 395-416.

Dunning, J. H. 1988. The eclectic paradigm of international production: A restatement and some possible extensions. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1), 1-31.

Dunning, J. H. 1993. Multinational enterprises and the global economy. Wokingham: Addison Wesley Publishing company.

Dunning, J. H., 1998. Location and the multinational enterprise: a neglected factor? Journal of International Business Studies 29 (1), 45–66.

Dunning, J. H. 2003. Relational assets, networks and international business activity. In John H. Dunning and Gavin Boyd (Eds.), Alliance Capitalism and Corporate Management – Entrepreneurial Cooperation in Knowledge Based Economies: 1-23. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.

Dunning, J. H. 2015. Reappraising the Eclectic Paradigm in an Age of Alliance Capitalism. In John H. Dunning (Ed.), The Eclectic Paradigm: A Framework for Synthesizing and Comparing Theories of International Business from Different Disciplines or Perspectives: 111-142. London, UK: Palgrave McMillan.

Dunning, J. H. and Boyd, G. (Eds.). 2003. Alliance Capitalism and Corporate Management – Entrepreneurial Cooperation in Knowledge Based Economies. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.

Dunning, J. H. & Lundan, S. M. 2008. Multinational Enterprises and the Global Economy. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.

Foss, N. & Pedersen, T. 2004. Organizing knowledge processes in the multinational corporation: an introduction. Journal of International Business Studies 35(5), 340–349.

Friedman, J., Gerlowski, D. A., & Silberman, J. 1992. What attracts foreign multinational corporations? Evidence from branch plant location in the United States. Journal of Regional Science, 32(4), 403-418.

Gereffi, G. 1999. International trade and industrial upgrading in the apparel commodity chain. Journal of International Economics, 48(1): 37-70.

Ghemawat, P. 2003. Semiglobalization and international business strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2), 138–52.

Goerzen, A., Asmussen, C. G., & Nielsen, B. B. 2013. Global cities and multinational enterprise location strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(5), 427-450.

Hennart, J.-F. 1977. A theory of foreign direct investment. University of Maryland, Maryland.

Hennart, J.-F. 1982. A theory of multinational enterprise. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Hennart, Jean-Francois. 1993. Explaining the swollen middle: Why most transactions are a mix of “market” and “hierarchy”. Organization Science, 4(4): 529-547.

Henderson, J., Dicken, P., Hess, M., Coe, N. & Wai-Chung Yeung, H. (2002) Global production networks and the analysis of economic development, Review of International Political Economy, 9(3), pp. 436–464

Kano, L. & Verbeke, A., 2015. The three faces of bounded reliability: Alfred Chandler and the micro-foundations of management theory. California Management Review, 58(1): 97-122.

Kaplinsky, R. 1998. Globalization, industrialization and sustainable growth: the pursuit of the nth rent. IDS Discussion Paper No. 365. Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.

Kirca, A. H., Hult, G. T. M., Roth, K., Cavusgil, S. T., Perryy, M. Z., Akdeniz, M. B., Deligonul, S. Z., Mena, J. A., Pollitte, W. A., & Hoppner, J. J. 2011. Firm-specific assets, multinationality, and financial performance: a meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. The Academy of Management Journal, 54(1), 47-72.

Kirca, A.H., Fernandez, W.D., & Kundu, S.K. 2016. An empirical analysis of internalization theory in emerging markets: The role of firm-specific assets and asset dispersion in the multinationality-performance relationship. Journal of World Business, 51(4): 628-640.

Lessard, D., Teece, D.J. & Leih, S., 2016. The Dynamic Capabilities of Meta‐Multinationals. Global Strategy Journal, 6(3), 211-224.

Mariotti, S., & Piscitello, L. 1995. Information costs and location of FDIs within the host country: empirical evidence from Italy. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(4), 815-841.

McWilliams, A., D. Siegel & P. M. Wright. 2006. Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1): 1–18.

Meyer, K.E., Mudambi, R. & Narula, R., 2011. Multinational enterprises and local contexts: The opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness. Journal of Management Studies, 48(2): 235-252.

Mudambi, R. & Navarra, P., 2004. Is knowledge power? Knowledge flows, subsidiary power and rent-seeking within MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5): 385-406.

Mudambi, R., Piscitello, L., & Rabbiosi, L. 2014. Reverse knowledge transfer in MNEs: Subsidiary innovativeness and entry modes. Long Range Planning, 47(1-2): 49-63.

Narula, R. 2014. Exploring the paradox of competence-creating subsidiaries: Balancing bandwidth and dispersion in MNEs. Long Range Planning, 47: 4-15.

Narula, R. & Verbeke, A., 2015. Making internalization theory good for practice: The essence of Alan Rugman's contributions to international business. Journal of World Business, 50(4), 612-622.

Oviatt, B.M. & McDougall, P.P., 1994. Toward a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1), 45-64.

Pitelis, C.N. & Teece, D.J., 2010. Cross-border market co-creation, dynamic capabilities and the entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(4), 1247-1270.

Rabin, M. 1993. Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics. American Economic Review, 83 (5): 1281-1302.

Raymond, L. & St-Pierre, J. (2013). Strategic capability configurations for the internationalization of SMEs: A study in equifinality. International Small Business Journal, 31(1), 82–102.

Regan, M.C. & Heenan, P.T. 2010. Supply Chains and Porous Boundaries: The Disaggregation of Legal Services, Fordham Law Review 78, 2137-2139.

Rugman, A. M. 1981. Inside the multinationals: The economics of internal markets. London: Croom Helm.

Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 1992. A note on the transnational solution and the transaction cost theory of multinational strategic management. Journal of international business studies, 23(4), 761-771.

Rugman, A. M. & Verbeke, A., 2001. Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 22(3), 237-250.

Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2003. Extending the theory of the multinational enterprise: internalization and strategic management perspectives. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2), 125-137.

Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2004. A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(1), 3–18.

Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2005. Towards a theory of regional multinationals: A transaction cost economics approach. Management International Review, 45(1): 5–17.

Singh, N. & Kundu, S.K. 2002. Explaining the growth of e-commerce corporations (ECCs): An extension and application of electic paradigm, Journal of International Business Studies, 33(4), 679-697.

Schmitz, H. & Knorringa, P. 2010. Learning from Global Buyers. The Journal of Development Studies, 37(2): 177-205.

Verbeke, A., Zargarzadeh, A. M. & Osiyevskyy, O., 2014. Internalization theory, entrepreneurship and international new ventures. Multinational Business Review, 22(3), 246-269.

Verbeke, A. & Asmussen, C.G. 2016. Global, Local, or Regional? The Locus of MNE Strategies. Journal of Management Studies, 53(6): 1051-1075.

Verbeke, Α., & Greidanus, N. 2009. The end of the opportunism versus trust debate: Bounded reliability as a new envelope concept in research on MNE governance. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(9): 1471-1495

Verbeke, A. & Kenworthy, T.P., 2008. Multidivisional vs metanational governance of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(6), 940-956.

About the Guest Editors (Listed Alphabetically)

Christian Geisler Asmussen is a Professor of Strategic and International Management at Copenhagen Business School. Drawing on a background in formal economics but applying a multi-disciplinary approach to his research, he focuses in particular on the interaction between competitive advantage, geographic scope, and organizational structure. His research has been awarded numerous prizes from the Danish and international research communities, including the Barry M. Richman best dissertation award from the Academy of Management and the Haynes Prize for most promising scholar from the Academy of International Business. He currently heads a research project aiming to uncover the drivers of the micro-location choices of multinational firms.

Tailan Chi is a Professor of International Business & Strategy and Co-Director of the Center for Global Business Studies at the School of Business, University of Kansas. He is an editor of the Journal of International Business Studies and serves on the editorial boards of the Strategic Management Journal, Journal of World Business, Global Strategy Journal, International Journal of Strategic Change Management, and Journal of International Business & Economy.   

Sumit Kundu is a Professor and James K. Batten Eminent Scholar Chair in International Business in the College of Business at Florida International University. He is the Vice President of the Academy of International Business [2014–2017] and serves on the editorial boards of Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of World Business, Global Strategy Journal, Journal of International Management, International Business Review, Management International Review, Cross Cultural and Strategic Management – An International Journal, and Thunderbird International Business Review.

Rajneesh Narula is the John H. Dunning Chair of International Business Regulation at the Henley Business School, University of Reading, UK. His research and consulting have focused on the role of multinational firms in development, innovation and industrial policy, R&D alliances and outsourcing. He has published over a 100 articles and chapters in books on these themes. He regularly acts as a consultant and advisor to the European Commission, UNIDO, UNCTAD and the OECD, and a variety of other international organizations. He holds honorary appointments at UNU-MERIT, Norwegian School of Business and Oxford University. 

Tentative publication date:   Summer 2018

Special Issue Editors:

• Christian Geisler Asmussen (Copenhagen Business School, Denmark, cga.smg@cbs.dk)
• Tailan Chi (University of Kansas, USA, chi@ku.edu)
• Sumit Kundu (Florida International University, USA, kundus@fiu.edu)
• Rajneesh Narula (University of Reading, UK, r.narula@reading.ac.uk)

Deadline for submission: June 1, 2017

Tentative publication date:   Summer 2018

Introduction

Forty years ago, Buckley and Casson (1976) published The Future of the Multinational Enterprise.. Following the intellectual legacy of Coase’s (1937) transaction cost economics, Buckley and Casson (1976: 33) argued that the multinational enterprise (MNE) internalizes activities across national boundaries “when markets in intermediate products are imperfect [because] there is an incentive to bypass them creating an internal market.” Hennart (1977, 1982), in parallel to Buckley and Casson (1976), contributed to the theory of the MNE by considering perspectives of transaction costs such as measurement and enforcement costs arising due to bounded rationality and opportunistic behavior in markets. Bringing an early resource-based perspective to internalization theory (before the notion of resource based view or RBV had even been coined in the field of strategy), Rugman (1981) explained internalization decisions made by the firm on the basis of firm specific advantages (FSAs) and country specific advantages (CSAs), while Rugman and Verbeke (1992, 2003, 2004) expanded on the geographic reach of these FSAs, thereby making the critical distinction between location-bound and non-location bound FSAs. Rugman and Verbeke (2001) also uncovered 10 distinct patterns of competence building across borders in MNEs that resulted from particular interactions between FSAs and CSAs, thereby acknowledging the joint importance of entrepreneurial action, transaction cost economizing and requisite resource combination inside the MNE. In parallel, the Eclectic Paradigm (Dunning, 1977, 1988, 1993; Dunning & Lundan, 2008) stressed the joint impact of ownership, location, and internalization advantages to explain the existence and functioning of the MNE.  In combination, these theoretical advances have contributed to the establishment of internalization theory as a generally accepted theory of the MNE – and as an analytical framework that has explicitly or implicitly underlined much of the progress being made in International Business (IB) research over the last four decades. Internalization theory allows predicting a great number of organizational regularities in IB. These range from entry mode choices – and more generally the governance of international transactions, including the rise of international new ventures (INVs) – to internal organizational design in terms of structural and strategic governance, as well as the structuring of the interface with external economic actors. Yet, a number of issues still remain unresolved, and new questions have emerged—in particular, about the continued applicability of internalization theory in a rapidly changing world, and about the foundations of the theory in light of new developments in other fields and disciplines. This special issue on Applying and Advancing Internalization Theory invites original research that addresses these questions.

As noted by Rugman and Verbeke (2003: 125), The Future of the Multinational Enterprise was “a superb starting point for the study of the MNE, even if the complexity of this governance structure has grown far beyond what any international business scholar … could have predicted 25 years ago”. This is even more evident today as the nature of the global economy has changed and continues to change. Novel types of cross-border transactions and forms of MNEs have arisen, raising questions about the universal applicability of the theory. It is now time to revisit the theory of the MNE and to challenge its underlying assumptions. More advanced theoretical and empirical approaches promise to identify and explain better the little explored causal mechanisms leading to the existence or absence of MNEs. Analysis of these mechanisms will highlight not only the “why” but also the “how” of internalization theory. To advance this research agenda, we invite manuscripts from a variety of disciplines, including management and organizational studies, strategy, economics, economic geography, marketing, etc. Ideally, submitted manuscripts should improve upon the current state of internalization theory and its implications for managerial practice, by criticizing or extending the conventional thinking embedded within it. We welcome diverse approaches to this topic, including (but not limited to) conceptual models, formal models, simulations, experimental designs, and empirical studies (both qualitative and quantitative ones). Specifically, we invite submissions falling within one or both of the two themes described below.

Theme 1. Applying Internalization Theory to New Realities: Firms and Markets in the Contemporary Global Economy

Building upon general economic principles, applicable across a wide range of empirical phenomena, many scholars have credibly used internalization theory as an analytical tool in different institutional contexts. The theory has allowed explaining the presence of a variety of governance forms for managing international transactions (Casson, 1995, 2015; Narula & Verbeke, 2015). At the same time, few will dispute the fact that the world looks dramatically different today than it did when internalization theory first emerged. IB scholars therefore need to pay special attention to the new realities of the international economy and their influence on the evolution of MNEs.

A key tenet of internalization is that MNEs arise to exploit imperfections in markets, imperfections that are influenced by the myriad changes often referred to under the conceptual umbrella of “globalization”. These include political developments pertaining to economic integration, trade agreements, currency regimes, and other supra-national institutions that transform both the cost of managing firms across borders and of transacting in international markets (Rugman & Verbeke, 2005). They also include technological advances such as internet-based collaboration tools, virtual communities of practice, and online market exchanges, which have equally strong transaction cost implications (Bakos, 1998; Ardichvili, 2008). In combination, these developments have paved ways for new types of firms and novel business models. Firms are also geographically more dispersed than ever, engage in coopetition, have diffused innovation, and deploy global teams as well as virtual organizational structures (Axinn & Matthyssens, 2002).

Accordingly, two issues that loom large in this new world economic system are the growth of the service sector and the advent of the digital economy. The interactions that e-commerce firms have with their customers tend to possess different attributes and thus alter the cost-benefit calculus of various governance modes, as compared to the manufacturing sector (Singh & Kundu, 2002). Increasingly, new ventures aim to internationalize, right from inception, by leveraging advances in information technology. Widening geographic spread, alternative governance structures to access and control unique resources, and internalization of the core of value chain have strong theoretical implications (Oviatt & McDougall 1994; Verbeke, Zargarzadeh, & Osiyevskyy, 2014). In this process, the role of the subsidiary has become more vital, reflected in the growing importance of subsidiary specific advantage (Rugman and Verbeke, 2001; Mudambi and Navarra, 2004; Meyer, Mudambi, & Narula, 2011) and reverse innovation in MNEs (Mudambi, Piscitello, & Rabbiosi, 2014). As reflected in the concept of “meta-MNEs” (Lessard, Teece, & Leih, 2016), the existence of which can be explained by internalization theory (Verbeke & Kenworthy, 2008), the ability to earn economic rents from the creation of knowledge assets in subsidiaries around the world depends upon advantages of common governance. Yet there are also substantial costs of managing increasingly complex organizations and combining external and internal embeddedness in dispersed subsidiaries (Narula, 2014).

The same technological developments, in parallel with managerial and organizational developments, have also enabled MNEs to operate with increasingly porous boundaries (Regan & Heenan, 2010). The twenty-first century has witnessed the growth of networks and coalitions between firms (Dunning & Boyd, 2003), while the importance of relational assets and social capital has increased over time to as firms aim to access new knowledge (Dunning, 2003). The phenomenon of “quasi-internalization” has thus become increasingly relevant in today’s competitive landscape as organizations seek to utilize a middle-of-the-road approach to organize their activities – via both hierarchy and markets. Since the seminal paper of Hennart (1993) on the “swollen middle”, there has been a growing interest on MNEs’ minimization of organizational cost by looking at shirking, cheating, monitoring and other costs, recognizing that the choice is not one between internalization and externalization, but of a contextually contingent combination including outsourcing and alliances (Dunning, 2015).

These developments, which are often closely interlinked, present unique opportunities for theory development as they reveal the diverse strategies, challenges, and imperatives of the modern MNE. For example, does internalization theory apply, or perhaps apply differently, to alternative governance forms and structures, such as service firms, e-commerce firms, conglomerate businesses, state-owned enterprises, born global firms, family-owned MNEs, and Bottom-of-the-Pyramid MNEs? Does the rise of new business models based on new technologies or management principles influence the choice between internalization and externalization? How do MNEs mitigate opportunism, moral hazard, free riding, and other associated costs when generating and leveraging relational assets for productive gains? Is it even meaningful to continue to talk about the choice between firms and markets when the nature of contemporary economic exchange is often approaching one of quasi-internalization? Application of the theory to new and evolving contexts may bring new insights into subtle mechanisms, and ultimately inform the structure of the theory itself. With this theme, we welcome contributions that reflect the applicability (or partial applicability or even inapplicability) of internalization theory to the new realities of the contemporary global economy.

Theme 2. Advancing Internalization Theory by Rethinking its Foundations: Rationality, Learning, and Evolutionary Dynamics

Just as the context of internalization theory has changed, so has the way in which academics within and outside IB think and theorize about this context. With these changes, there is a so far largely untapped opportunity to integrate theoretical advances and empirical approaches from other disciplines into research on the MNE. Such integration has only recently and partially begun to take place, with various perspectives making excursions into the realm of IB. These include different disciplines, such as political economy (Henderson, Dicken, Hess, Coe, & Yeung 2002) and economic geography (Baldwin & Venables, 2013), as well as different approaches to theorizing, such as those related to microfoundations (Foss & Pedersen, 2004), general equilibrium modeling (Buckley & Hashai, 2009), co-evolutionary economics (Pitelis & Teece, 2010), equifinality (Raymond & St. Pierre, 2013), and agent-based simulation (Asmussen, Larsen, and Pedersen, 2016). However, uncharted territory still abounds and it is an open question how these perspectives can be subsumed into internalization theory, and in what ways they extend, refine, and challenge this theory. With this theme, we therefore aim to “open up the black box” of internalization theory and revisit its foundations.

One issue that sits squarely in this black box is the issue of behavioral assumptions. Internalization theory mostly predicts that effective governance forms will prevail, thereby implicitly or explicitly deriving its predictions from a profit-maximizing (or cost minimizing) paradigm (reflecting its roots in economic theory). Empirical evidence, in turn, mostly supports the predictions emerging from this paradigm, including predictions of foreign entry modes (e.g., Anderson & Gatignon, 1986; Agarwal & Ramaswami, 1992), location choices (e.g., Friedman, Gerlowski, & Silberman 1992; Mariotti & Piscitello, 1995), and performance (e.g., Kirca et al., 2011; Kirca, Fernandez, & Kundu 2016). However, we know surprisingly little about how these outcomes actually emerge. At the same time, economists themselves have continued to refine and challenge the notion of rationality. More precise concepts developed within the Coasean paradigm, such as adverse selection, moral hazard, holdup, have further enriched the analysis using the basic internalization approach (Chi, 1994), and imperfections such as bounded rationality and bounded reliability have been more completely developed (Verbeke & Greidanus, 2009; Kano & Verbeke, 2015). Even more radical departures from orthodoxy have come from new perspectives such as behavioral game theory (Camerer, 1997) and fairness equilibrium (Rabin, 1993). In this process, the barriers between economics and the other social science disciplines have become more porous and alternatives to economic rationality concepts, for example altruism (McWilliams, Siegel, & Wright, 2006) and collective identification (Cooper & Thatcher, 2010), have been applied to organizations and business settings.

These observations raise a number of related questions pertaining to internalization theory. For example, who makes the decisions about internalization and externalization? What guides these decision processes in terms of expectations, learning, and feedback loops, and how are those influenced by bounded rationality and by the challenges of measuring transaction costs? Which selection mechanisms (for example, competition in the markets for managers, capital, labor, or products) ensure efficient outcomes and under which conditions? What are the dynamic implications in terms of the evolution of firms and markets in a global context, and the performance of firms in the short and long term? To answer these questions, we need a better understanding of the causal mechanisms underlying the theory of the MNE, the scope of predictions supported by its assumptions, and the consequences of relaxing these assumptions. Obviously, any modifications to the assumptions and analytical logic of internalization need to be explicitly spelled out to ensure commensurability and logical consistency.

In rethinking the foundations of internalization theory along the above lines, new theoretical developments in adjacent research fields may provide leverage. These include, for example, the considerable research efforts on the governance of global value chains that have been undertaken since the 1990s in the fields of sociology, economic geography, development studies, and political economy. Scholars in these fields have examined issues such as sourcing (Gereffi 1999; Kaplinsky 1998; Dolan & Humphrey 2000) and contract manufacturing (Schmitz & Knorringa, 2010). Since the early 1990s, various frameworks have been put forward in attempting to explain how global industries are organized and governed (Coe, Dicken, & Hess, 2008). In their discussion of the organization of economic activities, these studies implicitly relate to the issue of global markets versus hierarchies that internalization theory also addresses, but so far very little cross-fertilization has occurred between these research streams.

Finally, similar to the governance aspects, the spatial aspects of internalization theory arguably remain equally underdeveloped, leaving ample opportunities to further integrate geographic aspects into studies of the MNE (Dunning, 1998). The ongoing analyses of semi-globalization (Ghemawat, 2003) and discontinuities in geographic space (Beugelsdijk and Mudambi, 2013) suggest the need to revisit accepted IB theories with the added insight of supra-national geographic levels, such as regions (Rugman and Verbeke, 2004; Arregle, Miller, Hitt, & Beamish, 2013; Verbeke & Asmussen, 2016), and of sub-national geographic levels, such as cities (Goerzen, Asmussen, & Nielsen, 2013). With this theme, we aim to integrate insights from the above-mentioned disciplines (and potentially other ones)  outside of IB, into our understanding of the existence and boundaries of the MNE.

Conclusion

Of the two themes, the first has an emphasis on phenomena and the second on theory, but both themes have in common their focus on the MNE. Importantly, the two themes are not independent—for example, it is possible that the application of internalization theory to new contexts requires a re-specification of its assumptions, or that the change of assumptions leads to new predictions that require specific context for empirical testing. Overall, the aim of the special issue is to encourage academic research that develops more fine-grained analysis of how the MNE decides on its boundaries and on the organizational forms it takes. On particularly important, “intelligently controversial” questions, the editors may decide to foster debate using a point-counterpoint format. We hope that the collection of papers in our special issue will contribute to the evolving research on MNEs so as to create a more formative unified theory and a common epistemology for comprehending the evolution of MNEs within the ongoing progression of international business activities.                

Submission Process

All manuscripts will be reviewed as a cohort for this special issue. Manuscripts must be submitted in the window between May 15, 2017, and June 1, 2017, at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jibs. Please indicate in the cover letter which theme(s) of the two described above the submitted manuscript addresses. All submissions will go through the JIBS regular double-blind review process and follow the standard norms and processes.

For more information about this call for papers, please contact the Special Issue Editors or the JIBS Managing Editor (managing-editor@jibs.net).

References

Agarwal, S. & Ramaswami, S. 1992. Choice of foreign market entry: impact of ownership, location and internationalization factors. Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (1), 517-551.

Anderson, E., & Gatignon, H. 1986. Modes of foreign entry: A transaction cost analysis and proposition. Journal of International Business Studies, 17(3), 1–26.

Ardichvili, A. 2008. Learning and Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Communities of Practice: Motivators, Barriers, and Enablers. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10: 541–54.

Arregle, J.L., Miller, T.L., Hitt, M.A. & Beamish, P.W. 2013. Do regions matter? An integrated institutional and semiglobalization perspective on the internationalization of MNEs. Strategic Management Journal, 34(8), 910-934.

Asmussen, C.G., Larsen, M.M., & Pedersen, T. 2016. Organizational Adaptation in Offshoring: The Relative Performance of Home- and Host-based Learning Strategies. Organization Science, 27(4): 911-928.

Axinn, C. N. & Matthyssens, P. 2002. Limits on internationalization theories in an unlimited world. International Marketing Review 19(5), 436–449.

Bakos, Y. 1998. The emerging role of electronic marketplaces on the Internet. Communications of the ACM, 41(8): 35-42.

Baldwin, R. & Venables, A. 2013. Spiders and snakes: Offshoring and agglomeration in the global economy. Journal of International Economics, 90(2): 245–254.

Beugelsdijk, S., & Mudambi, R. 2013. MNEs as border-crossing multi-location enterprises: The role of discontinuities in geographic space. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(5), 413–426.

Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. C. 1976. The future of the multinational enterprise. London: Macmillan

Buckley, P. J., & Hashai, N. 2009. Formalizing internationalization in the eclectic paradigm. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(1), 58–70.

Camerer, C. 1997. Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. New York, USA: Princeton University Press.

Casson, M. 1995. Enterprise and competitiveness: A systems view of international business: Oxford University Press.

Casson, M. C. 2015. Coase and International Business: The Origin and Development of Internalisation Theory. Managerial and Decision Economics, 36(1), 55-66.

Chi, T. 1994. Trading in strategic resources: Necessary conditions, transaction cost problems, and choice of exchange structure. Strategic Management Journal, 15 (4): 271-290.

Coase, R. H. 1937. The Nature of the Firm. Economica, 4(16), 386-405.

Coe, N.M., Dicken, P. & Hess, M. G. 2008. Introduction: global production networks – debates and challenges. Journal of Economic Geography, 8(3): 267-269.

Cooper, D., & Thatcher, S. M. B. 2010. Identification in organizations: The role of self-concept orientations and identification motives. Academy of Management Review, 35: 516–538.

Dolan, C. & Humphrey, J. 2000. Governance and trade in fresh vegetables: the impact of UK supermarkets on the African horticulture industry. Journal of Development Studies, 37(2): 147-76.

Dunning, J. H. 1977. Trade, location of economic activity and the multinational enterprise: A search for an eclectic approach In B. Ohlin, P. O. Hesselborn, & P. J. Wijkmann (Eds.), The International Allocation of Economic Activity, London: McMillan, 395-416.

Dunning, J. H. 1988. The eclectic paradigm of international production: A restatement and some possible extensions. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1), 1-31.

Dunning, J. H. 1993. Multinational enterprises and the global economy. Wokingham: Addison Wesley Publishing company.

Dunning, J. H., 1998. Location and the multinational enterprise: a neglected factor? Journal of International Business Studies 29 (1), 45–66.

Dunning, J. H. 2003. Relational assets, networks and international business activity. In John H. Dunning and Gavin Boyd (Eds.), Alliance Capitalism and Corporate Management – Entrepreneurial Cooperation in Knowledge Based Economies: 1-23. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.

Dunning, J. H. 2015. Reappraising the Eclectic Paradigm in an Age of Alliance Capitalism. In John H. Dunning (Ed.), The Eclectic Paradigm: A Framework for Synthesizing and Comparing Theories of International Business from Different Disciplines or Perspectives: 111-142. London, UK: Palgrave McMillan.

Dunning, J. H. and Boyd, G. (Eds.). 2003. Alliance Capitalism and Corporate Management – Entrepreneurial Cooperation in Knowledge Based Economies. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.

Dunning, J. H. & Lundan, S. M. 2008. Multinational Enterprises and the Global Economy. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.

Foss, N. & Pedersen, T. 2004. Organizing knowledge processes in the multinational corporation: an introduction. Journal of International Business Studies 35(5), 340–349.

Friedman, J., Gerlowski, D. A., & Silberman, J. 1992. What attracts foreign multinational corporations? Evidence from branch plant location in the United States. Journal of Regional Science, 32(4), 403-418.

Gereffi, G. 1999. International trade and industrial upgrading in the apparel commodity chain. Journal of International Economics, 48(1): 37-70.

Ghemawat, P. 2003. Semiglobalization and international business strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2), 138–52.

Goerzen, A., Asmussen, C. G., & Nielsen, B. B. 2013. Global cities and multinational enterprise location strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(5), 427-450.

Hennart, J.-F. 1977. A theory of foreign direct investment. University of Maryland, Maryland.

Hennart, J.-F. 1982. A theory of multinational enterprise. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Hennart, Jean-Francois. 1993. Explaining the swollen middle: Why most transactions are a mix of “market” and “hierarchy”. Organization Science, 4(4): 529-547.

Henderson, J., Dicken, P., Hess, M., Coe, N. & Wai-Chung Yeung, H. (2002) Global production networks and the analysis of economic development, Review of International Political Economy, 9(3), pp. 436–464

Kano, L. & Verbeke, A., 2015. The three faces of bounded reliability: Alfred Chandler and the micro-foundations of management theory. California Management Review, 58(1): 97-122.

Kaplinsky, R. 1998. Globalization, industrialization and sustainable growth: the pursuit of the nth rent. IDS Discussion Paper No. 365. Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.

Kirca, A. H., Hult, G. T. M., Roth, K., Cavusgil, S. T., Perryy, M. Z., Akdeniz, M. B., Deligonul, S. Z., Mena, J. A., Pollitte, W. A., & Hoppner, J. J. 2011. Firm-specific assets, multinationality, and financial performance: a meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. The Academy of Management Journal, 54(1), 47-72.

Kirca, A.H., Fernandez, W.D., & Kundu, S.K. 2016. An empirical analysis of internalization theory in emerging markets: The role of firm-specific assets and asset dispersion in the multinationality-performance relationship. Journal of World Business, 51(4): 628-640.

Lessard, D., Teece, D.J. & Leih, S., 2016. The Dynamic Capabilities of Meta‐Multinationals. Global Strategy Journal, 6(3), 211-224.

Mariotti, S., & Piscitello, L. 1995. Information costs and location of FDIs within the host country: empirical evidence from Italy. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(4), 815-841.

McWilliams, A., D. Siegel & P. M. Wright. 2006. Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1): 1–18.

Meyer, K.E., Mudambi, R. & Narula, R., 2011. Multinational enterprises and local contexts: The opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness. Journal of Management Studies, 48(2): 235-252.

Mudambi, R. & Navarra, P., 2004. Is knowledge power? Knowledge flows, subsidiary power and rent-seeking within MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5): 385-406.

Mudambi, R., Piscitello, L., & Rabbiosi, L. 2014. Reverse knowledge transfer in MNEs: Subsidiary innovativeness and entry modes. Long Range Planning, 47(1-2): 49-63.

Narula, R. 2014. Exploring the paradox of competence-creating subsidiaries: Balancing bandwidth and dispersion in MNEs. Long Range Planning, 47: 4-15.

Narula, R. & Verbeke, A., 2015. Making internalization theory good for practice: The essence of Alan Rugman's contributions to international business. Journal of World Business, 50(4), 612-622.

Oviatt, B.M. & McDougall, P.P., 1994. Toward a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1), 45-64.

Pitelis, C.N. & Teece, D.J., 2010. Cross-border market co-creation, dynamic capabilities and the entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(4), 1247-1270.

Rabin, M. 1993. Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics. American Economic Review, 83 (5): 1281-1302.

Raymond, L. & St-Pierre, J. (2013). Strategic capability configurations for the internationalization of SMEs: A study in equifinality. International Small Business Journal, 31(1), 82–102.

Regan, M.C. & Heenan, P.T. 2010. Supply Chains and Porous Boundaries: The Disaggregation of Legal Services, Fordham Law Review 78, 2137-2139.

Rugman, A. M. 1981. Inside the multinationals: The economics of internal markets. London: Croom Helm.

Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 1992. A note on the transnational solution and the transaction cost theory of multinational strategic management. Journal of international business studies, 23(4), 761-771.

Rugman, A. M. & Verbeke, A., 2001. Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 22(3), 237-250.

Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2003. Extending the theory of the multinational enterprise: internalization and strategic management perspectives. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2), 125-137.

Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2004. A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(1), 3–18.

Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2005. Towards a theory of regional multinationals: A transaction cost economics approach. Management International Review, 45(1): 5–17.

Singh, N. & Kundu, S.K. 2002. Explaining the growth of e-commerce corporations (ECCs): An extension and application of electic paradigm, Journal of International Business Studies, 33(4), 679-697.

Schmitz, H. & Knorringa, P. 2010. Learning from Global Buyers. The Journal of Development Studies, 37(2): 177-205.

Verbeke, A., Zargarzadeh, A. M. & Osiyevskyy, O., 2014. Internalization theory, entrepreneurship and international new ventures. Multinational Business Review, 22(3), 246-269.

Verbeke, A. & Asmussen, C.G. 2016. Global, Local, or Regional? The Locus of MNE Strategies. Journal of Management Studies, 53(6): 1051-1075.

Verbeke, Α., & Greidanus, N. 2009. The end of the opportunism versus trust debate: Bounded reliability as a new envelope concept in research on MNE governance. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(9): 1471-1495

Verbeke, A. & Kenworthy, T.P., 2008. Multidivisional vs metanational governance of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(6), 940-956.

About the Guest Editors (Listed Alphabetically)

Christian Geisler Asmussen is a Professor of Strategic and International Management at Copenhagen Business School. Drawing on a background in formal economics but applying a multi-disciplinary approach to his research, he focuses in particular on the interaction between competitive advantage, geographic scope, and organizational structure. His research has been awarded numerous prizes from the Danish and international research communities, including the Barry M. Richman best dissertation award from the Academy of Management and the Haynes Prize for most promising scholar from the Academy of International Business. He currently heads a research project aiming to uncover the drivers of the micro-location choices of multinational firms.

Tailan Chi is a Professor of International Business & Strategy and Co-Director of the Center for Global Business Studies at the School of Business, University of Kansas. He is an editor of the Journal of International Business Studies and serves on the editorial boards of the Strategic Management Journal, Journal of World Business, Global Strategy Journal, International Journal of Strategic Change Management, and Journal of International Business & Economy.   

Sumit Kundu is a Professor and James K. Batten Eminent Scholar Chair in International Business in the College of Business at Florida International University. He is the Vice President of the Academy of International Business [2014–2017] and serves on the editorial boards of Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of World Business, Global Strategy Journal, Journal of International Management, International Business Review, Management International Review, Cross Cultural and Strategic Management – An International Journal, and Thunderbird International Business Review.

Rajneesh Narula is the John H. Dunning Chair of International Business Regulation at the Henley Business School, University of Reading, UK. His research and consulting have focused on the role of multinational firms in development, innovation and industrial policy, R&D alliances and outsourcing. He has published over a 100 articles and chapters in books on these themes. He regularly acts as a consultant and advisor to the European Commission, UNIDO, UNCTAD and the OECD, and a variety of other international organizations. He holds honorary appointments at UNU-MERIT, Norwegian School of Business and Oxford University.

International Journal of Multinational Corporation Strategy Special Issue on: "Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Technology Diffusion – Multinational Marketing Management Strategies"

As technology revolutionises communication, financial flows and transportation, the world continues to feel smaller and smaller. It is now possible for companies to conduct business in almost any country around the world due to advances in global trade. Consequently, international and multinational marketing management are becoming more important; they support business activities, co-operations and consumer promotions. Multinational marketing can be simply categorised into two modes: business-to-business mode (B2B; industrial marketing) focuses on co-operations between organisations and resource sharing and integration, while business-to-consumer mode (B2C; promotional marketing) puts more emphasis on product and service positioning as well as promotions for end customers. From the B2B industrial marketing perspective, with the trend of AI development, global technology companies such as Google, IBM and NVIDIA have started to establish research centres and invest in skilled technical employees in host countries. These multinational enterprises (MNEs) work closely with local businesses in host countries and utilise the host country's information and communications technology (ICT) supply chain planning and technological manufacturing capabilities in the MNEs' AI research and development (R&D) and production. Having support from the governments of these host countries, such as the policy of promoting open, investment regimes and liberalised trade as a basis for economic growth, MNEs aim to build a consummate innovation ecosystem in these host countries.

Nevertheless, the innovation diffusion and collaborative R&D industrial strategies are facing significant challenges. For instance, MNEs' strategies in innovation diffusion and R&D collaboration are affected by host countries' industrial clusters, supply chains and related regulations (Cantwell & Zhang, 2011; Crescenzi, Gagliardi & Iammarino, 2015; Nygaard & Dahlstrom, 1992); resource integration is difficult as industrial marketing elements such as the host country's technology adoption capabilities of different industries and companies—including semiconductors, ICT, precision machinery manufacturing, and textiles—all need considerable evaluation and organisation (Castellani & Zanfei, 2002; Reddy, 1997). From the B2C marketing perspective, although more researchers and practitioners are devoted to promoting new AI applications, existing studies predominantly focus on maximising AI utility. For instance, the technology acceptance model (TAM) suggests that ease of use, usefulness, privacy issues and the possible risks of using an AI application can affect consumers adoption intentions (Davis, 1989; Duan, Edwards & Dwivedi, 2019).

However, more and more industrial reports indicate that the relevant AI utility factors are not sufficient enough to support the international marketing and promotional activities in most host countries, particularly host countries with companies who have recently established cooperative relationships with the MNEs (i.e. the AI applications are fairly new to consumers in these host countries) (Roth & Romeo, 1992; Carneiro & Faria, 2016). For instance, the Chinese brand Vivo frequently introduces innovative technologies but often encounters challenges when promoting in host countries such as Japan and Korea where Vivo develops AI applications with local businesses (Batra et al., 2000). Similarly, plastic payment such as debit cards and mobile payment are widely adopted in Western countries but are hard to promote in most Eastern societies such as India, even though many technological protocols are codeveloped with companies in India (Kesharwani & Bisht, 2012; Zhao, Anong & Zhang, 2019).

Furthermore, Facebook has been widely adopted by 24 billion users worldwide, but their Marketplace services are difficult to promote outside the U.S (Al-Heeti, 2018). In summary, although a good AI multinational co-operation might be established between the home country and the host country, the promotion of these AI applications in host countries can still be challenging. Some practitioners suggest that when introducing new technologies and AI applications to a new country or region, companies should create a character brand (Zhao & Balague, 2015). For example, “LINE”, an instant communication application for electronic devices, introduced “LINE FRIENDS” to create different characters or mascots for the brand. Such brand positioning strategies may help companies introduce new technology to other countries by capitalising on an emotional bond with consumers (Calder, Malthouse & Schaedel, 2009).

Nevertheless, when lacking a consistent theoretical foundation, it is hard to duplicate business success across nations. Unfortunately, only a few studies have investigated AI business co-operations with local organisations in host countries (B2B) or promotional strategies of AI applications (B2C) in these host countries. Our understanding of brand management, consumers' technology adoption intention, and cultural differences in managing and establishing multinational marketing management strategies is still limited. This call for papers seeks to provide multinational companies with AI development and management strategies from the B2B and B2C marketing perspectives, including government policy development, innovation diffusion and ecosystems, consumer behaviour and culture differences, and consumer AI adoption. Studies are encouraged to investigate industrial marketing perspectives and/or the consumer promotional marketing perspective of MNEs seeking to expand AI technologies to new foreign markets.

Subject Coverage Suitable topics include, but are not limited, to the following:

From the B2B perspective:

• MNE with AI development’s marketing and innovation diffusion
• MNE with AI development’s global innovation strategy on AI technology
• MNE with AI development and (local) innovation ecosystem
• MNE with AI development and host countries’ sectoral and technological innovation system
• MNEs with AI development’s innovation diffusion and host countries’ technology adoption
• AI innovation diffusion and industrial dynamics/transformation

From the B2C perspective:

• MNEs’ brand extension and management
• MNEs’ country of origin and country image on the execution of AI and introduction of new technology to a new market
• MNEs’ communication and promotional strategies
• MNEs’ AI personalisation and localisation of products
• Target market legislation or government policy barriers on MNEs’ introduction of AI and new technology products

Notes for Prospective Authors

Submitted papers should not have been previously published nor be currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. (N.B. Conference papers may only be submitted if the paper has been completely rewritten and if appropriate written permissions have been obtained from any copyright holders of the original paper). All papers are refereed through a peer review process. https://www.dropbox.com/s/ih7pokks4wqhjxi/IJMCS%20CFP%20id4954.pdf?dl=0 All papers must be submitted online. To submit a paper, please read our Submitting articles page: https://www.inderscience.com/jhome.php?jcode=ijmcs

If you have any queries concerning this special issue, please email Dr. Yu-Lun Liu at y.l.liu@ntut.edu.tw.

Important Dates

Manuscripts due by: 31 May, 2020

Notification to authors: 31 July, 2020

Final versions due by: 1 October, 2020

References

Al-Heeti, A. (2018). 'Facebook Marketplace is used in 70 countries, by 800 million people monthly', CNET, 1 May [Online]. Available at: https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-marketplace-is-used-in-70-countries-by-800-million-people-monthly/ (Accessed: 28 September 2019).

Batra, R., Ramaswamy, V., Alden, D. L., Steenkamp, J. E. M. and Ramachander, S. (2000). 'Effects of brand local and nonlocal origin on consumer attitudes in developing countries', Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(2), pp. 83-95.

Calder, B. J., Malthouse, E. C. and Schaedel, U. (2009). 'An experimental study of the relationship between online engagement and advertising effectiveness', Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23(4), pp. 321-331.

Cantwell, J., and Zhang, Y. (2011). 'Innovation and location in the multinational firm', International Journal of Technology Management, 54(1), pp. 116-132.

Carneiro, J. and Faria, F. (2016). 'Quest for purposefully designed conceptualization of the country-of-origin image construct', Journal of Business Research, 69(10), pp. 4411-4420.

Castellani, D. and Zanfei, A. (2002). 'Multinational experience and the creation of linkages with local firms:evidence from the electronics industry', Cambridge Journal of Economics, 26(1), pp. 1-25.

Crescenzi, R., Gagliardi, L. and Iammarino, S. (2015). 'Foreign multinationals and domestic innovation: Intra-industry effects and firm heterogeneity', Research Policy, 44, pp. 596–609.

Davis, F. D. (1989). 'Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology', MIS quarterly, 13(3), pp. 319-340.

Duan, Y., Edwards, J. S. and Dwivedi, Y. K. (2019). 'Artificial intelligence for decision making in the era of Big Data – evolution, challenges and research agenda', International Journal of Information Management, 48, pp. 63-71.

Kesharwani, A. and Bisht, S. S. (2012). 'The impact of trust and perceived risk on internet banking adoption in India: An extension of technology acceptance model', International Journal of Bank Marketing, 30(4), pp. 303-322.

Nygaard, A. and Dahlstrom, R. (1992). 'Multinational company strategy and host country policy', Scandinavian Journal of Management, 8(1), pp. 3-13.

Reddy, P. (1997). 'New trends in globalization of corporate R&D and implications for innovation capability in host countries: a survey from India', World Development, 25(11), pp. 1821-1837.

Roth, M. S. and Romeo, J. B. (1992). 'Matching product category and country image perceptions: A framework for managing country-of-origin effects', Journal of International Business Studies, 23(3), pp. 477-497.

Zhao, H., Anong, S. T. and Zhang, L. (2019). 'Understanding the impact of financial incentives on NFC mobile payment adoption: An experimental analysis', International Journal of Bank Marketing, 37(5), pp. 1296-1312.

Zhao, Z. and Balague, C. (2015). 'Designing branded mobile apps: Fundamentals and recommendations', Business Horizons, 58(3), pp. 305-315.

Note: Special issue conference will be held at Tongji University, Shanghai, China, December 19–20, 2012.

A ten page paper proposal should be submitted by October 31, 2012 (see submission process below)

Over the past two decades, many Asian economies have grown dramatically with an average growth of about 8% per year throughout the region. This dramatic economic growth has allowed large numbers of people to move out of poverty. However, it is increasingly clear that while there has been dramatic improvement in the overall rates of poverty in many nations in Asia, there are large numbers of people still in poverty in spite of the fast economic growth. For example, China continues to have over 300 million people that live in severe poverty while India has over 600 million. The large number of the severely poor people has increasingly been recognized as an issue for both governments and for businesses throughout Asia.

Governments and businesses understand that for continued economic growth, there needs to be political stability. For governments the presence of large numbers of the severely poor whose lives do not seem to be able to improve despite rapid economic growth offers a potential challenge to the needed political stability. However, businesses increasingly also see the large number of people in severe poverty are not only an issue for social concern, but also as a potentially large untapped market of consumers for goods and services. This ability to provide products to those desperately poor may in fact be easiest for firms in Asia as they internationalize and understand these markets. Asian multinational and entrepreneurial firms’ environmental setting includes such potential customers where major North American and European firms typically have no major access or understanding of this setting that is immediately at hand.

The recognition of the desperately poor as a potential market will not only lead to  new sales for these firms but also offers a means to help those individuals in desperate poverty to create assets and prosperity. As a result, there is a fresh recognition that business in fact may offer the greatest single potential means to move individuals out of poverty. The generation of greater economic activity among the desperately poor may provide the means for the poor to change their own lives rather than the government or other groups doing for them. This has led to a focus by both governments and businesses to seek to encourage greater economic activity among the desperately poor. This activity includes not only business seeking to enter these settings but governments also looking to support other activities by non-profit organizations (NGOs) that generate business among the poor.

Management scholars have been slow to identify and examine an array of questions associated with the increasing entry of international business into settings of desperate poverty and the actions of government to support economic activity among the desperately poor. We believe that through poverty–business focused research, scholars can better understand businesses’ role in both helping Asia to reduce poverty, and also generating profit for companies as they reach out to serve these large untapped communities of consumers.

This APJM Special Issue seeks to provide a robust analysis of poverty and business in the Asian context. We want to generate new insights on poverty in the Asian context and how business can help to move people out of desperate poverty. Overall, the editors’ belief is that as business helps to generate greater economic activity in settings of severe poverty they will help to solve poverty as individuals in severe poverty are able to both generate greater incomes and accumulate greater assets as they participate with those large firms in those activities. Thus, a rich range of topics can be included in the special issue as we look at new and innovative activities that help to address these issues. 

For example, we hope to receive research that will expand the limited research on major corporations serving the “bottom of the pyramid” or “subsistence markets” and how firms create such innovative methods to serve these markets. In addition, we are also interested in seeing articles that address how bringing business skills and ideas to settings of severe poverty can address the issues of poverty. There are also new technologies that help to solve the issues of poverty such as cell-phone banking. How do firms developing such technologies ensure that their products meet the needs of very different customer than have been typically addressed? In addition, how government policy can encourage more economic activity in settings of severe poverty, micro lending by governmental and NGOs, and the role of informal firms are also encouraged.

All else being equal, we encourage interdisciplinary teams to explore the above issues and also encourage diversity of thinking to create the path-breaking insights that we seek. Research questions of potential interest for this special issue could include, but are not limited to:

1.   There are numerous enterprising individuals in Asia living in severe poverty with innovative ideas but without sufficient access to financial resources. What can be done to facilitate the transition of these innovative ideas to generate business venture growth in Asia? What is the role of microfinance in the effort to address this shortage of financial resources?

2.   Many individuals in poverty form informal firms—firms that do not conduct legal activities but which do not register with the government. What is the nature of these firms? How does being an informal firm enable or restrict the ability of such firms for both survival and growth.

3.   What is the role of networks and alliances by individuals in Asia living in severe poverty as they seek to either found or grow a business?

4.   When firms seek to serve those that live in desperate poverty what are the strategic actions of the business that generate the greatest success? What are the ethical issues a firm must address as they seek to serve and compete in this domain in Asia as they pursue those activities?

5.   What are the actions of governments that help to generate the greatest success as firms both seek to address issues of poverty and to serve and compete in markets characterized by desperate poverty?

6.   What alliances between for-profit firms and NGOs help to generate the greatest reduction in poverty? In such alliances, what are the factors that generate the greatest success for business?

7.   How do the issues of poverty and business differ across Asia? Particularly, as we consider the two largest economies in the region, China and India, what are the substantive differences of how business competes to serve the desperate poor in these two markets?

8.   How do the innovation processes of firms differ as they seek to address those living at the bottom of the pyramid? Are Asian firms that come from these settings able to develop unique or more appropriate solutions than are firms from richer countries?

Submission Process

The submission process for this special issue shall be different than those typically pursued by APJM. Individuals are encouraged to submit a proposal to the special issue conference prior to submission of the article to the journal. This proposal should be 10 pages in length and submitted by October 31, 2012. Those proposals found to be relevant to the special issue will be asked to make a short presentation of their proposal to a conference focused on the special issue.

The special issue conference will be held at Tongji University in Shanghai, China, December 19–20, 2012. Proposals will receive brief comments at the conference. From the larger set of proposals presented, a smaller subset of papers will be encouraged to be submitted to the special issue. This subset will receive more extensive comments from the editors on how the paper should be developed for submission to the special issue.

The papers in this subset of selected proposals will be sent out for peer review. While those who cannot attend the proposal conference may submit to the special issue, authors are strongly encouraged to participate in this conference and the proposal system that is established. The submission of papers for the special issue is May 20, 2013. The expected publication date is 2014.

For questions regarding the conference and the special issue and the submission, please contact the guest editors: Garry Bruton g.bruton@tcu.edu, David Ahlstrom Ahlstrom@baf.msmail.cuhk.edu.hk, and/or Steven Si ssi@bloomu.edu.

Asian Business & Management (ABM) invites proposals for a special issue to be published in December 2017.

Please submit your proposal to the Editor-in-Chief (Michael A. Witt, abm.editor@insead.edu) with the following information:

1. The names, contact details, and positions of the proposed Guest Editor(s).  Please include brief biographical details.
2. The title of the proposed special issue.
3. An indication of the type of special issue--invited submissions, open call for paper submissions, or a mix.  
4. If there is to be an open call for papers: a one-page draft “Call for Papers” indicating the theme of the special issue, key topics, and methodological considerations (if any).
5. For any invited papers: 300-word abstracts of the planned invited contributions, plus information about the authors and a confirmation of their commitment.
6. Two to three pages on the rationale of the proposal, its intended scope, its intended contribution relative to existing knowledge, and its fit vis-a-vis ABM editorial policy (http://www.palgrave-journals.com/abm/journal/v11/n1/full/abm201123a.html).

Please submit your proposal by 31 May 2016.  A committee of the editors of ABM will assess all received proposals and announce their decision by 11 June 2016.

Guest editors will be responsible for ensuring that the special issue adheres to our editorial policy and formal guidelines.  All manuscripts, including invited pieces, will undergo a standard double-blind review.  Guest editors are expected to contribute a substantively meaningful editorial for the special issues.  Guest editors may submit their own papers for the special issue; review of these papers will be handled by a regular Editor of the journal, and acceptance is subject to the same standards as any other papers submitted to ABM.

The approximate timeline of the special issue is as follows: 

• 31 May 2016: Submission deadline for proposals
• June 2016: Issue of public “Call for Papers” for the special issue
• Late November 2016: Deadline for first submission of papers, begin of review process
• September 2017: Deadline for submission of final manuscripts to publisher (precise date TBC)

For any questions, please contact me at abm.editor@insead.edu.

Submission Deadline: February 16, 2015

Program Chair: Carol Reade, San José State University

AJBS will hold its 28th Annual Meeting in cooperation with the Academy of International Business (AIB) in Bengaluru, India. The combined conference will run from June 26th through June 30th. The AJBS conference is June 26-27 (full day June 26th and half day June 27th) and the AIB conference is June 27-30, 2015).  The Program Chair for this year’s conference is Carol Reade, San José State University, USA.

About AJBS: From its genesis as an informal network in 1982, AJBS was officially organized and held its first conference at the Wharton Business School in January, 1987. AJBS holds annual conferences at venues throughout the world, providing an opportunity for discussion of current developments and research on a range of business, public policy and teaching issues related to Japan. Papers for AJBS conference presentation are double blind peer reviewed. Accepted papers are considered for publication in the journal, Asian Business & Management (ABM). AJBS welcomes scholars, students and practitioners from all disciplinary backgrounds who are interested in Japanese business issues.

Why should you participate in both (AJBS and AIB) conferences?  With one trip, you can attend both the most prestigious professional meeting in international business and an intimate conference that focuses specifically on Japanese business issues. The AJBS conference provides additional opportunities for journal publication and best paper awards, as detailed below.

Paper Submission: Authors may submit papers to either or both conferences. AJBS will consider submissions that have already been presented elsewhere, but not published in a journal or book. Authors are encouraged to consider submitting a paper tailored to the specialized audience at the AJBS conference as well as a modified version appropriate for the wider audience at AIB. As done in past years, we also plan to have one session run by AJBS at the AIB conference.

Submission Deadline: Monday, February 16, 2015.  You can submit your paper via http://aib.msu.edu/events/2015/SubmissionInstructions.asp. We kindly ask you to upload your paper in MS-Word format. Submissions must be on letter paper (8.5"x11" or 216x279 mm), with double-spaced text and a font size of 11 points or larger. Please follow the JIBS style guide (http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jibs/style_guide.html).

Please submit papers in MS-Word format (if MS-Word format is not available, please use a basic text format that can be easily converted to MS-Word. Please do not submit papers in PDF format.). To facilitate the blind review process, remove ALL author-identifying information from the papers. Papers will be double-blind reviewed, with the conference papers selected and authors notified by early April, 2015.

Conference Registration: Registration for the conference will include a specially-discounted combined (AJBS plus AIB) conference fee, a one-year membership to AJBS (if not already a member) and a one-year subscription to Asian Business & Management. 

Asian Business & Management: In 2003 AJBS established a partnership with the journal Asian Business & Management (ABM), published by Palgrave Macmillan in the U.K. As in recent years, the editor of ABM, together with the AJBS conference committee, will select several papers from this year's conference program to be considered for publication in ABM. 

Palgrave Macmillan – AJBS Best Paper Award:  Palgrave Macmillan has sponsored a ‘Best Paper’ prize at the annual AJBS meetings. The Best Paper Committee will review the finalist papers and select the winning paper.  

For further information: Information on the Bengaluru, India meeting venue and AIB conference is available at http://aib.msu.edu/events/2015/. For questions regarding conference papers and submissions, please contact Carol Reade (carol.reade@sjsu.edu). For questions or comments regarding AJBS or conference registration, please contact ajbs@ajbs.org or the AJBS President, Gary Knight (gknight@willamette.edu).

Despite the economic and also increasingly political role of today’s Asian economies, research on the diversity of capitalism in Asia remains underdeveloped. If at all, the literature has included Japan, but neither systematically analyzed other Asian countries nor embedded Japan into the Asian context. Asia offers a rich and challenging empirical ground to study the emergence and change of new types of institutions (e.g. lack of a coherent institutional framework in China, the contrasting speed of institutional change in Japan and Korea, the rather uncontested dominant technological ideology even after Fukushima, or the idiosyncratic industrial specialization in India based on textile, IT and service). We hence suggest enlarging the analysis on the diversity of capitalism onto Asia, and to enrich, contest or enlarge established theories and concepts of the comparative capitalism approach with empirical evidence of Asian systems.

Research has started to show an interest into the diversity of Asian capitalisms (Amable 2003; Aoki, Jackson, and Miyajima, 2007; Lechevalier, 2011, Storz and Schäfer 2011; Whitley 1992, 1999). This research sheds light on how the specific properties of Asian capitalisms may be understood in the context of established theories and concepts of capitalism and how change within these systems can be incorporated. These two topics make up the core of the special issue: diversity of institutions and institutional change. In both parts, the special issue aims to integrate and re-evaluate important approaches that helped to better understand US and European economic systems. The special issue is not looking for papers to recapitulate existing critiques of the main theoretical frameworks constituting the comparative capitalism literature (Crouch 2005; Deeg and Jackson 2007; Hermann 2008), but uses empirical cases and data from Asia as a chance to extend, revise, or develop new theories that are relevant to the broad concerns of the comparative capitalism approach. We are therefore especially interested in papers adopting a comparative perspective. In pursuit of this idea, we understand the special issue as an analytical program contributing to a theoretically informed and empirically grounded understanding of today’s economies in Asia. Hence, we have a rather “large question” in mind, so that the special issue will neither be able to cover all important countries in Asia, nor be able to develop a “final” understanding of institutional regimes, their design, and institutional change. However, we hope to contribute to an informed debate of the institutional foundations of Asian economies. The following is a list of indicative, but not exhaustive, topic areas:

• Asian capitalisms in cross-national comparison: transformation and institutional diversity of capitalisms; comparative capitalism approaches (e.g. varieties of capitalisms, national innovation systems, regulationist theory, business systems) and Asia
• Asian capitalisms and institutional change: patterns of institution building; forms of institutional change (e.g. path activation or innovative use of paths); weak and strong institutional complementarities; diversity and interaction of actors in inducing and implementing change, considering also socio-political factors
• Asian capitalisms and the organization of the firm: corporate governance, strategy and structure within the diverse institutional systems in Asia; forms and change of HRM practices, career systems, worker involvement; varieties of leadership within economic systems in Asia
•  Asian capitalisms and innovation: sectoral logics versus institutional logics; learning and knowledge creation; industrialization and de-industrialization
• Asian capitalisms, state regulation and political economy perspectives: implications of the role of the state in Asia; framing of Asian capitalisms in the context of state regulation, growth models and welfare regimes; inequalities;  capitalism and democracy
• Asian capitalisms and the international and regional division of labor: towards a new theory of the institutional comparative advantages?; new patterns of knowledge creation and innovation

Submissions
Socio-Economic Review (SER) aims to encourage work on the relationship between society, economy, institutions and markets, moral commitments and the rational pursuit of self-interest. The journal seeks articles that focus on economic action in its social and historical context. In broad disciplinary terms, papers may be drawn from sociology, political science, economics and the management and policy sciences. The journal encourages papers that seek to recombine disciplinary domains in response to practically relevant issues, while at the same time encouraging the development of new theory.

Papers should be submitted by email to Cornelia Storz (email: storz@wiwi.uni-frankfurt.de). Please prepare manuscripts according to the guidelines shown at ser.oxfordjournals.org. The maximum length of articles including references, notes and abstract is 10,000, and the minimum length is 6,000 words. Articles must be accompanied by an abstract of no more than 150 words. The main document has to be anonymous and should contain title, abstract, and strictly avoid self references. Papers will be reviewed following the journal’s normal review process and criteria. Papers accepted into the revision stage are also invited to be presented and discussed at the SASE network Q on Asian Capitalisms in 2013 (for details, see www.sase.org).

For further information for this Special Issue please contact any of the Guest Editors:
Bruno Amable: bruno.amable@univ-paris1.fr
Steven Casper: Steven_Casper@kgi.edu
Sebastien Lechevalier: sebastien.lechevalier@ehess.fr
Cornelia Storz: storz@wiwi.uni-frankfurt.de

Timeline
Full paper submissions due: June 1, 2012
Special Issue Publication: April 2013 (Issue 2)
 

Introduction
Families represent a large and growing market worldwide. The family has been identified as the most important decision making and consumption unit. Since last two decades, this domain has attracted interests of marketers and academicians. Marketers in emerging Asian economies are just beginning to experience the growing influence of families in the consumption process. The abrupt changes in lifestyle patterns, increasing per capita incomes, extensive media and major socio-cultural as well as economic changes are bringing altogether new perspectives in consumer markets in Asia. The tested marketing concepts in the west are not as effective as in the traditional Asian consumers. Marketers need to move beyond the traditional predictable techniques that worked for generations. The latest data from World Bank shows that global family consumption has been rising year on year. In 2016, India’s total household final consumption expenditure was growing at 8.7 % annually; China was growing at 7.8%, Indonesia at 5% Cambodia 6.7%, Pakistan 6.9% and the Philippines at 7%.

Objective
While family as the fundamental unit of analysis remains central to many consumption decisions, it has received relatively insufficient attention from researchers in the areas of marketing and consumer behavior, and many nuances have been overlooked. The premise of this special issue is that this lack of attention is due to a restrictive notion of the role of family in consumption decisions and that many fertile research areas can be identified.

Recommended Topics
Topics to be discussed in this special issue include (but are not limited to) the following:

• Family Buying Process
• Consumer Decision Making Dynamics in Family
• Strategic Alliances that Family Members make
• Family Life Cycles and impact on Market
• Children as an important Decision Maker
• Child Socialization and Parent’s Reverse Socialization
• Family Decisions in Tourism, Consumer durables, Gadgets, other specific industries
• Social Media and Family’s Consumer Attitudes
• New Parenthood & Changing Consumer Decision
• Other related studies

Submission Procedure
Researchers and practitioners are invited to submit papers for this special theme issue on “Asian Families and Consumer Decisions” on or before June 30, 2018. All submissions must be original and may not be under review by another publication. INTERESTED AUTHORS SHOULD CONSULT THE JOURNAL’S GUIDELINES FOR MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSIONS at http://www.igi-global.com/publish/contributor-resources/before-you-write/. All submitted papers will be reviewed on a double-blind, peer review basis. Papers must follow APA style for reference citations.

All submissions and inquiries should be directed to the attention of:
Dr. Monica Chaudhary monicarana@gmail.com
Dr. Suhail Mohammad Ghouse suhailmghouse@gmail.com

The year 2025 could be a year in which humanity, many eco-systems and biological species, and business sectors could hit the point of no return. This book aims to address the intersection between business, society, biodiversity and technology by the year 2025. This book seeks to analyze the challenges and transformations required to be able to have sustainable businesses with a future orientation. This volume targets contributions to provide elements on current and potential social, demographic, technological, and managerial trends; the implications of the digital revolution in society and business; as well as the challenges of surviving, being sustainable and profitable. Furthermore, we seek to provide an understanding on business reasons to incorporate a future orientation in business strategy, and to facilitate understanding of the need for profound changes in individual behavior, culture of the organizations, public policy and business environments to adapt to the accelerated changes, and to manage business with orientation to the future.

Therefore, with this book, we seek to (i) present a collection of evidence and analysis of the implications of the digital revolution in society and business, and the challenges of surviving, being sustainable and profitable; (ii) identify potential social, demographic, technological, and managerial trends by 2025; (iii) understanding of the need for profound transformations in individuals, the culture of organizations and the environment to adapt to accelerated changes, and managing organizations with a focus on the future.

Topics for this volume include, but not limited to:

• Connection between sustainability and digital transformation.
• After the 2030 sustainable development agenda.
• What has been said about the future in the past. The past history of the future.
• Industry 5.0: What does really mean the human touch revolution?
• Challenges for humanity after 2025.
• Challenges for business after 2025.
• Challenges for governments after 2025.
• Ethical challenges in the year 2025.
• The geopolitical evolution and demographic characteristics by the second half of the 21st century.
• The future of the world economy.
• Models of development after the digital revolution.
• Uncertainty and sustainability for international business. 
• Disruptive innovations and the challenges to sustainable and inclusive development.
• New conceptions of development.
• The future of production and consumption.
• Survival, sustainability and profitability.
• Business challenges for agile and exponential organizations.
• The challenges of inclusion: How to deal with the excluded.
• Diversity with diversity by 2025: the new different ones.
• Speed ​​as a competitive advantage.
• Leadership of the future.
• Emerging organizational forms (such as B Corporations and others).
• Extra-planetary business.
• Challenges on renewable energy.
• Considerations of human development and happiness by 2025.
• Utopian views of the future.
• Positive impacts for humanity and business of automation and robotics
• Positive impacts for humanity and the planet of climate change.
• Techno-humanitarianism.
• Opportunity-exploration paradigm.
• More human humans: sensitivity, compassion and connection.
• Political forces shaping the future.
• Climate related forces shaping the future.
• What will happen to the sustainable development goals that are not met?

Important dates:

• Submission deadline for chapter proposals, emailed to mgonza40@eafit.edu.co by May 10th 2019
• Notification of acceptance/rejection of chapter proposals: May 21st, 2019.
• Deadline for full chapter: October 10th2019
• Notification of acceptance/rejection of chapter: November 30th, 2019.
• Deadline for submission of revised chapters: January 30th, 2020.
• Estimated date of publication: End of first semester 2020.

Guidelines:

• Chapter Proposals: 250-500 words
• It should contain provisional title
• Author(s) information (name, affiliation, contact details)
• Summary of chapter including main idea, preliminary conclusions, and list of reference.

Peer Reviewer Commitments:

• Each accepted author must be willing to review several rounds of peer reviewed chapters by set deadlines during the October-November timeline.

Chapter:

Up to 10,000 words.

APA 6th manuscript formatting.

• Accepted chapters will be compiled in a book, which will be published by Palgrave Macmillan.

Book Editors:

Seung Ho "Sam" Park

Dr. Park is Professor and President’s Chair in Strategy and International Business and Executive Director of the Center for Emerging Market Studies at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. He was the Parkland Chair Professor of strategy and Director of the Center for Emerging Market Studies at CEIBS and the founding president of the Skolkovo-EY Institute for Emerging Market Studies and the Samsung Economic Research Institute China.

Maria Alejandra Gonzalez-Perez

Dr. Gonzalez-Perez (PhD, MBS, Psy) is Full Professor of Management at Universidad EAFIT (Colombia). She is the Chapter Chair for Latin America and the Caribbean at the Academy of International Business (AIB) (2018-2021). She is Member of the global council of the Sustainable Development Goal  number 1 (SDG 1: End Poverty) of the World Government Summit (WGS). Furthermore, Alejandra is a Research Partner at the Center for Emerging Market Studies at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. 

Dinorà Floriani

Dinorá Eliete Floriani is the Director for Professional master’s in science (MsC) in Management and International Business, and coordinates the Master of Business Administration (MBA).  Dinorá is Full Professor of Internationalization Strategy at University of Vale do Itajaí (UNIVALI)–Brazil. Visiting Professor at University of Florence in Italy and Halmstad University in Sweden.  She has been served as Board Member of the Academy of International Business – Latin America and Caribbean Chapter 2018-2021 (AIB-LAT). 

Corresponding editor:

• Maria Alejandra Gonzalez-Perez, Universidad EAFIT, Colombia. Email: mgonza40@eafit.edu.co

International Journal of Business and Management (IJBM) (ISSN Online: 2815-9330) cordially invites scholars, academicians, and researchers from all over the world to submit their unpublished original work for inclusion in our special issue “Business after pandemic” (Vol 2, No 1, 2023).

Acceptable themes include, but are not limited to, the following: Accounting and Finance, International Business, Management Corporate Governance, Marketing, Supply Chain, Business Ethics, Corporate Governance, and Corporate Social Responsibility after pandemic.

The International Journal of Business and Management (IJBM) (ISSN Online: 2815-9330) is a fully open access, peer-reviewed academic journal. We adhere to the highest scientific standards and follow a rigorous peer-review process. We welcome submissions from across the social sciences, economics, and humanities disciplines. IJBM aims to publish rigorous theoretical, methodological, or empirical research associated with the areas of business and management including strategy, accounting, economics, finance, management, marketing, tourism, organisation, human resources, operations, supply chain, corporate social responsibility, and corporate governance. The journal aims to attract original knowledge based on academic rigour and of relevance for academics, researchers, professionals, and/or public decision-makers. IJBM is published by OJS system and supported by International Emerging Scholars Society (IESS).

There is no submission fee.

Why publish in IJBM: Fully open access Rigorous peer-review process

Fast publication: average peer review time within 8 weeks

Impact: affiliated with International Emerging Scholars Society (IESS) Support for early career researchers and underrepresented populations Commitment to diversity and inclusion

Editor in Chief: Prof. Zhongqian Liu Editor-in-chief@iessociety.org

Associate Editor: Dr. Scott Johnson editor@iessociety.com

INTRODUCTION TO THE THEME:

Multinational entreprises (MNEs) experienced ‘golden days’ during the 1990s and 2000s, they expanded globally and were major players in globalization. Today they have become powerful actors in the global economy. CEOs of international businesses are welcomed by heads of state as their counterparts, they are invited by governments to help solve global issues such as climate change and poverty, and they are facing dilemmas comparable to those of other international actors.

However, MNEs are facing global legitimacy challenges. They are suspected of tax avoidance, using low wage countries for corporate benefits only, disrespecting privacy regulations, abusing consumer data, violating local community rights, exploiting natural resources, ignoring basic human rights, and employing too many lobbyists targeting national and international political decision-making processes for their own corporate interests.

Although many of these challenges are not new, they have resurfaced and become more apparent during the past couple of years, partly due to the economic recession that many developed economies have faced and to the broader awareness of increasing global inequality and the importance of sustainability.

BUSINESS DIPLOMACY

Business diplomacy seems to be more relevant than ever to deal with these challenges. Business diplomacy involves developing strategies for long-term, positive relationship building with governments, local communities, and interest groups, aiming to establish and sustain legitimacy and to mitigate the risks arising from all non-commercial or exogenous factors in the global business environment.

Business diplomacy is different from lobbying or strategic political activity; it implies an (strategic / holistic) approach of an international business to look at itself as an actor in the international diplomatic arena. Representation, communication and negotiation are key in such an approach.

One of the consequences is that MNEs are able to operate in and show respect for an international business environment that consists of multiple stakeholders. This demands a strategic perspective and vision on the sector and the business environments in which the company wants to operate, and requires a specific set of instruments, skills and competences.

Doing business internationally means facing a complex international business environment; global companies, large, medium or small, need to manage and ‘survive’ in a rapidly changing political and economic business environment that requires them to interact with multiple stakeholders such as host governments and NGOs. To operate successfully among all these complexities, international business will need to develop business diplomacy competences and knowhow more than before.

Yet not many international companies recognize the importance of business diplomacy. Instead of training their managers in business diplomacy, most multinational corporations (MNCs) hire political diplomats and rely on their experience in managing complex relationships with host governments. MNCs need to anticipate stakeholder conflicts, communicate with non-business pressure and interest associations, influence host-government decision-making and maintain constructive relations with external constituencies. Therefore, they cannot rely on advisors only, but should develop their own business diplomacy competences.

It is argued that by engaging in business diplomacy, corporations can increase their power and legitimacy. Firms that are involved in business diplomacy have chosen to satisfy a social public demand rather than only a market demand. Scholars emphasize that it is important for modern corporations to respond to the expectations of various stakeholders in order to obtain a “license to operate”, and therefore the importance of enacting business diplomacy in today’s business environment is stressed.

In the international management literature the term business diplomacy is not widely recognized and has received (too) little scholarly attention.

AIM OF THE BOOK

This book aims at shaping the debate on business diplomacy in multinational corporations (MNCs). It will deal with questions such as:

What exactly is business diplomacy?

How is business diplomacy in MNCs related to (political) corporate diplomacy?

To what extent do MNCs engage in business diplomacy and how?

How can business diplomacy help to deal with the global legitimacy challenges that MNCs face?

What strategies, tactics and instruments in enacting business diplomacy?

Which existing theories can be applied to understand the international business-as-an-diplomatic actor perspective?

New theory development to understand business diplomacy, and what are directions for research on business diplomacy?

Specific topics that chapters can address:

International Business and global legitimacy challenges

International Business, Business diplomacy and the OECD guidelines

International Business, Business diplomacy and mitigating risks

International Business, Business diplomacy and sustainable development

International Business, Business diplomacy and the impact and potential of digitalization

International Business, Business diplomacy and fragile states

International Business as international political actors

MNEs, business diplomacy and tax avoidance schemes

International Business, business diplomacy and ethical dilemmas

EDITOR: Huub Ruël, Phd – Professor of International Business – Windesheim University of Applied Sciences (The Netherlands).

EDITORIAL TEAM: Raymond Saner (CSEND, Diplomacydialogue, University of Basl, Science Po (Paris)), Jan Melissen (Netherlands Institute for International Relations Clingendael, University of Antwerp), Shaun Riordan (Netherlands Institute for International Relations Clingendael), Donna Lee (University of Bradford), Doudou Sidibe (Novancia Business School, Paris), Jennifer Kestelyn (Ghent University).

SUBMISSIONS:

Submissions to this new book in the Emerald Advanced Series in Management are welcomed.

Submission deadline of draft chapters/extended chapter proposals: November 15th 2015

Acceptance notification: December 15th 2015

Full chapter submission: January 31th 2016

Authors must follow the author guidelines of the Emerald Advanced Series in Management.

Send submissions to: hjm.ruel@windesheim.nl or h.j.m.ruel@utwente.nl

Business groups are prevalent in both developed and emerging markets (Ghemawat & Khanna, 1998) and constitute the dominant organizational form in many emerging markets (Chung & Luo, 2008; Khanna & Rivkin, 2001). Scholars have utilized multiple theoretical perspectives, including institutional economics, sociology and resource-based view to define, characterize and comprehend business groups. Business groups play an important role in emerging markets by filling institutional voids and creating their own internal capital, labor and product markets (Khanna & Palepu, 2000a). There are important differences between group affiliated and unaffiliated firms in emerging economies, in terms of their underlying resource base and embeddedness in the institutional and social fabric of the local market. To add to this complexity, institutional environments in emerging economies are constantly evolving and thereby impacting strategy, particularly of organizations such as business groups that are highly embedded in the domestic context (Hoskisson, Eden, Lau, & Wright, 2000; Hoskisson, Wright, Filatotchev, & Peng, 2013). Internationalization of business group firms under such tumultuous conditions presents a rich context for advancing internationalization theory and, in particular, contributing to a better understanding of the strategic adaptation of emerging market firms.

The extant literature on business group has primarily focused on how groups as a whole and/or firms affiliated to groups perform in their home countries (e.g. Chacar & Vissa, 2005; Chang, Chung, & Mahmood, 2006; Douma, George, & Kabir, 2006; Khanna & Palepu, 2000a; 2000b; Khanna & Rivkin, 2001). There are only a few studies that have explored the impact that affiliation to a business group has on the degree of internationalization of the focal firm, and present inconclusive findings (e.g. Chang, 1995; Kim, Kim, & Hoskisson, 2010). Examining not only institutional differences but also factor market difference between home and host countries also seems to matter with regard to internationalization from emerging economies (Kim, Hoskisson, & Lee, 2014). In the wake of the recent widespread and accelerated internationalization of emerging market firms, including many that are affiliated to larger business groups, the internationalization of business group affiliated firms warrants a deeper and systematic investigation from a variety of theoretical and empirical approaches.

As emerging economies develop and become mid-range economies (Hoskisson, et al., 2013), how does this change the nature of business groups and their internationalization strategies. Do they restructure their portfolios as transaction cost theory would imply (Hoskisson, Johnson, Tihanyi, & White, 2005)? Do they substitute domestic product diversification for more internationalization (Meyer, 2006)? How are they structured and governed differently (Chittoor, Kale, Puranam, 2014) as the country settings change and as they pursue increased innovation and internationalization (Yiu, Hoskisson, Bruton, Lu, 2014)? How does government ownership influence their corporate and internationalization strategies (White, Hoskisson, Yiu, & Bruton, 2008)?

Many studies simply use dummies to distinguish group affiliates from independent firms. This approach assumes all affiliates benefit equally, which is questionable due to differences in value capture.  For example, research shows that affiliate firms differ in their ability to capture benefits from internationalization; in this study more powerful group firms benefit from internationalization compared to less powerful affiliates (Wan, Hoskisson, & Kim, 2004). However, we have limited understanding of differences in power and of value capture among affiliates because few scholars examine heterogeneity among group affiliates.

The special issue solicits scholarly contributions that provide a finer-grained analysis of the internationalization of business group affiliated firms from emerging markets, encapsulating the unique attributes of business groups as well as that of the institutional and cultural contexts where they prosper. The following is an illustrative list of questions:

1. How is the efficacy of business groups affected due to the rapidly changing institutional environment in EEs?
2. Business groups are social structures deeply embedded in the broader institutional environment of EEs. How does this embeddnesses affect the internationalization propensity of their affiliates?
3. What are the similarities and differences between business groups from different emerging economies as well as developed economies and how do these similarities/differences affect their internationalization behavior?
4. How are business groups organized and managed differently in different country institutional and factor market settings? What organizational transformation are business groups undergoing to respond to the changes in the external institutional environment?
5. What are the unique resources and capabilities of business groups? How do these capabilities help group affiliated firms in internationalization?
6. Are the advantages and/or disadvantages of affiliation to business group context-dependent?  How do individual business affiliate firms benefit more or less from group affiliation?
7. Do advantages and/or disadvantages transfer to foreign markets when EE firms internationalize their operations?
8. How do business groups extend their group like structure in foreign markets?
9. How does the presence of a business group in an industry affect the industry-wide innovation and internationalization?
10. How do the foreign market entry modes different between group affiliated and unaffiliated firms?

We encourage potential contributors to examine the internationalization of business groups from different theoretical perspectives and empirical approaches, including multi-level models and case studies.  Authors should not merely be testing the existing theories in the context of business groups, but make use of the novel context to develop new theories and explanations, and thereby enrich our understanding of firm internationalization behavior in general, and of business group internationalization behavior in particular.

Submission Process:

By March 1, 2015 all manuscripts should be submitted using the online submission system.  The link for submitting manuscript is: http://ees.elsevier.com/jwb.

To ensure that all manuscripts are correctly identified for consideration for this Special Issue, it is important that authors select 'SI: Business Groups' when they reach the "Article Type" step in the submission process.

We may organize a workshop designed to facilitate the development of papers.

Authors of manuscripts that have progressed through the revision process will be invited to it. Presentation at the workshop is neither a requirement for nor a promise of final acceptance of the paper in the Special Issue.

Questions about the special issue may be directed to any of the following guest editors:

Ajai Gaur, Rutgers University, USA ajai@business.rutgers.edu

Jane Lu, University of Melbourne, Australia jane.lu@unimelb.edu.au

Vikas Kumar, University of Sydney, Australia vikas.kumar@sydney.edu.au

Robert E. Hoskisson, Rice University robert.hoskisson@rice.edu

References

Chacar, A., & Vissa, B. (2005). Are emerging economies less efficient? Performance persistence and the impact of business group affiliation. Strategic Management Journal, 26(10): 933-946.

Chang, S.J. (1995). International expansion strategy of Japanese firms: capability building through sequential entry.  Academy of Management Journal, 38(2): 383-407.

Chang, S., Chung, C., & Mahmood, I.P. (2006). When and how does business group affiliation promote firm innovation? A tale of two emerging economies. Organization Science, 17(5): 637-656.

Chittoor, R., Kale, P., & Puranam, P. (2014). Business groups in developing capital markets:  Towards a complementarity perspective.  Strategic Management Journal, forthcoming.

Chung, C., & Luo, X. (2008). Human agents, contexts, and institutional change: the decline of family in the leadership of business groups. Organization Science, 19(1): 124-142.

Douma, S., George, R., & Kabir, R. (2006). Foreign and domestic ownership, business groups, and firm performance: evidence from a large emerging market. Strategic Management Journal, 27(7): 637-657.

Ghemawat, P., & Khanna, T. (1998). The nature of diversified business groups: a research design and two case studies.  Journal of Industrial Economics, 46(1): 35-61.

Hoskisson, R.E., Eden, L., Lau, C.-M., & Wright, M. 2000. Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 249-267.

Hoskisson, R. E., Johnson, R. A., Tihanyi, L. & White, R. E. (2005). Diversified business groups and corporate refocusing in emerging economies. Journal of Management, 31: 941-965.

Hoskisson, R.E., Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Peng, M. (2013). Emerging multinationals from mid-range economies: The influence of institutions and factor markets. Journal of Management Studies, 50(7): 1295-1321.

Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. (2000a). Is group affiliation profitable in emerging markets? An analysis of diversified Indian business groups. Journal of Finance, 55(2): 867-891.

Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. (2000b). The future of business groups in emerging markets: long-run evidence from Chile. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3): 268-285.

Khanna, T., & Rivkin, J.W. (2001). Estimating the performance effects of business groups in emerging markets. Strategic Management Journal, 22(1): 45-74.

Kim, H., Hoskisson, R.E., & Lee, S.-H. (2014). Why strategic factor markets matter: 'New' multinationals' geographic diversification and firm profitability. Strategic Management Journal, Forthcoming.

Kim, H., Kim, H., & Hoskisson, R.E. (2010). Does market-oriented institutional change in an emerging economy make business-group-affiliated multinationals perform better? An institution based view. Journal of International Business Studies, 41: 1141-1160.

Meyer, K.E. (2006). Globalfocusing: From domestic conglomerate to global specialist. Journal of Management Studies, 43(5): 1109-1144.

Kim, H., Hoskisson, R. E. & Wan, W. P. 2004. Power dependence, diversification strategy and performance in keiretsu member firms, Strategic Management Journal, 25: 613-636.

White, R. E., Hoskisson, R. E., Yiu, D. & Bruton, G. (2008). Employment and market innovation in Chinese business group-affiliated firms: The role of group control systems, Management and Organization Review, 4: 225-256.

Yiu, D. Hoskisson, R. E., Bruton, G. & Lu, Y. (2014). Dueling institutional logics and the effect on strategic entrepreneurship in Chinese business groups. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 8(3): 195-213.

During the past three decades, the world has witnessed China’s rise from an underdeveloped country to the third largest economic power. Business leaders have taken a crucial role in developing the firms during this period, which constitutes the most powerful driving force for the rapid growth of the Chinese economy. While business leaders have made significant contributions to China’s economic and societal development via their unprecedented achievements, scholars have not systematically examined their leadership practices and, thus, have not developed rigorous theories to explain these practices. Among the vast amounts of literature on leadership, very few are on business leadership in the Chinese context. Researchers, educators, and practitioners are all aware that the Western-based leadership theories are not completely sufficient to understand the rich and unique leadership phenomenon in the Chinese context. To fully understand the miracle of the Chinese economy, it is essential to identify the unique issues in business leadership in the Chinese context.

The purpose of this special issue is to examine leadership in organizations at different levels, in different domains, or from different perspectives aimed at offering valuable insights into the organizational leadership phenomenon in Greater China. We intend to advance leadership research in the Chinese context, to improve leadership practices, and to add novel knowledge to global leadership literature.

China’s distinctive political, social and cultural environments have been regarded as the major factors breeding the leadership styles in Chinese business organizations. In addition, the unique characteristics of Chinese firms, which have been evolving in a transitional era, also play a major role in shaping the special leadership patterns in Chinese organizations. In the early state, leaders had to make arduous efforts to build legitimacy and to protect themselves in various ways such as registering a private firm as a collective one or getting a ‘red hat’ by registering a firm as a subsidiary or supplemental unit of a State-Owned Enterprise. Some business leaders skillfully adapted themselves to the changing environments and led their companies successfully.

Starting from the late 1990s and, in particular, after China became a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Chinese government has opened its market to the outside world in almost all business sectors. In the domestic market, Chinese firms have to fiercely compete with strong foreign companies, many of which are multinational giants. Pessimists predicted that Chinese firms were not ready and would be overwhelmed by their international counterparts. However, many Chinese firms have not only survived, but also gained advantages in competing with foreign firms. Some Chinese firms have not only dominated the domestic market, but also started to share the international markets with multinational companies. While we can attribute the success of Chinese firms to different factors, we have no doubt that business leadership plays a crucial role in achieving such performance.

In this special issue, we seek manuscripts investigating leadership practices in Greater China and offering theories to understand these practices, which may present conceptualizations or/and findings that differ from, if not challenge, Western-imported theories. We expect this special issue to enrich our understanding of business leadership in the dynamic Chinese context by producing meaningful and valid knowledge. We highlight a Chinese perspective in examining business leadership in China. Broadly, any study that incorporates the Chinese context and offers conceptual and theoretical explanations on business leadership in the Chinese context is welcome. We invite submissions that either modify or extend the well-accepted leadership theories or develop innovative theories based on grounded/inductive approaches. We invite submissions that conduct rigorous research using either qualitative (case study, interview, grounded theory, or ethnographic methods, etc.) or quantitative approaches (survey, laboratory experiment, analyzing archival data, etc.). Purely conceptual papers are also welcome. You are encouraged to identify and choose meaningful and important problems based on your keen observation, your in-depth knowledge, or your astute analysis of business leadership and related phenomena in the Chinese context.

Submissions could address, but are not limited to, the following topics:

• The evolving pattern of leadership in Chinese business organizations;
• Business leadership in the transitional era in China;
• The characteristics of Chinese business leadership;
• Indigenous models of Chinese business leadership and their functioning mechanisms;
• Cultural and social antecedents of leadership;
• Economic and social consequences of Chinese business leadership;
• Implicit theories of Chinese leadership;
• Leader-member exchange (LMX) in Chinese societies;
• Business leadership and team dynamics;
• The nature of transformational leadership in Chinese organizations;
• Newly emerging leadership styles (e.g., authentic leadership, servant leadership, and ethical leadership, etc.) in the Chinese context;
• Multiple intelligences (e.g., emotional intelligence, cultural intelligence) and business leadership in Chinese societies
• Cross-cultural and comparative studies of business leadership
• The similarity and diversity of business leadership in different Chinese societies (including mainland China, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong )
• Cross-level business leadership.

World Scientific Publisher, Singapore

Editors:

Dr. Luis. Camacho, SUNY Empire State College, New York, USA

Dr. Satyendra Singh, University of Winnipeg, Canada

Deadline: Oct. 15, 2019

Developing countries and emerging markets have one of the fastest growth rates due to the advancement in technology, rise in global investments, and changes in consumer culture. Therefore, the knowledge translations and technology transfers from advanced countries to emerging markets and vice-versa are of essence. The advanced countries need access to the markets of emerging markets, and the emerging markets need the technology and investments, among others, from advanced countries. It is a win-win situation. In this context, the Academy of Business and Emerging Markets (ABEM) Conference in association with the World Scientific Publisherinvites book chapters that are based on thought-provoking topics yet theoretically sound and empirically testable. Controversial or debatable topics in the context of Business, Government and Community in emerging markets are particularly invited for the edited book entitled Business Practices, Growth and Economic Policies in Emerging Markets. Case studies are not suitable for this book.

Publication Schedule

Chapters due: Oct. 15, 2019

Reviewers’ comments: Dec 30, 2019

Revised chapters due: Mar 30, 2020

Camera-ready copy: June 30, 2020

Submissions

Initial submissions should be sent in Word document using Times New Roman Font Size 12, 1″ margin and double-spaced, and must include: (1) Cover page with title of the study, five keywords, author name(s), title, affiliation, full address, contact no and e-mail; and, (2) First page with the title, an abstract between 150-200 words, followed by body of the paper between 5,000 and 6,000 words including Tables (3 max), Figures (2 max) and References (APA style). No appendices. Please avoid footnotes.

Submissions should be sent to Dr. Luis Camacho (luis.camacho@esc.edu) and Dr. Satyendra Singh (s.singh@uwinnipeg.ca)

You may forward any inquiries to Dr. Luis Camacho (luis.camacho@esc.edu )

Developing countries and emerging markets have one of the fastest growth rates due to the advancement in technology, rise in global investments, and changes in consumer culture. Therefore, the knowledge translations and technology transfers from advanced countries to emerging markets and vice-versa are of essence. The advanced countries need access to the markets of emerging markets, and the emerging markets need the technology and investments, among others, from advanced countries. It is a win-win situation. In this context, the Academy of Business and Emerging Markets (ABEM) Conference in association with World Scientific Publisher invites book chapters that are based on thought-provoking topics yet theoretically sound and empirically testable. Controversial or debatable topics in the context of Business, Government and Community in emerging markets are particularly invited for the edited book entitled Business Practices, Growth and Economic Policies in Emerging Markets. Case studies are not suitable for this book.

Publication Schedule

Chapters due: Sept 30, 2019

Reviewers’ comments: Dec 30, 2019

Revised chapters due: Mar 30, 2020

Camera-ready copy: June 30, 2020

Submissions

Initial submissions should be sent in Word document using Times New Roman Font Size 12, 1″ margin and double-spaced, and must include: (1) Cover page with title of the study, five keywords, author name(s), title, affiliation, full address, contact no and e-mail; and, (2) First page with the title, an abstract between 150-200 words, followed by body of the paper between 5,000 and 6,000 words including Tables (3 max), Figures (2 max) and References (APA style). No appendices. Please avoid footnotes.

Submissions should be sent to Dr. Luis Camacho (luis.camacho@esc.edu) and Dr. Satyendra Singh (s.singh@uwinnipeg.ca)

You may forward any inquiries to Dr. Luis Camacho (luis.camacho@esc.edu )

This special issue of Business and Society aims to contribute to the development of theoretical and empirical insights on the role of business in African countries, in the context of the important environmental, social and governance challenges faced by the Continent. The need for knowledge to help further sustainable development, in an equitable and accountable way, makes a better understanding of business in Africa particularly urgent, especially considering the relative lack of research published on these themes in management and organization journals. To address the specific situation in African countries, existing theories and frameworks may need to be extended, adjusted or replaced by approaches that could have implications beyond the continent. Conversely, current paradigms may be directly applicable to the African context as such, but data limitations may require methodological adaptations.

While environmental and social issues exist across the globe, leading to a thriving literature on a range of topics, Africa seems to accumulate both major environmental problems and social problems. Environmental problems include, among others, the effects of global warming and climate variability, pollution, the loss of biodiversity, deforestation and desertification, which affect the availability of land and food. Compounding environmental issues, social problems are also prevalent throughout the African continent. The World Bank’s ranked 26 African countries among the 30 poorest countries in the world in GDP (PPP) in 2009 and the UN’s Economic Commission for Africa shows at best mixed results in the progress towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals by 2015, sharply contrasting with other continents, such as Asia or Latin America. Poverty, human rights violations, health problems and lack of social security are coupled with often weak governance, corruption and conflict. While the number of wars across the continent has decreased since the 1990s, some countries still face conflict or continue to show worrying signs of political instability. At the same time, African countries exhibit strong and resilient economic growth in spite of the global economic crisis, with a continent-wide forecasted growth of 5.3% for 2011, according to the International Monetary Fund, and huge potential and promising economic developments have been noted.

Yet, in spite of the scale and importance of the environmental and social issues in Africa, and in spite of the sustained economic growth that the continent has experienced for a decade, very few published papers in mainstream management journals use African data. A literature search for published papers on Africa in leading management journals yielded a total of twenty-seven published papers, of which only seven were published in the last decade. Among African countries, South Africa in particular, and to a lesser extent Nigeria, receives attention. This same pattern is found for more specific outlets on corporate social responsibility, sustainability and business ethics, in which South Africa is also a main focus, followed by Nigeria (Kolk & Lenfant, 2010; Visser, 2006). In international business and management, overview articles on the “state of the art” in corporate (social) responsibility and sustainable development showed a serious lack of attention for Africa as well (Egri & Ralston, 2008; Kolk & Van Tulder, 2010). Egri and Ralston (2008, p. 325) noted that “it is particularly troubling that there has been relatively little on-the-ground corporate responsibility research in countries where the need for corporate responsibility is most pressing due to greater poverty, environmental degradation, and institutional governance issues”. Remarkably, even in research on the base/bottom of the pyramid most of the cases and examples stem from India and other emerging economies, leaving the African relatively understudied, as shown in a recent article on a decade of BOP article (Kolk, Rivera-Santos, & Rufín, forthcoming).

We believe that this dearth of studies uncovers two distinct issues. First, while emerging countries such as China or India have recently become relatively common empirical settings in management studies, Africa may simply not always be on the radar as a place to conduct research. Second, conducting research in Africa creates specific challenges, which stem directly from the social, environmental and governance problems mentioned above, coupled with complexities related to linguistic, security, cultural and/or political issues. This particularly affects the possibility to collect empirical data in the absence of large-scale databases. While scholars start to better recognize the implications of conducting research in nontraditional contexts (Kriauciunas et al., 2011), the challenges associated with data collection in contexts characterized by high levels of poverty, conflict and poor governance may seem daunting to many researchers.

With a goal of putting Africa on the scholarly map, this special issue aims to publish papers on business, society and environment in the African context. We welcome innovative papers, both conceptual and empirical, both qualitative and quantitative, with a focus on or data from the African continent. The possible topic list covers the whole range of environmental, social and governance issues mentioned above. The special issue is open to papers from different theoretical backgrounds and academic disciplines as long as it relates to the business and society domain in line with the overall focus of the journal.

Submission guidelines

All paper submissions should conform to Business & Society’s standard guidelines for authors, details of which can be found at the B&S website: http://bas.sagepub.com

Questions about the special issue can be directed at the guest editors via e-mail:

akolk@uva.nl (Ans Kolk) or mrivera@babson.edu (Miguel Rivera-Santos)

Deadline: Manuscripts must be received by 1 December 2013, and should be sent to mrivera@babson.edu.

References

Egri, C. P., & Ralston, D. A. (2008). Corporate responsibility: A review of international management research from 1998 to 2007. Journal of International Management, 14, 319-339.

Kolk, A., & Lenfant, F. (2010). MNC reporting on CSR and conflict in Central Africa. Journal of Business Ethics, 93, 241-255.

Kolk, A., Rivera-Santos, M., & C. Rufín (Forthcoming). Reviewing a decade of research on the “Base/Bottom of the Pyramid” concept. Business & Society.

Kolk, A., & Van Tulder, R. (2010). International business, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. International Business Review, 19(2), 119-125.

Kriauciunas, A., Parmigiani, A., & Rivera-Santos, M. (2011). Leaving our comfort zone: Integrating established practices with unique adaptations to conduct survey-based strategy research in non-traditional contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 32, 994-1010.

Visser, W. (2006). Research on corporate citizenship in Africa: A ten-year review (1995-2005). In W. Visser, M. McIntosh and C. Middleton (Eds.), Corporate citizenship in Africa: Lessons from the past; paths to the future. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

Introduction: Increasing importance of India in the global economy

India, considered to be an emerging market, is also a prominent BRIC country (Brazil, Russia, India and China), and fast becoming the hub of global economy today. Matloff (2004) cites a Gartner study according to which, 25 percent of all U.S. IT jobs will be offshored by 2010, from 5 percent today. It is likely that most of these offshored jobs will land up in India. Some industry pundits predict that like the Japanese ziabatsu, and the South Korean chaebols, India too may have its share of successful giants that accelerate her economic growth. Sheth and Sisodia (2006) in their path-breaking book, Tectonic Shift: The Geoeconomic Realignment of Globalizing Markets foresee the world to get fragmented into three main regional trading blocks: the European/African bloc, the Asian Bloc with China and Japan as its center, and the US/North American bloc with US and India as allies.

Learning from innovative Indian business-to-business market management practices

In such a business environment, new and innovative business marketing practices are required. One of the most successful examples of innovative business marketing practices is that of India’s largest private sector steel manufacturer, Tata Steel, which was the first company to go for intermediate branding, and a co-branding with its suppliers. Tata Steel, using such innovative marketing processes, has decommoditized steel in India. Similarly, Tata Steel’s joint venture with India’s largest public sector steel giant, Steel authority of India (SAIL) has launched an e-sourcing initiative called www.metaljunction.com which is the largest B2B e-commerce platform in India. This joint venture also started an e-selling initiative that facilitated dis-intermediation, collecting statutory sales tax documents and receivables from buyers, and on its way to become a full-fledged KPO outfit, providing complete order generation and fulfillment services for the sales chain.

The promise of the India-focused special issue of JBIM

New B2B marketing practices should engender new B2B marketing theories, which while originating from Indian practice and context, are expected to have wider applicability and relevance. Most B2B Marketing literature presents theories and models that are grounded in B2B marketing practices in developed countries, which are characterized by mature markets. Very little research has been carried out on the issues and challenges facing B2B marketers in different sectors in India. Many sectors are growing rapidly, taking up important positions in the global context as well.
This special India-focused issue of JBIM seeks to focus on intriguing practices and resulting theory relating to the B2B Marketing and Sales in some of the key industries in India.

Indicative coverage of the India-focused special issue of JBIM

Contributions to this special issue should fulfill one or more of the following conditions:

* Papers could be from both academics and practitioners in B2B Marketing & Sales
* Papers that take an interdisciplinary perspective in understanding B2B Marketing & Sales in India
* Papers presenting new theories or research about B2B Marketing and Sales practice in the Indian context
* Papers covering any type of research paradigm including case studies, qualitative and quantitative analysis, conceptual and empirical research
* Papers presenting rigorously validated qualitative studies that build new theories or provide a “really fresh perspective” in B2B Marketing and Sales that are relevant for India
* Papers presenting case studies of not so celebrated firms in India, that showcase innovative Marketing & Sales practices

Papers that will not be appropriate for the special issue are:

* Papers that are mere replication studies and/or based on validating extant theories in the Indian context.
* Teaching cases.

Indicative list of topics for developing the papers

An indicative, though not exhaustive, list of suggested topics that would be suitable for this special issue would include:

* Understanding and managing value in the B2B context in India
* Managing Buyer-Seller relationships in the Indian market
* Driving efficiency and effectiveness in B2B selling processes in India
* Customer-centricity in B2B marketing processes in India
* Role of buying centers in Indian B2B firms
* Intermediate branding in India
* Pricing Issues in B2B buyer-seller relationships
* Role of supply-chain and logistics in B2B marketing in India
* Outsourcing/offshoring to India
* Co-creation of value with B2B customers in India
* Innovation and new product development for B2B customers in India
* Segmentation practices in Indian B2B markets
* Sales-Marketing interface issues in industrial firms
* Market orientation of B2B firms in India
* Ethics in B2B marketing and sales
* Green marketing of B2B products and services
* Influence of culture on B2B marketing
* Tendering and purchasing processes in India
* Online B2B marketing practices and innovations

Additional dimensions that the paper should address

All contributions should have the following sections, in addition to the specific
content of the paper:

1. A section highlighting managerial implications, based on results from the application of the theories being presented.

2. For the key ideas presented, a section explaining the relevance/applicability to a broader audience of practitioners/academics in other parts of the world.

Process for the submission of papers:

Papers submitted must not have been published, accepted for publication, or presently be under consideration for publication with any other journal. Submissions should be approximately 6,000-8,000 words in length. Submissions to the Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing must be made using the Scholar One Manuscript Central system. For more details, please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/jbim.htm and consult the author guidelines.

A separate title page must be uploaded containing the title, author/s, and contact information for the author(s). Suitable articles will be subjected to a double-blind review. Hence authors should not identify themselves in the body of the paper.

Deadlines for various stages of processing the papers are:

Submission of first draft of paper: 31 December 2009.
First review results: 31 March 2010.
Submission of revised manuscripts (as applicable): 31 May 2010.
Second review results (as applicable): 31 July 2010.
Submission of accepted manuscripts in final form: 31 August 2010.
Special issue expected: late 2010 or early 2011.

Please address all communication to the special issue Guest Editors:

D.V.R. Seshadri, Visiting Faculty – Marketing Area, Indian Institute of Management
Bangalore, Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore 560076, India
E-mail: dvrs@iimb.ernet.in

Or

Ramendra Singh, Doctoral Candidate (Marketing), Indian Institute of Management
Ahmedabad, IIM Ahmedabad, Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380015, India
E-mail: ramendras@iimahd.ernet.in

References

Matloff, N. (2004), “Globalization and the American IT Worker,” Communications of the ACM, 47(11), 27-29.

Sheth, Jagdish N., and Rajendra S.Sisodia (2006), Tectonic Shift: The Geoeconomic Realignment of Globalizing Markets, Response Books; Sage Publications, New Delhi.

Anthem Business & Management is a new series from Anthem Press that will publish
research monographs, reference books and upper-level textbooks for professionals, academics and students in these fields. Volumes in the series will be written by subject experts and may cover developments in all areas of business and management practices.

The series will also include authoritative, timely and accurate information on critical
developments in the world’s capital markets in areas such as hedge funds, regulation
and strategy, and practitioners’ guides in the financial services industry. We welcome
the opportunity to pursue co-publishing ventures with institutions and organizations
connected engaged with all areas of business, management and finance.

We welcome submissions of proposals that meet the criteria of this series. Should you
wish to send in a proposal for a research monograph, reference books upper-level textbook or handbook please contact us at: proposal@wpcpress.com. We also welcomeapplications for membership of our editorial board in this series, which should be addressed to the series editor.

Anthem Press is a distinguished independent international publishing house pioneering a
distinctive approach to the publishing of serious works across a wide range of subjects that appeal to academics, area specialists, students and researchers, professionals as well as to general readers.

Please send proposals to Kim Cahill, Managing Editor (kimberly.cahill@villanova.edu)

The Journal of World Business has a long tradition of publishing high impact special issues on emerging or provocative topics within the editorial purview of the journal. The objective of these special issues is to assemble a coherent set of articles that move understanding of a topic forward empirically and theoretically. Therefore, as a rule, Journal of World Business (JWB) will not publish special issues based solely on conferences. Rather, special issues must be motivated by a clear and compelling focus on an issue that is timely, significant and likely to generate interest among the readership of JWB.

PROCESS

Prospective guest editor(s) should submit written proposals that incorporate the rationale for the special issue topic, positions it in the literature, and include some illustrative topics that papers could focus upon. Prospective guest editor(s) should consult JWB's Aims and Scope to ensure the proposal fits within the journal's remit. The proposal should also include a draft of the actual call for papers and outline the credentials of the guest editor(s).

http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-world-business/

After the closing date, the JWB editorial team will review the proposals submitted and select one to three for further assessment. This additional analysis may include communication with prospective guest editors, suggestions as to how to strengthen the proposal and/or recommendations for the addition of other guest editors. Following this consultation, one proposal will generally be selected by the Editor in Chief to progress, although the guest editor(s) may still be asked to develop and refine the proposal further. The Editor-in-Chief will generally assign a JWB Senior Editor to serve on the SI editorial team as the Supervising Editor. The Supervising Editor will be responsible for acting as a liaison between the JWB editorial team and the guest editor(s) and ensuring that JWB editorial standards are maintained through the special issue process. She/he will be actively involved in the entire editorial process, including helping to select which papers are sent for review, identifying and assigning reviewers and in preliminary decisions throughout the review process. However, the ultimate decision to accept or reject papers rests with the Editor in Chief.

GUEST EDITOR(S)’ ROLE

The guest editor(s) will be responsible for publicizing the call for papers and for generating submissions for the special issue. If appropriate, they may host a workshop for papers being considered for the special issue but attendance at the workshop cannot be a prerequisite for the acceptance of papers. They will also be actively involved in all stages of the review process in terms of inviting reviewers and making preliminary decisions on submissions. The review process will be managed online through the EES system. It is also expected that the guest editors will write an introductory article that will position the special issue in the relevant literature and briefly introduce the papers in the issue. This article will be subject to editorial review. In order to prevent any perception of conflicts of interest, it is JWB policy that guest editors cannot submit to the special issue as authors of papers beyond the introductory article.

The Journal of World Business (JWB) invites proposals for special issues with a due date of July 15, 2015.

JWB has a long tradition of publishing high impact special issues on emerging or provocative topics within the editorial purview of the journal. The objective of these special issues is to assemble a coherent set of papers that move understanding of a topic forward empirically and theoretically. Therefore, as a rule, JWB will not publish special issues based solely on papers presented at conferences or workshops. Rather, special issues must be motivated by a clear and compelling focus on an issue that is timely, significant and likely to generate interest among JWB's readership.

PROCESS

Prospective guest editor(s) should submit written proposals that incorporate the rationale for the special issue topic, positions it in the literature, and include some illustrative topics that papers could focus upon. The proposal should also include a draft of the actual call for papers and outline the credentials of the guest editor(s).

After the closing date, the JWB editorial team will review the proposals submitted and select one to three for further assessment. This additional analysis may include communication with prospective guest editors, suggestions as to how to strengthen the proposal and/or recommendations for the addition of other guest editors. Following this consultation, one proposal will generally be selected by the Editor in Chief to progress, although the guest editor(s) may still be asked to develop and refine the proposal further. The Editor-in-Chief will generally assign a JWB Senior Editor to serve on the SI editorial team as the Supervising Editor. The Supervising Editor will be responsible for acting as a liaison between the JWB editorial team and the guest editor(s) and ensuring that JWB editorial standards are maintained through the special issue process. She/he will be actively involved in the entire editorial process, including helping to select which papers are sent for review, identifying and assigning reviewers and in preliminary decisions throughout the review process. However, the ultimate decision to accept or reject papers rests with the Editor in Chief.

GUEST EDITOR(S)’ ROLE

The guest editor(s) will be responsible for publicizing the call for papers and for generating submissions for the special issue. If appropriate, they may host a workshop for papers being considered for the special issue but attendance at the workshop cannot be a prerequisite for the acceptance of papers. They will also be actively involved in all stages of the review process in terms of inviting reviewers and making preliminary decisions on submissions. The review process will be managed online through the EES system. It is also expected that the guest editors will write an introductory article that will position the special issue in the relevant literature and briefly introduce the papers in the issue. This paper will be subject to editorial review. In order to prevent any perception of conflicts of interest, it is JWB policy that Guest Editors cannot submit to the special issue as authors of papers beyond the introductory article.

Please send proposals to : Kim Cahill, Managing Editor (kimberly.cahill@villanova.edu)

The Editorial Board of the Elite Hall Publishing House is calling for papers to be considered for publication in the upcoming issues of the three journals:

1. International Journal of Information, Business and Management (IJIBM)
2. International Journal of Advanced Engineering and Science (IJAES)
3. International Journal of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Research (JMIER)

We welcome papers and articles of analytic or empirical merit (up to 20 pages in length) in English. All our submitted papers are treated in an anonymous way between author(s) and referees (double blind) and articles are evaluated anonymously by two reviewers. We highly encourage doctoral students to submit excerpts of their dissertations or working papers relevant to entrepreneurship research for consideration. We don't charge any publication fee. So, it is free to publish your papers in the International Journal of Information, Business and Management (IJIBM), International Journal of Advanced Engineering and Science (IJAES) and International Journal of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Research (JMIER).

For more information, visit the official website of the journals: http://elitehall.elitehall.com/ With thanks, Josephine Roy Publishing Manager, Elite Hall Publishing House, Taiwan International Journal of Information, Business and Management http://ijibm.elitehall.com/ International Journal of Advanced Engineering and Science http://ijaes.elitehall.com/ Journal of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Research http://jmier.elitehall.com/

Guest Editors:

Piotr Trąpczyński (Poznan University of Economics and Business)

Łukasz Puślecki (Poznan University of Economics and Business)

Andreja Jaklič (University of Ljubljana)

Since the early 1990s, the region of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) has attracted the interest of scholars because of its transition from a planned economy to a market economy.Both the different paths, and also the divergent outcomes of institutional reforms and frameworks constituted interesting areas of investigation (Meyer& Peng, 2005; Jaklič et at., 2020a). Attracting FDI, along with new technology and skills,creating indigenous MNEs, and changing business environment was essential for transformation.

One of the main interests of scholars and practitioners alike has been the development of effective market entry strategies for this turbulent and heterogeneous region.Many multinational enterprises (MNEs) entered CEE by acquiring local firms, usually lacking essential resources and management experience in competitive markets (Meyer & Estrin, 2001; Uhlenbruck & De Castro, 2000), and need to develop a comprehensive strategy to improve the competitiveness of these acquired subsidiaries (Uhlenbruck, 2004). The initial focus of foreign direct investment (FDI) on access to cheaper resources and sales markets gradually shifted to other, moreupstream areas of activity (Pavlínek, Domański & Guzik, 2009). This functional upgrading was preceded by spillover effects from cooperation with Western partners (Prokop et al., 2021).The increased integration of foreign subsidiaries and the creation of local entrepreneurial ecosystems simultaneously encouraged domestic companies to engage in more outward internationalization(Jaklič et at., 2020a; Trąpczyński & Banalieva, 2016). Comparatively weak institutional support and inadequate innovation capacity have long been among the barriers to international competitiveness for companies from CEE. Nevertheless, many have achieved leapfrogging internationalization and solid performance in international markets (Mair & Schoen, 2007; Caputo et al., 2016; Ipsmiller & Dikova, 2021). The establishment of domestic multinationals is based on innovative business models in their respective market segments (Suurna, 2011; Stocker, 2016), collaboration with foreign partners, and the use of complex internationalization strategies (Dikova et al. 2016, Jaklič & Burger, 2020). It has been argued that this increased focus on innovation is increasingly important given the challenge of the middleincome trap also facing CEE economies (Myant, 2018).

In the third decade since institutional change began in the region, there has been a new trend toward nearshoring and reshoring of activities from more distant Asian locations, driven by trends such as digitalization (Fel & Griette, 2017; Butollo, 2021), but also risks due to recurring crises.Continuous disruptions intensified value chain reconfiguration and innovation activity, thus forcing a new transition to digital and more sustainable business models. Firms from CEE economies (traditionally strongly affected by local and global shocks and conflicts) keep integration into GVC as development priority. Thestructure of GVC and functional specialization in CEE is heterogeneous and different from Western Europe (Jaklič et al, 2020b), the main business partner of CEE.For instance, Poland and Slovakia tend to focus on lower value-added fabrication processes, theBaltic countries and Slovenia specialize in management services, Hungary and Latvia gain inmarketing services, while the Czech Republic and Slovenia are concentrated on R&D activities (Kordalska & Olczyk, 2021).

Companies operating in a competitive global environment, where the risk and complexity of product development are increasing and the need for even more innovative services and products is growing, are seeking to expand collaboration through partnerships, especially in recent decades (Trąpczyński et al., 2018). As a result, we can observe the development of advanced and complex alliances between companies. The need to collaborate on innovative projects has led companies to use modern partnership models, including those based on the principles of open innovation (Chesbrough & Bogers, 2014). Research on open innovation shows how organizations manage both the inflow and outflow of knowledge and how they seek and select partners, and the innovations they offer (Chesbrough, 2020; West & Bogers, 2014). The propensity for open innovation and, more generally, the development of innovation collaborations are far less documented in CEE than in Western markets (Dziurski & Sopińska, 2020; Gołębiowski & Lewandowska, 2015; Jaklič et al, 2014; Lewandowska, 2015; Lewandowska et al, 2016; Pustovrh et al, 2017; Puślecki et al., 2021 a,b, 2022; Rangus et al, 2017). It is worthwhile (both from an academic and business perspective) to explore this area of research, especially in turbulent times, and to monitor the shift from an efficiency-driven economic model to a knowledge-based economy (CEE) that leverages the local and domestic innovation potential of all partners involved in innovation collaboration.

The changes mentioned above received new dynamics in the context of the rising wave of skepticism towards international business and recurring crises, whereby a smaller number of firm and MNE location and control configurations emerges, and domestic firms become more dominant (Buckley & Hashai, 2020). The COVID-19 pandemic has acted as a catalyst to the already ongoing processes of questioning the existing GVC configurations (Hayakawa & Mukunoki, 2021), while the war in Ukraine further aggravated the challenges to GVC.

In light of the said new wave of transition in the CEE region, a number of research topics emerge, which the following special issue of the Journal of East European Management Studies seeks to address. The range of areas for inquiry includes, but is not limited to, inter alia the following aspects:

• The emerging sectoral and geographic patterns of foreign direct investment (FDI) in CEE, with particular for reshoring and re-configuration of GVCs
• The sectoral and geographic patterns of innovation cooperation in CEE
• The development of new modes of innovation cooperation in CEE taking into account multidisciplinary perspective, R&D innovation ecosystems and open innovation paradigm
• The R&D alliance and alliance portfolio management in CEE – towards increased fragmentation and complexity
• Open innovation in CEE
• The role of location, experience, knowledgeand partner selection in innovation cooperation in CEE
• The development of organizational modes of R&D alliances in CEE – a shift to contractual and non-equity agreements
• The determinants of innovation cooperation in CEE; business-academia innovation cooperation (performance)in CEE • Business model innovations of CEE firms and their role on firm internationalization
• The strategic logic behind diverse patterns the international expansion of CEE firms
• The competitive strategy of CEE firms in different locations and sources of competitive advantage
• Strategies of CEE firms in coping with ongoing economic crises and the effects thereof on their international competitiveness

With the special issue we seek to reflect upon the most recent changes in CEE with regard to its role for international business, take stock of extant developments and provide an outlook for an emerging research agenda.

Submission process and important dates:

• Deadline for full paper submissions: 28/02/2023
• 1 st Double-blind review round completed: 31/05/2023 
• Deadline for submission of revised versions: 31/08/2023
• 2 nd Double-blind review round completed: 15/10/2023
• Final decision: 31/10/2023
• Publication of the SI: until 15/12/2023

To be considered for this Special Issue, full papers must be submitted no later than, 28/02/2023 to Piotr Trąpczyński (piotr.trapczynski@ue.poznan.pl).

Submitted papers will undergo a double-blind peer review process and will be evaluated by at least two anonymous reviewers. Final acceptance is dependent on the reviewers’ judgment regarding:

1. Topic fit: does the submission contribute to the special issue topic?
2. Theoretical contribution: Does the submission offer novel insights or extend existing considerations?
3. When applicable: Empirical contribution: Are the study design, data analysis, and results rigorous and suit the research questions? Do empirical findings offer innovative insights?

All submissions should be prepared for blind review according to the JEEMS author guidelines (https://www.jeems.nomos.de/fileadmin/jeems/doc/Authors_Guidelines.pdf). Informal enquiries regarding the Special Issue (topics, potential fit etc.) are welcome and can be directed to guest editors:

Piotr Trąpczyński (piotr.trapczynski@ue.poznan.pl)

Łukasz Puślecki (lukasz.puslecki@ue.poznan.pl)

Andreja Jaklič (andreja.jaklic@fdv.uni-lj.si)

China has experienced an incredible rate of growth in GDP in recent decades. Looking forward whether China’s economy will continue to remain stable and grow is of significant interest not only to China but also to the rest of the world. One significant challenge to the economic growth is China’s nascent financial markets. Recognizing the importance of a better financial system for more broad economic growth, the Chinese government has implemented a number of reforms in the financial markets. Moreover, the financial system itself constituents the major risks that the Chinese economy faces.

This special issue aims to invite scholarly writings that touch on any aspect of the challenges that relate to the reforms and risks in the financial markets and offer solutions as well as discuss the opportunities that could arise from such solutions. Papers in all areas of finance related to China are welcome, especially those on current issues such as shadow banking, internet finance, exchange rate reform, and local government debt, among others. The special issue will be guest-edited by Xiaoya Ding (University of San Francisco, USA), Chen Liu (Trinity Western University, Canada), and Ligang Zhong (University of Windsor, Canada).

PAPER SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS:

1. All submissions will be handled electronically. Those interested in submitting their work to this special issue should e-mail their papers to Ligang Zhong (lzhong@uwindsor.ca).
2. Papers should be written in English and should contain original material that have not been previously published or currently submitted elsewhere.
3. Papers should be double-spaced and limited to between 7000-10,000 words including references. All submitted papers will go through the standard double-blind reviewing process so be sure to include an additional page with the title and abstract but without the names of the authors.
4. Final editorial decisions shall be sent to authors within two months and authors of accepted papers will be required to follow the formatting instructions and complete a “Consent to Publish” form.
5. Please e-mail all queries to Ligang Zhong (lzhong@uwindsor.ca).

The bimonthly journal, Chinese Economy, published by Taylor and Francis Group, offers an objective and analytical account of economic issues concerning China. The journal publishes original works written by scholars from all over the world on recent changes to the Chinese economy. The Chinese Economy focuses on China’s current economic development as well as issues pertaining to the country’s trade, banking, and finances. Policy and research papers addressing macroeconomic and firm-level analysis are particularly welcome. Scholars and policy-makers will find The Chinese Economy informative as it provides relevant and rigorous analysis by experts on China.

The articles in this journal are listed in the Contents of Recent Economic Journals (COREJ) and the Journal of Economic Literature, and indexed in the Bibliography of Asian Studies Online, Econlit, e-JEL, and JEL on CD, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, International Bibliography of Periodical Literature on the Humanities and Social Sciences (IBZ), Emerging Sources Citation Index(ESCI), PAIS International, ProQuest Database, RePEc, and Scopus. Chinese Economy is ranked as B in the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) Journal Quality List.

Guest Editors:

Prof. Tamar Almor

College of Management, Academic Studies, Israel, talmor@colman.ac.il

Dr. Shlomo Y. Tarba

The University of Sheffield, UK, s.tarba@sheffield.ac.uk

 Background and Rationale for the Special Issue

Rapidly internationalizing, entrepreneurial companies seem to emerge more frequently in small countries with advanced economies, such as Israel, than in larger economies such as the U.S. (Efrat and Shoham, 2012; Freeman and Cavusgil, 2007; Gabrielsson and Kirpalani, 2004), and are often referred to in literature as “born-global” companies (Hashai 2011; Hewerdine and Welch, 2013; Melen and Rovira Nordman, 2009; Vasilchenko and Morrish, 2011). Born-global companies are characterized as having the ability to create innovative, self-developed, technology-based products that are sold internationally from the start of their existence (Rovira Nordman and Melen, 2008). Born-global companies are defined as business organizations that from the time of their founding or shortly thereafter seek superior international business performance, by creating knowledge-based resources and capabilities in which form the basis for sales in various countries (Almor, 2013; Gabrielsson and Kirpalani, 2004). While most research on this topic has focused on developed economies (Almor, 2011; Almor and Hashai, 2004; Efrat and Shoham, 2011; Hewerdine and Welch, 2013; Uner, Kocak, Cavusgil, and Cavusgil, 2013), case studies and incidental reporting seems to indicate that such companies can be found, with increasing frequency, in developing economies as well. However, to date, few empirical studies have been published on this topic.

Most empirical studies on born-global companies examine firms that exist for less than a decade. Moreover, the afore-mentioned studies deal primarily with issues of the initial survival and growth of these companies (Hashai and Almor 2004). Incidental case studies published in newspapers, however, have suggested that at least part of these entrepreneurial knowledge-intensive companies have now been in existence for about two decades, are maturing, and have been facing issues that differ from those encountered by the young firms. Furthermore, the maturing process of born-global companies seems to be a relatively new phenomenon that has not yet been researched to date, and therefore few questions have been raised regarding their maturation process (Glaister, Liu, Sahadev, and Gomes, 2014; Trudgen and Freeman, 2014). As a result, relatively little data exist about maturing born-global companies, whether or not they have survived as independent companies, and what international strategies they use to remain competitive (Almor, 2013; Almor, Tarba, Margalit, 2014) . Although there are many examples of born-global, technology-based companies that have been acquired by larger technology-based firms and have been merged into the larger businesses (e.g., Gomes, Weber, Brown, and Tarba, 2011; Weber and Tarba, 2011; Weber, Tarba, and Oberg, 2014), there are relatively few that have survived as independent entities and so far little research has addressed the topic of independent survival, the strategies employed to do so and the effect of culture, the management team as well as other factors, on the independent survival.

Despite the fact that about two decades of research exists regarding high-tech, born-global companies and international new ventures (INVs), many research gaps remain. The purpose of this special issue is to examine these gaps by addressing issues such as born global companies originating from developing countries, the relationships between collaborative agreements and survival of such companies, the effect of senior management and culture on survival and more, as explained below.

Topics for the special issue:

The goal of this special issue is to stimulate scholars to focus (i) on the challenges and strategies of small, international high-tech companies in the global environment at individual, group, and firm level as well as (ii) on the role of location (eg. quality of business location, impact of presence of clusters, etc.) of the home and/or of the host countries on the international high-tech companies competitiveness.

We encourage review, conceptual, and empirical contributions that may address, but are not limited to, the following topics:

The contributions may address, but are not limited to, the following topics:

1. What are the antecedents, moderators/mediators, and outcomes of competitive and/or growth strategies pursued by small, international high-tech companies in developed and/or emerging economies?
2. How does the macro-environmental and micro-environmental (industry) context in developed and/or emerging economies influence success/failure of collaborative partnerships (alliances, joint ventures, and M&A) established by small, international high-tech companies?
3. How do clusters impact on the ability of born-global firms to emerge, to invest in specific location abroad and to perform in international markets?
4. What is the impact of senior management on success/failure of collaborative partnerships (alliances, joint ventures, and M&A) established by small, international high-tech companies in developed and/or emerging economies?
5. What skills, competencies, and behaviours the incumbent managers and employees need to learn and practice in order to enable small, international high-tech companies' success in developed and/or emerging economies?
6. What is the impact of strategic agility and organizational ambidexterity on success/failure of small, international high-tech companies in developed and/or emerging economies?
7. What are the social, economic and environmental implications of innovation management (product vs. process innovation) in small, international high-tech companies' success in developed and/or emerging economies?
8. What are the value-creating and value-capturing factors in small, international high-tech companies in developed and/or emerging economies?
9. What is the impact of emotions and resilience on success/failure of small, international high-tech companies in developed and/or emerging economies?
10. What is the influence of national cultural distance and corporate (organizational) differences on success/failure of small, international high-tech companies in developed and/or emerging economies?
11. What is the impact of venture capital funds on success/failure of small, international high-tech companies in developed and/or emerging economies?
12. What is the effect of collaborative agreements between governmental and industry bodies and academics institutions on success/failure of small, international high-tech companies in developed and/or emerging economies?

References:

Almor, T. (2011). Dancing as fast as they can: Israeli high-tech firms and the great recession of 2008. Thunderbird International Business Review, 53, 109-276.

Almor, T. (2013). Conceptualizing paths of growth for the technology-based, born-global firm originating in a small population, advanced economy. International Studies of Management & Organization, 43(2), 56-78.

Almor, T., & Hashai, N. (2004). Competitive advantage and strategic configuration of knowledge-intensive small and medium sized multinationals: A modified resource based view. Journal of International Management, 10, 479-500.

Almor, T., Tarba, S. Y., & Margalit, A. (2014). Maturing, technology-based, born-global companies: Surviving through mergers and acquisitions. Management International Review, (Forthcoming, doi: 10.1007/s11575-014-0212-9). 

Efrat, K., & Shoham, A. (2011). Environmental characteristics and technological capabilities' interaction in high-technology born global firms. European Journal of International Management, 5(3), 271-284. 

Efrat, K., & Shoham, A. (2012). Born-global firms: The differences between their short-and long-term performance drivers. Journal of World Business, 47, 675-685.

Gomes, E., Weber, Y., Brown, C., and Tarba, S.Y. (2011). Mergers, Acquisitions and Strategic Alliances: Understanding The Process. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Freeman, S., & Cavusgil, T. (2007). Towards a typology of commitment states among managers of born-global firms: A study of accelerated internationalization. Journal of International Marketing, 15(4), 1-40.

Gabrielsson, M., & Kirpalani, V.H.M. (2004). Born globals: How to reach new business space rapidly. International Business Review, 13, 555-571.

Glaister, A. J., Liu, Y., Sahadev, S., & Gomes, E. (2014). Externalizing, internalizing and fostering commitment: The case of born-global firms in emerging economies. Management International Review, (Forthcoming, doi: 10.1007/s11575-014-0215-6)

Hashai N., & Almor T. (2004). Gradually internationalization 'born-global' firms: An oxymoron? International Business Review,13, 465-483

Hashai, N. (2011). Sequencing the expansion of geographic scope and foreign operations by “born-global” firms”. Journal of International Business Studies, 42(8), 995-1015.

Hewerdine, L., & Welch, C. (2013). Are international new ventures really new? A process study of organizational emergence and internationalization. Journal of World Business, 48(4), 466-477.

Melen, S., & Rovira Nordman, E. (2009). The internationalisation modes of born globals: A longitudinal study. European Management Journal, 27, 243-254.

Rovira Nordman, E., & Melen, S. (2008). The impact of different kinds of knowledge for the internationalization process of born globals in the biotech business. Journal of World Business, 43, 171-185.

Trudgen, R., & Freeman, S. (2014). Measuring the performance of born-global firms throughout their development process: The roles of initial market selection and internationalisation speed. Management International Review, (Forthcoming, doi: 10.1007/s11575-014-0210-y). 

Uner, M. M., Kocak, A., Cavusgil, E., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2013). Do barriers to export vary for born globals and across stages of internationalization? An empirical inquiry in the emerging market of Turkey. International Business Review, 22(5), 800-813. 

Vasilchenko, E., & Morrish, S. (2011). The role of entrepreneurial networks in the exploration and exploitation of internationalization opportunities by information and communication technology firms. Journal of International Marketing, 19(4), 88-105.

Weber, Y., & Tarba, S. Y. (2011). Exploring integration approach in related mergers: Post-merger integration in the high-tech industry. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 19, 202–221.

Weber, Y., Tarba, S.Y., and Oberg, C. (2013). A Comprehensive Guide to Mergers and Acquisitions: Managing the Critical Success Factors Across Every Stage of the M&A Process. USA & UK: Financial Times Press.

Submissions:

All papers will be subject to double-blind peer review, according to author guidelines available at : http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/journals.htm?id=cr

 Submissions to Competitiveness Review are made using ScholarOne Manuscripts: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/comprev (please select the correct special issue from the drop-down menu)

Submission deadline: March 31, 2015. However, earlier submissions are encouraged.

The review process will take approximately up to 6 months.

About the special issue editors

Tamar Almor (talmor@colman.ac.il) is a professor of Strategic Management and International Entrepreneurship at School of Business Administration, College of Management, Israel. She received her PhD from Tel-Aviv University, Israel. Her research interests include new entrepreneurial ventures, born global firms, innovation strategies, and mergers and acquisitions. Her work has been published in journals such as Journal of International Business Studies, Management International Review, Human Relations, Research Policy, International Business Review, International Studies of Management & Organization, Journal of International Management, Thunderbird International Business Review, and others.

Shlomo Y. Tarba (s.tarba@sheffield.ac.uk) is a Lecturer in Strategic Management at the Management School, University of Sheffield, UK. He received his PhD in Strategic Management from Ben-Gurion University and Master's in Biotechnology degree at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel. His research interests include strategic agility, born global firms, organizational ambidexterity and innovation, and mergers and acquisitions.

His research papers are published/forthcoming in journals such as Journal of Management, Academy of Management Perspectives, Management International Review, California Management Review, International Business Review, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Thunderbird International Business Review, International Studies of Management & Organization, Human Resource Management Review, and others.

The Japanese economy faced numerous challenges in the past decades. Among them are severe shocks caused by natural disasters and by domestic and international financial crises, but also long-term fundamental transformations like demographic change, globalization and digitalization as well as economic reforms addressing the labor market, corporate governance and employment practices. In this special issue, we want to take stock of how the changes in the economic, regulatory, technological and international environment affected the Japanese employment system (system level), and the recruitment, management and development of human resources (management level) since the year 2000. Papers may either address the system or management level. We aim at an overall balance between system and management level analyses.

Guiding questions are:

• To what extent did adjustments occur?
• To what extent did they differ across industries and firms?
• To what extent do we see continuity?

Multi-disciplinary perspectives and a wide range of research methodologies (such as literature reviews, qualitative or quantitative studies) are welcome. All papers (max 6000 words each) will go through a double-blind peer-review process.

Keywords: Japanese Employment System, Japanese Labor Markets, Japanese Management, Japanese Human Resource Management, Lifetime Employment.

Deadline for manuscript transmissions: July 31, 2019

Please send your manuscript to parissa@haghirian.com

Editor: Dr. Parissa HaghirianProfessor of International ManagementSophia University, Japan www.haghirian.com

50th Anniversary Special Issue of the Journal of International Business Studies

Tentative publication date:   late 2019

The Academy of International Business (AIB) is a social community of scholars dedicated to creating and disseminating knowledge on international business (IB) challenges, with JIBS as its main, global conduit for publishing leading research.

In 2019, JIBS will be celebrating its 50th anniversary. The 50th year anniversary issue of the journal will address the broad issue of ‘Changing the World: How IB Research Makes a Difference.’ The anniversary issue will include scholarly pieces that can be theoretical in nature, empirical, or managerially oriented. Each paper will showcase how the research presented has made a difference to changing the world in a tangible fashion (retrospective work) or could do so in the foreseeable future (prospective work). The ‘world’ can refer to an entire subfield of IB research and teaching, or to mainstream managerial practice, or both. A few examples of past IB research that clearly meets the ‘changing the world’ criterion, include C. Bartlett and S. Ghoshal’s work on the transnational solution; G. Hofstede’s work on culture’s consequences; W.C. Kim and R. Mauborgne’s work on procedural justice in multinational enterprises; and S. Zaheer’s work on overcoming the liability of foreignness.

However, IB research making a difference should be interpreted generously, especially for prospective work aimed at transforming contemporary academic discourse or managerial practice. The work of IB researchers provides insight on IB phenomena, but whether an entire subfield of IB research and teaching, or mainstream managerial practice will be significantly altered by this insight, is never guaranteed. For example, in the face of well-researched, unambiguous conclusions on linkages between specific managerial actions and performance (or the absence thereof), mistaken views from the past might still reign for long periods of time, whether in research and teaching, or in managerial practice.

The JIBS Editors will consider work that includes how IB research is affecting – or is constructively interacting with – functional fields in management and other social sciences, so as to address more effectively critical IB subject matter. The subject matter studied can range from micro-foundational challenges to society’s grand questions. The reference to ‘critical’ subject matter means that the work should have major implications for our understanding of the governance, the strategy or the performance of internationally operating firms. Of special interest is work on internationally operating firms that goes against common perceptions, and that provides balanced analysis of the costs and benefits of particular managerial choices or courses of action. One example is analysis of the vulnerability of MNE networks and value chains, rather than the supposed market power thereof. A second example is integrative analysis of entry strategy (including mode mixes and in-depth study of firms’ entire foreign-operations portfolios) and the effects of compounded distance, seldom found in past research. A third example includes fact-based analysis of the outcomes of firm-level, industry-level and macro-level decisions and actions fostering globalization or de-globalization. Of particular interest is also how IB research can make a tangible difference in the practice of management, whether by increasing economic efficiency, creating better outcomes for a variety of stakeholders, or even improving the welfare of mankind broadly construed.

As regards theoretical papers, the JIBS Editors have a preference for path-breaking work, rather than incremental contributions, though radical new ideas should be solidly grounded in extant research. For empirical work, the JIBS Editors would like to see submissions that build mainly on primary data, rather than secondary data, in order to maximize the likelihood of truly path-breaking work, and with the authors having an unambiguously strong command of their data. Finally, papers with a distinct managerial flavor have been a hallmark of JIBS since 1970. In keeping with this tradition, the anniversary issue aims to include pieces that combine ‘state-of-the-art’ scholarly insight with important, evidence-based recommendations for management. As noted above, retrospective work, credibly documenting achievements of IB research in truly ‘making a difference’, will also receive full consideration.

The JIBS Editors are inviting submissions aligned with the ‘changing the world’ theme, and subject to the above qualifications, in three tracks.

Track 1: Theory papers making distinct contributions to the ‘changing the world’ theme, by recombining elements of IB theory with state-of-the-art findings from functional fields in management and from other social sciences.

Track 2: Empirical papers making distinct contributions to the ‘changing the world’ theme, by building mainly on primary data, and providing truly novel insight into the critical subject matter covered.

Track 3: Managerial-practice oriented papers making distinct contributions to the ‘changing the world’ theme, through evidence-based guidance on how to improve the governance, strategy or performance of internationally operating firms.

Submission Process and Deadlines

All manuscripts for the JIBS 50th Anniversary Issue will be reviewed as a cohort. Manuscripts must be submitted during the period July 9–20, 2018, to: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jibs. 

All submissions will go through a first, fast-track evaluation round, conducted by the JIBS Reviewing Editor and Editor-in-Chief, to assess the suitability for the Anniversary Issue. Papers viewed as being sufficiently aligned with the ‘changing the world’ goals will be assigned to a member of the JIBS Editors team for further evaluation and subjected to double-blind review. High-quality submissions insufficiently aligned with the anniversary issue’s goals will be reassigned to the standard evaluation process for regular JIBS issues.

It is anticipated that a formal workshop will be organized for the papers that have passed the first round of double-blind reviews, in order to provide editorial guidance for additional revisions. This workshop will likely be organized in late 2018.

For more information about this Call for Papers, please contact the JIBS Managing Editor (managing-editor@jibs.net).

China has firmly installed itself as a key player in the world trade and investment arena. Not even four decades since its opening up, it has surpassed Germany and the United States to become the world’s largest exporter. Adding to this, it has recently become the world’s largest recipient of foreign direct investment (FDI) as well as the largest source of outward FDI (if Hong Kong is included). Originally, the key driver of China’s growing clout in international economy has been its export-led growth strategy. From the onset of its open-door policy in the early eighties, China has made attraction of export-oriented FDI a key element of its development path. Abundant supplies of low-cost labor and artificially cheap inputs to production, as well as an undervalued currency, contributed to China’s attraction of FDI and its comparative advantage in low-skilled exports. Decades of rapid economic growth, however, are now threatening to undermine China’s export-led growth. Rising labor costs (especially in the coastal area), tightening regulations and currency appreciation have gradually eroded China’s comparative advantage in low-skilled exports. As a consequence, China has spent significant resources trying to rebalance its economy by moving from an export-led growth strategy to a consumption-led growth model and by pushing the companies to upgrade their activities up a global value chain.

The new trends beg a serious question how China’s Great Rebalancing Act affects the country’s integration in the world economy. Is China’s growing middle class changing the type of FDI that it is able to attract? Is China’s export sector moving up the value chain and specializing in higher-skilled activities such as innovation? What explains the massive rise of Chinese outward FDI? And how does all this matter for China’s economic performance?

This special issue aims to provide insights into these questions by exploring and explaining new trends in China’s exports, FDI inflows and outflows. We welcome both theoretical and empirical contributions adopting different perspectives, and focusing on different levels of analysis and research methodologies. Particularly, we welcome empirical papers that make use of original data and that can explain their findings non-technically and for wider audiences. Possible research questions that would suit to this special issue include but are not limited to the following: What is the impact of inward FDI on investment, innovation and industrial sophistication in China? What is the impact of outward FDI on China’s economic integration and development? How do China’s shift towards services and the emergency of the middle class affect FDI flows and global economy?

The submission deadline for this special issue is 31 August 2016. Potential author(s) are encouraged to send us a proposal or abstract for pre-review by 31 May 2016 to the Managing (Guest) Editor(s) at tncr.special@gmail.com with an email subject “China CER Special”.

When China's leaders surveyed their development prospects at the onset of the twenty-first century, they reached an increasingly obvious conclusion, namely that their current economic development strategy, heavily dependent on natural resources, fossil fuel, exports based on cheap labour, and extensive capital investment, was no longer viable or attractive. For a range of pressing competitiveness, national security, and sustainability reasons, they decided to shift gears and as a result have embarked on an effort to move their country in the direction of building a so-called “knowledge-based economy”; in this new model, innovation and high-end talent are positioned as the new primary drivers of enhanced economic performance. Underlying this transition also seems to be a rather pervasive sense of urgency about the need for China to catch up more quickly with the rest of the world, especially in terms of science and technology (S&T) capabilities. In fact, the top echelon of Chinese leaders, foremost among them both President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao, has recognized that enhancing innovation performance and harnessing the country's huge talent resources are crucial to China's ability to cope with an increasingly competitive international environment, build a comprehensively well-off and harmonious society and, more importantly, consolidate and fortify the ruling base of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

At the core of China's efforts to enhance its R&D capabilities and performance lies the steadily evolving Chinese national innovation system (NIS). Since the 1980s, there has emerged a growing literature in the West regarding the concept of the NIS; this literature has formed the focal point for Chinese efforts at both the national and local level to develop and enhance their own indigenous capabilities, science and technology. China's NIS differs from those in other developed countries, not only in organizational terms (Yifei, 2002), but also in terms of the strategic role of the innovation system in China's efforts to advance its national S&T capabilities. In 2006, the State Council announced the launch of the 15-year “Medium-to-Long-term Plan Outline for the Development of National Science and Technology (2006-2020)” (MLP) to promote more rapidly China's scientific and technological progress (Ministry of Science and Technology of the PRC, 2006). A key goal of the MLP is to “push forward the comprehensive establishment of a national innovation system with Chinese characteristics.” Understanding precisely what is meant by “Chinese characteristics” reveals much about the nature of innovation in China. It also will promote greater understanding of the steadily more pivotal role of the enterprise in driving the overall performance and productivity of China's NIS.

As of 2009, this new, very strong emphasis on innovation, talent and high-end knowledge seems to have begun to pay off, as China has built an indigenous innovation system that is very different from the Soviet-inspired one that existed for most of the Maoist era and well into the era of Deng Xiaoping. In fact, it is increasingly clear that China is now not only better positioned for, but also steadily more confident about, becoming a true technological power on both regional and global levels. In fact, one can now identify several new, emerging pockets of excellence across the spectrum of Chinese industries and technologies. Moreover, it is also obvious to Chinese scientific leaders that the country's recent progress and future potential can be explicitly attributed to the increasing role of the nation's talent assets. It is quite clear that China already has begun to move away from being the so- called “factory to the world.” Increasingly, China is relying more on brainpower than brawn to drive and shape its economic future. In this regard, the rise of China as a global technological power, even taking into account many of the PRC's prevailing shortcomings, is have important consequences for the country internally as well as externally. In this context, we might ask, is China really poised to become a substantial force in global innovation? In which fields is China likely to make its impact felt most? What might be the specific implications for China of having a more dynamic, proactive science and engineering talent pool? And what broad potential impact will China's innovation on global technological competition and international technological advance during the first part of the twenty-first century?

This special issue calls for papers that review and highlight the workings and performance of China's national innovation system at both the macro and micro levels. We are looking precisely for papers that can highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the Chinese innovation system in terms of organizational structure and performance; management of R&D in specific sectors; handling of S&T budgets and financial resources; supply, demand and utilization of scientific and engineering talent; and China's evolving role and positioning in the global innovation system. Both industry and enterprise case studies and technology-oriented research are welcome. Contributions by scholars from Mainland China are particularly encouraged. An internal Chinese perspective on the structure, operation and management of R&D in China from a so-called “insider point of view” will greatly enhance our knowledge about the operation and performance of the innovation system, including both its limits and its potential.

The primary criterion for consideration of publication is that manuscripts should be on research and application, and must be grounded in organizations operating in China. Contributed manuscripts may deal with, but are not restricted to, the following:

* The “culture of creativity” and its limits in the Chinese research environment.
* Innovation and the challenges of technological entrepreneurship.
* Innovative performance of small versus large firms in China.
* Case studies regarding the operation and performance of foreign R&D centres in China.
* The supply, demand and utilization of high end talent, including the role of returnees in altering the innovation environment.
* Case studies of indigenous innovation across one to two technology fields.
* Analysis and assessment of the enterprise R&D environment.


Submission guidelines
All manuscripts should be prepared according to the Chinese Management Studies author guidelines located at: www.emeraldinsight.com/cms.htm. All papers will be double blind reviewed following the journal's normal review procedure.

The deadline for submission of manuscripts is: 1 April 2010.

Submissions must be made using the ScholarOne Manuscript Central system: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cms

Please direct enquiries to: Professor Denis Fred Simon, Penn State University: dfs12@psu.edu



References
Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China (2006), ``Medium-to-Long-term Plan Outline for the Development of National Science and Technology (2006-2020) (MLP)'', China Science and Technology Newsletter, No. 456, February 9.
Yifei, S. (2002), ``China's national innovation system in transition'' Eurasian Geography and Economics, Vol. 43, pp. 476-93.

Bibliography
Cao, C., Suttmeier, R.P., and Simon, D. (2006), ``China's 15-year science and technology plan'', Physics Today, December.
Rowen, H.S. (Ed.) (2008), Greater China's Quest for Innovation, Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Simon, D.F. and Cao, C., China's Emerging Technological Edge: Assessing the Role of High-End Talent, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Suttmeier, R.P., Cao, C. and Simon, D. (2006a), ``China's Super Science Center: knowledge innovation and the remaking of the Chinese Academy of Sciences'', Science, April.
Suttmeier, R.P., Cao, C. and Simon, D. (2006b), ``China's innovation challenge and the re-making of the Chinese Academy of Sciences'', Innovations, December.
Thomson, R.E. and Sigurdson, J. (Eds) (2008), China's Science and Technology Sector, World Scientific Publishing, Singapore.

Clusters and MNEs innovation strategies

Editors: Philippe Gugler and Christian Ketels

Submission deadline : August 30th 2014

The Competitiveness Review invites research papers in the field of clusters and MNEs innovation strategies and in particular on the role of clusters in home and host countries as location advantages fostering MNEs competitiveness

The evolution of the global economy and improved access to goods and resources from distant locations have placed knowledge at the core of firms’ competitive advantages (Zander and Kogut, 1995, p. 76; Jensen and Szulanski, 2007, p. 1716; Sala-I-Martin et al., 2012, p. 7). As a result of their ability to supersede the market and internalize the benefits of the geographic distribution of their activities, multinational enterprises (MNEs) have distributed their value chain around the world and implemented a global network of subsidiaries that allow them to take advantage of the specific profile of different environments (Sölvell, 2002, p. 3; Ketels, 2008, p. 124; Mudambi and Swift, 2011, p. 1).

Firms are constantly driven to generate new knowledge to maintain a competitive edge (Sala-I-Martin et al., 2012, p. 7). The important role of the internationalization of R&D has been studied in detail since the 1990s (Kummerle, 1997; Cantwell et al., 2004, p. 58; Criscuolo, 2004, p. 39). Since the 1980s, strategic asset-seeking investments have exhibited increased importance as a significant motivator for FDI and have helped explain the increased internationalization of R&D (Dunning and Narula, 1995; Dunning, 1998, p. 50).  

Because MNEs have the special ability to internalize the benefits of their geographic dispersion of activities, they can significantly improve their competitive advantages by spreading their activities across locations and taking advantage of the specificities of each business environment (Sölvell, 2002, p. 3; Dunning, 2008, p. 83). Innovation scholars have analyzed the tendency of innovative activities to concentrate spatially (Kline and Rosenberg, 1986; Freeman 1991; Nelson 1993; Malmberg et al., 1996). As noted by Maskell and Malmberg (1999, p. 172) and Asheim and Gertler (2005, p. 292), tacit knowledge represents a key ingredient in the development of unique capacities and innovations.  

Although the literature on innovation and new knowledge generation has provided significant documentation of the benefits of agglomeration, few studies have analyzed the role of clusters in the global innovation strategies of knowledge-intensive MNEs (Dunning, 1998, p. 60; Birkinshaw and Sölvell, 2000, p. 3; Tavares and Texeira, 2006, p. 1; De Beule et al., 2008; p. 224; Asmussen et al., 2009; Mudambi and Swift, 2010, p. 463). Knowledge capabilities and innovation are the main drivers of a firm’s competitiveness (Zander and Kogut, 1995, p. 76; Jensen and Szulandski, 2007, p. 1716).

Clusters appear to be a unique source of knowledge dissemination and generation and may play an important role in the global innovation strategy of MNEs (Birkinshaw and Sölvell, 2000; Tavares and Teixeira, 2006; Mudambi and Swift, 2010). Defined in their strictest sense as “geographic concentrations of interconnected companies, specialized suppliers, service providers, firms in related industries, and associated institutions in particular fields” (Porter, 1998, p. 197-198), clusters provide an environment that is particularly conducive to innovation. In addition to the positive influence of clusters on productivity and new business creation, recent empirical studies have confirmed the role of clusters in the stimulation of innovation (Jaffe, 1989; Feldman, 1994; Baptista, 2001; Audretsch et al., 2005; Breschi et al., 2005; Cumbers et al., 2008; De Beule et al., 2008).

By referring to the traditional notions developed in the international business (IB) literature, clusters not only offer strong CSAs for regions and countries but also represent unique sources of FSAs for MNEs in their perpetual quest for new knowledge and innovation. Clusters represent a new target for strategic asset-seeking investments in the global innovation strategies of MNEs that we could label “CSA-cluster.”  As highlighted by Rugman and Verbeke, “(…) an FSA may be developed internally from three possible geographic locations, each associated with particular CSAs: a home country operation, a host country operation, or an internal network whereby operations in various countries are involved” (2001, p. 240).

These three dimensions are particularly important for knowledge-intensive MNEs to improve their FSAs. The acquisition and generation of new knowledge through home and host cluster relationships may constitute a unique source of new knowledge and innovation for MNEs (Park, 2011; Yao et al., 2013; Nell and Andersson, 2012). (Note: this text above is extracted from a paper in progress of Gugler, Keller and Tinguely).

Themes of this special issue:

We welcome submissions that provide a contribution through interdisciplinary approaches. We invite conceptual papers and empirical studies based on qualitative and/or quantitative methods. Potential themes includes, but are not limited to:

•       How MNEs develop innovative capabilities thanks to their location with host countries’ clusters?
•       Which kind of interactions with clusters’ members are the most appropriate for MNEs to operate R&D and innovate?
•       To what extend clusters constitute an important asset for countries to attract technology intensive MNEs?
•       To what extend clusters constitute a valuable alternative to other mean to get access to foreign technology?
•       How MNEs may organize and manage their internal and external networks in combination with clusters activities within their home and host countries?
•       How clusters constitute powerful home and host CSAs and how to consider clusters in the literature based on the interactions between FSAs and CSAs?
•       Do clusters create negatives externalities for firms that may induce some firms to adopt specific strategies to avoid that their knowledge being “lost” through spillovers within a cluster ?
•       How cluster initiatives may play a crucial role to attract technology intensive MNEs?

Submissions:

1.      All papers will be subject to double-blind peer review, according to author guidelines available at: www.emeraldinsight.com/cr.htm
2.      Submissions to Competitiveness Review are made using ScholarOne Manuscripts: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/comprev (please select the correct special issue from the drop-down menu)

Submission deadline : August 30th 2014

Papers will be published in 2015.

References:

Asheim, B.T. and Gertler, M.S. (2005), “The Geography of Innovation – Regional Innovation Systems,” in J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery and R. R. Nelson (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 291-317.

Asmussen, C.G., Pedersen, T. And Dhanaraj, C. (2009), Host-Country Environment and Subsidiary Competence: Extending the Diamond Network Model, Journal of International Business Studies 40 (1): 42-57.

Audretsch, D.B., Lehmann, E.E. and Warning, S. (2005), University Spillovers and New Firm Location, Research Policy 34: 1113-1122.

Baptista, R. (2001), Geographical Clusters and Innovation Diffusion, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 66 (1): 31-46..

Birkinshaw, J. and Sölvell, Ö. (2000), Preface, International Studies of Management and Organization 30 (2): 3-9.

Breschi, S., Lissoni, F. and Montobbio, F. (2005), “The Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: Conceptual Issues and Measurement Problems,” in S. Breschi and F. Malerba (eds.), Clusters, Networks, and Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 343-376.

Cantwell, J., Glac, K. and Harding, R. (2004), The Internationalization of R&D – The Swiss Case, Management International Review 44 (3): 57-82.

China. In: Henderson, J.V. & Thisse, J.F. (eds.). Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Vol 4. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Criscuolo, P. (2004), R&D Internationalisation and Knowledge Transfer: Impact on MNEs and their Home Countries. Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology.

Cumbers, A., MacKinnon, D. and Chapman, K. (2008), “Innovation, Collaboration and Learning in Regional Clusters: A Study of SMEs in the Aberdeen Oil Complex,” in C. Karlsson (eds.), Handbook of Research on Innovation and Clusters, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 300-317.

De Beule, F., Van Den Bulcke, D. and Zhang, H. (2008), “The Reciprocal Relationship between Transnationals and Clusters: A Literature Review,” in C. Karlsson (eds.), Handbook of Research on Cluster Theory, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Dunning, J.H. (1998), Location and the Multinational Enterprise: A Neglected Factor?, Journal of International Business Studies 29 (1): 45-66.

Dunning, J.H. (2008), “Space, Location and Distance in IB Activities: A Changing Scenario,” in J.H. Dunning and P. Gugler (eds.), Foreign Direct Investment, Location and Competitiveness, Oxford: Elsevier, 83-110.

Dunning, J.H. and Narula, R. (1995), The R&D Activities of Foreign Firms in the US, International Studies in Management Organization 25: 39-73.

Economic Literature, American Economic Association, 28 (4), pp. 1661–1707.

Feldman, M.P. (1994), The Geography of Innovation, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Freeman, C. (1991), Networks of Innovators: A Synthesis of Research Issues, Research Policy 20: 499-514.

Jaffe, A.B. (1989), Real Effects of Academic Research, The American Economic Review 79 (5): 957-970.

Jensen, R.J. and Szulanski, G. (2007), Template Use and the Effectiveness of Knowledge Transfer, Management Science 53 (11): 1716-1730.

Ketels, C.H.M. (2008), “Microeconomic Determinants of Location Competitiveness for MNEs,” in J.H. Dunning and P. Gugler (eds.), Foreign Direct Investment, Location and Competitiveness, Oxford: Elsevier, 111-131.

Kline, S.J., and Rosenberg, N. (1986), “An Overview of Innovation,” in R. Landau and N. Rosenberg (eds.), The Positive Sum Strategy: Harnessing Technology for Economic Growth, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 275-304.

Kuemmerle W. (1997), Building Effective R&D Capabilities Abroad, Harvard Business Review 75 March, 61-70.

Malmberg, A., Sölvell, Ö. and Zander, I. (1996), Spatial Clustering, Local Accumulation of Knowledge and Firm Competitiveness, Geografiska Annaler 78 B (2): 85-97.

Maskell, P. and Malmberg, A. (1999), Localized Learning and Industrial Competitiveness, Cambridge Journal of Economics 23: 167-86.

Mudambi R. and Swift T. (2011), Leveraging knowledge and competencies across space: The next frontier in international business, Journal of International Management 17 (3), 186-189.

Mudambi, R. and Swift, T. (2010), “Technological Clusters and Multinational Enterprise R&D Strategy,” in T. Devinney, T. Pedersen and L. Tihany (eds.), The Past, The Present and The Future of International Business and Management, Volume 23, Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.

Nell P.C. and Andersson U. (2012), The complexity of the business network context and its effect on subsidiary relational (over-) embeddedness, International Business Review 21 (6), 1087-1098.

Nelson, R.R. (1993), National Systems of Innovation: A Comparative Study, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Park B.I. (2011), Knowledge transfer capacity of multinational enterprises and technology acquisition in international joint ventures, International Business Review 20 (1), 75-87.

Porter, M.E. (1998), On Competition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2001), “Location, Competitiveness, and the Multinational Enterprise,” in A.M. Rugman and T. Brewer (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Business, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 150-177.

Sala-I-Martin, X., Bilbao-Osorio, B., Blanke, J., Crotti, R., Drzeniek Hanouz, M, Geiger, T. and Ko, C. (2012), “The Global Competitiveness Index 2012-2013: Strengthening Recovery by Raising Productivity,” in K. Schwab, The Global Competitiveness Report 2012-2013, Geneva: World Economic Forum, 3-48.

Sölvell, Ö. (2002), The Multi-Home Based Multinational – Combining Global Competitiveness and Local Innovativeness, Paper presented at the Symposium in honor of John Stopford, London.

Tavares, A. T. and Teixeira, A. (2006), “Introduction,” in A.T. Tavares and A. Teixeira (eds.), Multinationals, Clusters and Innovation: Does Public Policy Matter, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Yao Z., Yang Z., Fisher G.J., Ma C. And Fang E. (2013), Knowledge complementarity, knowledge absorption effectiveness, and new product performance: The exploration of international joint ventures in China, International Business Review 22 (1), 216-227.

Zander, U. and Kogut, B. (1995), Knowledge and the Speed of the Transfer and Imitation of Organizational Capabilities: An Empirical Test, Organization Science 6 (1): 76-92.

Information and communication technologies drive globalization and have radically changed the organization of work structures within organizations. The organizations have responded by progressively shifting from traditional collocated teams to global virtual teams (GVTs) (Webster and Wong, 2008; Zakaria, 2008). The effective use of GVTs has become an indispensable prerequisite to implementing global strategies of Multinational Enterprises (MNEs) and independent firms working together in international networks (Lovelace et al., 2005). Several authors report that more than 60% of managers work regularly in virtual teams (de Lisser, 1999; Kanawattanachai and Yoo, 2002; Hertel, Geister, and Kondradt, 2005).

Global virtual teams can be defined as “temporary, culturally diverse, geographically dispersed, and electronically communicating work group[s]” (Jarvenpaa and Leidner, 1999). GVTs are not constrained by traditional geographic and time boundaries and can offer many advantages if properly managed. As Duckworth (2008) points out, through GVTs MNEs can economize on travel, immigration, expat relocation costs and save time. GVTs help improve efficiency by seamlessly distributing workload across different time zones. Importantly, the different backgrounds, local networks and knowledge resources of locally embedded team members create new opportunities to leverage complementarities, creativity and innovation.

However, to live up to their full potential, MNEs need to address crucial challenges of GVTs, such as time-zone differences (Sutanto, Kankanhalli and Tan, 2011), work styles (Liu, Magjuka and Lee, 2008), communication via low-context and low-media-richness channels across cultures (Butler and Zander, 2008) and leadership as well as technological-related issues hindering effective communication (Flammia, Cleary and Slattery, 2010).

This new phenomenon entails several important repercussions for management theories regarding the boundaries of the firm, principal-agent relationships, organizational learning, appropriability and social networks, among others. The growing importance of GVTs is also affecting the contents of the business curriculum, as many universities and business schools are implementing activities to teach and train students how to effectively work in this type of teams and how to cope with challenges mentioned above (Taras et al. 2013). As the crucial role of GVTs is only expected to grow more in the years to come, we encourage scholars to examine GVTs from different theoretical perspectives and empirical approaches in order to achieve implications relevant both for academics and practitioners.

This Special Issue aims to attract contributions that offer a fine-grained analysis of the distinct aspects that affect the behavior and performance of GVTs. Specifically, how can MNEs benefit from the several potential advantages that a smart management of this kind of team may provide? How can MNEs avoid the common pitfalls of GVTs? We welcome theoretical, empirical, methodological and case studies submissions addressing, but not limited to, the following issues:

1. Advantages and disadvantages of GVTs vis à vis traditional collocated teams.
2. Determinants and characteristics of successful GVTs.
3. Knowledge-creation, dissemination and leakages in GVTs.
4. Open collaboration and GVT-headquarters relationships.
5. The process of creation and development of GVTs over time.
6. Differences in GVTs composition and performance across industries.
7. Leadership and team-dynamics in GVTs.
8. Improving inter-personal communication, team cohesion and trust among GVT members.
9. The impact of cross-cultural differences among GVT members on the team performance.
10. Language-related issues in GVTs.
11. Information and communication technologies and GVTs.
12. The multifaceted role of distance (geographical, institutional, psychic, cultural, etc) in GVTs.
13. Training employees and students how to effectively work in a GVT.
14. The relationship between the use of GVTs and firm performance.
15. GVTs and employee satisfaction.
16. Reducing shirking and cheating in GVTs
17. Trends in the use of GVT around the world – who makes use of them, who does not, and why?
18. The role of GVTs in global business strategy.

Submission information

The deadline for manuscript submission is March 8, 2016. Manuscripts should be prepared in accordance with Journal of International Management’s Style Guide for Authors: http://www.elsevier.com/journals/journal-of-international-management/1075-4253/guide-for-authors and submitted through the Journal’s submission website.

To ensure that all manuscripts are correctly identified for consideration for this Special Issue, it is important that authors select ‘SI: Global Virtual Teams’ when they reach the “Article Type” step in the submission process.

Please direct any questions regarding the Special Issue to Alfredo Jimenez (ajimenez@ubu.es), Dirk Boehe (dirk.boehe@adelaide.edu.au), Vasyl Taras (v_taras@uncg.edu), and Dan Caprar (dan.caprar@unsw.edu.au).

References

Butler, C., Zander, L. 2008. The business of teaching and learning through multicultural teams. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 19(2), 192-218.

de Lisser, E. 1999. Update on Small Business: Firms with Virtual Environments Appeal to Workers. Wall Street Journal, October 5, 1999.

Duckworth, H. 2008. How TRW automotive helps global virtual teams perform at the top of their game. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 28, 6-16.

Flammia, M., Cleary, Y., Slattery, D. M. 2010. Leadership roles, socioemotional communication strategies, and technology use of Irish and US students in virtual teams. IEEE Transactions of Professional Communication, 53(2), 89-101.

Hertel, G., S. Geister., U. Kondradt. 2005. Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15, 65-95.

Jarvenpaa, S.L., Leidner, D.E. 1999 Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams, Organization Science 10, 791–815.

Kanawattanachai, P., Yoo, Y. 2002. Dynamic nature of trust in virtual teams. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3-4), 187-213.

Liu, X., Magjuka, R.J., Lee, s. 2008. An examination of the relationship among structure, trust, and conflict management styles in virtual teams. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 21(1), 77-93.

Lovelace, K., Shapiro, D. L., Weingart, L. R. 2001. Maximizing cross-functional new Product teams’ innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communications perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 479-493.

Sutanto, J., Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C. Y. 2011. Deriving IT-mediated task coordination portfolios for global virtual teams. IEEE Transactions of Professional Communication, 54(2), 133-151.

Taras, V., Caprar, D., Rottig, D., Sarala, R., Zakaria, N., Zhao, F., Jimenez, A., Wankel, C., Lei, W.S., Minor, M., Bryła, P., Ordenana, X., Bode, A., Schuster, A., Vaiginiene, E., Froese, F., Bathula, H., Yajnik, N., Baldegger R., Huang V., 2013. A global classroom? Evaluating the effectiveness of global virtual collaboration as a teaching tool in management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 12(3), 414-435.

Webster, J., Wong, W. 2008. Comparing traditional and virtual group forms: Identity, communication and trust in naturally occurring project teams. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(1), 41-62.

Zakaria, N. 2008. Using computer mediated communication as a tool to facilitate intercultural collaboration of global virtual teams. In M. Pagani (ed.) Encyclopedia of Multimedia Technology and Networking, (1115-1123), 2. New York: Information Science Reference.

About the Guest Editors

Dr. Jiménez is Assistant Professor at the University of Burgos (Spain). His research interests are focused on the process and the determinants of success in the internationalization strategy of firms including political risk, cultural and psychic distance and corruption. In addition, he is also working on a research line devoted to virtual team and multi-cultural team management and dynamics. He has previously published several papers in several international relevant journals, including Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of World Business, Management International Review International Business Review and European Journal of International Management. He has also been a visiting scholar in different institutions in Australia, Norway, Italy, Germany, Ecuador and Mexico.

Dr. Dirk Boehe is Senior Lecturer at the University of Adelaide Business School (Australia). His research interests focus on multinational corporations, corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in emerging markets. His scholarly articles have appeared in The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of International Management, Journal of Small Business Management, Management International Review, Journal of World Business, World Development, Business and Society, Studies in Higher Education, among others. Before joining the University of Adelaide, he held full-time positions at Brazilian business schools. Before joining academia, Dirk gained professional experience in related areas such as market research, foreign trade and international consulting projects in Colombia, England, Germany and Venezuela.

Dr. Vasyl Taras is Assistant Professor at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro (United States). He has published several papers on culture and global virtual teams in leading International Business and Psychology journals such as Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of World Business, Journal of International Management, Academy of Management Learning and Education, International Journal of Human Resource Management and Management International Review. He is also Associate Editor of the International Journal of Cross Cultural Management and Editorial Review Board Member of Journal of International Business, Journal of International Management and Management Research Review. He has recently co-edited a book about Experiential Learning and has plenty of experience as a business consultant.

Dr. Dan Caprar is a Senior Lecturer at the School of Management of the UNSW Australia Business School. His research, teaching, and consulting work are in the area of cross-cultural management, leadership, and self-development. Dan has published several papers on culture and global virtual teams in top journals including Journal of International Business Studies, Academy of Management Learning and Education, Journal of Business Ethics, Personnel Psychology, and the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. In addition, his work on the culture of MNC local employees, published in the Journal of International Business Studies, was the runner-up for the Academy of Management HR Division Scholarly Achievement Award in 2011. Dan is currently a member of the Editorial Board for the Journal of International Business Studies and a Regional Associate Editor for the International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management.

International Business Research, a journal of Shanghai Institute of Foreign Trade, China and Asia and Globalization Review, a journal of MacEwan University, Canada, jointly announce a call for papers on Competition and Cooperation between China and Other Emerging Economies: Transnational Trade and Investment.

China has successfully fostered its robust economic growth in the past years, which has consolidated its status of world economic power. In the era of post-crisis, China is faced with challenges and competition from other emerging economies. How to tackle the issues of competition and cooperation between China and other emerging economies in the context of stagnated world economy and spreading financial crisis is worthy of special academic attention.

The call for papers seeks to deepen research, analysis and discussion of the issues of such challenges, competition and cooperation as China and other emerging economies are facing . We therefore call for papers that examine the environmental, social and economic effects of transnational trade and investment by China and other emerging economies.

We expect to publish the selected papers in the two journals. We are also organizing a conference in Shanghai on May 11, 2013, giving contributors of selected papers an opportunity to present and discuss their work.

The deadline for submitting the abstract for the papers is February 28, 2013. The notification of acceptance will be sent by March 30, 2013. The deadline for submitting the papers will be April 15, 2013.

Contacts:
Dr. JIN Xiaobai (shiftjournal@163.com)
Executive editor-in-chief, International Business Research; Associate professor of international law, Shanghai Institute of Foreign Trade, China

Dr. William X. Wei (weix@macewan.ca)
Editor-in-Chief, Asia and Globalization Review; Chair, Asia Pacific Management Program; Institute of Asia Pacific Studies, MacEwan School of Business, MacEwan University, Canada

Special Issue of the Competitiveness Review

“The Competitive Advantage of Nations: 25 Years After”

Christian Ketels (editor)

In 1990 Michael Porter published “The Competitive Advantage of Nations”, proposing a comprehensive framework to understand the competitiveness of locations.  The book triggered a rich academic debate; up to now, Google Scholar registers more than 35,000 citations. Numerous countries, regions, and clusters have launched efforts to upgrade their competitiveness, motivated by Porter’s work.

In this special issue we aim to collect two groups of papers, reflecting on the impact that the book had on theory and practice. First, we want to explore how the thinking on competitiveness has evolved over time. In the academic community there has been an on-going debate about the nature of the competitiveness concept, and the policy implications it might have. Twenty-five years after the Competitive Advantage of Nation was published, it is time to see where we have ended up so far. Second, we want to learn from a number of specific country and region cases in which Porter’s framework provided the foundation for specific diagnostics and policy action. Practitioners have been looking at Porter’s competitiveness framework as a way to organize their economic policies.  With the experience of these efforts over the last twenty-five years it is time to take stock and draw conclusions for policy practice going forward.

We are inviting a number of authors from academia and the policy community to this special issue. We also encourage submission from other authors, which will then go through the normal review process of the journal.

Submissions:

1. Papers will be subject to double-blind peer review, according to author guidelines available at: http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/cr.htm
2. Submissions to Competitiveness Review are made using ScholarOne Manuscripts: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/comprev (please select the correct special issue from the drop-down menu)

Submission deadline : May 15th 2015

About the Editor:

Christian Ketels is a member of the Harvard Business School faculty where he serves as the Principal Associate of the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness. He is the President of the TCI Network, the leading global network of practitioners in competitiveness, clusters and innovation. Together with Prof. Philippe Gugler, University of Fribourg and Chairman of the European International Business Academy (EIBA, he is the editor of the Competitiveness Review. Email: cketels@hbs.edu.

In terms both of its scale and severity, the worldwide financial crisis of 2007–2008 was the most damaging financial crisis to affect the world economy since the Great Depression of the 1930s. Many major financial institutions around the world collapsed or had to be bailed-out by governments. Global trade was also severely hit and a large number of national economies went into deep recessions. In the view of many economists and politicians, one of the main reasons why the fallout from the worldwide financial crisis of 2007–2008 proved to be so damaging was down to the fact that the global financial system had, in the years prior to the crisis, simply become too complex. This increased complexity, it is argued, proved to be especially damaging in the aftermath of the 2007–2008 crisis not only because it led to increased levels of contagion, but also because it made it more difficult for governments and regulators to intervene effectively.

This edited volume contributes to these ongoing debates by bringing together some of the top academics from the US and UK in the disciplines of Law, History and Economics to look in more depth at the historical and institutional aspects of the relationship between financial crises and systemic complexity. Conceptually, it is motivated by three main questions: 1) Is the present financial system more complex than in the past and, if so, why? 2) To what extent and in what ways does the worldwide financial crisis of 2007–2008 differ from past financial crises? 3) How can governments, regulators and businesses better manage and deal with increased levels of complexity both in the present and in the future?

It is the intention of the editors that this collection will not only encourage greater interdisciplinary debate, but also to be of use to policy-makers and legislators in their efforts to come up with more resilient ways of managing and dealing with increased levels of risk, both in the present and in the future. As such, we are particularly keen for contributions that deal with any of the following issues:

• Directors’ duties and the role of shareholders in financial regulation
• Government regulation, with a particular emphasis on moral hazard
• The extent to which financial crises are an inevitable consequence of free-market banking systems
• How changes in the size and scale of the US and UK banking sector have affected financial stability
• The impact of economic fundamentals on financial instability, with a particular focus on speculative manias and investment bubbles
• Differences in government responses to financial crises over time
• The differences between legal and economic understandings of financial property and corporate control
• Technological innovation and change, with a particular emphasis on changing payment and trading systems
• ‘Short-termism’ and high-risk trading in financial markets
• Transformations in the US and UK banking sector, particularly as regards the relationship between commercial and investment banking
• The relationship between ownership structure and systemic crises
• Changes in accounting practices and financial reporting procedures

The initial proposal for this edited volume has been already been officially accepted by Edward Elgar for publication in 2015 and confirmed confirmations have been accepted from a number of prominent academics in both the UK and the US. However, we still have a limited amount of space within which to fit a couple more contributions.

Submissions should be in the form of a 1–2 page chapter proposal (750 words max), clearly explaining the objective of the proposed chapter and the reasons why it is relevant to the issues covered in this collection. In addition, we also ask that all potential contributors submit a brief and up-to-date CV outlining their past work and previous achievements. The deadline for initial chapter proposals is 1 July 2013, but we both welcome and encourage potential contributors to submit before this date. All chapter proposals should be emailed in Word or PDF form to: matthew.hollow@durham.ac.uk

Call for papers for a special issue of International Journal of Cross Cultural Management

Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Studying Cross Cultural Performance

(Optional) Abstract submission deadline: April 30, 2021

Full paper submission deadline: June 30, 2021

Initial decisions: August 20, 2021

Final decisions: November 15, 2021

Expected publication: from April 2022

Special Editors

Jessica L. Wildman, Florida Institute of Technology, USA (jwildman@fit.edu)

Richard Griffith, Florida Institute of Technology, USA (griffith@fit.edu)

Jennifer Klafehn, HUMRRO, USA (jklafehn@humrro.org)

We invite articles that address the theoretical conceptualization of, measurement of, or study of cross cultural performance as a criterion in organizational contexts (e.g., multi-national corporations, non-governmental organizations, military) that provide novel and cutting edge perspectives on cross cultural performance as a construct.

In the past 20 years, global integration has peaked, the movement of people around the world has increased, and migration has more than doubled (Strauss, 2019). Increased globalization in the workplace has brought about increases in international assignments, travel, and collaborations (Hammond and Grosse, 2003; Shaffer et al., 2012), all of which require organizational employees to engage in any number of cross cultural interactions. Accordingly, the extent to which individuals succeed in these cross cultural interactions is an important focal topic for organizational leaders and researchers. Successful performance in cross cultural settings has been studied in a number of different organizational groups and contexts, including expatriate employees (e.g., Wang et al., 2013), international students (e.g., Burke et al., 2009), non-governmental organizations (e.g., Charleston et al., 2018), military populations (e.g., Hardison et al., 2009), global leaders (e.g., Caligiuri and Tarique, 2012), and global or multicultural teams (e.g., Yitmen, 2013). Given the increased globalization in multiple organizational settings, the need to appropriately define and measure cross cultural performance is becoming more pronounced.

To date, much of the cross cultural management research has centered its focus on the operationalization of predictors that influence how individuals perform in cross cultural situations. There is a wide body of research examining constructs such as cross cultural competence, cultural intelligence, and intercultural competence, which are terms that have sometimes been used interchangeably (Deardorff, 2015), but are generally conceptualized as some combination of knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics that enable individuals to perform effectively in cross cultural settings (Ang and Van Dyne, 2008; Charleston et al., 2018; Chiu et al., 2013; Gallus et al., 2014; Hammer et al., 2003; Jyoti and Kour, 2017; Li, 2020; Velez-Calle et al., 2018).

Upon closer examination of the research on cross cultural competence, cultural intelligence, intercultural competence, and related constructs, most of the time, the predicted outcome of these constructs has not been well-defined or consistently measured. There is generally a lack of research that explicitly focuses on providing an unambiguous definition regarding what constitutes successful performance in cross cultural interactions, or what we will refer to as cross cultural performance (e.g., Kour, 2017; Lima et al., 2016; Velez-Calle, 2018).  Few studies have explicitly defined (e.g., Gallus et al., 2014; Klafehn et al., 2013) or developed specific taxonomies (e.g., Hardison et al., 2009; Wisecarver et al., 2014) of cross cultural performance. More commonly, empirical studies have used any number of inconsistent concepts and measures to represent cross cultural performance including, but not limited to, expatriate failure rates (Chen et al., 2014; Okpara, 2016), subjective adjustment (Matsumoto and Hwang, 2013; Selmer and Lauring, 2016; Okpara, 2016), adaptability and adaptation (Matsumoto and Hwang, 2013), communication competence (Matsumoto and Hwang, 2013), interaction success (Charleston et al., 2018; Matsumoto and Huang, 2013), taking on a task or project (Charleston et al., 2018), multinational team leadership (Hajro and Pudelko, 2010), and multicultural team performance (Matveev and Nelson, 2004). In other words, most research examining cross cultural performance defines the concept using very general and vague terms, such as effective performance, effective interaction, success, functioning, and appropriate behavior in cross cultural contexts (e.g., Charleston et al., 2018; Li, 2020; Velez-Calle et al., 2018) without providing any careful analysis regarding what those terms actually mean and how they should be measured.

Examining the approaches and measures used to assess cross cultural performance also reveals an area ripe for study. There are existing validated measures of cross cultural competence (Matsumoto and Huang, 2013; van Driel and Gabrenya, 2013), cultural intelligence (e.g., Van Dyne et al., 2008), and intercultural competence (e.g., Hammer et al., 2003), and, generally, more research has focused on assessing the predictors of cross cultural performance than on assessing cross cultural performance itself (e.g., Lima et al., 2016; Velez-Calle et al., 2018). While many theoretical and methodological issues remain for existing cross cultural competence measures (van Driel and Gabrenya, 2013), the measurement of cross cultural performance is even less well developed. Cross cultural performance has been assessed using validated measures of adaptability (Lima et al., 2016, Matsumoto and Huang, 2013), adjustment (Chen et al., 2014; Okpara, 2016), and job performance (e.g., Jyoti and Kour, 2017), but no widely accepted and validated measure specific to cross cultural performance currently exists.

Furthermore, criterion measures of cross cultural performance often overlap conceptually with predictor measures. In fact, in some cases, cross cultural competence measures have been used and interpreted as criterion measures of performance (e.g., Lima et al., 2016, Velez-Calle, 2018) rather than as the predictor. Some researchers have argued in favor of more performance-based measures of cross cultural competence and its related constructs (e.g. Deardorff, 2015; Chiu et al., 2013). In other words, there exists ample conceptual muddiness around these concepts that suggests a need to detangle the conceptualization and measurement of cross cultural competence from the conceptualization and measurement of cross cultural performance.

In sum, cross cultural management research seems to be experiencing a criterion problem (Austin and Villanova, 1992) in which there is not a consistent framework for how to define and measure cross cultural performance. Without an agreed upon conceptualization and operationalization, it is difficult to systematically study the nomological network surrounding cross cultural performance in a way that moves toward scientific consensus. As a first step toward addressing this criterion problem within cross cultural management research, we invite scholarly articles that grapple with some aspect of the conceptualization, measurement, and study of cross cultural performance as a criterion in organizational contexts broadly defined (e.g., multi-national corporations, educational settings, non-governmental organizations, military). Consistent with the aim of this call for papers, we are not interested in works that focus primarily or only on predictors of cross cultural performance without giving careful attention to the criterion space, and/or works focused on culture-specific performance (e.g., what behaviors are most appropriate in a certain culture or country). Instead, we aim to bring together a set of scholarly works that clarify or provide novel perspectives on what cross cultural performance is as a criterion before building its nomological network. Submissions may take many forms including empirical studies, theoretical or conceptual papers, or integrative reviews. Ideal submissions will address key issues such as, but not limited to, the following:

• Theoretical/conceptual papers that explicitly and systematically define cross cultural performance and explore the implications of that new conceptualization.
• Theoretical/conceptual papers that explore the nuances of what cross cultural competence is and is not, and how it is similar or different from related concepts such as cultural intelligence, general intelligence/cognitive ability, cross cultural competence or general job performance.
• Theoretical/conceptual and/or measurement-oriented papers exploring the dimensionality of cross cultural performance as a criterion.

• Critical and integrative reviews of existing theories and research regarding cross cultural performance aimed at spurring new theory and research in this area.
• Papers considering the impact of context on cross cultural performance, for example, unifying definitions across multiple organizational contexts, or exploring the nuances of cross cultural performance within a particular/unique context.
• Empirical studies that include predictors of cross cultural performance but that are focused primarily on the conceptualization and/or measurement of cross cultural performance as a criterion rather than just on the predictors.
• Papers that describe the systematic development, validation, and/or use of new methods or tools for assessing cross cultural performance and that highlight implications for future research and/or practice.

Submissions

If you would like to discuss a possible submission, and for any further information, please contact the special editors: Jessica L. Wildman, PhD, at jwildman@fit.edu,  Richard L. Griffith, PhD, at griffith@fit.edu, and Jennifer Klafehn, PhD, at jklafehn@humrro.org. Editors will be reviewing and providing feedback on optional 1000-word abstracts through April 30, 2021. After that date, full papers should be submitted through the IJCCM online submission system. Please visit our SAGE webpages at http://journals.sagepub.com/home/ccm, for more information on formatting and submission criteria, and submit your article via our online submission system at https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/IJCCM, ensuring you submit to the special issue. Submissions are subject to a rigorous double-blind review.

References

Ang S and Van Dyne L (2008) Handbook of cultural intelligence: theory, measurement, and applications. New York, NY: Routledge.

Austin JT and Villanova P (1992) The criterion problem: 1917–1992. Journal of Applied Psychology 77(6): 836–874.

Burke MJ, Watkins MB and Guzman E (2009) Performing in a multi-cultural context: The role of personality. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 33(6): 475–485.

Caligiuri P and Tarique I (2012) Dynamic cross-cultural competencies and global leadership effectiveness. Journal of World Business 47(4): 612–622.

Charleston B, Gajewska-De Mattos H and Chapman M (2018) Cross-cultural competence in the context of NGOs: bridging the gap between ‘knowing’ and ‘doing’. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 29(21): 3068–3092.

Chen ASY, Wu IH and Bian MD (2014) The moderating effects of active and agreeable conflict management styles on cultural intelligence and cross-cultural adjustment. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 14(3): 270–288.

Chiu CY, Lonner WJ, Matsumoto D and Ward C (2013) Cross-cultural competence: Cross-Cultural Competence: Theory, Research, and Application. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 44(6): 843–848.

Deardorff DK (2015) Intercultural competence: Mapping the future research agenda. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 48: 3–5.

Gallus JA, Gouge MC, Antolic E, Fosher K, Jasparro V, Coleman S, Selmeski B and Klafehn, JL (2014) Cross-cultural competence in the department of defense: an annotated bibliography (No. SR-71). Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Fort Belvoir, VA.

Hajro A and Pudelko M (2010) An analysis of core-competences of successful multinational team leaders. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 10(2): 175–194.

Hammer MR, Bennett MJ and Wiseman R (2003) Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The Intercultural Development Inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 27(4): 421–443.

Hammond C and Grosse R (2003) Rich man, poor man: Resources on globalization. Reference Services Review 31(3): 285–295.

Hardison CM, Sims CS, Ali F, Mundell B and Villamizar A (2009) Cross-cultural skills for deployed Air Force personnel: Defining cross-cultural performance. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.

Jyoti J and Kour S (2017) Cultural intelligence and job performance: An empirical investigation of moderating and mediating variables. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 17(3): 305–326.

Klafehn J, Li C and Chiu CY (2013) To know or not to know, is that the question? Exploring the role and assessment of metacognition in cross-cultural contexts. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 44(6): 963–991.

Kour S (2017) Cultural intelligence as an effective cross-cultural competency: A literature review. International Journal in Management & Social Science 5(12): 123–131.

Li M (2020) An examination of two major constructs of cross-cultural competence: Cultural intelligence and intercultural competence. Personality and Individual Differences 164: 1–6.

Lima JE, West GB, Winston BE and Wood JA (2016) Measuring organizational cultural intelligence: The development and validation of a scale. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 16(1): 9–31.

Matsumoto D and Hwang HC (2013). Assessing cross-cultural competence: A review of available tests. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 44(6): 849–873.

Matveev AV and Nelson PE (2004) Cross cultural communication competence and multicultural team performance: Perceptions of American and Russian managers. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 4(2): 253–270.

Okpara JO (2016) Cross-cultural adjustment of expatriates: Exploring factors influencing adjustment of expatriates in Nigeria. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 16(3): 259–280.

Selmer J and Lauring J (2016) Work engagement and intercultural adjustment. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 16(1): 33–51.

Shaffer MA, Kraimer ML, Chen YP and Bolino MC (2012) Choices, challenges, and career consequences of global work experiences: A review and future agenda. Journal of Management 38(4): 1282–1327.

Strauss D (2020) Globalisation Not To Blame For Rise In Inequality, Research Finds. [online] Ft.com. Available at: <https://www.ft.com/content/c8eacdfa-c375-11e9-a8e9-296ca66511c9> [Accessed 14 August 2020].

Van Driel M and Gabrenya Jr WK (2013) Organizational cross-cultural competence: Approaches to measurement. Journal of cross-cultural psychology 44(6): 874–899.

Van Dyne L, Ang S and Koh C (2008) Development and validation of the CQS. In: Ang and Van Dyne (eds) Handbook of cultural intelligence: Theory, measurement, and application. New York, NY: Routledge, pp.16–38.

Velez-Calle A, Roman-Calderon JP and Robledo-Ardila C (2018) The cross-country measurement invariance of the Business Cultural Intelligence Quotient (BCIQ). International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 18(1): 73–86.

Wang D, Freeman S and Zhu CJ (2013) Personality traits and cross-cultural competence of Chinese expatriate managers: A socio-analytic and institutional perspective. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 24(20): 3812–3830.

Wisecarver M, Foldes H, Adis C, Gallus J and Klafehn J (2014). Army Sociocultural Performance Requirements. Personnel Decisions Research Institute Inc, Arlington, Virginia.

Yitmen I (2013) Organizational Cultural Intelligence: A Competitive Capability for Strategic Alliances in the International Construction Industry. Project Management Journal 44(4): 5–25.

Special issue editors:

Madhu Viswanathan, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, mviswana@illinois.edu

Ronika Chakrabarti, Lancaster University, r.chakrabarti@lancaster.ac.uk

Paul Ingenbleek, Wageningen University, paul.ingenbleek@wur.nl

Srinivas Venugopal, University of Vermont, svenugop@uvm.edu

The Journal of Consumer Affairs (JCA) invites papers for a special issue on consumer affairs in subsistence marketplaces. Subsistence marketplaces consist of consumer and entrepreneur communities living at a range of low income levels, and are concentrated in developing countries and regions such as Brazil, India, China, Vietnam, and Sub-Saharan Africa. Additionally, many individuals in developed countries also live in subsistence. 

For more than a decade, the Subsistence Marketplaces Conferences have been a leading forum for evolving and sharing research and fostering best practices for improving quality of life in these communities. The subsistence marketplaces approach is unique in examining the intersection of poverty and marketplaces with a bottom-up approach that begins with micro-level understanding of life circumstances of consumers, entrepreneurs, and communities. This stream has been reflected in seven biennial conferences, one immersion conference [1],  and almost 60 refereed articles in related special journal issues (https://business.illinois.edu/subsistence/conferences/), as well as in dedicated session tracks at other conferences and refereed articles in a variety of journals. The current call flows from the Seventh Conference on Subsistence Marketplaces, held in June 2018, but is also open to authors who did not attend this conference.

The conferences cover themes from consumption and entrepreneurship beyond literacy and resource barriers to consumption and commerce for a better world, impactful research to sustainable innovation, micro-level insights to macro-level impact, spanning geographies and substantive domains, and developing pathways at the intersection of research and practice. 

Encouraging scholarship on subsistence marketplaces addresses one of the most critical and enduring ethical challenges faced by society - that of global poverty. A central theme is how to increase quality of life for people living in subsistence marketplaces. Research on subsistence marketplaces holds the potential to uncover important insights on how poverty intersects with major societal trends of today such as climate change, refugee crises, income inequality and rapid technological advancements. Obtaining deep understanding of these issues will be crucial to advancing well-being in subsistence contexts. 

The following are suggestions for topics; however, submissions may go beyond these topics.

• Consumer behavior in subsistence marketplaces;
• Substantive domains of subsistence (e.g., water, sanitation, energy, food);
• Powerlessness of consumers in subsistence marketplaces;
• Access to innovation and consumer products in impoverished rural areas;
• Interventions to increase quality of life in subsistence marketplaces;
• Environmentalism of subsistence consumers and consumer-merchants;
• Issues of environmental justice relating to subsistence marketplaces;
• Pricing for value and sustainability;
• Economic and financial perspectives on subsistence marketplaces (e.g., financial literacy);
• Health, well-being, and justice in subsistence marketplaces;
• Research methods for subsistence marketplaces.

Researchers in all relevant fields are encouraged to submit their work. Manuscripts may be submitted online through Scholar One Manuscripts. Style guidelines and publishing requirements can be viewed online at wileyonlinelibray.com/journal/JOCA. Please contact the issue editors or the Journal office [ronhill@american.edu] for further information.

Guest Editors: 

Dr. Pavlina Jasovska - University of Technology Sydney, Australia

Associate Professor Danielle Logue - University of Technology Sydney, Australia

Associate Professor Hussain G. Rammal - University of Technology Sydney, Australia 

Deadlines:
Proposals submission: October 15, 2019
Full Chapters Due: January 31, 2020

Objective of the book:

There has been growing attention placed on the role of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial activities in driving global economic growth and also in responding to changing social and environmental conditions affecting societies globally. In itself, the identification and capture of international opportunities represents an act of entrepreneurship by disrupting and creating markets in foreign countries. Historically, the international entrepreneurship literature has focused on the rapid and early internationalization of new ventures and start-ups. Yet an increasing number of multinational enterprises (MNEs) are encouraging and developing corporate intrapreneurship, where managers promote innovation in products and processes. Moreover, various activities by entrepreneurs and their start-ups are solving social, cultural and environmental challenges in foreign markets. This dedicated volume discusses these and other contemporary and emerging issues of entrepreneurship in International Business.

Contributions may address but are not limited to the following topics:

• What are the internationalization and scaling strategies of entrepreneurial firms (e.g., early and rapid internationalization or international withdrawal)?
• How do entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial firms identify new opportunities?
• How does social entrepreneurship address social, cultural and environmental issues?
• How do firms encourage and develop corporate intrapreneurship?
• What is the role of individuals in encouraging entrepreneurship (e.g., new venture owners, female entrepreneurs, expatriates, refugees)?
• What are the strategic responses employed by entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial firms to the institutional environment (i.e. non-market strategies)? 
• How do entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial firms respond to the challenges faced in cross-border activities?

Submissions:

We welcome comparative studies, cross-cultural investigations, case studies, and both qualitative and quantitative approaches to examining entrepreneurship in the context of international business.

We invite chapter proposals of 1,000 words with 5 keywords by October 15, 2019 that outline the focus and contribution of the chapter. Authors will be notified by October 31, 2019 about the status of their proposals and, if accepted, sent chapter guidelines. Full chapters (of between 5,000 and 10,000 words) should be submitted by January 31, 2020. All submitted chapters will be subject to double-blind peer review. Contributors may also be requested to serve as reviewers for this project. 

Submissions or any inquiries should be sent to Pavlina Jasovska (pavlina.jasovska@uts.edu.au), Danielle Logue (danielle.logue@uts.edu.au) and Hussain Rammal (hrammal@gmail.com).

Note: There are no submission or acceptance fees for manuscripts submitted to this book publication. All manuscripts are accepted based on a double-blind peer review editorial process.

Important Dates:

Proposal deadline: October 15, 2019

Acceptance notification: October 31, 2019

Full chapter submission: January 31, 2020

Reviewers’ comments: March 16, 2020

Revised chapters submission: May 15, 2020

It is likely that the book will be published in January, 2021.

Editors

Dr. Mehmet Ali TURKMENOGLU (Assist. Prof.) (PhD from Brunel University London) 
Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Kampusu, IIBF Ofis No 306, Diyarbakır Yolu 7. Km 49250- Muş/TURKEY 
Email: dr.mturkmenoglu@gmail.com

Dr. Berat CICEK (Assist. Prof) 
Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Kampusu, IIBF Ofis No 302, Diyarbakır Yolu 7. Km 49250- Muş/TURKEY 
Email: beratcicek@gmail.com

Dates

Proposals Submission Deadline: June 15, 2019
Full Chapters Due: October 13, 2019
Submission Date: March 4, 2020

Introduction

Over the last few decades, rapid changes have affected organizations' perspectives about employees. One change could be globalisation which caused a tough competition for enterprises. This competition has forced organisations to change the way of doing business which also affected people's expectations from organizations. Other changes include technological, societal, demographical, political, legal, and cultural transformations. These changes have raised awareness of paying attention to the importance of valuing human resources among employers and employees. Therefore, human resources researches have been attractive to business and academic environments to solve problems at work. For instance, globalisation has enabled employees to migrate to other countries and this situation caused to work in a culturally different work environment. Migrating to other countries has created both positive and negative consequences e.g. employers have obtained the talented employees they required and employees have reached to the desired labour market. Employers and employees have benefited from technological developments immensely. But also, it is argued that technology has deteriorated human relations. Ageing has become a major issue for employers rapid changing environment, especially adapting new changes, decreased performance and absenteeism. Opposed to ageing issues, having a rising and modernised education level created opportunities for finding better employees and employers. 
Political and legal changes e.g. minimum wage, maximum working hours and union rights have guaranteed employees' working conditions and rights. In this context, researches of the human resources have concentrated on employees' work-related as well as personal life issues. This book is intended to cover current and future changes, issues, solutions of human resources management from an improving, critical, innovative and contemporary standpoint.

Objective

This book aims to examine attitudes, behaviours, experience, expectations of employees and employers about HR Management in a rapidly changing business environment. In this context, we would like to contribute to the field by shedding light on current trends of Human Resources functions e.g. planning, recruiting, orienting, developing and training and appraising of employees as well as managing industrial relations. In order to meet this aim, we invite authors to focus on especially workplace issues that employees encounter before, during and after employment e.g. discrimination, bullying, conflicts, emotions, ethics, participation and work-life balance. We expect that this book will not only expand the literature but also increase awareness among practitioners. Due to the rising trends such as intellectual capital and talent management, employees are considered more valuable to organizations. Thus, we expect related to mentioned HR issues with an interdisciplinary and critically point of view.

Target Audience

The potential audience will include but not limited to: 
Graduate students, 
PhD Candidates, 
Researchers, 
Business Community, 
Academia, 
Practitioners of profit and non-profit organizations, 
Policymakers

Recommended Topics

Topics below are encouraged for authors to cover but it is not limited to: 
Main Topics 
- Human resources management in a competitive environment with advantages and disadvantages 
- Effects of globalization on human resource management issues 
- Demographic changes and societal transformations & HR Management 
- Critiques of HR Practices 
- Legal and political changes & HR Management 
- Technological developments in HR Management 

Sub Topics related to HR Management 
- Ageing issues 
- Diversity issues 
- Work-life Balance Issues 
- Recruitment Issues 
- Orientation Issues 
- Training and Development Issues 
- Performance Appraisal Issues 
- Downsizing Issues 
- Industrial Relations Issues 
- Ethical Issues 
- Migrant Employment Issues 
- Bullying

Submission Procedure

Researchers and practitioners are invited to submit on or before June 15, 2019, a chapter proposal of 1,000 to 2,000 words clearly explaining the mission and concerns of his or her proposed chapter. Authors will be notified by July15, 2019 about the status of their proposals and sent chapter guidelines. Full chapters are expected to be submitted by October 13, 2019, and all interested authors must consult the guidelines for manuscript submissions at http://www.igi-global.com/publish/contributor-resources/before-you-write/ prior to submission. All submitted chapters will be reviewed on a double-blind review basis. Contributors may also be requested to serve as reviewers for this project. 

Note: There are no submission or acceptance fees for manuscripts submitted to this book publication, Trust in Knowledge Management and Systems in Organizations. All manuscripts are accepted based on a double-blind peer review editorial process. 

All proposals should be submitted through the eEditorial Discovery®TM online submission manager.

Publisher

This book is scheduled to be published by IGI Global (formerly Idea Group Inc.), publisher of the "Information Science Reference" (formerly Idea Group Reference), "Medical Information Science Reference," "Business Science Reference," and "Engineering Science Reference" imprints. For additional information regarding the publisher, please visit www.igi-global.com. 

This publication is anticipated to be released in 2020.

Important Dates

June 22, 2019: Proposal Submission Deadline 
July 15, 2019: Notification of Acceptance 
October 13, 2019: Full Chapter Submission 
November 22, 2019: Review Results Returned 
December 27, 2019: Final Acceptance Notification 
February 21, 2020: Final Chapter Submission

Inquiries

Dr. Mehmet Ali TURKMENOGLU (Assist. Prof.) (PhD from Brunel University London) 
Email: dr.mturkmenoglu@gmail.com

Dr. Berat CICEK (Assist. Prof) 
Email: beratcicek@gmail.com

Propose a chapter for this book

Contextualizing international business research to achieve research rigor and practical relevance is a challenge faced by all sub-disciplines within the domain of international business.  Contextualizing international business research focuses on the big question, 'How do we identify and integrate context into our international business research?' and a corollary, 'Why should we identify and integrate context into our international business research?' We seek submissions for this special issue that explore the implications of context for IB theory building, research design and methodology including methodological approaches to build more robust IB theories; articles that focus on the conceptualization and meaning of context; and limitations of contextualization. Additionally, submissions that demonstrate novel methodological approaches for integrating context into IB theory building are welcome.

When the renowned international business scholar Peter Buckley (2002) questioned the distinctiveness of IB research, he responded to his own question and argued for more integration of culture, more use of comparative studies and of distinctive methods in IB research. Many argue contextual dimensions are what differentiate domestic research from international business and international management research (Buckley, 2002; Child, 2009; Oesterle & Wolf, 2011). Oesterle and Wolf (2011) raised the question, 'how international are our international journals?'  And concluded that context was not adequately or at best modestly addressed in most of our research. We concur.

Despite the urging of thought leaders in IB for more contextualization, our approaches to contextualization appear limited, for example, focusing on categorical data or concepts like country or nationality (Von Glinow & Shenkar, 1994).  They are static since our methods do not appear to be changing despite calls to do so (Buckley, 2002; Child, 2009; Teagarden, et al. 1995). Perhaps, most importantly, the scope of IB is expanding dramatically and our research contextualization appears inadequate, given the shift in business from the United States and Europe toward more 'exotic' emerging markets in Asia, Latin America and Africa with more pronounced differences in business and cultural environments.  For our IB research to remain relevant we must more adequately contextualize our theory building. 

Contextualization has been viewed through many lenses, and at multiple levels of analysis. While focusing on theory building, Whetten (2009) and Tsui (2004) differentiate context-specific and context-bound theory development, and Child (2009) discusses an 'outside in' versus 'inside out' perspective of contextualization. Von Glinow, Shapiro and Brett (2004) and Shapiro, Von Glinow and Xiao (2007) suggest a more complex perspective when they contrast 'single contextuality' with 'polycontextuality' or the multiple and qualitatively different contexts embedded within one another.  Each of these studies acknowledges that context is important in IB theory building and each offer prescriptive recommendations for incorporating context.

Strategists (Ricart et al., 2004, Rugman & Verbeke, 2001) and behaviorists (Rousseau & Fried, 2001; Gelfend, Erez & Aycan, 2007) assert that location, one form of context, has an impact on theory. Khanna (2002) explores institutions and institutional voids in locations. Ghemawat (2001, 2003) examines country differences and offers the CAGE (Culture, Administrative, Geographic and Economic) framework to guide analysis.  Ghemawat (2007) argues that despite globalization, there are significant locational differences that must be considered. Cheng (1994) suggests that context-embedded research ought to include '…a nation's social, cultural, legal, and economic variables as predictors and organizational attributes as dependent variables. Enright (2002) urges the use of multilevel analysis including supranational, macro, meso, micro and firm levels in the integration of location into competitive strategy.  House and colleagues (2004) in their seminal GLOBE study discuss societies and their impact on leadership.  Von Glinow and colleagues (2002 a, 2002 b) identify locational influences on human resource management best practices as do Von Glinow & Teagarden (1988, 1990).  Shapiro and colleagues (2007) identify numerous contextual variables, including location, that address the multiple and qualitatively different contextual variables that influence understanding behavior in China.

Given the magnitude of possible contexts, researchers are challenged to comprehend the contextual and polycontextual dynamics in a limited number of foreign cultures. Tsui (2004) argues for inside-out, context specific indigenous research, and this represents one possible solution to the context challenge. Teagarden and Schotter (2013) and Enright (20020 argue for the importance of multilevel analysis to contextualize research and provide a deeper understanding of phenomena.  Teagarden and colleagues (1995) suggest that team-based comparative-management studies provide the collective understanding to contextualize and make sense of multiple contexts in a single research project.  There have been numerous examples that demonstrate the effectiveness of this latter approach (House, et al., 2004; Von Glinow, Teagarden & Drost, 2002a, 2002b).

The list of topics below is merely suggestive of the range of topics appropriate for the Special Issue, which ideally seeks inputs from scholars across a number of disciplines related to conducting research on organizational, institutional and environmental contexts. Through contributions to this special issue, we aspire to expand the boundaries of rigor and relevance in international business research.

Contributors are invited to submit manuscripts focus on topics and themes such as:

• How important is context to conducting International Business research?
• What are the various methodological approaches used to measure context?
• Is national culture an accurate reflection of context; if not, what other contextual variables better capture the notion of context?
• Do traditional measures of political, institutional, and governance capture important contextual conditions; if not, how are they incomplete and what additional constructs are required to supplement them? 
• How does indigenous research help us uncover multiple contexts?
• What is context-embedded research, and why is it important?
• What role do institutions and institutional voids play in establishing context in International Business research?
• How does the use (or abuse) of context affect rigor or relevance in our theory development?
• How does the use of context help us expand theory in International Business?
• What research methods are most appropriate to uncovering the different and multiple contexts that underlie most international settings?

Submission process:

By 01 November, 2015, authors should submit their manuscripts online via the new Journal of World Business EES submission system. The link for submitting manuscript is: http://ees.elsevier.com/jwb. 

To ensure that all manuscripts are correctly identified for consideration for this Special Issue, it is important that authors select ‘SI: Contextualizing Research’ when they reach the “Article Type” step in the submission process

Manuscripts should be prepared in accordance with the Journal of World Business Guide for Authors available at http://www.elsevier.com/journals/journal-of-world-business/1090-9516/guide-for-authors. All submitted manuscripts will be subject to the Journal of World Business’s blind review process.

We may organize a workshop designed to facilitate the development of papers. Authors of manuscripts that have progressed through the revision process will be invited to it. Presentation at the workshop is neither a requirement for nor a promise of final acceptance of the paper in the Special Issue.

Questions about the Special Issue may be directed to the guest editors:

Mary B. Teagarden, Thunderbird School of Management, Arizona State University, USA (mary.teagarden@asu.edu)

Mary Ann Von Glinow, Florida International University, USA (vonglino@fiu.edu) 

References:

Buckley, P.J. (2002) 'Is the international business research agenda running out of steam?', Journal of International Business Studies, 33(2): 365-373.

Cheng, J.L.C. (1994) 'On the concept of universal knowledge in organization science: implications for cross-national research', Management Science, 40: 162-168.

Child, J. (2009) 'Context, Comparison, and methodology in Chinese Management Research', Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 57-73.

Enright, M.J. (2002) 'Globalization, regionalization, and the knowledge-based economy in Hong Kong.  In J.H. Dunning (ed.) Regions, Globalization and the Knowledge-based Economy, Oxford University Press: Oxford, pp. 381-406.

Gelfend, M.J., Erez, M.and Aycan, Z. (2007) 'Cross-cultural organizational behavior', Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 479-514.

Ghemawat, P. (2001) 'Distance still matters', Harvard Business Review, 79(8), September: 137-147.

Ghemawat, P. (2003) 'Semiglobalization and international business strategy', Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2): 138-152.

Ghemawat, P. (2007) 'Why the world isn't flat', Foreign Policy, March-April: 54-60.

House, R. J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P.W. and Gupta, V. (2004) Culture, Leadership and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. Sage.

Khanna, T. (2000) Local Institutions and Global Strategy, Harvard Business School: Boston, Harvard Business School Note No. 702-475.

Oesterle, M.J. and Wolf, J.M. (2011) '50 years of MIR and IB/IM research; an inventory and some suggestions for the fields development', Management International Review, 51: 735-757.

Ricart, J.E., Enright, M.J., Ghemawat, P., Hart, S.L., and Khanna, T. (2004) 'New frontiers in international strategy', Journal of International Business Studies, 35: 175-200.

Rousseau, D.M. and Fried, Y. (2001) 'Location, location, location: contextualizing organizational research', Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22: 1-13.

Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2001) 'Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises', Strategic Management Journal, 23(3): 237-250.

Shapiro, D.L., Von Glinow, M.A. and Xiao Z. (2007) 'Toward polycontextually sensitive research methods', Management and Organization Review, 3(1): 129-152.

Shenkar, O. and Von Glinow, M.A. (1994) 'Paradoxes of organizational theory and research: using the case of China to illustrate national contingency', Management Science, 40: 56-71.

Teagarden, M.B. and Schotter, A. (2013) 'Favor prevalence in emerging markets: a multi-level analysis of social capital', Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(2): 447-460.

Teagarden, M.B., M.A. Von Glinow, D. Bowen, C. Frayne, S. Nason, P. Huo, J. Milliman, M.C. Butler, M.E. Arias, N.H. Kim, H. Scullion and K.B. Lowe (1995). 'Toward building a theory of comparative management research methodology: An idiographic case study of the best international human resources management project', Academy of Management Journal, 38(5): 1261-1287.

Tsui, A.S. (2004) 'Contributing to global management knowledge: a case for high quality indigenous research', Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21: 491-513.

Von Glinow, M.A. and Teagarden, M.B. (2009) 'The future of Chinese management research: rigor and relevance redux', Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 75-89.

Von Glinow, M.A. and Teagarden M.B. (1990). 'Contextual determinants of human resource management effectiveness in international cooperative alliances: evidence from the People's Republic of China',  International Human Resource Management Review, 1: 75-93.

Von Glinow, M.A. and Teagarden M.B. (1988). 'The transfer of human resource management technology in Sino-U.S. cooperative ventures: problems and solutions', Human Resource Management, 27(2), Summer: 201-229.

Von Glinow, M.A, Teagarden, M.B. and Drost E. (2002a). 'Converging on IHRM best practices: lessons learned from a globally-distributed consortium on theory and practice', Human Resource Management, Special Issue, 41(1): 123-140.

Von Glinow, M.A, Teagarden, M.B. and Drost E. (2002b). 'Converging on IHRM best practices: lessons learned from a globally-distributed consortium on theory and practice', Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resource Management, Special Issue, 40 (1): 123-140.

Whetten, D. (2009) 'An examination between context and theory applied to the study of organizations in China', Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 29-55.

Guest Editors:

Crystal Jiang Ph.D., Bryant University, cjiang1@bryant.edu

Irem Demirkan Ph.D., Loyola University Maryland, idemirkan@loyola.edu

Qin Yang Ph.D., Robert Morris University, yang@rmu.edu

Submission deadline: September 15, 2017

Special Issue Theme Background

This New England Journal of Entrepreneurship (NEJE) special issue on ‘Corporate Entrepreneurship in Emerging Markets’ aims to explore key features of the corporate entrepreneurship in emerging economies.

It is widely accepted in the literature that corporate entrepreneurship encompasses two main phenomena of innovation and venturing (Yiu & Lau, 2008). While innovation refers to introduction of new products and production processes for improved firm performance, the focus on venturing is the creation of new businesses.

Corporate entrepreneurship can be a necessary driver for economic growth, new sources of employment, and an important source for reducing economic disparity. Contextual factors and social mechanisms are very important for entrepreneurship (Antio, Kenney, Mustar, Siegel & Wright, 2014; van Burg & Romme, 2014). For instance, firms’ corporate entrepreneurship interplays with government institutions (Holmes, Zahra, Hoskisson, DeGhetto & Sutton, 2016). However, studies focusing on corporate entrepreneurship, specifically those look into the roles of innovation and new venture creation have been neglected in emerging economies nations. Although corporate entrepreneurship can make a big difference in the firm competitiveness of emerging markets (Bruton, Ahlstrom & Obloj, 2008; Guo, Jiang, & Yang, 2014), the literature is still lacking in exploring the dynamics of corporate entrepreneurship in these contexts (e.g., De Clercq, Danis & Dakhli, 2010; Kiss, Danis & Cavusgil, 2012).

Emerging markets are defined as low-income, rapid-growth countries where government policies encourage economic liberalization. Emerging markets includes 51 developing countries in Asia, Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East and 13 transition economies (Hoskisson, Eden, Lau, & Wright, 2000). Emerging markets offer not only market potential but also a competitive advantage of their own as they become increasingly integrated into the global economy. Moreover during the last decade, emerging markets have assumed a prominent position in the global economy and they account for more than half of world GDP (IMF). Owning to their weak legal environment and resource deficiency, emerging market firms have been found to access to all possible sources of competitive strength (Contractor, 2013) and exploit unique firm-specific advantages for corporate entrepreneurship activities (Jiang, Yang, Song, & Annavarjula, 2016; Kotabe, Jiang, & Murray, 2016;  Luo & Rui, 2010). Therefore, the need to open up the issue of corporate entrepreneurship as a significant source of firm competitiveness in these economies will fill an important void not only in corporate entrepreneurship, but also in emerging market management literatures.

Overall, the guest editors hope that the NEJE special issue will contribute to establishing the groundwork for corporate entrepreneurship in emerging markets that potentially inform both management research and practice for the future.

Potential Research Questions

The following list of research questions is neither intended to be exhaustive nor complete.

• How does unique setting of emerging markets foster corporate entrepreneurship?
• What are the processes of corporate entrepreneurship of firms in emerging markets?
• How do technological forces drive the process of innovation in emerging markets?
• What are the implications of government involvement in emerging markets on corporate entrepreneurship? How can firms from emerging markets create and protect their propriety technologies while competing globally?
• How can firms from emerging markets benefit from the pursuit of corporate entrepreneurship?
• Do firm characteristics matter in the pursuit of its corporate entrepreneurship from emerging markets including but not limited to firm size, firm age, industry, geographical locations, and among others? Do differences in ownership (ex. State owned enterprises, family businesses, business groups) common to emerging markets matter in pursuit of corporate entrepreneurship?
• Does internationalization of firms from emerging markets stimulate corporate entrepreneurship? Why and how?
• Are multinational corporations operating in emerging markets in a more favorable position than local firms in the pursuit of corporate entrepreneurship?
• Compared with developed economies, does the nature of corporate entrepreneurship change in some way in emerging economies?

Questions about the special issue may be directed to any of the guest editors: Crystal Jiang (cjiang1@bryant.edu), Irem Demirkan (idemirkan@loyola.edu), and Qin Yang (yang@rmu.edu).

Notes for Prospective Authors:

Submitted papers should not have been previously published nor be currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.

All papers are refereed through a double-blind rigorous developmental peer review process.

All papers must be submitted online. Submission guidelines are available at http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/neje/policies.html.

Important Dates:

Submission of manuscripts: September 15, 2017

Notification to authors: November 15, 2017

Final versions due: January 31, 2018

Publication date: Spring, 2018

References:

Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2014). Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of context, Research Policy, 43(7), 1097-1108.

Bruton, G., Ahlstrom, D., & Obloj, K. (2008). Entrepreneurship in emerging economics: where are we today and where should the research go in the future? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 1-14.

Contractor, F.  (2013). “Punching above their weight”: The sources of competitive advantage for emerging market multinationals, International Journal of Emerging Markets, 8(4), 304-328.

De Clercq, D., Danis, W., & Dakhli, M. (2010). The moderating effect of institutional context on the relationship between associational activity and new business activity in emerging economies, International Business Review, 19(1), 85-101.

Guo, C., Jiang, C., Yang, Q. (2014). The development of organizational capabilities and corporate entrepreneurial processes: The case of Chinese automobile firms. Thunderbird International Business Review, 56(6): 483-500.

Holmes, R.M., Zahra, S.A., & Hoskisson, R.E. (2016). Two-way streets:Tthe role of institutions and technology policy in firms’ corporate entrepreneurship and political strategies, Academy of Management Perspectives, 30(3), 247-272.

Hoskisson, R.E., Eden, L., Lau, C.M., & Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 249-267.

Jiang,C., Yang, Q., Song, S., Annavarjula, M. (2016). Emerging market firms’ catch-up strategy in new product development: Cases from Chinese companies. International Journal of Business and Emerging Markets, 8(3): 324-339.

Kiss, A., Danis, W., & Cavusgil, S. (2012). International entrepreneurship research in emerging economies: A critical review and research agenda, Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2), 266-290.

Kotabe, M., Jiang, C., & Murray, J. (forthcoming). Examining the complementary effect of political networking capability with absorptive capacity on the innovative performance of emerging-market firms. Journal of Management (online available).

Luo, Y., & Rui, H. (2010). An ambidexterity perspective toward multinational enterprises from emerging economies. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(4), 49-70.

Van Burg, E., & Romme, A. (2014). Creating the future together: Toward a framework for research synthesis in entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 38(2), 369-397.

Yiu, D., & Lau, C.M. (2008). Corporate entrepreneurship as resource capital configuration in emerging market firms. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 32, 37-58.

Aims and Scope

Corporate failures resulting from financial instability or scandal have serious negative consequences for all stakeholders, including employees, business partners, investors, creditors, auditors, regulators, capital markets, and society at large. The impact is even more severe when these events happen concurrently with economic stress, such as during the recent financial crisis, or when they occur on an industrywide basis, such as with the diesel emission scandal. This can lead to widespread negative effects in a particular country, or even unfold contagion effects across countries and industries. Furthermore, the effects of these events are usually profound, and can range from long-lasting negative reputational damage to the collapse of entire industries.

Establishing a clear understanding of the drivers of corporate failure is key. Unfortunately, the task has been overly challenging for researchers, partly because of misconceptions about how exactly to define it. Corporate failure has generally been deemed the cessation of operations by a corporation due to involvement in court procedures, or voluntary actions such as bankruptcy. We believe in taking a somewhat broader view of corporate failure, whereby a firm may be considered a failure if it does not meet particular objectives set forth by shareholders, stakeholders, and management. This type of failure is often linked with various agency problems, ineffective corporate governance, and misplaced incentives.

Some recent scandals and corporate failures of large corporations have underscored the impact on the capital market and society as a whole. They have highlighted the need for regulators to rethink regulatory frameworks and enforcement, and for corporations to rework their organizational structures and business ethics. For example, the financial industry appears especially prone to scandals, even after the hard lessons of the financial crises. Several large global banks, including Deutsche Bank, Merrill Lynch, Santander, JPMorgan, and Commerzbank, were involved in one of the largest tax evasion trading schemes in history, referred to as "cum-ex," where bank clients falsely claimed multiple tax rebates on capital gains taxes. This resulted in treasury costs of about €55.2bn. Similarly, major banks were accused of committing fraud and collusion in their rate submissions to LIBOR, which is the underlying for many derivatives and contracts, including mortgages.

However, even the perceived saviors in the finance arena called “Fintech” have disrupted the industry itself by increasing the margin pressure on established banks. Margin pressure was cited as the primary reason behind Wells Fargo’s recent scandal, where the bank charged over 800,000 customers for unwanted auto insurance. And Fintechs also seem to have become victims of their own success and high growth. For example, shares of the financial service provider Wirecard dropped by 25% on January 30, 2019, after it was accused of using forged contracts in multiple suspicious transactions.

Another example is the rise of Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs). This less regulated form of crowdsales, created to raise funds through a blockchain by selling venture-related tokens or coins in exchange for legal tender or cryptocurrencies, garnered enormous attention during 2017 and 2018. ICOs ultimately raised tens of billions of dollars. Unfortunately, according to Statis Group, about 80% of the transactions completed in 2017 have been identified as scams.

All of these recent events have raised fundamental questions that will be addressed in this special issue. We welcome the submission of research papers on the following topics:

Insider Trading

• What problems are associated with current insider trading regulations, and how can we improve the regulatory framework (e.g., penalties for breaking the law) to ensure effective enforcement of current laws?
• What are the direct and indirect detection mechanisms for illegal insider trading? What is an optimal and reliable detection policy?
• What ethical and economic issues are associated with insider trading, and how do they interact?

Market Manipulation

• How do accounting scandals affect firm, market, and investor confidence? What are the most effective methods to restore investor confidence after a major corporate scandal?
• What aspects of corporate governance structures and executive compensation schemes encourage or prevent managers from engaging in fraudulent or deceptive conduct?
• How do disclosure-disciplining mechanisms in general, and shareholder litigation in particular, mitigate the problem of illegal or unethical insider behavior? What are the problems associated with the current laws, and what potential new regulations could improve the regulatory framework?

Tax Evasion

• How does a firm’s corporate governance structure impact illegal tax evasion behavior? And how do managerial incentives (versus shareholder value maximization) motivate tax avoidance behavior?
• What are the economic impacts of tax evasion on firm value, and how does it differ among countries with different legal and cultural environments?
• How do offshore intermediaries help firms evade taxes and violate regulations? What potential channels could improve regulation?
• What are the most effective detection mechanisms to uncover tax evasion? And how does detection probability affect their use by firms?

High Frequency Trading (HFT)

• What are the positive and negative impacts of HFT and algorithmic trading on the equity market?
• What problems are associated with the current and suggested regulations on HFT (e.g., a per trade tax, implementation of fees, restricting the number of cancelled orders, etc.)? How can we improve HFT regulations in order to block potential channels for financial misconduct?
• What are the potential ethical/legal problems arising from the use of sophisticated and high-speed computer programs for generating, routing, and executing orders? How does it affect investor confidence (and also fairness perception) in financial markets?

Initial Coin Offerings and Crypto Assets

• What legal issues are associated blockchain-based coins and tokens?
• What are the potential channels for digital currency scams, and how can the regulatory framework be improved to mitigate the problem?
• What are the benefits and costs associated with crypto assets?
• How should the Initial Coin Market be regulated?

Details of Paper Submission and Due Date

Interested contributors should submit preferably full papers (only in English), but extended abstracts (1,000 to 1,500 words) may also be considered if they show considerable promise no later than September 30, 2019. Papers are submitted to the attention of the Guest Editors Rebel Cole (coler@fau.edu), Sofia Johan (sjohan@fau.edu), and Denis Schweizer (denis.schweizer@concordia.ca) with the subject heading: "Corporate Failures: Declines, Collapses and Scandals."

Based on these drafts, the Guest Editors in consultation with the Scientific Committee Members will select manuscripts that are most likely to result in first-rate, high-impact publications. Authors will be notified on or before November 30, 2019 if their papers are accepted for presentation at the International Conference on Corporate Failures: Declines, Collapses and Scandals that will be held the College of Business, Florida Atlantic University (Boca Raton, U.S.) February 29, 2020. Following the conference, authors will be invited to revise their papers based on the Guest Editors’ comments and those from the discussants and conference participants. Authors will then be asked to submit their revised version through the journal portal (https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-corporate-finance/) by August 1, 2020, to be peer-reviewed by two anonymous referees based on Guest Editors recommendation. Journal of Corporate Finance General Editors will make final decisions. After the normal review process, we expect to publish the Special Issue during the second half of 2021.

The International Conference on Corporate Failures: Declines, Collapses and Scandals will be conjointly organized by John Molson School of Business (Concordia University, Montreal, Canada) and Florida Atlantic University (Boca Raton, U.S.)

OVERVIEW: The objective of this Special Issue is to address theoretical and empirical gaps in prior Finance and International Business (IB) studies associated with corporate governance problems and the effectiveness of governance solutions in the context of multi-national enterprises (MNEs).  The last decade has witnessed significant growth in both policy and research devoted to the corporate governance of MNEs.  While IB and corporate finance research continue to evaluate the challenges facing MNEs in foreign product and capital markets, scholars have yet to adequately address the underlying corporate governance challenges, especially when MNEs operate in different industry and formal regulatory and informal normative and cultural institutional contexts.  We invite submissions with a focus on the complex interface between firm-level governance mechanisms and diverse institutional contexts, including legal, economic, cultural and political institutions, that have a profound impact on various organizational outcomes of MNEs, such as capital structure, global business strategy including, for example, cross-border M&As, non-market strategies, and performance.  This Special Issue will attempt to extend our understanding of governance issues in MNEs to embrace corporate finance, strategy and knowledge dimensions together with contextual issues related to national and global institutions.

TOPICS: The Special Issue welcomes both theoretical and empirical papers.  Topics for the Special Issue can include, but are not limited to:            

• The role of institutions and national business systems in corporate governance of MNEs.
• Complementarities and substitution among governance mechanisms at the firm-, industry- and macro-levels.
• Ownership and control structures in MNEs and their impact on global strategy and performance.
• Institutional voids and governance in global business groups, especially in emerging markets.
• The family-centric governance model in MNEs and its organizational effects.
• The governance role of global financial institutions and institutional investors including private equity and sovereign wealth funds (SWFs).
• The role of political connections and business networks in governance of emerging market MNEs.
• Executive incentives and their performance outcomes in the global business context.
• The role of informal institutions in the governance of MNEs, including normative, cognitive and cultural aspects.
• The inter-relationships between governance, institutions and the capital raising strategies of MNEs.
• The influence of legal and regulatory institutions on the governance of MNEs.
• Institutions, governance, and non-market strategies of MNEs.
• The influence of institutions and industry context on the balance between monitoring, strategic and legitimacy roles of governance in the MNE context.
• The governance aspects of MNEs’ global networks. The headquarter-subsidiary governance relationships.
• The impact of competition in both product and capital markets on governance of MNEs.
• The interactive effects of institutions and the external governance of third party “gatekeepers” (e.g., stock market analysis, bank-underwriters etc.) on MNE outcomes.

PAPER SUBMISSION PROCEDURE:  Authors are asked to submit a full article by February 27, 2017. All submissions must adhere to the Journal of Corporate Finance editorial guidelines (http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-corporate-finance/). The papers will be screened initially by Special Issue’s Editors. The short-listed papers will go through the JCF regular review process according to standard journal policy. The first round of reviews will be followed by a paper development conference that will be held at the University of Georgia campus in Atlanta, Georgia (USA) on August 2-3, 2017.  Acceptance to the conference does not guarantee acceptance into the Special Issue.

DEADLINE: February 27, 2017  

There is growing interest among scholars concerning the managerial implications of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and related areas such as firm sustainability. Because of the rise in consumer, investor, supplier, and worker demands for CSR, managers have begun to ask important questions regarding how to manage these activities and how to allocate resources to them. All of this has led to a strong organizational and community demand for research on CSR-related topics such as environmental responsibility, sustainability, and the appropriate management of stakeholders (including employee relations issues). In addition, practitioners seek knowledge that can be used to better manage employees in organizational settings vis-à-vis CSR.

Despite increasing attention, CSR research is still in an embryonic stage, with critical issues regarding frameworks and empirical methods yet to be resolved. Furthermore, much of the research to date has largely involved a macro level of analysis, focusing on such issues as understanding the relationship between CSR and the financial performance of firms. To achieve a more complete perspective on CSR, however, theory and research will need to address more micro-level human resource management and organizational behavior issues. As such, the primary goal of this special issue is to serve as a catalyst for scholarly work on CSR that expands the domain from an exclusive focus on the macro level of analysis to an inclusive focus that incorporates issues more directly related to human resource management and organizational behavior.

Original empirical research, theory development, meta-analytic reviews, and narrative literature reviews are all potentially appropriate for inclusion in the special issue. A number of topic areas that are commonly addressed by Personnel Psychology are potentially relevant to CSR issues. Some research questions that might be addressed in this special issue include (but are not limited to):

• How is CSR related to leadership and the characteristics of top executives?
• Can human resource management or organizational behavior offer innovative approaches to the study or measurement of CSR?
• How are ethical decision-making processes related to CSR endeavors?
• What implications do traditional human resource systems (e.g., selection, training, performance management, work design) have for effective adoption or implementation of CSR?
• What is the relationship between organizational culture/climate and CSR?
• Can CSR have an effect on employee identity?
• Is it appropriate for job analysis, recruitment, selection, appraisal, reward, and training processes to take into account CSR, and if so, how might such processes be designed?
• How does CSR affect employee-based indicators of effectiveness, such as absenteeism or turnover rates?
• What is the relationship between CSR and international human resource management?
• What are the effects of programs whereby employees engage in community service activities while receiving compensation from their firms?
• Is there a relationship between diversity and CSR?
• What are the implications of CSR for strategic human resource management?
• How do CSR policies or practices relate to employee work attitudes or morale?

Submission Process and Timeline
To be considered for the special issue, manuscripts must be submitted no later than December 31, 2011, U.S. Eastern Standard Time. Papers may be submitted prior to this deadline as well. Submitted papers will undergo a double-blind review process and will be evaluated by at least two reviewers and a special issue editor. Final acceptance is contingent on the review team’s judgments of the paper’s contribution on four key dimensions:

1. Theoretical contribution: Does the article offer new and innovative ideas and insights or meaningfully extend existing theory?
2. Empirical contribution: Does the article offer new and unique findings and is the study design, data analysis, and results rigorous and appropriate in testing the hypotheses or research questions?
3. Practical contribution: Does the article contribute to the improved management of people in organizations?
4. Contribution to the special issue topic.

Authors should prepare their manuscripts for blind review according to the directions provided in the 2010 Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Be sure to remove any information that may potentially reveal the identity of the authors to the review team.

Manuscripts should be submitted electronically at:
http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ppsych

One notable feature of corporate social responsibility (CSR) is its fundamentally contested and socially constructed nature. While CSR has been typically seen in terms of voluntary and firmspecific phenomena in prior research, what constitutes responsible or irresponsible corporate behaviour depends very much on the wider institutional setting and how it defines and regulates legitimate corporate action. Corporations are embedded in wider societal and political arrangements and participate in local, national, and transnational polities. While CSR research widely acknowledges the importance of stakeholder salience and institutional context in shaping CSR, the role of institutions and processes of institutional change for CSR has remained under-explored. A second, less studied, aspect of the comparative, and therefore collective, character of CSR concerns the importance of norms, conventions, and expectations of appropriate conduct that originate outside of firms’ organisational field. Such norms and standards of behaviour often relate to differences between countries in formal regulatory institutions or in normative or cultural conventions regarding business conduct.

Researchers have recently shown particular interest in the intersection of CSR and institutional theory (Aguilera & Jackson, 2003; Campbell, 2006; Matten & Moon, 2008). The study of institutions brings light to how responsible and irresponsible behaviour of corporations is framed by wider social and political frames. Apart from mapping out new conceptual space in the understanding of CSR, an institutional perspective beyond the immediate organisational fields of individual companies has recently generated interest through the developments in the world economy in the late 2000s. The so-called ‘financial crisis’ has not only surfaced novel forms of corporate irresponsibility but in fact has unmasked the pivotal role of private corporations for a host of issues hitherto seen as core expectations on governments. The institutional embeddedness and governance mechanisms with which business and societies are mutually interdependent have given rise to novel ways of thinking not only about CSR, but in fact about the role of the institution of the modern (global) corporation Crouch, 2004, 2009).

While institutions shape how firms respond to a variety of social and environmental issues, research has shown that companies are not passive actors in processes of institutional entrepreneurship and development, particularly in contexts characterised by weak, underdeveloped, or unenforced institutional arrangements. The presence of such ‘institutional voids’ presents particular opportunities and challenges for understanding and enacting corporate responsibilities.

Multinational companies face particular difficulties in developing and implementing approaches to the management of their social responsibilities when operating across diverse institutional environments.

The goals of this Special Issue are to (a) stimulate innovative research on the social and political embeddedness of CSR within a variety of local, sectoral, national, and international settings; (b) develop conceptual tools for understanding the intersection of CSR with regulatory institutions, as well as diverse institutions of economic governance or “varieties of capitalism”; and (c) advance our understanding of CSR as a process of governance, whereby responsible and irresponsible behaviour is socially defined, contested, and sanctioned by various stakeholders with different degrees of power and influence over corporate decision-making. We invite theoretical and empirical papers from a variety of traditions in thinking about and studying institutions. The following is a list of indicative, but not exhaustive, topic areas:

• CSR in cross-national comparison: institutional diversity and CSR; varieties of capitalism and corporate responsibility; implicit vs. explicit forms of CSR
• CSR and state regulation: the implications of liberal or interventionist forms of state intervention for defining the social space of CSR; framing of CSR in the context of different forms of statehood; CSR as a substitute for formal regulation; the role of CSR within “institutional voids” or areas of limited statehood
• Diffusion of CSR: understanding the spread and form of CSR initiatives; regulative, normative, and mimetic forms of isomorphism
• Standard setting: standard setting with regard to social, environmental or governance standards; use of social branding and labeling; regulation of social and environmental disclosure
• Stakeholder power and influence: local actor constellations and power dynamics; the role of unions in implementing CSR initiatives; forms of influence by NGOs, media, or other civil society actors
• Reputation as a governance mechanism: role of responsible and irresponsible behavior in shaping reputation;
• Historical perspectives on CSR: origins of CSR in different countries or sectors; long-term changes in the relationship between the state, civil society and corporations.

Submissions
Socio-Economic Review (SER) aims to encourage work on the relationship between society, economy, institutions and markets, moral commitments and the rational pursuit of self-interest. The journal seeks articles that focus on economic action in its social and historical context. In broad disciplinary terms, papers are drawn from sociology, political science, economics and the management and policy sciences. The journal encourages papers that seek to recombine disciplinary domains in response to practically relevant issues, while at the same time encouraging the
development of new theory.

Papers should be submitted by email to Gregory Jackson (email: gregory.jackson@fu-berlin.de). Please prepare manuscripts according to the guidelines shown at ser.oxfordjournals.org. The
maximum length of articles including references, notes and abstract is 10,000, and the minimum length is 6,000 words. Articles must be accompanied by an abstract of no more than 150 words. The main document has to be anonymous and should contain title, abstract, and strictly avoid selfreferences. Papers will be reviewed following the journal’s normal review process and criteria. Papers accepted into the revision stage will be presented and discussed with the Guest Editors at a workshop which will be organized in conjunction with the SASE annual conference on June 23-25, 2010 held at the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain (for details, see www.sase.org). 

For further information please contact any of the Guest Editors for this Special Issue:

Steve Brammer: mnssjab@management.bath.ac.uk
Gregory Jackson: gregory.jackson@fu-berlin.de
Dirk Matten: dmatten@schulich.yorku.ca

Special issue call for papers from International Marketing Review

Guest Editors

Pervez N. Ghauri, King’s College London, United Kingdom
Byung Il Park, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, South Korea
Chang Hoon Oh, Simon Fraser University, Canada

Purpose and Research Questions

Despite the recent economic slump and subsequent fluctuations of development activities in some markets, the general trend of economic growth around the globe has continuously shown upward movement over the last three decades. Along with the improvement in the quality of life, consumers are paying more attention to ethical and philanthropic activities of Multinational Enterprises (MNEs). Due to this phenomenon, corporate social responsibility (CSR) research is growing in importance. Scholarly evidence increasingly confirms that CSR activities are beneficial for corporate success (e.g., Orlitzky et al., 2003; Waddock and Graves, 1997). We presume that this is probably because consistent CSR activities induce a corporation's image enhancement, which subsequently results in consumer's trust in its products (Turker, 2009). Taken together, there is a general consensus that CSR is often considered as a key factor significantly influencing market image and corporate success at home as well as in international markets.

Reflecting the trend discussed above, scholars and business practitioners perceive CSR as an integral part of marketing strategy. In addition, in order to maximize shareholder wealth by carrying out actions that increase business profit, various stakeholders also need to be convinced that the company is a good citizen in the society (Freeman, 1984). Meanwhile, it should be noted that among all the stakeholders, one important group that appears to be particularly influential for firms to initiate CSR activities is consumers (Du, Bhattacharya and Sen, 2010). Considering the globalization of the markets, companies need to create a positive image in all international markets. However, a thorough review of the literature indicates that most studies exploring CSR are concentrated only on Domestic Marketing (e.g., the impact of CSR on consumer loyalty in the local markets) (see e.g., Adams, Licht and Sagiv, 2011; Muller and Kräussl, 2011; Luo and Bhattacharya, 2006; Lai et al., 2010), which clearly indicates that CSR research tends to have an implied domestic marketing bias and very little research into CSR issues has considered CSR’s international marketing implications.

CSR activities can also be used as a valuable international marketing strategy. For instance, some studies in International Marketing suggest that CSR by international marketers will significantly improve their national and corporate brands in developing and emerging markets (Torres et al., 2012). As another example, the spread of good word-of-mouth about desirable business practices between international consumers is definitely crucial for multinational enterprises to achieve successful subsidiary operations in foreign markets (Luo and Bhattacharya, 2006). Despite these facts, it is hard to find scholarly attention paid to the discussions linking international marketers, their CSR behavior and its influence on success/failure in foreign markets. Many major questions thus remain unanswered with respect to the nature and consequences of CSR activity for MNEs’ marketing strategies.

The aim of this special issue is to bring together theoretical and empirical advancements connecting CSR and international marketing issues. We seek both theoretical and empirical papers that may address, but are not limited to, the following list of potential research questions:

• Do international marketers' CSR practices function as a catalyst enhancing international competitiveness and organizational performance in foreign markets?
• Does good corporate image derived from CSR practices play a pivotal role in acquiring local market information and eventually improving competitiveness in international markets?
• What are the motivations for CSR practices in foreign markets? Is there any particular relationship between the level of foreign CSR and national brand enhancement? Is there a difference in motivations between the CSR activities of international marketers in developed and developing nations?
• How do international marketers adapt themselves to host country CSR practices and regulations? What factors influence this adaptation? Does this adaptation process increase the brand value of MNEs?
• Do international marketers adopt standardized CSR practices, or do they adapt their approaches to host countries? What are the potential benefits/drawbacks and other marketing related consequences?
• Are the marketing-related and ethically-related benefits of CSR activities universal across foreign markets?
• Do foreign firms’ advanced environmental and marketing capabilities affect their CSR practices and brand image?
• How do firms transform environmental capability in order to internationally link it to marketing advantages under the institutional void (i.e., in least developed countries)?
• How do international marketers manage their CSR best practices in different local market environments?
• What are international marketing strategies of social enterprises?
• Is the CSR activity of global marketing firms related to the development of country of origin perceptions, country image or consumer ethnocentrism?
• Do MNEs in developed and emerging markets differ with respect to their CSR activity, and if so, why? Does it matter in terms of marketing success?
• Multinational CSR activity: what is it and how should it be measured?
• What is the impact of CSR communications on employee citizenship behavior across different markets?
• Do consumers, employees and investors in different countries respond differently to CSR activities and communications?

Submission Instructions

The deadline for submissions is 31 March 2014. Submissions should be made via ScholarOne Manuscripts: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/imrev

All submissions will be subject to the regular double-blind peer review process at the International Marketing Review. The guest editors are seeking reviewers for this issue and are soliciting nominations and volunteers to participate as reviewers. Please contact the guest editors to volunteer or nominate a reviewer.

More Information

To obtain additional information, please contact the guest editors:

Pervez N. Ghauri, King’s College, London (pervez.ghauri@kcl.ac.uk)
Byung Il Park, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (leedspark@hufs.ac.kr)
Chang Hoon Oh, Simon Fraser University (coh@sfu.ca)

References

Adams, R. B., Licht, A. N., and Sagiv, L. (2011), “Shareholders and stakeholders: how do directors decide?”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 32, pp. 1331-1355.
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B. and Sen, S. (2010). “Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 8-19.
Freeman, R. E. (1984), Strategic Management: A stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.
Lai, C. S., Chiu, C. J., Yang, C. F., and Pai, D. C. (2010), “The effects of corporate social responsibility on brand performance: the mediating effect of industrial brand equity and corporate reputation”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 95, pp. 457-469.
Luo, X., and Bhattacharya, B. (2006), “Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70, pp. 1-18.
Muller, A., and Kräussl, R. (2011), “Doing good deeds in times of need: a strategic perspective on corporate disaster donations”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 32, pp. 911-929.
O’Shaughnessy, K. C., Gedajlovic, E. and Reinmoeller, P. (2007), “The influence of firm, industry and network on the corporate social performance of Japanese firms”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 24, pp. 283-303.
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F., and Rynes, S. (2003). “Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis”, Organization Studies, Vol. 24, pp. 403–441.
Torres, A., Bijmolt, T. H. A., Tribo, J. A., and Verhoef, P. (2012), “Generating global brand equity through corporate social responsibility to key stakeholders”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 29, pp. 13-24.
Turker, D. (2009), “How corporate social responsibility influences organizational commitment”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 89, pp. 189-204.
Udayasankar, K. (2008), “Corporate social responsibility and firm size”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 83, pp. 167-175.
Waddock, S. A., and Graves, S. B: (1997). “The Corporate Social Performance – Financial Performance Link”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 303–320.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the subject of growing attention from firms, governments and regulators, stakeholder groups, and the media.  Based on various responsibility criteria, a rapidly increasing number of institutes, investment funds, publications and online resources are calling on corporations to alter their business practices.  In response to the increased attention given to corporations’ impact on society and the environment, a 2017 KPMG survey finds substantial growth in global CSR reporting rates (75% in 2017 compared to 64% in 2011 and 18% in 2002) and in the number of firms that include CSR information in their annual reports (60% in 2017 compared to 56% in 2015). Moreover, although the survey reveals that emerging markets from Africa and the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Latin America are lagging behind North America and Western Europe, two emerging markets—Mexico and Taiwan—experienced the highest growth in CSR reporting relative to 2015 and four—India, Malaysia, South Africa, and Mexico—are among countries with the highest CSR reporting. This growth reflects regulatory changes and new requirements in several countries, as well as greater market awareness and pressure from investors (domestic and foreign) and consumers.

Against this backdrop of increased corporate engagement in social activities worldwide and given the substantial prior evidence in the context of developed countries, this special issue of Emerging Markets Review aims to promote high-quality, theoretical and empirical research that develops a better understanding the determinants and consequences of CSR practices of firms (financial and nonfinancial) and the role CSR plays in emerging financial markets. In particular, we are interested in innovative papers that exploit unique sources of CSR data and apply rigorous empirical methods.

The following are some selected examples of possible research topics:

CSR and corporate governance. How does corporate governance affect CSR behavior? Are better-governed firms more socially responsible? Is CSR an outcome of agency conflicts?

• Institutional ownership and institutional owner identity (Long-term vs short-term horizons; independent vs. non-independent)
• Board characteristics: size, independence, heterogeneity (e.g., gender diversity), busyness, interlocks, etc.
• CEO characteristics: tenure, ownership, power, political ideology, compensation, etc.
• Ownership concentration and blockholder identity (family, state, etc.)
• Does privatization in emerging markets affect CSR?
• Foreign ownership (identity and country of origin of foreign owners) and cross-listing

CSR, formal and informal institutions.

• What is the impact of informal institutions, such as culture and trust on CSR?
• How does the institutional, political and economic environments in emerging markets affect CSR and its disclosure?

Do socially responsible firms behave differently than socially irresponsible firms in emerging markets?

• Investment efficiency
• Dividends
• Restructuring
• Risk-taking
• Innovation

CSR and corporate performance. 

• Is there a CSR valuation premium?
• Do socially responsible firms perform better than socially irresponsible firms?
• Do CSR and corporate governance interact to shape corporate performance and corporate valuations?
• Do CSR and factors related to the institutional, political and economic environments interact to shape corporate performance and corporate valuations?
• What is the value of CSR during crisis periods?
• How different are socially responsible firms in emerging markets compared to those in more developed countries?

CSR and access to financing.

• Access to finance (equity and debt issues, trade credit)
• Financing costs and credit ratings
• Stock liquidity
• Investor base

CSR, financial intermediaries and financial intermediary development.

• What is the effect of financial market development on CSR?
• Is CSR more prevalent in bank-based or market-based systems?

Methodology: Use traditional and innovative methodologies to address the endogeneity of CSR.

• Regression discontinuity design
• Difference-in-difference
• Instrumental variables
• Matching models (Propensity score matching, coarsened exact matching)

Paper Submissions 

The deadline for submitting papers is December 31, 2018. Papers should be submitted by e-mail to csr_emr@aus.edu and copied to nboubakri@aus.edu. All submissions must be in English. Submissions should include two files: (1) full version of the paper with contact information for all authors, and (2) an anonymous version with title and abstract (no identification of the authors). PDF files are preferred, but word files are also accepted.

All submissions will go through a double reviewing process. First, the guest editors will evaluate the submissions. The outcome of the first-stage review process will be communicated to authors by January 31, 2019. Acceptable papers will be sent out for review. The outcome of the second-stage review process will be communicated to authors by March 31, 2019. Papers invited for further consideration for the special issue will have to go through the standard refereeing process of Emerging Markets Review, including addressing the reviewers’ and guest editors comments.  Further instructions will be provided to the authors of the papers considered for publication in the special issue. In cooperation with the Managing Editor, we expect the special issue to be published at the end of 2019 or early 2020.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a contraction in demand for several products globally due to a decrease in consumption and investments.  In particular, Caribbean countries are experiencing a disproportionate decline in export-related business, rising unemployment levels, poverty, and inequality. The purpose of this special issue is to analyze the newly-emerged business dynamics, trends, and patterns in the Caribbean region, within the context of intra and extra-regional relationships that would allow decision-makers to design and implement post-pandemic business strategies. 

We invite theoretically sound and empirically-tested papers related to COVID-19 and businesses in the Caribbean region (defined as the Caribbean islands and continental countries with Caribbean coasts and islands).

JABEM mission, scope and submission guidelines are available at https://www.abem.ca/journal

All inquires and submission should be sent to Dr. Luis Camacho at luis.camacho@esc.edu with a copy to the guest co-editors:

• Dr. Moisés Alejandro Banks Peña, Universidad APEC, Dominican Republic (mbanks@adm.unapec.edu.do) 
• Dr. Luis Baquero Rosas, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico (lbaquero@pucpr.edu) 
• Dr. Meena Rambocas, The University of the West Indies, Trinidad and Tobago (Meena.Rambocas@sta.uwi.edu)  

Important dates 

Submission deadline: June 15, 2021 

First reviews: Aug 15, 2021 

Second reviews: Oct 1, 2021 

Camera-ready copy: Oct 30, 2021 

Publication: Jan 2022 

The COVID-19 outbreak has a large impact on business in operation all around the world. It is expected that this outbreak will have a much larger impact on the world economy than the epidemic of SARS in 2003 or arguably even than the global financial crisis in 2008. While the healthcare systems in the world scramble to combat this emergency, businesses, such as tourism, hospitality, airline, and restaurant, are hit hard with immediate and probably long lasting impact. Many other businesses, particularly manufacturing, struggle to get back to their normal operation due to the strict cordoning-off policies implemented in many countries.

Given the urgency and the scale of the impact by COVID-19 outbreak on China and the world, Frontiers of Business Research in China (FBR) calls for business scholars to contribute to the society by sharing their intelligence and research on related issues.  

Examples of topics suitable for this special call may include, but are not limited to:

• Global value chain restructuring/resilience
• The outbreak and firm’s digitalization transformation
• The impacts of the outbreak upon firms, especially SMEs
• Firm's business strategies during and after the outbreak
• Social entrepreneurship in responding to the outbreak
• How to facilitate virtual work/learning from home
• Employees' risk perception and wellbeing during the outbreak
• How the company can support employees during the critical time
• How to help employees to recover from traumatic experience

FBR accepts studies using various methodologies including survey research, archival data analysis, experimental studies, case studies, qualitative methods, and other creative methods. We will do our best to expedite the peer review process and ensure timely publications. Accordingly, the time window for revision and resubmission may be shortened. To promote global communication, FBR sponsors Open Access and all published papers can be downloaded from our SpringerOpen website for free shortly after editorial acceptance.

The submission deadline is May 31, 2020. However, any new submission will be processed with double-blind peer review immediately. To submit a paper, please go to FBR’s SpringerOpen website: https://fbr.springeropen.com. When submit your paper, please select “COVID-19 and Business” under “Thematic Series” to be included in this special call.

ABOUT THE EDITORS

Zhaoli Song (bizszl@nus.edu.sg) is an Associate Professor of at School of Business, National University of Singapore. Prof. Song obtained his Ph.D. at University of Minnesota. His research interests include behavior genetics, leadership, social interactions, new comer socialization, job search and unemployment experience, and work-family boundary. He was the Associate Editor of Applied Psychology: An International Review during 2014-2017, and serves on the editorial board of Journal of Organizational Behavior. His papers have been published in journals such as Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Journal of Business Venturing.

Wu Liu (wu.liu@polyu.edu.hk) is a Professor and Head of Department at School of Business, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Prof. Liu obtained his Ph.D. at Vanderbilt University. His current passion of research centers on (1) leader-member and team dynamics on voice behavior, and (2) under which social conditions that cross-cultural differences in conflict resolutions may appear or disappear. His works have appeared in journals such as Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Journal Organizational Behavior. Professor Liu serves on the editorial board of Management and Organization Review.

Ziliang Deng (dengziliang@rmbs.ruc.edu.cn) is a Professor of International Business and Associate Dean (Research) at Renmin Business School, Renmin University of China. Prof. Deng obtained his PhD from the University of Nottingham. His research interest is international business in emerging markets (China in particular) and institutional environment, and his recent papers appeared in Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of Business Ethics, among others. He is Executive Editor-in-Chief of Frontiers of Business Research in China, an editor of Journal of International Management and Asia Pacific Journal of Management.

ABOUT FBR

Created in 2007, FBR (ISSN 1673-7326; e-ISSN 1673-7431; CN11-5746/F) is a double-blind refereed quarterly journal in business research jointly managed by Renmin Business School, Renmin University of China, SpringerOpen, and Higher Education Press. FBR encourages interdisciplinary studies and interactions between Chinese and international researchers in the broad area of business administration. FBR is abstracted and indexed in major international databases including EconLit, ESCI, INSPEC, SCOPUS, and ProQuest. In 2019, FBR is awarded “The Highest International Impact Academic Journal of China (Humanities and Social Sciences)”.

Special Issue Editors:

• Gary Knight (Willamette University, USA, gknight@willamette.edu)
• Peter Liesch (University of Queensland, Australia, p.liesch@uq.edu.au)
• Lianxi Zhou (Brock University, Canada, lzhou@brocku.ca)
• Rebecca Reuber (University of Toronto, Canada, reuber@rotman.utoronto.ca)

Deadline for submission: November 16, 2015

Tentative publication date:   Spring 2017

Introduction

The goal of this special issue of JIBS is to encourage research that deepens knowledge of the creation and capture of entrepreneurial opportunities across national borders by diverse organizational types such as international new ventures (INVs), born global firms, micro-multinationals, corporate entrepreneurs, family businesses, and social and non-profit ventures (e.g., Arregle, Naldi, Nordqvist & Hitt, 2012; Coviello & Jones, 2004; Knight & Cavusgil, 2004; Oviatt & McDougall, 1994; McDougall & Oviatt, 2000; Zahra, 2005; Zahra & George, 2002; Zahra, Newey & Li, 2014). 

International entrepreneurship has been defined as “the discovery, enactment, evaluation, and exploitation of opportunities – across national borders – to create future goods and services” (Oviatt & McDougall, 2005: 7).  Recent commentaries on the field (e.g. Cavusgil & Knight, 2015; Coviello, 2015; Jones, Coviello & Tang, 2011; Keupp & Gassmann, 2009; Mathews & Zander, 2007; Zander, McDougall-Covin & Rose, 2015) have urged scholars to move beyond current understandings of early and accelerated internationalization through richer theoretical and empirical investigations of international entrepreneurship. There has long been consensus that the pursuit of opportunity is the core of entrepreneurship (e.g. Knight, 1921; Schumpeter, 1939; Shane & Venkataraman, 2000), whether opportunities are discovered or created (Alvarez, Barney & Anderson, 2013).   Scholars have identified important processes in this pursuit, including processes related to cognition (e.g. Grégoire, Barr & Shepherd, 2010), effectuation (e.g. Sarasvathy, 2001), and bricolage (e.g. Baker & Nelson, 2005; Garud & Karnoe, 2003), and an opportunity-focused perspective is being extended to international entrepreneurship (e.g. Bingham, 2009; Jones & Casulli, 2014; Mainela, Puhakka & Servais, 2014; Sarasvathy, Kumar, York & Bhagavatula, 2014).

Scholarship that integrates perspectives from entrepreneurship and international business, or spans disciplinary boundaries, can create new perspectives or frameworks that improve our understanding of the creation and capture of opportunities across national borders. We invite submissions that advance international business theory in this domain and, ideally, that also contribute to the entrepreneurship literature.

Possible Research Topics

The proposed special issue focuses on the creation and capture of entrepreneurial opportunities across national borders. We seek papers that advance theoretical perspectives and provide valuable insights and new knowledge to enrich international entrepreneurship scholarship, and also that guide practitioners and policy-makers.  We invite submissions from scholars who, individually or collectively, draw on varied theoretical perspectives, adopt diverse empirical approaches, and investigate at multiple levels of analysis.  We particularly encourage submissions that provide conceptual clarity of international entrepreneurship as pursued by different types of market actors, and those that provide new empirical contributions.  Well-conceived submissions antithetical to this domain are welcome too, provided they make a meaningful contribution to the international business field more generally.  Examples of appropriate topics and research questions include, but are not limited to, the following:

• How can perspectives from entrepreneurship and international business be integrated to create new perspectives or frameworks to enrich an opportunity-based understanding of international entrepreneurship, and unify and improve heterogeneous constructs and operational definitions?

• What processes are involved in the creation and capture of entrepreneurial opportunities across national borders?   What accounts for variance in these processes and their outcomes?  What is the role in such processes of key IB concepts such as psychic distance, risk, uncertainty, or transnational communities?

• How does the pursuit of international opportunities vary across categories of individuals?  What new concepts, relationships or processes are important in understanding the cognitions, behaviors and/or outcomes associated with the pursuit of international opportunities by focal categories of entrepreneurs (for example, immigrant entrepreneurs, ethnic entrepreneurs, transnational entrepreneurs or women entrepreneurs)? 

• How does the pursuit of international opportunities vary across categories of organizations?  What new concepts, relationships or processes are important in understanding the cognitions, behaviors and/or outcomes associated with the pursuit of international opportunities by focal categories of organizations (for example startups, corporations, SMEs, family businesses, social ventures, not-for-profit ventures, governmental agencies, or non-governmental organizations)?

• How are organizations managing the challenges of early and/or accelerated internationalization in pursuing international opportunities?  How do such firms manage costs, uncertainty and risks in such environments?  How do they overcome inherent liabilities to be perceived as legitimate and reputable?  What are their subsequent trajectories?  We particularly welcome research in this area on firms in emerging, rapid-growth and less-developed economies, and from disciplines that have been under-represented to-date such as human resource management, finance, accounting, operations and policy studies.

• How do advanced technologies and digitization provide new and enhanced prospects to create and capture international opportunities?  How does the sociomateriality of technologies impact interactions among market actors, and, for example, overcome the challenges of lack of a local presence?  What are trade-offs between scale and adaptation?

• How do cultures and institutions, such as governments, regulations, and industries, affect market and nonmarket approaches to the pursuit of international opportunities, and, in turn, how do entrepreneurial activities affect cultural and institutional contexts?  What institutional policies and practices impact, or are impacted by, the pursuit of international opportunities?  How does entrepreneurial internationalization vary across different cultural and institutional environments?

Submission Process

All manuscripts will be reviewed as a cohort for this special issue.  Manuscripts must be submitted in the window between November 2, 2015, and November 16, 2015, at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jibs.  All submissions will go through the JIBS regular double-blind review process and follow the standard norms and processes.

For more information about this call for papers, please contact the Special Issue Editors or the JIBS Managing Editor (managing-editor@jibs.net).

References
Alvarez, S.A., Barney, J.B., & Anderson, P. 2013.  Forming and exploiting opportunities:  The implications of discovery and creation processes for entrepreneurial and organizational research.  Organization Science, 24(1): 301-317.

Arregle, J-L., Naldi, L., Nordqvist, M., & Hitt, M.A. 2012.  Internationalization of family-controlled firms: A study of the effects of external involvement in governance.  Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 36(6): 1115-1143.

Baker, T., & Nelson, R. 2005.  Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage.  Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3): 329-366.

Bingham, C. 2009.  Oscillating improvisation: How entrepreneurial firms create success in foreign market entries over time.  Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(4): 321-345.

Cavusgil, S.T., & Knight, G. 2015.  The born global firm:  An entrepreneurial and capabilities perspective on early and rapid internationalization.  Journal of International Business Studies, 46(1): 3-16.

Coviello, N. 2015.  Re-thinking research on born globals.  Journal of International Business Studies, 46(1): 17-26.

Coviello, N., & Jones, M. 2004.  Methodological issues in international entrepreneurship research.  Journal of Business Venturing, 19(4): 485–508.

Garud, R., & Karnoe, P. 2003.  Bricolage versus breakthrough: Distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship.  Research Policy, 32: 277-300.

Grégoire, D.A., Barr, P.S., & Shepherd, D.A. 2010.  Cognitive process of opportunity recognition:  The role of structural alignment.  Organization Science, 21(2): 413-431.

Jones, M.V., & Casulli, L. 2014.  International entrepreneurship:  Exploring the logic and utility of individual experience through comparative reasoning approaches.  Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 38(1): 45-69.

Jones, M. V., Coviello, N., & Tang, Y. K. 2011.  International entrepreneurship research (1989-2009): A domain ontology and thematic analysis.  Journal of Business Venturing, 26(6): 632-659.

Keupp, M., & Gassmann, O. 2009.  The past and the future of international entrepreneurship: A review and suggestions for developing the field.  Journal of Management, 35(5): 600-633.

Knight, G., & Cavusgil, S.T. 2004.  Innovation, organizational capabilities, and the born global firm.  Journal of International Business Studies, 35(2): 124-141.

Knight, F.H. 1921.  Risk, Uncertainty and Profit.  New York:  Houghton Mifflin.

Mainela, T., Puhakka, V., & Servais, P. 2014. The concept of international opportunity in international entrepreneurship:  A review and research agenda.  International Journal of Management Reviews 16(1): 105-129.

Mathews, J., & Zander, I. 2007.  The international entrepreneurial dynamics of accelerated internationalization.  Journal of International Business Studies, 38(3): 387-403.

McDougall, P., & Oviatt, B. 2000.  International entrepreneurship: The intersection of two research paths.  Academy of Management Journal, 43(5): 902–906.

Oviatt, B., & McDougall P. 1994.  Toward a theory of international new ventures.  Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1): 45–64.

Oviatt, B. & McDougall, P. 2005.  The internationalization of entrepreneurship.  Journal of International Business Studies, 36(1): 2-8.

Sarasvathy, S.D. 2001.  Causation and effectuation:  Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency.  Academy of Management Review, 26(2): 243-263.

Sarasvathy, S., Kumar, K., York, J.G., & Bhagavatula, S. 2014.  An effectual approach to international entrepreneurship: Overlaps, challenges, and provocative possibilities.  Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 38(1): 71-93.

Schumpeter, J.A. 1939.  Business cycles:  A Theoretical, Historical, and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process.  New York: McGraw-Hill.

Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. 2000.  The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research.  Academy of Management Review, 25(1): 217-226.

Zahra, S. 2005.  A theory of international new ventures: A decade of research.  Journal of International Business Studies, 36(1): 20–28.

Zahra, S., & George, G. 2002.  International entrepreneurship: The current status of the field and future research agenda. In M. Hitt, R. Ireland, M. Camp, & D. Sexton (Eds.) Strategic leadership: Creating a new mindset: 255–288. London: Blackwell.

Zahra, S., Newey, L., & Li, Y. 2014.  On the frontiers:  The implications of social entrepreneurship for international entrepreneurship.  Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 38(1): 137-158.

Zander, I., McDougall-Covin, P., & Rose, E.L. 2015.  Born globals and international business: Evolution of a field of research.  Journal of International Business Studies, 46(1): 27-35.

Special Issue Editors

Gary Knight is the Helen Jackson Chair in International Management at Willamette University in Salem and Portland, Oregon, USA, and Visiting Professor at the University of Southern Denmark.  He is Chair of the Western United States Chapter of the Academy of International Business.  He has published widely on born globals and international entrepreneurship, including several articles in JIBS.  His 2004 co-authored article on born globals won the 2014 JIBS Decade Award.  Co-authored books include Born Global Firms: A New International Enterprise.  He is currently an editor of the International Business book collection at Business Expert Press.  He testified on firm internationalization before the US House of Representatives Small Business Committee.  He was inaugural Chair of the “SMEs, Entrepreneurship, and Born Global” track of the Annual Meeting of the Academy of International Business.  His co-authored textbook with S. Tamer Cavusgil and John Riesenberger, International Business: Strategy, Management, and the New Realities, 3rd Ed, is published by Pearson Prentice-Hall.  His PhD in international business is from Michigan State University.  Prior to academia, he was the export manager of an internationalizing SME. 

Peter Liesch is Professor of International Business in the UQ Business School at The University of Queensland, Australia.  He has published extensively on small firm internationalization and born global firms.  He co-edited a special issue on early internationalization at the Journal of World Business, and jointly won an Australia Research Council Grant on born globals.  Funded by the Australia Business Foundation, he jointly produced Born to be Global: A Closer Look at the International Venturing of Australian Born Global Firms.  His publications have appeared in the Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Journal of World Business, and others.  Currently Associate Editor, Strategy and International Business with the Australian Journal of Management, he was also Senior Editor of the Journal of World Business.  He served as Vice-President (Administration) of the Academy of International Business and Vice-President of the Australia and New Zealand International Business Academy.  A Fellow of the Australian Institute of Management and a Professional Member of the Economics Society of Australian (Qld) Inc., his Ph.D. is from the School of Economics at The University of Queensland.

Lianxi Zhou is Professor of Marketing and International Business in the Goodman School of Business (GSB) at Brock University, Canada.  He is also a Visiting Professor at the Nottingham University Business School (NUBS) China, and has served as Chair Professor in the School of Management and Economics at Shaoxing University and Honorary Professor in the MBA School of Management Zhejiang Gongshang University, China. Previously he taught at the University of Guelph, Canada and Lingnan University in Hong Kong. His recent research on international entrepreneurship has focused on born globals and international new ventures. He brings perspectives from international marketing, entrepreneurship, and IB theories to the study of international entrepreneurship. He has published extensively in refereed journals, including Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of Business Venturing, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, International Business Review, Journal of International Marketing, Journal of World Business, and others. Also, he has taught for MBA and EMBA programs in a number of leading universities across Canada, Hong Kong, and the Chinese Mainland. He is currently in the Editorial Board for the Journal of International Marketing. He received his PhD in Marketing from Concordia University in Montreal, Canada.

Rebecca Reuber is Professor of Strategic Management at the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management, and Area Editor for International Entrepreneurship at JIBS.  Her recent IE research has focused on the internationalization of internet-based new ventures.   She sits on the editorial boards of Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, and recently completed three terms as Associate Editor at Family Business Review.  She has held visiting positions at the University of Adelaide, the University of Glasgow, the University of Victoria, The Australian National University, and Dartmouth College.  She has also conducted policy-oriented research in the international entrepreneurship area, in collaboration with the Conference Board of Canada, Industry Canada, the Department of Foreign Affairs & International Trade Canada, and the Commonwealth Secretariat.

Editors

• Jasmin Mahadevan,  Pforzheim University, Germany (corresponding editor), jasmin.mahadevan@hs-pforzheim.de
• Henriett Primecz, Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary
• Laurence Romani, Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden

Publisher: Routledge (2019)

Type of book: casebook

Condensed case chapter (2,000 words) submission: February 15th, 2018

A casebook about intersectionality in Cross-Cultural Management

With the help of rich case studies, we wish to introduce the notion of ‘intersectionality’ to facilitate a critical Cross-Cultural Management (CCM). Intersectionality refers to the understanding that individuals are not only different, but related, and that multiple identity markers need to be considered when trying to comprehend individual life-experiences. Related to CCM, this means to consider ‘culture’ on multiple levels (e.g. national, organizational, professional, et cetera), to acknowledge interrelated processes of social identity (e.g. identification, recognition and sense of belonging) and to pay attention to power-effects as being intertwined with CCM contexts, frameworks and actors (e.g. majority-minority relations, the impact of diversity markers such as gender, race, religion, age, sexual orientation etc., and social class, dominant discourses, dynamics of organizational change etc.).

What we mean by an intersectional approach to culture

An intersectional approach to culture requires us to challenge simple and singular explanations of cultural difference, to investigate the divergent meanings of perceived difference, and to challenge the labels to which perceived difference is attached. For instance, it might be that organizational actors ascribe difficulties in working together to national culture, but a closer investigation might reveal that these perceptions are actually rooted in organizational inequalities of power between headquarters and subsidiary and learned discourses such as ‘modern West’ versus ‘undeveloped non-West’.

Intersectionality therefore also means to acknowledge that every life-experience has a standpoint, and that we are not necessarily able to take up or even approximate the position of others. At the same time, intersectionality invites us to consider how also we, as CCM researchers and actors, are different and related to those with whom we interact. This means that we need to explicate our own standpoints from which we approach CCM and to reflect upon why and how ‘this makes sense to us’. For example, we must assume that the researcher’s cultural identifications will shape their research approach and the interpretations that ‘make sense’ to them, and that the researcher’s embodied, performed or assumed cultural identity will inform how the researcher is perceived by those studied.

References

Acker, J. (2012) ‘Gendered organizations and intersectionality: problems and possibilities’, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 31(3): 214-224.

Boogard, B. and Roggeband, C. (2010), ‘Paradoxes of intersectionality’, Organization, 17(1): 53-75.

Kerner, I. (2012). “Questions of intersectionality: Reflections on the current debate in German gender studies, European Journal of Women's Studies, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 203-218.

McCall, L. (2005). “The complexity of intersectionality”, Signs, Chicago Journals, Vol. 30, No 3, pp. 1771-1800.

Mahadevan, J. (2017), A Very Short, Fairly Interesting and Reasonably Cheap Book about Cross-Cultural Management. London: Sage (in particular, chapters 4 and 5).

Prasad, A. (2006), ‘The jewel in the crown: Postcolonial theory and workplace diversity’. In: Konrad, A.M., Prasad, P. and Pringle, J.K. (eds.), Handbook of Workplace Diversity, London: Sage, 1-21.

Rahman, M. (2017), ‘Islamophobia, the impossible Muslim, and the reflexive potential of intersectionality’. In J. Mahadevan and C.-H. Mayer (eds), Muslim Minorities, Workplace Diversity and Reflexive HRM. London: Taylor and Francis, 35-45.

Ridgeway, C.L. (2009), ‘Framed before we know it: How gender shapes social relations’, Gender & Society, 23(2): 145-60.

Wells, C.C., Gill, R., McDonald, J. (2015).“Us foreigners”: intersectionality in a scientific organization", Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, Vol. 34, No. 6, pp. 539 – 553.

Zanoni, P., Janssens, M., Benschop, Y. and Nkomo, S. (2010), ‘Editorial: Unpacking diversity, grasping inequality: Rethinking difference through critical perspectives’. Organization, 17, 9-29.

Your case chapter

We invite case chapters that highlight selected aspects of an intersectional approach to culture. Cases should be empirical, and can be based in any of the research paradigms as long as they offer ‘thick’ or ‘rich’ insights into single contexts or individuals. They should challenge common-place cultural explanations and offer multiple perspectives, involving power-sensitivity and researcher reflexivity. Learning should flow from the empirical material, not from theory, and should then be put into perspective using selected aspects of an intersectional approach to culture. Each case should focus on a selected few points and conclude with recommendations to practitioners.

Regardless of the focus point of your contribution: Ultimately, we would like to help answer the following questions: If we believe that mainstream (comparative) CCM with its focus on national cultural differences is insufficient – what else do we have to offer? How can CCM not only focus on difference but also show how we are related? What are the cases that highlight how exactly individuals (including the researcher) give divergent and intersecting meaning to perceived difference? How can we better include power in our CCM analyses and conceptualizations? We will be pleased to discuss any ideas for chapters. Please direct all your questions to jasmin.mahadevan@hs-pforzheim.de.

Submission schedule

• Inform the Editor of your intention to submit a chapter no later than 10 December 2017.                     

For doing so, send an e-mail to jasmin.mahadevan@hs-pforzheim.de, using the subject heading “critical CCM casebook guidelines”. You will receive informative guidelines and sample chapters.

• Condensed case chapter proposal due 15 February 2018
• Editorial decision (accept or reject) and feedback to authors who are invited to develop the full chapter 31 March 2018
• Full chapter (max 5,000 words, including references) due 01 September 2018

Send your submission to

jasmin.mahadevan@hs-pforzheim.de,

using the subject heading “critical CCM casebook submission”.

All submissions will undergo peer-review.

Topics for the chapters may include, but are not limited to:

• language as linked to cultural hegemony (the power-effects which are linked to language fluency, English as a lingua franca, values attached to certain languages et cetera)
• diversity, identifications and requirements for cultural belonging (how dominant identity requirements construct disadvantaged individuals/groups, and how these individuals/groups are perceived)
• cultural explanations, neo-colonialism and organizational power (how organizational conflicts are explained with cultural differences but are rooted in structural hierarchy, history and dominant perceptions on what constitutes ‘good’ management which advantages some over others)
• challenging dominant viewpoints (how CCM might look like from previously neglected standpoints and what needs to be considered in order to challenge presumed ‘CCM truths’ such as: what does it ‘mean’ to be Muslim?, which are the regions of the world to be considered by CCM?, what defines ‘difference’ in CCM? and so on). This also includes a critique of dominant IM or CCM ‘lenses’ through which phenomena such as expatriation, internationalization et cetera are perceived and researched upon. Moreover, it might refer to neglected facets of culture, for instance by highlighting the relevance of phenomenology, embodiment, habitus, tacit culture, et cetera.

For some years now, fair trade has been typically spoken and written about in solely positive terms, as a ‘trading partnership based on dialogue, transparency and respect, which seeks greater equity in international trade. It contributes to sustainable development by offering better trading conditions to, and securing the rights of, marginalized producers and workers – especially in the South’. (FINE, 2001 in Moore, 2004: 73). However, the current global economic recession has brought with it the need to reflect upon the way in which trade activities are carried out across the world, including those practices associated with fair trade. For example, questions have been asked whether, indeed, the ‘Fair Trade Project’ is entirely beneficial to all involved parties and whether, in the present economic climate, we can actually afford to engage in fair trade.

Responding to Goodman (2004: 910), who sees a need for fair trade to continue to ‘become more politically and economically threatening’ by opening up ‘the definition of “fairness” contra its economic logic to facilitate a broader constituency from which to construct a less privileged, more sustainable, and more just sense of development….plantation workers, growers with lower quality products, and coffee servers can and should become a moral and politicized goal for fair trade…a re-centering of Northern identities around notions of global citizenship rather than those of a one dimensional consumer’, we seek contributions to the critical exploration of the practices and discourses of fair trade.

Contributions to the special issue may take theoretical or empirical approaches to the nature, dysfunctions and/or possibilities of fair trade. They might, for example, include discussions of:

* How fair is fair trade?
* Ethics of consumption and fair trade
* Marketing and fair trade
* Power and identity issues in fair trade
* Mainstreaming of fair trade
* Environmental and sustainability issues of fair trade
* The fair trade status of a city / university
* Fair trade as business strategy
* Political economy of fair trade
* Accreditation and cost of fair trade to producers
* Accountability and impact of fair trade on producers
* Co-operative and collective business models for fair trade


Those wishing to contribute should submit an extended of 1,000 words to Jane Gibbon jane.gibbon@ncl.ac.uk or Martyna Sliwa martyna.sliwa@ncl.ac.uk by 30th November 2009. Feedback on the abstracts will be provided by December 30th 2009. Full papers of 5,000 - 8,000 words should be submitted to the Guest Editors by 30th April 2010.

Suitable articles will be subjected to a double-blind review; hence authors should not identify themselves in the body of the paper.

The special issue is scheduled for publication in February 2011. Papers submitted must not have been published, accepted for publication, or be under consideration for publication. For additional information about the journal please see the journal’s webpage: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/cpoib.htm

By the end of this decade, the majority of African countries would have celebrated their 50th independence anniversary. The world has been carefully watching developments on the African continent during this half-century journey, and perceptions broadly oscillate between optimism and pessimism. Rapid socioeconomic gains achieved during the early decades of independence heralded hopeful predictions that the continent was on the march towards prosperity. This Afro-optimistic promise has alternatingly given way to Afro-pessimism as respective African countries have faltered and encountered difficulties in the lead up to the turn of the century. References to a ‘hopeless continent’ (The Economist, 2001) tend to highlight unfavourable business environments, weak institutions, and limited opportunities (Asiedu, 2004).

Rapid economic growth in recent decades and the resilience of African economies in the wake of global recessions have seen the pendulum shifting back towards optimism. Investors and observers increasingly speculate on the promise Africa has for global economic development. Positive perceptions of new and emerging opportunities on the continent underscore this logic. These opportunities are occurring against a backdrop of new developments within Africa which include, inter alia, the emergence of a sizeable middle-class with enhanced purchasing power, the emergence of multinational enterprises (MNEs) from within the region, the evolution of multi-lateral and international trade and investment agreements, and the rising levels of both inward and outward foreign direct investment flows. Alongside these shifts is a widespread transformation of structural, economic, political and social institutions currently underway across numerous African countries. New and rapidly growing trade and investment links are evident between African economies and new emerging economies such as China and India.

A resurgent scholarship on international business in Africa has resulted, focusing variously on the motives and determinants of foreign direct investment (Naudé and Krugell, 2007; Asiedu, 2006); the role of government policies, institutions and corruption on foreign direct investment (Musila and Sigue, 2006), knowledge transfer, and human resource practices within multinational corporations (Horwitz, 2015; Osabutey, William and Debrah, 2014). These and related studies present mixed and sometimes conflicting findings.

What this body of scholarship may tend to share is the unequivocal acceptance of the legitimacy of existing paradigms to explain current shifts being played out across Africa. Critical perspectives of international business in Africa therefore remain few and under the research radar. This widespread acceptance and application of established models may, in particular contexts, limit the ability to critically probe and analyse the current shifts in order to generate fresh insights.

For instance, given the diversity and pluralism of political, economic, sociocultural, and institutional systems among African countries, what are the implications of recent foreign investment flows on existing management practices or inter-state power relations in Africa? Do these represent new possibilities or are these simply a recreation of previous trends? Additionally, in which new ways are the current national, regional and global institutions influencing the international business environment in Africa? How are colonial legacies shaping investment flows in recent times? To what extent might post-colonial African countries be experiencing new forms of colonialism (neo-colonialism) through inward FDI? How does the nature and role of inward FDI from Asia (China and India for example) differ from that originating from the EU, USA or Japan? In which ways do international business and trade fuel conflict and the erosion of human rights in Africa?

The assumption of African homogeneity tends to obfuscate the realities of diversity and complexity as well as limit impactful research. Traditional models of inquiry may not necessarily explain these unanswered questions and leave us less knowledgeable about the motives, practices and implications of international business in Africa. There is however a growing research interest in critical perspectives on international business in Africa (e.g. see Amankwah-Amoah, 2016; Ado and Su, 2016; Ayres, 2012; de Jonge, 2016; Eweje, 2006; Konijn and Tulder, 2015). Although there has been a growing body of research on Africa, it has been suggested that this needs to be marshalled towards a better narrative and understanding of how firms behave, the role of leaders and the management of indigenous enterprises (Amankwah-Amoah, 2016).

This special issue on critical perspectives on international business in Africa is therefore timely. Following the mission of cpoib (Roberts and Dörrenbächer, 2016, 2012) this issues supports critically reflexive discussion of the nature and impact of international business activity in Africa on individuals, specific communities, the environment, the economy and society from inter-, trans-, and multi-disciplinary perspectives. The special issue seek to contribute to IB and related literature, and generate useful information and analysis for business educators, management practitioners and policy makers. Moreover, this special issue aims to provide a platform for scholars to rethink and further develop integrative as well as novel IB frameworks that are relevant in the African context.

Researchers are invited to consider and address these critical IB issues in the African context from a variety of perspectives.  Scholars can identify and examine common issues in Africa as well as highlight country-specific issues. We encourage scholars to apply a wide variety of rigorous methodological approaches drawing on the latest research in this respect. Manuscripts may cover wider perspectives as long as the papers are in line with the broad theme of the proposed special issue: Guiding areas of useful contributions may include, but are not restricted to:

1.      Theory of international business

i.         What is the influence of western IB theory and management practices within international business in Africa? 

ii.        Are there African-specific perspectives which non-African firms could learn from? Are western business practices appropriate within African multinational firms?

2.      Institutions

i.          What are the implications of the wide-ranging diversity of national institutional and governance systems within African countries on foreign direct investment flows and management practices?

ii.         In which new ways are national, regional (African Union/ ECOWAS/EAC/SADC) or international institutions (World Bank/ IMF/UN) influencing the international business environment in Africa? How is regional integration shaping the reality of international business within Africa?

iii.        How are perceptions of fragility, corruption or instability influencing the dynamics of international business in Africa?

iv.        In which ways do colonial legacies influence flows of foreign direct investment (FDI) to Africa? To what extent do the recent flows of foreign investment into Africa constitute neo-colonialism? 

v.         Is there a new narrative to the new Afro-Sino relations?  Is there another story behind resource-seeking motives of Chinese MNEs in Africa?

3.      Bottom of the pyramid

i.         Which are the opportunities and challenges that international business may encounter in developing new products and markets to service consumers at the so-called ‘bottom of the pyramid’ within African countries?

4.      Risk

i.         What are the implications of the contemporary risks of doing business in Africa, including terrorism, domestic insurgencies and political interference?

Submission process and deadlines:

Submissions should follow the author guidelines for critical perspectives on international business which can be found at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/cpoib.htm

The submission deadline is 30th November, 2016, with initial reviewing to be completed by 1st March, 2017, revisions due by 30th June 2017, final decisions by 31st August, 2017, and anticipated publication in 2018.

Submissions should be via the Scholar One Manuscripts online submission system (http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cpoib).  Enquiries about the special issue should be directed to the special issue guest editors Dr Richard B. Nyuur (Richard.Nyuur@northumbria.ac.uk) or Dr Roseline Wanjiru (Roseline.Wanjiru@northumbria.ac.uk) or Dr Joseph Amankwah-Amoah (Joseph.Amankwah-Amoah@bristol.ac.uk) or Dr Simeon E. Ifere (sifere@unilag.edu.ng).  

References

Amankwah-Amoah, J. (2016), “Coming of age, seeking legitimacy: The historical trajectory of African management research”, critical Perspectives on International Business, Vol. 12 Iss: 1, pp. 1-14,

Ado, A and Su, Z. (2016), “China in Africa: A Critical Literature Review”, critical perspectives on international business, Vol. 12 Iss: 1, pp. 40-60. 

De Jonge, A. (2016), “Australia-China-Africa Investment Partnerships: A new frontier for triangular cooperation?” critical Perspectives on International Business, Vol. 12 Iss: 1, pp. 61-82.

Asiedu, E. (2004), “Policy reform and foreign direct investment in Africa: Absolute progress but relative decline”, Development Policy Review, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 41-48.

Asiedu, E. (2006), “Foreign Direct Investment in Africa: The Role of Natural Resources, Market Size, Government Policy, Institutions and Political Instability”, The World Economy, Vol. 21 Iss: 1, pp. 63-77.

Ayres, C. J. (2012),"The international trade in conflict minerals: coltan", critical Perspectives on International Business, Vol. 8 Iss 2, pp. 178 - 193

Eweje, G. (2006), “Environmental costs and responsibilities resulting from oil exploitation in developing countries: The case of the Niger Delta of Nigeria”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 69 Iss: 1, pp. 27-56.

Horwitz, F. (2015), “Human resources management in multinational companies in Africa: a systematic literature review”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 26 Iss: 21, pp. 2786-2809.

Konijn, P & van Tulder, R. (2015),"Resources-for-infrastructure (R4I) swaps", critical Perspectives on International Business, Vol. 11 Iss: 3/4 pp. 259 – 284.

Musila, J. W. and Sigue, S. P. (2006), “Accelerating foreign direct investment flow to Africa: from policy statements to successful strategies”, Managerial Finance, Vol. 32 Iss: 7, pp. 577-593.

Naudé, W. A. and Krugell, W. F. (2007), “Investigating geography and institutions as determinants of foreign direct investment in Africa using panel data”, Applied Economics, Vol. 39, pp. 1223-1233.

Osabutey, E. L., Williams, K. and Debrah, Y. A. (2014), “The potential for technology and knowledge transfers between foreign and local firms: A study of the construction industry in Ghana”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 49 Iss: 4, pp. 560-571.

Roberts, J. and Dörrenbächer, C., (2016), “Renewing the call for critical perspectives on international business: towards a second decade of challenging the orthodox”, critical perspectives on international business, Vol. 12 Iss: 1, pp. 2-21 .

Roberts, J. and Dörrenbächer, C., (2012), “The Futures of critical perspectives on international Business”, critical Perspectives on International Business, 8 Iss: 1, pp. 4‐13.

The Economist (2001), “Africa's elusive dawn”, Vol. 358 Iss: 8210, pp. 17.

Bios of Guest Authors

Richard B. Nyuur, PhD, is a Senior Lecturer in Strategic Management and International Business at the Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University, UK. His research interests lie at the intersection of strategy and international business in the broad areas of foreign direct investment (FDI), international business strategy, international human resource management, and corporate social responsibility. He has published in journals such as International Human Resource Management Journal, Journal of Small Business Management, Thunderbird International Business Review, Journal of Strategy and Management, African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy, and Social Responsibility Journal. His scholarly work has also been presented at leading international conferences and published as chapters in peer-reviewed books. He is currently on the editorial boards of Journal of African Business and the European Journal of Economics and Management.

Dr Roseline Wanjiru, PhD, is a Senior Lecturer in Strategic Management and International Business at the Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University, UK. She has broad interdisciplinary research interests in the economic geography of multinational enterprises, the location of foreign direct investment, and economic development particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa. Roseline has worked in several East African countries and her scholarly work has been published in journals such as World Development, Transnational Corporations, and Regions as well as international conference proceedings. She holds a PhD from the University of Leeds and is currently the programme leader for the Business with Economics and Business with International Management degrees at Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University.

Dr. Simeon Emezana Ifere, PhD, is a lecturer at the Department of Business Administration

University of Lagos. Before returning to academia, he had over 25 years’ industry experience, which includes 5 years in management and 12 years in senior management positions in two Multinational organisations - Elf and Total groups. He also subsequently worked for Total group and Oando Plc as an Operations Consultant and a Turnaround Consultant respectively. His research interests broadly focus on employee engagement and work-life balance, talent management, and corporate social responsibility. His papers are forthcoming in the International Journal of Human resource Management. He has also presented his scholarly work at leading international conferences.

Dr Joseph Amankwah-Amoah, PhD, is an Associate Professor (Senior Lecturer) of Management at University of Bristol. His research focuses on global business strategy, international divestment, liberalisation, international entrepreneurship (business failure), and lateral hiring in emerging economies. Since completing his PhD in 2010, Joseph has published over 80 articles in refereed academic journals, conference proceedings and book chapters. He has published articles in journals such as the International Journal of HRM, Business History, Group & Organization Management, Journal of Business Research, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, European Business Review, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Critical Perspectives on International Business, Management & Organizational History, Thunderbird International Business Review and Journal of General Management

The postcolonial thinker Edward Said (1978, 1993) noted that migration was the great marker of our time and that with the increasing global movement of people there would be increasing ‘inter-cultural’ contact. When viewed through the ‘lens’ of critical organization and management studies, the processes and types of mobility, movement and migration in today’s ‘globalized’ environment present interesting possibilities for a reformulation and reconsideration of mobility within contemporary global capitalism.

In particular, there seems to be much room for the critical study of managerial and professional mobility and movement in business and organization studies, and specifically the idea of the “transnational capitalist class”. Beyond conventional expatriation, there are many new kinds of mobility occurring that involve the transnational capitalist class in the contemporary global business environment. They have yet to be exposed to critical investigation in a sustained fashion. In Western-based multinational companies these include the development of mobile ‘global elites’ and increasing numbers of short-term, commuter and rotational assignments and assignees (Dickmann and Doherty, 2010; McKenna and Richardson, 2007; Suutari, 2003).

The implications of these systems and forms of mobility in the broader context of ‘globalization’ and global capitalism have yet to be significantly explored from a critical perspective. In addition, the so-called self-initiated expatriate (SIE) has recently come under scrutiny. The SIE is an individual who ‘expatriates’ independently of an organizational sponsor. Much of the research on the SIE has been conducted on and with professionals moving from Western countries to other parts of the world (Jokinen, Brewster and Suutari, 2008; Myers and Pringle, 2005; Richardson, 2006; Selmer and Lauring, 2010; Tharenou and Caulfield, 2010). While there has been some more critical work undertaken on the ‘whiteness’ of these SIEs and emigrants in the broader sociological literature (Leonard, 2010), very little has been undertaken from a critical paradigm specific to business and organizations.

In this special issue, then, we seek papers that subject the globally mobile managerial and professional class, particularly in the context of business and organizational studies, to critical investigation.

The list below presents illustrative topics for contributions:

• How can we conceptualize organizational and self-initiated managerial professional global mobility critically?
• To what extent do globally mobile professionals represent a transnational capitalist class operating in the interests of global capital? How do this growing transnational class reflect changes in the global labour process?
• To what extent are those who are globally mobile professionals, both within organizational contexts and SIE’s engaging in ‘Imperial careering’?  What are the elements of ‘Imperial careering’ in the contemporary business world and how can we link it to a postcolonial analysis?
• Who are the globally mobile elite and why are they being created by corporations?  What purposes do a globally mobile elite perform within multinational corporations that maintain and enhance discourses and structures of multinational power and dominance?
• What is the impact of global mobile professionals on the locations to which they move?  How is ‘whiteness’ important in this mobility and in forms of racial hierarchicalization in host locations?  How can we conceptualize and empirically research globally mobile professionals from non-metropolitan centres?  What are the gendered aspects of professional global mobility? 
• What do concepts such as hybridization and mimicry offer a critical analysis of mobility and how has hybridization in particular been appropriated by multinational corporations?
• How do globally mobile professionals impact the host countries from a critical perspective?
• How does the movement of the global professional and managerial class underpin a globalized system of neoliberalism?  Do the global professional and managerial class constitute a group from all parts of the world who cross borders in support of global capital?

We welcome theoretical, conceptual and empirical papers that explore and investigate the critical dimensions of the global mobility of professionals and managers as a developing transnational capitalist class.

Submission process:

Submissions should follow the author guidelines for Critical Perspective on International Business which can be found at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/cpoib.htm

The submission deadline is 1st September 2012, with initial reviewing to be completed by 30th November 2012, revisions due by 1st February 2013, final decisions by 1st May 2013, and anticipated publication in early 2014.

Submissions should be via the Scholar One Manuscripts online submission system (http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cpoib).

Please direct questions to any of the special issue editors at: smckenna@yorku.ca, M.N.Ravishankar@lboro.ac.uk, D.Weir@ucs.ac.uk

References

Dickmann, M., & Doherty, N. (2010).  Exploring organizational and individual career goals, interactions, and outcomes of developmental international assignments.  Thunderbird International Business Review, 52, 301-311.

Jokinen, T., Brewster, C., & Suutari, V. (2008).  Career capital during international work experiences: contrasting self-initiated expatriate experiences and assigned expatriation.  The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19, 979-998.

Leonard, P. (2010). Expatriate Identities in Postcolonial Organizations: Working Whiteness, Surrey: Ashgate.

McKenna , S., & Richardson, J. (2007).  The increasing complexity of the internationally mobile professional:  issues for research and practice.  Cross Cultural Management, 14, 307-329.

Myers, B., & Pringle, J. K. (2005).  Self-initiated Foreign Experience as Accelerated Development:  Influences of Gender.  Journal of World Business, 40, 421-431.

Richardson, J. (2006).  Self-directed expatriation:  family matters.  Personnel Review, 35, 469-486.

Said, E.W. (1978) Orientalism, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd.

Said, E.W. (1993) Culture and Imperialism, New York: Vintage.

Selmer, J., & Lauring, J. (2010).  Self-initiated academic expatriates:  Inherent demographics and reasons to expatriates.  European Management Review, 7, 169-179.

Suutari, V. (2003).  Global managers:  Career orientation, career tracks, life-style implications and career commitment.  Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18, 185-207.

Tharenou, P., & Caulfield, N. (2010).  Will I stay or will I go?  Explaining repatriation by self-initiated expatriates.  Academy of Management Journal, 53, 1009-1028.

Urry, J. (2000), Sociology beyond societies: Mobilities for the twenty-first century, Routledge, London.

About the Guest Editors

Dr Steve McKenna is Professor of Human Resource Management at York University, Toronto. His research interests include global mobility, postcolonial approaches to management and organization studies and the processes involved in ‘learning to work’.  He co-convened a sub-theme at EGOS in 2007 from which came a special issue of the Journal of Management Development on ‘Managing, managerial control and managerial identity in the post-bureaucratic world’.  He has published articles in Organization, Management Learning, International Journal of Human Resource Management and Management International Review.  He is regional editor (North America) for Personnel Review.

Dr. M.N. Ravishankar is Reader in Globalization and Emerging Markets at the School of Business and Economics, Loughborough University, UK. His research interests span culture and its interface with business strategies, offshore outsourcing of work and IT-enabled transformations in emerging markets. Ravi’s research has appeared in leading international journals such as Information Systems Research, Journal of Vocational Behaviour and Omega.

Professor David Weir is Dean of the Business School at University Campus Suffolk, UK.  He is also Emeritus Professor of the University of Northumbria, Visiting Professor in Management Development at Lancaster University, Visiting Professor Bristol Business School, Professor Affilie, ESC Rennes, France and Distinguished Visiting Professor, ETQM College, Dubai.  He is a Companion of the Chartered Institute of Management and the author of several books including the best selling “Modern Britain” series.  He is currently completing a book on “Management in the Arab world”.  He was a joint editor of the book Critical Management Studies at Work (2009), Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Guest Editors

Claudine Gaibrois, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland

Philippe Lecomte, Toulouse Business School, France

Mehdi Boussebaa, University of Glasgow, UK

Martyna Śliwa, University of Essex, UK

Introduction to the Special Issue

Scholarly interest in the role of language and, in particular, the rise of English as a global language in international business (IB), and organizational life more generally, has grown considerably in the past two decades. Most of the studies to date, however, have adopted a managerialist-functionalist perspective, focusing on corporate or individual solutions for overcoming language barriers. While this stream of research has significantly contributed to understanding the challenges of multilingualism in IB, research would now benefit from other perspectives. In other words, there is a need for research in IB going beyond questions of organizational efficiency and performance.

In particular, there is a need for more critical studies so as to examine how language policies and language practices in IB are mediated by power and politics. For instance, the increasingly widespread practice of mandating of a common language inside multinationals, far from being a neutral process, “should be viewed as exercise of power” (Vaara et al., 2005, p. 596). In this context, native speakers of the imposed language typically benefit from “unearned status gain” (Neeley and Dumas, 2016, p. 1) that gives them undue control over the communication flow (Feely and Harzing, 2003; Harzing and Pudelko, 2013; Neeley, 2013). The mandated language typically empowers some while disempowering others (Dotan Elliaz et al., 2009; Vaara et al., 2005) and acts as a source of individual influence within the firm (Barner-Rasmussen et al., 2014; Marschan-Piekkari et al., 1999; Peltokorpi and Vaara, 2014). Similarly, some research has shown how translation can be understood as an inherently political act (Ciuk et al., 2018; Logemann and Piekkari, 2015).

Moreover, studies of human agency creation in the context of linguistic inequalities, which might include open resistance against the use of a certain language as well as more subtle forms of non-compliance such as adaptation, would highlight power and politics in multilingual organizations as a source of dynamism and change, stressing possibilities of empowerment, emancipation and giving voice to marginalized groups. As an example, scholars have recently stressed the power effects of hybrid language use, as it can provide possibilities to express voice and participate (Gaibrois, 2018; Janssens and Steyaert, 2014), thus departing from the general tendency to emphasize national languages in language-sensitive IB (Tietze et al., 2016).

This emerging body of power-sensitive research has advanced understanding of language policies and practices in IB and one can expect it to be developed further, both empirically and conceptually. However, we believe it is time to conduct more critically oriented studies that can locate corporate language policies and practices in wider historical and socio-political contexts. One example is research on language policy informed by theories of imperialism and colonialism (Boussebaa et al., 2014; Boussebaa and Brown, 2017; Śliwa, 2008; Vaara et al., 2005). Another example is research pointing to the linkages between global English and neo-liberalism (e.g. Śliwa, 2010). Research on language policies and language use in IB also needs to take into account the hierarchy that exists between languages so as to bring into the analysis the fact that languages are generally “not equal in terms of socio-politico-economic value” (Hua 2014, p. 236) and thus potentially productive of intra-organizational inequalities. As Bourdieu’s (1991) notion of linguistic capital highlights, the value of an individual’s utterance depends on the value of that person’s first language on the market of languages.

Additionally, in order to understand the effects contemporary IB activity has on the individual, specific communities and society (Dörrenbächer and Michailova, 2019), we need more research on the ways in which language policies and practices in IB relate to privilege and inequality as well as to processes of participation and inclusion/exclusion (e.g. Tatli and Özbilgin, 2012). Research investigating how language intersects with other diversity dimensions such as migrant background, education or organizational function shows how language contributes to social and organizational differentiation (Johansson and Śliwa, 2016). Possible questions include the effects of using English as ‘lingua franca’ on low-qualified employees’ participation in organizational life (Gaibrois, 2015), or the consequences of the foreign-language environment on migrants’ and refugees’ organizational status.

On a conceptual and empirical level, most research on language policies and language use in IB tends to be conducted from a Western perspective. Frameworks and methodologies developed in the USA and Western Europe continue to be applied across different socio-cultural contexts, and the major debates are orchestrated by scholars affiliated with Western universities and by Westerners based elsewhere, as Michailova and Tienari (2014) have criticized with regards to IB in general. However, conceptualizations of multilingualism or methodologies stemming from outside the industrialized world (Roberts and Dörrenbächer, 2016) hold great potential for deepening understanding of language policies and language use in IB.

Finally, research in other organizational contexts than multinational corporations is required, because focusing on the multinational as a core category of IB research often remains static, structural and binary, and is not aligned with the fluidity and change of human activity, in which language practices play a crucial role (Angouri and Piekkari, 2018). Examples of other research contexts include universities (Boussebaa and Brown, 2017), offshore outsourcing companies (Boussebaa et al., 2014). Informal, partial and temporal organizations (Angouri and Piekkari, 2018) or non-profit based IB, as suggested in a call by Dörrenbächer and Michailova (2019), are another promising research context.

In this Special Issue, we therefore invite scholars from various disciplines and geographical locations to address multilingualism in IB from a critical perspective, focusing on how multilingualism in IB relates to privilege and inequality. Potential authors are encouraged to highlight the impact of the contemporary global and societal context on language policies and practices, and vice versa. Conceptual, methodological and empirical contributions addressing the following, by no means exhaustive, themes are particularly welcome:

• The impact of (neo)colonialism on language policies and language practices in IB 
• The effects of language hierarchies on individuals’ language capital in organizations
• Language and its intersection with other diversity dimensions, such as education, occupation, organizational status or gender
• The consequences of language policies for employees on the lower hierarchical levels and/or with limited proficiency in foreign-languages  
• Migrants’ and refugees’ language-related challenges
• Agency creation in multilingual organizations and resistance against language-skill related privilege
• The political dimensions of translation
• Perspectives on language policies and language practices in IB from outside the industrialized world

Following the renewed aim of critical perspectives on international business (cpoib) to focus on the contemporary context of IB (Dörrenbächer and Michailova, 2019), submissions are expected to address how global and societal changes relate to language policies and practices in IB. Potential contributors are encouraged to challenge the earlier focus on managerial perspectives by highlighting issues of privilege and inequality. They are also invited to suggest alternatives to focusing on efficiency and individual-level language skills by presenting innovative approaches to addressing multilingualism in organizations.

Submission Instructions

The deadline for submissions is 31 March 2020. For more information on critical perspectives on international business, including style guidelines, please visit the journal’s website at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/loi/cpoib/.

All submissions will be subject to the regular blind peer review process of critical perspectives on international business. Submissions to the special issue are made using ScholarOne Manuscripts http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cpoib.

More Information

Enquires about the special issue should be directed to the guest editors: 
Claudine Gaibrois, claudine.gaibrois@unisg.ch

Philippe Lecomte, p.lecomte@tbs-education.fr

Mehdi Boussebaa, mehdi.boussebaa@glasgow.ac.uk

Martyna Śliwa, masliwa@essex.ac.uk

References

Angouri, J. and Piekkari, R. (2018), “Organising multilingually. Setting an agenda for studying multilingual organisations and organising”, European Journal of International Management, Special Issue: “Working across Language Boundaries in International Business", Vol. 12 Nos 1/2, pp. 8-27.

Barner-Rasmussen, W., Ehrenrooth, M., Koveshnikov, A., and Mäkelä, K. (2014), “Cultural and language skills as resources for boundary spanning within the MNC”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 45 No. 7, pp. 886-905.

Bourdieu, P. (1991), Language and Symbolic Power, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Boussebaa, M., Sinha, S. and Gabriel, Y. (2014), “Englishization in offshore call centers: A postcolonial perspective”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 45 No. 9, pp. 1152-1169.

Boussebaa, M. & Brown, A-D. (2017), “Englishization, Identity, Regulation and Imperialism”, Organization Studies, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 7-29.

Ciuk, S., James, P. and Śliwa, M. (2018), “Micropolitical Dynamics of Interlingual Translation Processes in an MNC Subsidiary”, British Journal of Management, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12323.

Dörrenbächer, C. and Michailova, S. (2019), “Societally engaged, critical International Business research: A programmatic view on the role and contribution of cpoib”, critical perspectives on international business, forthcoming

Dotan-Eliaz, O., Sommer, K. L. and Rubin, Y. S. (2009), “Multilingual groups. Effects of linguistic ostracism on felt rejection and anger, coworker attraction, perceived team potency, and creative performance”, Basic and Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 31, pp. 363-375.

Feely, A. J. and Harzing, A.-W. (2003), “Language management in multinational companies”, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 37‑52.

Gaibrois, C. (2015), Power at work: The discursive construction of power relations in multilingual organizations, Bamberg: Difo-Druck.

Gaibrois, C. (2018), “’It crosses all the boundaries': Hybrid language use as empowering resource”, European Journal of International Management, Special Issue “Working across Language Boundaries in International Business”, Vol. 12 Nos 1/2, pp. 82-110.

Harzing, A.-W. and Feely, A. (2008), “The language barrier and its implications for HQ-subsidiary relationships”, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 49-61.

Harzing, A-W. and Pudelko, M. (2013), “Language competencies, policies and practices in multinational corporations: A comprehensive review and comparison of Anglophone, Asian, Continental European and Nordic MNC”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 87-97. 

Hua, Z. (2014), “Piecing together the ‘workplace multilingualism’ jigsaw puzzle”, Multilingua, Vol. 33 Nos 1/2, pp. 233-242.

Janssens, M. and Steyaert, C. (2014), “Re-considering language within a cosmopolitan understanding. Toward a multilingual franca approach in International Business studies”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 45 No. 5, pp. 623-639.

Johansson, M. and Śliwa, M. (2016), “‘It is English and there is no alternative’: Intersectionality, language and social/organizational differentiation of Polish migrants in the UK”, Gender, Work and Organization, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 296-309.

Logemann, M., and Piekkari, R. (2015), “Localize or local lies? The power of language and translation in the multinational corporation”, critical perspectives on international business, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 30-53.

Marschan-Piekkari, R., Welch, D. and Welch, L. (1999), “In the shadow: The impact of language on structure, power and communication in the multinational”, International Business Review, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 421-440.

Michailova, S. and Tienari, J. (2014),"What's happening to international business?", critical perspectives on international business, Vol. 10 Nos 1/2, pp. 51-64.

Neeley, T. (2013), “Language matters. Status loss and achieved status distinctions in global organizations”, Organization Science, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 476-497.

Neeley, T.B. and Dumas T.L. (2016), “Unearned status gain. Evidence from a global language mandate”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 14-43.

Peltokorpi, V. and Vaara, E. (2014), “Knowledge transfer in multinational corporations: Productive and counterproductive effects of language-sensitive recruitment”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 45 No. 5, pp. 600-622.

Philippson, R. (1992), Linguistic Imperialism, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Roberts, J. and Dörrenbächer, C. (2016), “Renewing the call for critical perspectives on international business: towards a second decade of challenging the orthodox”, critical perspectives on international business, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 2-21.

Śliwa, M. (2008), “Understanding social change through post‐colonial theory: Reflections on linguistic imperialism and language spread in Poland””, critical perspectives on international business, Vol. 4 Nos 2/3, pp. 228-241.

Śliwa, M. (2010), “‘Catching up with civilisation’: Reflections on language spread in Poland”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 689-709.

Tatli, A. and Özbilgin, M. (2012), “Surprising intersectionalities of inequality and privilege: the case of the arts and cultural sector”, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 249-265.

Tietze, S., Holden, N. and Barner-Rasmussen, W. (2016), “Language use in multinational corporations: The role of special languages and corporate idiolects”, In: Ginsburgh, V. and Weber, S. (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Economics and Language, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 312-341.

Vaara, E., Tienari, J., Piekkari, R. and Säntti, R. (2005), “Language and the Circuits of Power in a Merging Multinational Corporation”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 595–623.

About the Special Issue Editors

Claudine Gaibrois (PhD from the University of St. Gallen) is a Lecturer for Culture, Society and Language at the Zurich University of Applied Sciences and an External Lecturer for Language Diversity in Organizational Contexts at the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, and the Ecole de Management Strasbourg, France. Her research interests include linguistic and cultural diversity, communication in organizational contexts, intercultural communication and power relations. She has published in journals such as Journal of World Business, International Journal of Cross Cultural Management and European Journal of International Management. She has also co-edited a volume of the Bulletin Suisse de linguistique appliquée, which addresses the role and perception of language at the workplace from an international comparative perspective. She is a member of the board at the Groupe d’Etudes en Management et Langage (GEM&L)

Contact: claudine.gaibrois@unisg.ch

Philippe Lecomte is President and founding member of GEM&L, an international research group on Management and Language. He has been Associate Professor at Toulouse Business School (TBS), France for over 30 years. He was head of the Language department of TBS and co-director of the Major in International Management at TBS. Philippe Lecomte was guest lecturer at WFI- Ingolstadt School of management in 2009 and 2011. His current research interest is in language in international business and management education. He has co-edited four special issues on language and management (Management & Avenir, 2013; Gérer et Comprendre, 2014; International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 2015, European Journal of International Management, 2017). He is senior editor of the European Journal of International Management.

Contact: p.lecomte@tbs-education.fr

Mehdi Boussebaa is Professor of International Business at the University of Glasgow in the UK. His primary research investigates the impact of globalization on organizational behaviour and the role of multinationals as agents of globalization. Empirically, he has a particular interest in professional service multinationals and internationalizing universities. His work has been published in journals such as Organization Studies, Human Relations, Journal of International Business Studies and Journal of World Business. He currently is an Associate Editor of critical perspectives on international business and serves on the editorial boards of Organization Studies, Journal of World Business and Journal of Professions and Organization. 

Contact: mehdi.boussebaa@glasgow.ac.uk

Martyna Śliwa is Professor of Management and Organisation Studies at the University of Essex. Her research interests include linguistic diversity, multilingualism and translation in multinational corporations. She has published research addressing issues of language and power in journals such as Journal of International Business Studies, British Journal of Management and Culture and Organization. She is particularly interested in how language intersects with other aspects of organisational diversity and what effects it has on individual careers as well as organisational hierarchies and power relations. Martyna has extensive experience of editorial work and is currently Associate Editor of the British Journal of Management and Management Learning.

Contact: masliwa@essex.ac.uk

The European single market has come a long way in allowing for the free movement of people, goods, services and capital across the Union. European institutions, organizations, businesses and private citizens, can potentially operate, compete and coexist within a supranational society, the citizens of which come from divergent cultural backgrounds of no fewer than 27 member states, that become even more composite as a result of an increasing influx of migrant workers seeking a better life in Europe.

Externally, European organizations expand their scope of activities following EU's leading position in the global political and economic arena, including its role in the so much needed Islamic-Western mutual understanding and reconciliation. This reality is reflected in the complexity of the European business, governance and administrative environment that demands a high level of cultural competency from organizations and their management. A cross-cultural know-how that can potentially become an organizational resource needs to be developed that will expand managers' effectiveness in a wide spectrum of international and home settings.

Yet, research allowing us to improve our understanding of cross-cultural management issues, in Europe and elsewhere, is rather limited. Researchers intending to address this gap are invited to submit their work to this special issue. Theoretical and/or empirical papers of both a quantitative and a qualitative nature on all aspects of modern management are invited. A European-Mediterranean perspective is preferable.

Topics could include but are not limited to:

* Implications of culture on managerial styles and decision making
* Culture and strategy: implications of culture for strategic decision making
* Strategic alliances, mergers and acquisitions across cultures
* Implications of culture on management practice
* Corporate and organizational cultures
* Leadership in multi-cultural contexts
* Marketing services and products in cross-cultural environments
* Culture's impact on customer behaviour
* Ethnocentrism
* Cross-cultural communications and negotiations
* Management ethical Issues related to culture
* Cross-cultural perspectives of branding strategies.

Submission guidelines

Papers submitted must not have been published, accepted for publication, or presently be under consideration for publication with any other journal. Submissions should be approximately 4,000-6,000 words in length. Submissions to Cross Cultural Management must be made using the ScholarOne Manuscript Central system. For more details, please visit Emerald Insight and consult the author guidelines. A separate title page must be uploaded containing the title, author(s), and contact information for the author(s).

Suitable articles will be subjected to a double-blind review; hence authors should not identify themselves in the body of the paper.

Guest Editors

Yaakov Weber

College of Management Academic Studies, Israel

Shlomo Tarba

University of Birmingham, UK

Consulting Editor

Daniel Rottig

Florida Gulf Coast University, USA

Mergers and acquisitions (M&As) of companies located in emerging markets (EMs) as well as M&A deals that have originated from emerging market firms in recent years account for a large share of foreign direct investment (Rottig, 2017). Furthermore, the majority of outward foreign direct investment from EMs is created through M&As that help firms to achieve strategic objectives such as growth and acquisitions of technology and resources. However, the number of studies that focus on M&As in and out of EMs is much smaller than those studies that analyze M&As in and out of developed economies, which constitute a major research gap and opportunity for future studies. For example, a recent review of the literature on the critical success factors of M&As (Gomes, Angwin, Weber and Tarba, 2013; Rottig and Reus, 2018) concluded that there is a scarcity of theoretical and empirical work examining cross-border M&As by EM firms.  Moreover, based on a meta-analysis of culture’s consequences for acquisition performance, Rottig (2017: 28) notes that “the majority of culture-related acquisition performance research is based on samples of acquirers and targets in developed countries with a recent emergence of studies examining acquisitions of Western-based firms in emerging markets. Interestingly, however, we could not identify a single empirical study that examined the effects of cultural differences on acquisition performance based on a sample of acquisitions of emerging market targets by emerging market acquirers. Against the background of the recent proliferation of acquisitions across emerging markets – with emerging market acquirers accounting for 53 percent of global cross-border acquisitions and 72 percent of targets being located in emerging markets (UNCTAD, 2014) – future research is likely to make a contribution by theoretically examining the unique institutional environments of emerging markets, developing location-specific conceptual models for the culture-based acquisition performance determinants in these markets, and empirically analyzing such models based on samples of acquirers and target firms that are indigenous to these markets.” These reviews point out the need for more research on M&As within EMs as well as M&As originating from EM firms.

Most of the scarce, extant literature on M&As in and out of EMs is based on samples from only one single country such as China or India, and the results are mixed. It is questionable whether conclusions drawn from studies of M&As in one emerging market context can be generalized to other EM contexts and other EM firms. Furthermore, there is a lack of research testing the applicability of findings and theories from the literature on cross-border M&As in developed countries in the context of M&As in and out of EM. For example, more research is needed on the unique institutional (external and internal) factors in EMs that impact the strategies, implementation, and performance of M&A in EMs (e.g., see Rottig, 2016). Studies have therefore pointed to the fact that that there are significant differences in institutional environments between developed economies and emerging economies, and underscored the need for extending the existing knowledge on M&As by exploring these transactions in new national and organizational settings (Ahammad, Leone, Tarba, Glaister & Arslan, 2017; Buckley, Elia, & Kafouros, 2014).

This special issue aims to foster the research streams on antecedents (factors affecting performance) and outcomes (performance) of cross-border mergers and acquisitions in and out of emerging markets. This complex, widespread and growing phenomenon of M&As will require the incorporation of multidisciplinary, multi-level and cross-cultural models and analyses (Junni, Sarala, Tarba, & Weber, 2015; Weber, 2012; Weber, Tarba, & Oberg, 2013).

We invite papers that focus on theories and findings that explain pre- and post-M&A processes in EMs. We encourage both conceptual and empirical (quantitative and qualitative) contributions that may address, but are not limited to, the following topics:

Multidisciplinary Approach and Interrelationships Among M&A Stages in and out of EMs:

• What insights can perspectives from strategy, organizational behavior, international management, psychology, sociology, anthropology and other disciplines provide to our understanding of M&A performance in and out EMs?
• Given that some studies show that experience does not necessarily lead to better performance, how can Learning theory, the Knowledge-based-view and/or Resource-based-view explain M&A performance in EMs?
• Do strategic goals, strategic choices and screening processes during the pre-M&A stage lead to different psychological experiences and outcomes that require different HR practices and implementation approaches in the post-M&A stage in an emerging market context?

Success Factors at M&A Stages in and out of EMs

• What are the success factors during the planning, closing and implementation stages of M&A in EMs?
• How do the unique institutional contexts of emerging markets affect M&A performance across stages in the M&A process?
• What are the roles of leadership and trust during different stages of M&A in EMs?
• What are the best practices for synergy realization in M&As in and out EMs?
• Under what circumstances (e.g., institutional contexts, industries, firm size) are communication, training, staffing, recruiting, rewarding and other practices during the pre and post-merger period the most effective?

Paper Submission Deadline:      December 20, 2018

Guidelines on Submission:

• Please visit the International Journal of Emerging Market website at www.emeraldinsight.com/journal/ijoem for details about author and submission guidelines.
• Please submit your papers directly through the ScholarOne submission and review system, which you can access via http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ijoem Please select this special issue in ScholarOne when submitting your paper.

References:
 

Ahammad, M. F., Leone, V., Tarba, S. Y., Glaister, K. W., & Arslan, A. (2017). Equity ownership in cross-border mergers and acquisitions by British firms: An analysis of real options and transaction cost factors. British Journal of Management, 28 (2), 180-196.

Buckley, P. J., Elia, S., & Kafouros, M. (2014). Acquisitions by emerging market multinationals: Implications for firm performance. Journal of World Business, 49(4), 611-632.

Gomes, E., Angwin, D. N., Weber, Y., & Tarba, S. Y. 2013. Critical success factors through the mergers and acquisitions process: Revealing pre- and post-M&A connections for improved performance. Thunderbird International Business Review, 55(1): 13-35.

Junni, P., Sarala, R., Tarba, S. Y., & Weber, Y. (2015). Strategic agility in acquisitions. British Journal of Management, 26(4), 596-616.

Rottig, D. 2016. Institutions and emerging markets: Effects and implications for multinational corporations. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 11(1): 2-17.

Rottig, D. 2017. Meta-analys es of culture's consequences for acquisition performance: An examination of statistical artifacts, methodological moderators and the context of emerging markets. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 12(1): 8-37.

Rottig, D. & Reus, T. H. 2018. Research on culture and international acquisition performance: A critical evaluation and new directions. International Studies of Management & Organization, 48(1): 3-42.

UNCTAD. 2014. World Investment Report: Investing in the SDGs: An action plan. New York: United Nations Publications.

Weber, Y. 2012. Handbook of Research on Mergers and Acquisitions. Edward Elgar, MA, USA.

Weber, Y., Tarba, S.Y., & Oberg, C. (2013). A Comprehensive Guide to Mergers and Acquisitions: Managing the Critical Success Factors Across Every Stage of the M&A Process. USA & UK: Financial Times Press.

CSR in Developing Countries: Towards a Development-Oriented Approach

Editors: Dima Jamali, Charlotte Karam & Michael Blowfield

Since the turn of the millennium, we have witnessed a surge of interest in the notion of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) coupled with an explosion in the number of articles, books, and chapters written on the topic. CSR is generally used as an umbrella term to describe the complex and multi-faceted relationships between business and society and to account for the economic, social and environmental impacts of business activity. Within the literature emerging from developed economies, CSR has been examined along three main tracks, namely as a function of profit maximizing behavior (McWilliams & Siegel, 2002), institutional pressures (Campbell, 2007), or managerial cognition (Muller & Kolk, 2009).

In this respect, scholars have delved into various aspects and applications of CSR including the use of CSR for legitimation, the relationship between CSR and financial performance and analyses of institutional pressures affecting CSR expressions. While this research has significantly advanced our understanding of CSR and its antecedents and implications, the bulk of this research has been concentrated in developed economies and in European and North American countries more specifically.

There has been a burgeoning parallel interest in understanding the dynamics and peculiarities of CSR in developing economies (Blowfield & Frynas, 2005; Newell & Frynas, 2007; Idemudia, 2011). Authors have contested the immediate transferability of frameworks and conclusions drawn in the developed world to developing countries and have argued for the need for a more nuanced analysis of how CSR manifests itself in emerging markets (Egri & Ralston, 2008; Kolk & Lenfant, 2010; Kolk & Van Tulder, 2010). The context-dependence of CSR has indeed been re-emphasized in recent years and the fact that developing countries present peculiar institutional constellations that affect CSR manifestations is now well-recognized (e.g. Jamali & Sidani, 2012; Visser, 2008). Scholars have suggested for example that philanthropy constitutes the main expression of CSR in the developing world whether because of prevailing cultural norms and expectations (Jamali &Neville, 2011; Gao, 2009), religious expectations (Jamali, Sidani, & El-Asmar, 2009a; Jamali, Zanhour, & Keshishian, 2009b) or the difficult and pressing socio-economic needs which put pressure on firms to embrace philanthropic programs and interventions (Frynas, 2005).

Other institutional gaps that affect the expressions of CSR in developing countries, include the contracted and retracted role of governments in developing countries (Frynas, 2005; Amaeshi et al., 2006) which often creates environments that are ripe for abuse (Khavul & Bruton, 2013; Newenham-Kahindi, 2011) and the weakness of drivers pertaining to business associations and nongovernmental organizations (Jamali & Neville, 2011). Ite (2005) identifies corruption, poor governance and the lack of accountability to be the main hindrances for CSR in Nigeria, causing exacerbated poverty and unemployment. Hence while there has been some increased scholarship on CSR in developing countries, and new insights into the cultural and local specifics of CSR engagement, there is need for additional research that can inform a more nuanced and sophisticated research agenda that links to public policy and development goals in more substantive ways. In fact various authors have highlighted a core challenge pertaining to how to move CSR beyond philanthropy, rhetoric, legitimization, imagery, and public relations in the developing world to substantive engagement that addresses engrained social problems (e.g. poverty, education, unemployment) and that has developmental impact and implications (Barkemeyer, 2009; Karam & Jamali, 2013).

Hence, this book volume is intended to highlight the current discussion on CSR in developing countries, through the voices of authors, scholars and practitioners working in these contexts. The editors welcome contributions pertaining to various aspects of CSR engagement in developing countries, with a particular focus on the question of the promise and potential of CSR to serve as an effective development tool.

The question of how the business sector can serve as an effective agent of change in the developing world is important and timely, particularly as the CSR paradigm continues to be anchored in voluntary self-regulatory conceptions (Barmekeyer, 2009; Jamali, 2010). In this respect, Blowfield and Dolan (forthcoming) begin to chart the way by giving insights into how the business sector has moved from a reactive non-intentional role in promoting development to a more proactive and engaged stance and specify three important criteria for an engaged developmental orientation pertaining to investing one’s capital, giving primacy to the poor and their issues, and accountability to address poverty and marginalization. In summary we invite contributions to this book volume seeking to address two primary questions. The first question is to what extent and in what ways do CSR agenda challenges and initiatives differ in developing economies, and how to account for these variations?

The second equally important question is how CSR can be mobilized more effectively to serve as a development tool, in the sense of aligning more systematically with meeting development goals that are worthy and substantive. We believe that exploring CSR in developing country contexts is important because these are the contexts where CSR and developmental needs are most acute (Jamali & Mirshak, 2007; Visser, 2008) and because developing countries often present a distinctive set of CSR agenda challenges which may have qualitative differences from those faced in the developed world (Visser, 2008). We also believe that in our current time, CSR needs to be examined more systematically not only in terms of constraints but also in terms of developmental potential in addressing relevant societal concerns and local development needs. We invite a range of nuanced contributions that are able to move beyond the ideological fault lines of CSR is good versus bad (Dolan & Rajak, 2011), to focus on the CSR peculiarities, ambivalences and tensions of CSR in developing countries and addressing the CSR-development nexus or interface more specifically.

Some questions that can guide contributors as they reflect on possible topics include:

1. What are the possible lines of inquiry linking CSR to development? What are the important questions needed to be asked to develop fruitful future research directions on CSR in developing countries?
2. What are the specificities of CSR in developing countries? How to account for the variation?
3. What does it mean for business to be a genuine development agent?
4. How can CSR be leveraged, or mobilized, or tailored for greater developmental impact in different developing contexts?
5. What is meant by inclusive growth or inclusive capitalism and how can companies channel some of their innovative ingenuity to worthwhile development needs and projects in the developing world?
6. What are the questions that CSR researchers should be asking to contribute to a locally appropriate CSR discourse while simultaneously remaining relevant to the global CSR dialogue?Similarly, what questions should practitioners be asking to make a local contribution and to lead the development-oriented CSR forward on the global stage?
7. Where can CSR research in developing countries feed back into CSR research and practice in developed countries?
8. What are the practical and methodological challenges of conducting quantitative and qualitative CSR research within and across developing economies and how can these serve as opportunities for developing innovative and stimulating new avenues for CSR research in general?
9. What are the practical challenges of implementing development-oriented CSR initiatives within and across developing economies and how can these serve as opportunities for developing innovative and stimulating new avenues for responsible engagement?

A brief (one page) proposal or outline of your book chapter in terms of intended structure and main arguments and objectives is due by end of November 2013; we will endeavor to get back to you in relation to acceptance by end December 2013 and the full chapter contribution will be due on May 30, 2014.

In terms of formatting guidelines, Greenleaf formatting guidelines should be closely followed. These include the following (we should check with John): - Harvard referencing should be used throughout - The entire manuscript is double-spaced - Tables and diagrams are sent separately from the text

REFERENCES

Amaeshi, K. M., Adi, B. C., Ogbechie, C., & Amao, O. O. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in Nigeria: Western mimicry or indigenous influences? Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 24 (winter) 83-99. Barkemeyer, R. (2009). Beyond compliance – below expectations? Cross-border CSR, development and the UN Global Compact. Business Ethics: A European Review, 18(3), 273-289. Blowfield, M. (2007). Reasons to be cheerful? What we know about CSR’s impact. Third World Quarterly, 28(4), 683-695. Blowfield, M., & Dolan, C. (Forthcoming). Business as development agent: Evidence of possibility and improbability. Blowfield, M., & Frynas, J. G. (2005). Setting new agendas: critical perspectives on corporal social responsibility in the developing world. International Affairs, 81(3), 499–513. Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32, 946–967. Dolan, C. & Rajak, D. (2011). Introduction: Ethnographies of corporate ethicizing. Journal of Global and Historical Anthropology, 60, 3-8. Egri, C. P., & Ralston, D. A. (2008). Corporate responsibility: A review of international management research from 1998 to 2007. Journal of International Management, 14, 319-339. Frynas, J. G. (2005). The false development promise of corporate social responsibility: Evidence from multinational oil companies. International Affairs, 81, 581-98. Gao, Y. (2009). Corporate social performance in China: Evidence from large companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 23-35. Greenfield, W. M. (2004). In the name of corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 47(1), 19-28. Idemudia U. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and developing countries: Moving the critical CSR research agenda in Africa forward. Progress in Development Studies, 11(1), 1-18. Ite, U.E. (2005). Poverty reduction in resource-rich developing countries: what have multinational corporations got to do with it? Journal of International Development, 17, 913-929. Jamali, D. (2010). The CSR of MNC subsidiaries in developing countries: Global, local, substantive or diluted? Journal of Business Ethics, 93, 181-200. Jamali, D., & Mirshak, R. (2010). Business-conflict linkages: Revisiting MNCs, CSR and conflict. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(3), 443-464. Jamali, D., & Mirshak, R. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: Theory and practice in a developing country context. Journal of Business Ethics, 72(1), 243-262. Jamali, D. & Neville, B. (2011). Convergence versus divergence of CSR in developing countries: an embedded multi-layered institutional lens. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(4), 599-621. Jamali, D. & Sidani, Y. (2012). CSR in the Middle East: Fresh perspectives. In D. Jamali, & Y. Sidani (Ed.), Introduction: CSR in the Middle East: Fresh Perspectives (pp. 1-11). Palgrave Publishers: UK. Jamali, D., Sidani, Y., & El-Asmar, K. (2009a). Changing managerial CSR orientations: A three country comparative analysis of Lebanon, Syria and Jordan. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(1), 173-192. Jamali, D., Zanhour, M., & Keshishian, T. (2009b). Peculiar strengths and relational attributes of SMEs in the context of CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(3), 355–367. Karam, C., & Jamali, D. (2013). Gendering CSR in the Arab Middle East: an institutional perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(1), 31-68. Khavul, S., & Bruton, G. D. (2013). Harnessing innovation for change: Sustainability and poverty in developing countries. Journal of Management Studies, 50(2), 285-306. Kolk, A., & Lenfant, F. (2010). MNC reporting on CSR and conflict in Central Africa. Journal of Business Ethics, 93, 241-255. Kolk, A., & Van Tulder, R. (2010). International business, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. International Business Review, 19(2), 119-125. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2002). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26, 177–127. Muller, A., & Kolk, A. (2009). CSR performance in emerging markets: Evidence from Mexico. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 325-337. Newell, P., & Frynas, J. G. (2007). Beyond CSR? Business, poverty and social justice: An introduction. Third World Quarterly, 28(4), 669-681. Newenham-Kahindi, A. M. (2011). A global mining corporation and local communities in the Lake Victoria Zone: The case of Barrick Gold multinational in Tanzania. Journal of Business Ethics, 99, 253–282. Visser, W. (2008). Corporate social responsibility in developing countries. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility (pp. 473-479). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Whether conducted internationally or within the same nation, cross-cultural research relies heavily on questionnaires and surveys. However, analysts often wonder whether responses generated by respondents from different cultural contexts mean the same thing. Cultural background may shape how different people use the same response scales. Likewise, self-report questions might elicit tendencies that interfere with what a survey researcher might want to know. In other cases, culture might influence as to whether respondents provide answers to the question as stated in the text, or if they are inclined to tailor their answer based on the specific context in which the question is being asked. And yet in other cases, participants’ answers may differ as a function of whether a question appears early or late in the same survey.

The present Special Section aims to bring together contemporary research that tackles problems of survey responding in a cross-cultural context. The focus is on issues, which have the potential of compromising cultural comparisons, yet which may also be of interest as cultural phenomena in their own right. Issues include, but are not limited to, acquiescent responding, disaquiescent responding, extreme responding, middling responding, socially desirable responding and context-driven responding. Papers may wish to diagnose cultural response tendencies, broadly construed, and demonstrate the consequences for conclusions about cultural differences. Similarly, papers may wish to propose new approaches in how to deal with various response tendencies, either at the stage of questionnaire design or the analysis of self-report data. Papers are also encouraged if they examine the predictors of cultural response tendencies, or demonstrate the conditions under which they are present or absent. Both theoretical and empirical contributions will be considered.

Manuscripts should be no longer than 6,000 words (including footnotes, references, tables, and figures, but excluding the abstract), have no more than 30 references, and include a 200-word abstract. If warranted (e.g., when reporting a coherent series of multiple studies) longer manuscripts may be considered, but authors are encouraged to contact the special section editor. Manuscripts are expected to follow standard guidelines of the International Journal of Psychology (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/%28ISSN%291464-066X/homepage/ForAuthors.html). Submissions will be peer-reviewed.

To ensure the suitability of a manuscript for the special section, authors should send an abstract (300-500 words) to reach the Guest Editor, Markus Kemmelmeier (markusk@unr.edu) by December 15, 2014, before submitting the complete manuscript. Manuscripts must be submitted in electronic form via IJP’s website (http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pijp).

Deadline for paper submissions is April 30, 2015.

Papers acceptable for publication that cannot be published in this special section may be considered for publication in a regular issue of the International Journal of Psychology, unless authors explicitly decline this option.

This is a call for papers for a special issue of Research in International Business and Finance focused on behavioral explanations for the use of outside financing by business firms.  This topic has assumed great importance following the global financial crises of 2007-2008 and the great recession that followed.  One of the major causes of these events has been traced to the high leverage employed.  However, there have been wide international variations in the leverages employed and in the outside financing used by entities in various countries and not all countries suffered equally in these crises. This special issue will focus on the international differences in outside financing and financial leverages used by businesses and possible explanations for these international differences.

Traditionally, research on the capital structure of firms has focused on the impact of firm-level variables to assess the relative strength of the pecking order theory versus the trade-off theory and other theories. However, it seems outcomes in finance, including capital structure and financing decisions, are shaped by laws and institutions that result from nations’ culture and history. Thus, there has been much interest in how international differences in risk attitudes and other national social and institutional characteristics influence the availability of external finance and the capital structure of firms. Recent research has begun to examine the influence of such factors as national culture, social trust, legal origins, bankruptcy laws, disclosure environments, governance, employment rights, and other national behavioral characteristics on the capital structures of firms.

Additionally, since traditional research on capital structure and financing sources has focused on non-financial firms, we also invite papers focused on financial and/or service firms. We feel the capital structure of financial firms is of particularly timely relevance as nations recover from the recent financial crisis and consider the impact of financing restrictions of banks.

Papers that use new and or novel empirical methodologies to examine topical issues using extensive cross-sectional and time-series international data sets are particularly welcome.  We are also interested in behavioral explanations that are backed up by adequate empirical analysis.

In order to enhance the fit of a manuscript with the goals of the special issue, potential authors are invited to submit and receive feedback on a three page summary of the proposed paper as early as possible. 

Journal information and author guidelines can be accessed at
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/699534/authorinstructions

Please send your manuscripts and other inquiries to the attention of the special issue editors: 

Raj Aggarwal and John Goodell at: RIBAFSpecialIssueAG@gmail.com;

Journal information and author guidelines can be accessed at:
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/699534/authorinstructions

The deadline for submission of completed manuscripts is July 30, 2012.  We look forward to your submissions to this special issue of the RIBAF.

The German Journal of Research in Human Resource Management is the highest ranked German journal covering research on all issues related to Human Resource Management (HRM) and is listed by the SSCI. The Special Issues published in English receive considerable attention both in Germany and across Europe.

This Special Issue is dedicated to current issues in international HRM: Global assignments, global careers and global talent management. These topics have gained tremendous importance due to the increasing globalization of the world economy and the war for internationally qualified talent. This not only applies to multinational enterprises, but also to small- and medium-sized enterprises, as senior managers are challenged to attract and retain global talent.

We seek to publish research articles that deepen our understanding of phenomena related to global assignments, global careers and global talent management from both individual and from organizational perspectives. Individual perspectives include challenges of various types of assignments and their management. Papers on global careers might address, for example, the success of international assignments, female careers in international management, or cross-cultural learning processes of expatriates. The organizational perspective comprises various functional areas in IHRM, including the most important practice, global talent management. However, topics such as expatriate management and global performance management are also related to global assignments, global careers, and talent management.

The objective of this Special Issue is to draw together scholars who are working at the forefront of this research domain. This includes strong theoretical, conceptual and/or empirical papers using quantitative or qualitative approaches in order to advance our knowledge of international HRM – especially with regard to global assignments, global careers, and global talent management.

As an illustrative (but not exhaustive) list of themes/topics we hope to see addressed in this special issue are:
•    Various types of assignments (traditional, self-initiated assignments, etc.)
•    Expatriation and repatriation for various types of assignments
•    International careers
•    Female careers in international management
•    Global performance management
•    Global talent management
•    Cross-cultural training methods
•    Cross-cultural learning
•    Human resource development strategies
•    A comparative approach to human resource development
•    Any additional theoretical, empirical, review or model-building contributions in international human resource development (broadly defined).

Submissions
In order to be considered for publication in this Special Issue, an abstract of two pages should be sent to the editors by 15 July, 2012. The submission process is competitive, and the Editors will review the abstracts and contact authors with an invitation to submit full manuscripts. Abstracts and full papers should be written in English.
The deadline for the full papers is 31 December, 2012. The papers will undergo a double-blind review process. Submitted papers must represent original work that is unpublished and not currently submitted or under review for possible publication in other journals. Formal guidelines for final submission are available from: www.Hampp-Verlag.de or www.zfp-personalforschung.de. Publication is scheduled in late 2013.

Introduction
The importance of customers for business firms has created tough ‘rivalries’ among competitors over acquiring new customers or retaining/expanding relationship with current ones. In particular, customer knowledge has been utilized as a key strategic resource and distinctive core competency to gain sustainable competitive advantage following the transformation of organizations from ‘product-centric’ to ‘customer-centric’ ones. The advancements in electronic and web-enabled systems coupled with accelerations in globalization, competitive environments, and changing customer’s preferences have created new challenges as well as opportunities for leveraging customer knowledge (CK) competencies.

Objectives
Customer-Centric Knowledge Management (CCKM) is needed in order to build good customer relations, continue to serve each customer in his or her preferred way, and to maintain customer satisfaction and loyalty. It includes the management of processes and techniques used to collect information regarding customers' needs, wants, and expectations for the development of new and/or improved products/services.

This book intends to address managerial and technical aspects of customer-centric knowledge implementation. It seeks to expand the literature and business practices and to create a very significant academic value to the dynamic and emerging fields of organizational knowledge management, customer relationship management, and information and communication technologies (ICTs).

Target Audience
This book seeks to offer audiences of business/IT academics and practitioners a refreshed and an enhanced view of research ideas in customer knowledge management.

Recommended topics include, but are not limited to, the following:

Customer Knowledge

• Generation
• Sharing
• Implementation

Customer–Centric Knowledge Management
Strategic Analysis

• Design and Development
• The Role of People
• The Role of Technologies
• The role of Processes
• Delivery Channels
• Supply Chains
• Organizational Learning
• Organizational Change
• Communities of Practice/Creation
• Performance Metrics
• Project Management
• e-Commerce
• e-Governmental

Submission Procedure
Academics, researchers and practitioners are invited to submit on or before March 15, 2010, a 2-3 page chapter proposal clearly explaining the mission and concerns of his or her proposed chapter. Authors of accepted proposals will be notified on or before March 30, 2010 about the status of their proposals and sent chapter guidelines. Full chapters are expected to be submitted by June 30, 2010. All submitted chapters will be reviewed on a double-blind review basis. Contributors may also be requested to serve as reviewers for this project.

Publisher
This book is scheduled to be published by IGI Global (formerly Idea Group Inc.), publisher of the “Information Science Reference” (formerly Idea Group Reference), “Medical Information Science Reference” and “IGI Publishing” imprints. For additional information regarding the publisher, please visit www.igi-global.com. This publication is anticipated to be released in 2011.

Important Dates
March 15, 2010: Proposal Submission Deadline
March 30, 2010: Notification of Acceptance
June 30, 2010: Full Chapter Submission
September 30, 2010: Review Results to Authors
October 30, 2010: Revised Chapter Submission
November 15, 2010: Final Acceptance Notifications

Inquiries and submissions can be forwarded electronically (Word document) or by mail to:

Prof. Minwir Al-Shammari
Director, Graduate Studies Program
College of Business Administration
University of Bahrain
P.O Box 32038, Sakhir
Kingdom of Bahrain

Fax: (+973) 17-449-776
Email: minwir@yahoo.com

As a result of globalization, migration and international mobility of human resources are of growing relevance (OECD, 2015). Many individual factors drive this increasing mobility, such as the desire for adventure, higher quality of life, compensation, career, and family or personal ties (e.g. Al Ariss et al., 2013; Cerdin, Diné and Brewster, 2014; Doherty, Dickmann and Mills, 2011; Froese and Peltokorpi, 2013; Hippler, 2009; Selmer and Lauring 2011). Externally, the joint influence of the global economic climate, demographic changes, and geopolitical crises have been triggering the phenomena (OECD, 2015). At the same time, the domestic context in which many business organizations operate is becoming more complex and dangerous, mainly due to the threat of natural disasters, war, violent conflicts, crime, civil unrest, and terrorism (Bader, Schuster and Dickmann, 2015). Therefore, an increasing number of people are engaging in roles and jobs that involve mobility under higher danger and risk, such as military, health, emergency and rescue service providers, development aid volunteers and peacekeepers, journalists, diplomats, religious missionaries etc. Until now, we know only little about how the intensification of risks affects international mobility. Previous research has focused on the physical and psychological hazards of certain occupational groups, such as military (e.g. Kelly, Hutchings and Pinto, 2015) and war journalists/correspondents (e.g. Feinstein, Owen and Blair, 2002); other studies have considered the HRM issues of hostile settings (e.g. Bader and Schuster, 2015, Reade and Lee, 2012), highlighting the reality that terrorism-related threats can cause stress and impair expatriates’ attitudes and performance (Bader and Berg, 2013).

Despite these contributions and recent developments in the understanding of multiple forms of international mobility (Mayrhofer and Reiche, 2014; Shaffer et al., 2012), little is known about the people who work in dangerous and remote areas, such as offshore, war zones, humanitarian, and emergency settings. Therefore, this special issue aims at attracting scholarly research that contributes to the knowledge about (1) the dangerous settings (profit and non-profit) in which international mobility occurs, (2) the dangerous occupations (skilled or less-skilled) involving permanent, long-term or short-term international mobility, (3) the individual antecedents and outcomes related to these dangerous assignments, and (4) the organizational policies and practices aimed at managing these dangerous assignments.

Original quantitative and qualitative empirical research, theory development, case studies, and critical literature reviews from multiple disciplines (e.g. sociology, psychology, occupational health, migration, international travelling, risk and safety management, etc.) are appropriate for potential inclusion in this special issue. Also, multi-level approaches are particularly sought to accommodate individual, organizational, and societal perspectives. The following list of topics and research questions illustrate the aims and scope of the special issue. Please note that this list is not exhaustive and other ideas are welcome as well:

•       Dangerous and extreme settings: What can we learn from the most frequent threats of dangerous international contexts, such as war and conflict scenarios, peacekeeping, humanitarian and health international assistance etc.? How can permanent threats be managed and overcome?

•       Dangerous and extreme occupations: What are the most frequent forms of dangerous and extreme occupations in the context of international mobility? To what extent does the understanding of these occupations advance our theorization of international work and mobility?

•       Danger and risk – individual antecedents: What are the main motivations and requirements of accepting dangerous international assignments? What effects do intrinsic motives (e.g. a specific calling, a religious duty, etc.) and extrinsic motives (e.g. compensation, career advancement, etc.) have on the acceptance, outcome and repetition of these assignments?

•       Danger and risk – individual outcomes: How do individuals cope with dangerous international assignments, related to different aspects such as decision-making, family, work-life interface, work identity, compensation, career implications etc.? What are the differences in the underlying psychological processes, such as adjustment, commitment (organizational and occupational), and satisfaction of the workers in dangerous international assignments?

•       Danger and risk – beyond the individual: How do family members handle the separation or the move into dangerous settings? What are the social networks established in the dangerous host location? How do individuals and/or family members cope, over the short and long-term, with extreme outcomes, such as injury, illness, burnout, disability, or death?

•       Danger and risk – organizational policies and practices: What are an organization’s reasons to assign people in dangerous locations? What are the human resource management policies and practices aimed to attract, select, and prepare people for dangerous international assignments? What are the challenges associated with multiple reassignments? What are the main hardship policies and practices in view of accident, illness, death, kidnapping etc.? To what extent can for-profit organizations and multinational corporations (MNCs) learn from the organizational policies and practices of the non-profit organizations (NPO’s) operating in dangerous and extreme contexts?

•       Danger and risk – the role of the employer: What is the organization’s ethical responsibility and under which conditions should assignments be terminated or not initiated in the first place? What is the employer’s duty of care required by law and social responsibility? How can employers guarantee safety for employees?

Submission Process and Timeline

To be considered for the special issue, manuscripts must be submitted no later than 30 November, 2016, 5:00pm Central European Time. Papers may be submitted prior to this deadline as well. Submitted papers will undergo a double-blind peer review process and will be evaluated by at least two reviewers and a special issue editor. The final acceptance is dependent on the review team’s judgments of the paper’s contribution on four key dimensions:

(1)   Theoretical contribution: Does the article offer novel and innovative insights or meaningfully extend existing theory in the field of global mobility?

(2)   Empirical contribution: Does the article offer novel findings and are the study design, data analysis, and results rigorous and appropriate in testing the hypotheses or research questions?

(3)   Practical contribution: Does the article contribute to the improved management of global mobility? 

(4)   Contribution to the special issue topic.

Authors should prepare their manuscripts for blind review according to the Journal of Global Mobility author guidelines, available at www.emeraldinsight.com/jgm.htm. Please remove any information that may potentially reveal the identity of the authors to the reviewers. Manuscripts should be submitted electronically at: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jgmob. For enquiries regarding the special issue please contact any of the three Guest Editors, Luisa Pinto, at lhpinto@fep.up.pt; Benjamin Bader, at benjamin.bader@leuphana.de and Tassilo Schuster, at tassilo.schuster@fau.de.

References

Al Ariss, A., Koall, I., Mustafa, Ö. and Vesa, S. (2013), 'Careers of skilled migrants', Journal of Management Development, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 148-151.

Bader, B. and Berg, N. (2013), ‘An empirical investigation of terrorism-induced stress on expatriate attitudes and performance’, Journal of International Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 163-175.

Bader, B. and Schuster, T. (2015), 'Expatriate Social Networks in Terrorism-Endangered Countries: An Empirical Analysis in Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia', Journal of International Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 63-77.

Bader, B., Schuster, T. and Dickmann, M. (2015), 'Special issue of International Journal of Human Resource Management: Danger and risk as challenges for HRM: how to manage people in hostile environments', The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 26 No.15, pp. 2015-2017.

Cerdin, J. L., Diné, M. A. and Brewster, C. (2014), 'Qualified immigrants’ success: Exploring the motivation to migrate and to integrate', Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 151–168.

Doherty, N., Dickmann, M. and Mills, T. (2011), 'Exploring the motives of company-backed and self-initiated expatriates', The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 595-611.

Feinstein, A., Owen, J. and Blair, N. (2002), 'A Hazardous Profession: War, Journalists, and Psychopathology', American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 159 No. 9, pp. 1570-1575.

Fisher, K., Hutchings, K. and Pinto, L. H. (2015), 'Pioneers across war zones: The lived acculturation experiences of US female military expatriates', International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol. 49, pp. 265–277.

Froese, F. J. and Peltokorpi, V. (2013), 'Organizational expatriates and self-initiated expatriates: differences in cross-cultural adjustment and job satisfaction', The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 24 No.10, pp. 1953-1967.

Hippler, T. (2009), 'Why do they go? Empirical evidence of employees' motives for seeking or accepting relocation', The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 1381 - 1401.

Mayrhofer, W. and Reiche, S. B., (2014), ’Guest editorial: context and global mobility: diverse global work arrangements’, Journal of Global Mobility, Vol. 2 No. 2.

OECD (2015), International Migration Outlook 2015. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Reade, C. and Lee, H. J. (2012), ‘Organizational Commitment in Time of War: Assessing the Impact and Attenuation of Employee Sensitivity to Ethnopolitical Conflict’, Journal of International Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 85–101.

Selmer, J. and Lauring, J. (2011), 'Acquired demographics and reasons to relocate among self-initiated expatriates', The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 22 No. 10, pp. 2055-2070.

Shaffer, M. A., Kraimer, M. L., Chen, Y. P. and Bolino, M. C. (2012), 'Choices, Challenges, and Career Consequences of Global Work Experiences', Journal of Management, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 1282-1327.

Special Guest Editors:

• Jeffrey J. Reuer (University of Colorado Boulder, USA, jeffrey.reuer@colorado.edu)
• Marjorie Lyles (Florida International University, USA, mlyles@fiu.edu)
• Samuel Adomako (University of Birmingham, UK, S.Adomako@bham.ac.uk)
• Riikka M Sarala (University of North Carolina at Greensboro, USA, rmsarala@uncg.edu)
• Jeoung Yul Lee (Hongik University, Korea / Chongqing Technology & Business University, China, jeoungyul@hongik.ac.kr)
• Consulting Senior Editor: Lucia Naldi (Jönköping University, Sweden, Lucia.Naldi@ju.se)

Submission window: January 2 - February 29, 2024

Submission deadline: February 29, 2024

Tentative publication date: Spring 2026

Related tracks: International Business; CSR and Business Ethics

Motivation for the Special Issue

This Special Issue focuses on the importance of political institutions, such as democratic and autocratic beliefs, and examines their impact on international business (IB). The traditional definition of democracy refers to a political system characterized by “free and fair elections, adult suffrage, protection of civil liberties, and few non-elected tutelary authorities (e.g., militaries, monarchies, religious bodies)” (Filippaios, Annan-Diab, Hermidas, & Theodoraki, 2019: 1104). Under democratic governance, political governance risks can be reduced, and multinational corporations (MNCs) can benefit from democracy. In this sense, because “a true democracy” can strongly protect political rights and civil liberties (Levitsky & Way, 2010), politically transparent and democratic host countries can attract MNCs from democratic home countries (Filippaios et al., 2019).

However, the intersection of the phenomenon of democracy and international business (IB) remains a conceptual, theoretical, and empirical research gap in the IB field except for a few papers (e.g., Arregle, Miller, Hitt, & Beamish, 2013; Filippaios et al., 2019). In leading management and IB journals, few studies have dealt with democracy in the business/management context from an IB perspective (c.f., Stratu-Strelet et al., 2023). Furthermore, among these few studies, only two papers have dealt with democracy and IB directly (Arregle et al., 2013; Filippaios et al., 2019). Within the broader fields of political science and economics, the relationship between democracy, political risk, and international trade has been examined, but few discussions have pertained to the level of international firms, such as MNCs or small international firms (e.g., global firms), and managerial decision-making. However, democratization plays a vital role for companies when deciding on the modus operandi for their foreign investment (As-Saber et al., 2001). In addition, democratization can leverage prosperity and free trade, which rely on the institutional determinants of both international and local micro- and macroeconomic mechanisms and interest group rivalry (Henisz & Mansfield, 2006). This research gap implies interesting avenues for further research, including examining firms in the context of less-developed, emerging markets and transition economies where “low intensity” democratic or autocratic political regimes prevail, which influences MNCs’ operations and globalization (Youngs, 2004).

To address this gap, this Special Issue aims to contribute to an interdisciplinary and heterogenous understanding of the role of democracy in the IB. Democracy is a socially important and relevant topic through which the IB can offer novel contributions with the broader goal of progress towards a better and socially more equitable world. For example, the literature on international political economy has examined the association between democratic governance and the degree of democracy in host countries (Asiedu & Lien, 2011; Greider, 1998; Ursprung & Harms, 2001), with conflicting results. Some studies have found that MNCs undertake FDI more in host countries where democratic governance prevails (McGuire & Olson, 1996; Ursprung & Harms, 2001). On the other hand, previous studies have revealed a negative association between MNCs’ FDI and democracies in host countries (Greider, 1998; Wintrobe, 1998) or even a non-linear association between them (Adam & Filippaios, 2007; Asiedu & Lien, 2011). Hence, all these studies are predominantly based on an international political economy perspective, and there is no clear conclusion. In addition, there has been limited exchange between the fields of international political economy and IB in translating the findings to the level of specific critical decisions for international firm managers. There is a need to bring interdisciplinary theorizing (from economics, political science, public administrative science, sociology, and psychology) to the field of IB in an integrative manner, with a focus on different types of international firms, their managers, employees, and stakeholders. Moreover, we encourage research that pursues creative or innovative ways of operationalizing democracy and democratic governance to capture its multiple dimensions.

Submissions should offer explicit and new theoretical contributions(s) but can build on relevant theoretical perspectives. It is crucial to employ a theoretical framework to link democracy—as a broader, cross-disciplinary field of interest—and IB to develop novel theoretical insights and contributions that can benefit decision-making in international firms.

We encourage multidisciplinary approaches and multilevel research designs. Researchers can study democracy in the IB context based on various data sources. For example, to investigate the impact of the political democracy of host countries and geographic regions on MNCs’ location selection, Arregle et al. (2013) used a composite index based on factor analysis on datasets from multiple data sources, such as Freedom House’s annual survey of political rights and civil liberties and the Political Constraint Index (POLCON) dataset (Henisz, 2000). To explore the impact of a host country’s political governance (democratic vs. autocratic regimes) on its attractiveness to MNCs, Filippaios et al. (2019) measured political governance (a composite index on the spectrum of democratic and autocratic regimes) based on Polity IV and civil liberties suppression based on Freedom House. In addition, research can utilize content analysis based on Internet searches, newspapers, magazines, academic journals, and surveys. Furthermore, qualitative research based on field research and interviews can offer unique insights into these phenomena.

Specific Focus of the Special Issue

Given the understudied research gap on the effects of democracy on IB and vice versa, as well as the related organizational outcomes and interaction effects, the themes of this call for papers are purposefully very wide. We offer the following areas and research questions as illustrative examples rather than an exhaustive list:

1. Democratic vs. autocratic political governance and organizations  

• What are the effects of different dimensions of democracy on organizational processes across borders (e.g., international corporate social responsibility, international knowledge flows and spillovers, internationalization process and entry mode decisions, location selections, and so on) (Ursprung & Harms, 2001)?
• What are the relationships between institutions, political rights, civil liberties, and FDI outflows and inflows?
• How does human capital moderate the relationship between civil liberties and FDI motives?
• What is the relationship between global CSR practices and democracy? What are their implications on the behaviors of MNCs (Wettstein, Giuliani, Santangelo, & Stahl, 2019)? How do institutional voids in home countries of emerging market MNCs allow them to decouple CSR from their implementations (Tashman, Marano, & Kostova, 2018)?

2. Democracy vs. autocracy and global value chains, digitalization, environmental disruptions, institutions, and non-market strategy

• How do democracy and autocracy affect global value chains? What are their implications for the regionalization and localization of global value chains currently? What are the implications of this agenda for globalization/de-globalization and IB?
• How do digitalization and the fourth industrial revolution affect the relationship between democracy and MNCs’ FDI?
• How does democracy vs. autocracy affect the non-market strategies of MNCs? How do lobbying, bribery, corruption, and political connections affect MNCs’ FDI decisions and entry modes, as well as globalization/de-globalization?
• How do formal institutions and societal trust relate to democracy and IB (Gaur, Pattnaik, Singh, & Lee, 2022)?

3. Research across levels of analysis

Democracy can be conceptualized at various levels, such as the supranational, regional, national, corporate, subsidiary, functional area, team, or individual levels of analysis, as well. The examples are as follows:

• From the push-and-pull forces perspective, how does the home country’s political democracy influence the internationalization of an MNC in a host country (Arregle et al., 2013)? How does the host country’s “region-relative” political democracy influence the internationalization of an MNC (Arregle et al., 2013)?
• How can organizations maintain democratic rules across their overseas subsidiaries or operational locations to obtain social outcomes or create global efficiency and outcomes?
• How do advanced vs. emerging economies-based business groups differ in their emphasis on human rights or labor rights, and what are the implications for IB? How do different types of business groups (i.e., widely held, state-owned, and family owned) (Cuervo-Cazurra, 2006) affect MNCs’ human or labor rights orientation?
• How do organizations deal with human rights or labor rights across their global units (headquarters, regional headquarters, and subsidiaries), functions, or teams?
• How do entrepreneurs maintain the rule of human rights or labor rights when they expand their start-ups to the global markets? How do MNC CEOs or senior managers maintain human rights or labor rights for their employees in local subsidiaries, especially in the context of weak institutions?

Paper Development Workshop Conference and Symposium

To help authors further improve their papers, we will organize a paper development workshop conference during the summer of 2024. We invite the authors of papers that receive the decision to revise and resubmit their papers, but participation in the workshop is not a condition for the acceptance of a paper for the Special Issue. This opportunity allows these authors to receive constructive feedback from well-reputed journal editors, discussants, and conference participants, and can support these authors in strengthening and improving their manuscripts.

In addition, we plan to hold a symposium at a major academic conference in 2026 for papers selected for acceptance in our special issue to increase their visibility and impact.

Submission Process and Deadlines

All manuscripts will be reviewed as cohorts in this Special Issue.  Manuscripts must be submitted between January 2 – February 29, 2024, at https://www.editorialmanager.com/jobr. All submissions will go through the JBR regular double-blind review process and follow the standard norms and processes.

For more information on this call for a paper, please contact the Special Issue Editors.

Submission window: February 1st - September 30, 2024 

Tentative publication date: Spring 2026

Related tracks: International Business; CSR and Business Ethics

Motivation for the Special Issue

This Special Issue focuses on the importance of political institutions, such as democratic and autocratic beliefs, and examines their impact on international business (IB). The traditional definition of democracy refers to a political system characterized by “free and fair elections, adult suffrage, protection of civil liberties, and few non-elected tutelary authorities (e.g., militaries, monarchies, religious bodies)” (Filippaios, Annan-Diab, Hermidas, & Theodoraki, 2019: 1104). Under democratic governance, political governance risks can be reduced, and multinational corporations (MNCs) can benefit from democracy. In this sense, because “a true democracy” can strongly protect political rights and civil liberties (Levitsky & Way, 2010), politically transparent and democratic host countries can attract MNCs from democratic home countries (Filippaios et al., 2019).

However, the intersection of the phenomenon of democracy and international business (IB) remains a conceptual, theoretical, and empirical research gap in the IB field except for a few papers (e.g., Arregle, Miller, Hitt, & Beamish, 2013; Filippaios et al., 2019). In leading management and IB journals, few studies have dealt with democracy in the business/management context from an IB perspective (c.f., Stratu-Strelet et al., 2023). Furthermore, among these few studies, only two papers have dealt with democracy and IB directly (Arregle et al., 2013; Filippaios et al., 2019). Within the broader fields of political science and economics, the relationship between democracy, political risk, and international trade has been examined, but few discussions have pertained to the level of international firms, such as MNCs or small international firms (e.g., global firms), and managerial decision-making. However, democratization plays a vital role for companies when deciding on the modus operandi for their foreign investment (As-Saber et al., 2001). In addition, democratization can leverage prosperity and free trade, which rely on the institutional determinants of both international and local micro- and macroeconomic mechanisms and interest group rivalry (Henisz & Mansfield, 2006). This research gap implies interesting avenues for further research, including examining firms in the context of less-developed, emerging markets and transition economies where “low intensity” democratic or autocratic political regimes prevail, which influences MNCs’ operations and globalization (Youngs, 2004).

To address this gap, this Special Issue aims to contribute to an interdisciplinary and heterogenous understanding of the role of democracy in the IB. Democracy is a socially important and relevant topic through which the IB can offer novel contributions with the broader goal of progress towards a better and socially more equitable world. For example, the literature on international political economy has examined the association between democratic governance and the degree of democracy in host countries (Asiedu & Lien, 2011; Greider, 1998; Ursprung & Harms, 2001), with conflicting results. Some studies have found that MNCs undertake FDI more in host countries where democratic governance prevails (McGuire & Olson, 1996; Ursprung & Harms, 2001). On the other hand, previous studies have revealed a negative association between MNCs’ FDI and democracies in host countries (Greider, 1998; Wintrobe, 1998) or even a non-linear association between them (Adam & Filippaios, 2007; Asiedu & Lien, 2011). Hence, all these studies are predominantly based on an international political economy perspective, and there is no clear conclusion. In addition, there has been limited exchange between the fields of international political economy and IB in translating the findings to the level of specific critical decisions for international firm managers. There is a need to bring interdisciplinary theorizing (from economics, political science, public administrative science, sociology, and psychology) to the field of IB in an integrative manner, with a focus on different types of international firms, their managers, employees, and stakeholders. Moreover, we encourage research that pursues creative or innovative ways of operationalizing democracy and democratic governance to capture its multiple dimensions. 

Submissions should offer explicit and new theoretical contributions(s) but can build on relevant theoretical perspectives. It is crucial to employ a theoretical framework to link democracy—as a broader, cross-disciplinary field of interest—and IB to develop novel theoretical insights and contributions that can benefit decision-making in international firms.

We encourage multidisciplinary approaches and multilevel research designs. Researchers can study democracy in the IB context based on various data sources. For example, to investigate the impact of the political democracy of host countries and geographic regions on MNCs’ location selection, Arregle et al. (2013) used a composite index based on factor analysis on datasets from multiple data sources, such as Freedom House’s annual survey of political rights and civil liberties and the Political Constraint Index (POLCON) dataset (Henisz, 2000). To explore the impact of a host country’s political governance (democratic vs. autocratic regimes) on its attractiveness to MNCs, Filippaios et al. (2019) measured political governance (a composite index on the spectrum of democratic and autocratic regimes) based on Polity IV and civil liberties suppression based on Freedom House. In addition, research can utilize content analysis based on Internet searches, newspapers, magazines, academic journals, and surveys. Furthermore, qualitative research based on field research and interviews can offer unique insights into these phenomena. 

Specific Focus of the Special Issue 

Given the understudied research gap on the effects of democracy on IB and vice versa, as well as the related organizational outcomes and interaction effects, the themes of this call for papers are purposefully very wide. We offer the following areas and research questions as illustrative examples rather than an exhaustive list:

1. Democratic vs. autocratic political governance and organizations  

• What are the effects of different dimensions of democracy on organizational processes across borders (e.g., international corporate social responsibility, international knowledge flows and spillovers, internationalization process and entry mode decisions, location selections, and so on) (Ursprung & Harms, 2001)?
• What are the relationships between institutions, political rights, civil liberties, and FDI outflows and inflows? 
• How does human capital moderate the relationship between civil liberties and FDI motives?
• What is the relationship between global CSR practices and democracy? What are their implications on the behaviors of MNCs (Wettstein, Giuliani, Santangelo, & Stahl, 2019)? How do institutional voids in home countries of emerging market MNCs allow them to decouple CSR from their implementations (Tashman, Marano, & Kostova, 2018)
• What are the repercussions of well-established economic institutions and protection laws in home and host countries to attract FDI inflows (Wong, 2016)

2. Democracy vs. autocracy and global value chains, digitalization, environmental disruptions, institutions, and non-market strategy

• How do democracy and autocracy affect global value chains? What are their implications for the regionalization and localization of global value chains currently? What are the implications of this agenda for globalization/de-globalization and IB?
• How do digitalization and the fourth industrial revolution affect the relationship between democracy and MNCs’ FDI? 
• How does democracy vs. autocracy affect the non-market strategies of MNCs? How do lobbying, bribery, corruption, and political connections affect MNCs’ FDI decisions and entry modes, as well as globalization/de-globalization?
• How do formal institutions and societal trust relate to democracy and IB (Gaur, Pattnaik, Singh, & Lee, 2022)?

3. Research across levels of analysis

Democracy can be conceptualized at various levels, such as the supranational, regional, national, corporate, subsidiary, functional area, team, or individual levels of analysis, as well. The examples are as follows:

• From the push-and-pull forces perspective, how does the home country’s political democracy influence the internationalization of an MNC in a host country (Arregle et al., 2013)? How does the host country’s “region-relative” political democracy influence the internationalization of an MNC (Arregle et al., 2013)?
• How can organizations maintain democratic rules across their overseas subsidiaries or operational locations to obtain social outcomes or create global efficiency and outcomes?
• How do advanced vs. emerging economies-based business groups differ in their emphasis on human rights or labor rights, and what are the implications for IB? How do different types of business groups (i.e., widely held, state-owned, and family owned) (Cuervo-Cazurra, 2006) affect MNCs’ human or labor rights orientation?
• How do organizations deal with human rights or labor rights across their global units (headquarters, regional headquarters, and subsidiaries), functions, or teams?
• How do entrepreneurs maintain the rule of human rights or labor rights when they expand their start-ups to the global markets? How do MNC CEOs or senior managers maintain human rights or labor rights for their employees in local subsidiaries, especially in the context of weak institutions? 

Paper Development Workshop Conference and Symposium

To help authors further improve their papers, we will organize a paper development workshop conference during February of 2025. We invite the authors of papers that receive the decision to revise and resubmit their papers, but participation in the workshop is not a condition for the acceptance of a paper for the Special Issue. This opportunity allows these authors to receive constructive feedback from well-reputed journal editors, discussants, and conference participants and can support these authors in strengthening and improving their manuscripts.

In addition, we plan to hold a symposium at a major academic conference in 2026 for papers selected for acceptance in our special issue to increase their visibility and impact.

Submission Process and Deadlines

All manuscripts will be reviewed as cohorts in this Special Issue.  Manuscripts must be submitted between February 1st and September 30, 2024, at https://www.editorialmanager.com/jobr. All submissions will go through the JBR regular double-blind review process and follow the standard norms and processes.

For more information on this call for a paper, please contact the Special Issue Editors.

Are you interested in contributing a chapter to a new book project titled Digital Entrepreneurship and the Global Economy (Routledge, 2023)?

Digital entrepreneurship refers to business activities in the digital media and information and information and communication technologies. It encompasses entrepreneurial pursuits in areas such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, internet of things, and augmented reality among many others. The digital economy is expected to bring about $60 Trillion in revenue by 2025.  

Drawing from international contributors from different countries, the book aims to be a key resource on digital entrepreneurship within an international context. The intended audience will be academics, corporate leaders, entrepreneurs, government leaders, consultants and policy makers worldwide.  

In this book project, I am gathering academics, scholars and thought leaders from around the world to provide their perspective on digital entrepreneurship.  

Potential chapter topics are shown below:   

   Chapter                                 Title                                                Word Count    

A country or international angle on the above topics is highly recommended. Proposals for topics outside of the above list may be accepted, provided that there is a compelling rationale behind it.  Chapter contributors will have over a year to complete their chapters. Chapter due date is July 15, 2022.   

If you are interested in contributing a chapter, kindly submit the following to me via email in one MS Word file on or before March 15, 2021 : 1) Proposed title from the list of chapters above or an alternative topic, 2) 3 sentence abstract, 3) 3 sentence bio of chapter contributor(s).  

I look forward to hearing from you, and in working together to advance knowledge of digital entrepreneurship within an international context.  
 

Dr. J. Mark Munoz  

Professor, Management and International Business  

Dwayne Andreas Endowed Professor of Business, Millikin University  

Tel Nos (217) 433-1425  

Email : jmunoz@millikin.edu  

Dr. J. Mark Munoz is currently co-editing a book with Drs. Alka Maurya, Loveleen Gaur and Gurinder Singh titled “Disruptive Technologies and International Business: Challenges and Opportunities for Emerging Markets” (DeGruyter, 2022). Might you be interested in contributing a chapter?  

This book project is very relevant to the AIB community for the following reasons: 1) it has an international business theme, 2) it underscores the importance of disruptive technologies in today’s global business environment, 3) it promotes collaboration of scholarship across countries, 4) it provides an opportunity for scholars and researchers to showcase their work to a global audience, and 5) it helps advance the understanding of the challenges and opportunities relating to disruptive technologies in emerging markets.  

Various disruptive technologies are reshaping organizations and impacting economies worldwide. Drawing from international contributors from different countries, the book aims to be a key resource on disruptive technologies and international business. The intended audience will be academics, corporate leaders, entrepreneurs, government leaders, consultants and policy makers worldwide. 

In this book project, we are gathering academics, scholars and thought leaders from around the world to provide their perspective of disruptive technologies: 

Potential chapter topics are shown below:  

   Chapter                                                                        Title                                                                                                        Word Count 

Proposals for topics outside of the above list may be accepted, provided that there is a compelling rationale behind it. 

Chapter contributors will have over a year to complete their chapters. Chapter due date is May 15, 2021.  

If you are interested in contributing a chapter, kindly submit the following to jmunoz@millikin.edu  in one MS Word file on or before Feb 15, 2021 : 1) Proposed title from the list of chapters above or an alternative topic, 2) 3 sentence abstract, 3) 3 sentence bio of chapter contributor(s). 

Divergence, Convergence, or Crossvergence in International Human Resource Management

Human Resource Management Review (HRMR) announces a call for papers for a special issue on “Divergence, Convergence, or Crossvergence in International Human Resource Management”.

The special issue is edited by Professor Akram Al Ariss (Université de Toulouse, Toulouse Business School) and Professor Yusuf Sidani (American University of Beirut, Olayan Business School).

a.alariss@tbs-education.fr

ys01@aub.edu.lb

Whether organizations and their HR practices are converging—becoming more similar—(convergence theory) or diverging in their practices (divergence theory) is a matter of intense scholarly interest. In their award-winning paper about values evolution, Ralston et al. (1993; 1997), proposed the crossvergence theory of values evolution. This perspective marked a departure from the traditional convergence/divergence theory of values formation. The convergence theory posited that values develop in sync with the prevailing technology in a particular society given the impact of technological development on other educational and institutional structures. As societies become more similar to one another in terms of industrialization and use of technology, values will eventually converge to Western capitalism, given that this is where most industrialization has traditionally occurred (Ralston, 2008). The divergence theory, on the other hand, argues that the socio-cultural influences are typically the prevailing forces that lead societal members to adopt specific values irrespective of other external drivers. The crossvergence theory argues instead that it is in fact a combination of sociocultural forces as well as “business ideology influences” that is the major force behind the formation of value systems. A similar term that has been coined in HR research is the “bounded convergence” perspective, which argues that HRM practices sometimes pursue hybrid models of HR (Zhang, 2012). 

Congruent to the above, this CFP invites scholars to explore these ideas in the realm of HR practices. To what extent do HR practices converge in line with what may be considered best practices in that regard, which are mainly developed in Western societies? Or is it the case that in any given society, sociocultural practices particular to that society have more impact in determining that society’s HR practices? Or are we instead witnessing a realization of the crossvergence theory, wherein a combination of factors molds HR practices. The crossvergence theory, as far as HR practices are concerned, has been understudied in HR scholarship. From the papers we are calling for, we would like to build an understanding of the trends of convergence/divergence/crossvergence of HRM processes and systems. Earlier HR research seems to be hinting at crossvergence in certain areas. Sidani and Al Ariss (2013), for example, suggest that MNCs operate in such a way that certain practices converge (given their global usage) while other practices diverge (given local contexts) thus leaning toward a crossvergence perspective. Brewster, Wood, and Brookes (2008) also find evidence of both similarities and differences in IHRM practices.  Brewster (2004) presents what he terms as “European perspectives on human resource management” suggesting the existence of institutional and cultural factors that do not conform to a pure convergence theory. Likewise, Rowley and Benson (2002) explore the difficulties and challenges facing HRM convergence theory in the Asian context (please refer to the SI in HRMR about the Chinese context, Zhang, 2012). Other contributions to HRMR also explore the existence of country/region-specific HR practices (for example Gooderham & Nordhaug, 2011; Huo, Huang, & Napier, 2002; Mayrhofer, Brewster, Morley, & Ledolter, 2011; Morley, 2004). The questions that we ask in this SI cover issues including to what extent we have a global HRM versus region-specific model of HR (North American model, European model, Asian model, Middle Eastern model, Nordic model, etc.)? Where do these systems meet and where do they part both in theory and in practice? In this special issue, we are interested in discourses that are currently present in the English language in various parts of the world. We are also interested in under-represented regions of the world, such as the Asian, African, and Latin American contexts in addition to other world experiences. We encourage researchers whose work entails investigating work practices in non-Western contexts to share their perspectives of HRM within their own contexts. The idea is to attract papers addressing these issues at the micro (i.e., individual and group) level with openness to the macro (organizational and societal) levels of analysis.

Some relevant questions (non-exhaustive list) are as follows:

1. Are the assumptions of HRM that we understand in the West applicable in other world regions? What are the major concepts, models, and theories of HRM in those non-Western contexts and how do these enrich our understanding of divergence/convergence/convergence perspectives?
2. What are some of the comparative features of HRM systems in different parts of the world, and at different levels of analysis?  What does this tell us about HRM and allied fields (e.g. organizational behavior, industrial/organizational psychology, labor relations)?
3. What are the roles of individuals, groups, organizations, and institutions in creating similar or different approaches to HRM?
4. How is HRM practiced in countries where most of the major employers are large government affiliated employers?  What differences do we see in such contexts in areas such as personnel selection, compensation, performance appraisal, attraction and retention, training and development, among others?
5. HRM in Western contexts assumes a certain level of ‘rule of law’. How are HRM processes understood at the individual, group, and organizational levels where the rule of law is deficient or barely existent?
6. What key new trends in HRM can be identified as international/global (e.g. Global Talent Management)? How do such trends stimulate empirical research, as well as critical examination of existing concepts, models, and theories?
7. What is the impact of national cultures in developing a specific understanding for the role of HRM? Should we expect that variances along such dimensions (i.e. Hofstede, GLOBE etc.) would be reflected in different HR systems?

Consistent with HRMR’s scope, conceptual and theoretical papers are welcomed (not empirical). Papers should be submitted according to the journal’s guidelines:

http://ees.elsevier.com/humres/

Deadlines:

15th September 2014: Submit abstracts (maximum 1000 words) to the guest-editors.

15th October 2014:      Invitations to submit full papers will be sent out.

15th April 2015:           Submission of full papers for refereeing.

15th May 2015:            Authors will receive feedback.

15th September 2015: Full papers with revisions will be due.

2016:                           Journal volume to be published.

REFERENCES

Brewster, C. (2004). European perspectives on human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 14(4), 365-382.

Brewster, C., Wood, G., & Brookes, M. (2008). Similarity, isomorphism or duality? Recent survey evidence on the human resource management policies of multinational corporations. British Journal of Management, 19(4), 320-342.

Gooderham, P., & Nordhaug, O. (2011). One European model of HRM? Cranet empirical contributions. Human Resource Management Review, 21(1), 27-36.

Huo, Y. P., Huang, H. J., & Napier, N. K. (2002). Divergence or convergence: a cross‐national comparison of personnel selection practices. Human Resource Management, 41(1), 31-44.

Mayrhofer, W., Brewster, C., Morley, M. J., & Ledolter, J. (2011). Hearing a different drummer? Convergence of human resource management in Europe—A longitudinal analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 21(1), 50-67.

Morley, M. J. (2004). Contemporary debates in European human resource management: Context and content. Human Resource Management Review,14(4), 353-364.

Rowley, C., & Benson, J. (2002). Convergence and divergence in Asian human resource management. California Management Review, 44(2).

Ralston, D. A. (2008). The crossvergence perspective: Reflections and projections. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(1), 27-40.

Ralston, D. A., Holt, D. H., Terpstra, R. H., & Kai-Cheng, Y. (1997). The impact of national culture and economic ideology on managerial work values: A study of the United States, Russia, Japan, and China. Journal of International Business Studies, 177-207.

Ralston, D. A., Gustafson, D. J., Cheung, F. M., & Terpstra, R. H. (1993). Differences in managerial values: A study of US, Hong Kong and PRC managers. Journal of International Business Studies, 249-275.

Sidani, Y., & Al Ariss, A. (2013) Institutional and corporate drivers of global talent management: Evidence from the Arab Gulf region. Journal of World Business (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2013.11.005.

Zhang, M. (2012). The development of human resource management in China: An overview. Human Resource Management Review, 22(3), 161-164.

Guest Editors: Professor Sanjoy Sircar, and Professor SK Shanthi, and Editorial Assistant: K. Srinivasa Reddy (ismo.special@gmail.com).

Key benefits to the authors: There is one best paper award, which will be awarded by the Guest Editors of this issue of ISMO. The forthcoming issue of International Studies of Management & Organization (Ranked “B” in ABDC Rankings and Indexed in Scopus) focuses on Diversification Strategy of Firms in Emerging Economies and its objective is to shed light on uncovered strategic decisions of emerging-market firms in the existing international business (IB) literature. The concept of diversification strategy has been significantly investigated in developed market enterprises (DMEs), and covered topics such as related and unrelated firm performance, motives behind international diversification and cultural aspects. Corporate diversification was found to improve shareholders value in the short-run and enhances firm value in the long-run (e.g. Erdorf et al. 2013; Purkayastha et al. 2012). However, does diversification offer extra returns to the shareholders and improve the firm’s value in firms in emerging-markets? What are the determinants (motives) of emerging-market firms' diversification choice? Does diversification strengthen the firm competitiveness? Most of the studies conclude that diversification is the choice of top-level management for maximizing firm value and shareholders premium. Thus, a recent review on corporate diversification and firm value by Erdorf et al. (2013) concluded that firm’s value is influenced by industry-specific and macroeconomic factors, and that those factors may vary for different organizations. They also suggest that diversified firms, as compared with focused firms, seem to have higher returns, and tend to acquire discounted business divisions. Conversely, it is also argued that there is a growing amount of academic research on various aspects of management in emerging markets but few scholars have studied diversification-strategy using fewer samples (e.g. Mishra and Akbar 2007). Therefore, this issue will bridge the existing knowledge gap and will add knowledge to the IB literature on corporate diversification and firm value, especially of firms in emerging economies. With this backdrop, the guest editors invite scholars to submit their papers on the following themes or other related issues.

The papers can be conceptual, empirical, and case-study based.

• Diversification, learning and resource-seeking
• Costs and benefits of diversification strategy
• Diversification of state-owned, public and private enterprises
• Diversification and group affiliation (e.g. Khanna and Palepu 2000)
• Concentric diversification and firm performance
• Conglomerate diversification and firm performance
• Market expansion, product diversification and firm performance
• Determinants of concentric vs. conglomerate diversification
• Diversification announcements and shareholders value creation
• Diversification of firms within emerging markets/developed, and comparison
• Diversification of family-business enterprises
• Diversification of small- and medium-sized enterprises
• Private equity investments, acquisitions and diversification
• Diversification and its effect on capital structure
• Diversification and firm competitiveness
• Diversification and corporate governance
• Cross-border diversification strategies and firm performance (e.g. Donnelly 2013; Luo and Tung 2007)
• Critical aspects and risks in corporate diversification
• Comparative studies with reference to above themes

Case studies development and analysis (Single or Multi) Submission and Publication Information:

Submission of First Draft via e-mail: 30 April, 2014

First round review comments returned to authors: 30 September, 2014

Resubmission of First-round selected papers via e-mail: 31 December, 2014

Second round review comments returned to authors (If necessary): 28 February, 2015

Final Decision: 31 March, 2015 Number of papers: 4 to 6 papers

Submission guidelines: The papers should confer with the theme. It is advised that there is a greater interest in selecting papers, which are comparative, empirical and case-study based. The papers must be relevant to theory testing/development, and/or policy implications. Further, authors should submit their papers in structured format that includes abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, results and discussions and conclusions. (http://www.mesharpe.com/journal_info/IMOcontrib_guidelines.pdf). Please do not hesitate to contact the Editorial Assistant for more information.

References: Donnelly, N. 2013. “The Emergence and Internationalization of Irish MNEs – Exploring “Small Country Effects.” International Studies of Management & Organization 43(1): 26-51. Erdorf, S.: T. Hartmann-Wendels: N. Heinrichs, and M. Matz. 2013. “Corporate Diversification and Firm Value: A Survey of Recent Literature.” Financial Markets and Portfolio Management 27(2): 187-215. Khanna, T., and K. Palepu. 2000. “Is Group Affiliation Profitable in Emerging Markets? An Analysis of Diversified Indian Business Groups.” Journal of Finance 55(2): 867-891. Luo, Y., and R. L. Tung. 2007. “International Expansion of Emerging Market Enterprises: A Spring Board Perspective.” Journal of International Business Studies 38(4): 481-498. Mishra, A., and M. Akbar. 2007. “Empirical Examination of Diversification Strategies in Business Groups: Evidence from Emerging Markets.” International Journal of Emerging Markets 2(1): 22-38. Purkayastha, S.: T. S., Manolova: and L. F. Edelman. 2012. “Diversification and Performance in Developed and Emerging Market Contexts: A Review of the Literature.” International Journal of Management Reviews 14(1): 18-38.

Special Issue Editors

• Phillip C. Nell (Vienna University of Economics and Business, Austria and Copenhagen Business School, Denmark, phillip.nell@wu.ac.at)
• Philip Kappen (Copenhagen Business School, Denmark, pka.smg@cbs.dk)
• Tomi Laamanen (University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, tomi.laamanen@unisg.ch)

Deadline for submission:  June 30, 2015

INTRODUCTION

Headquarters (HQ) activities have long been a subject of research in management, strategy, and international business. This research focuses on activities such as control and coordination of subunits, resource allocation, conflict resolution, the orchestration of innovations, and many more sometimes subsumed under the term “parenting” activities.

Interestingly, recent empirical evidence suggests that firms seem to use increasingly fine-grained and complex approaches to organize their HQ activities and they increasingly locate these activities abroad. For example, Desai (2009: 1284) formulates that we are now witnessing firms that are “Bermuda-incorporated, Paris-headquartered (...), listed on the NYSE [New York Stock Exchange] with US-style investor protections and disclosure rules, a chief information officer in Bangalore, a chief finance officer in Brussels and a chief operating officer in Beijing”. What seems to emerge is a picture where not only regular value chain activities are increasingly “disaggregated” and “dispersed” (cf. Contractor, Kumar, Kundu, and Pedersen, Journal of Management Studies Special Issue, 2010) but where this applies also to HQ activities.

Although much is known of individual HQ units (e.g. corporate HQs) and individual HQ activities, we believe that these recent trends have not been focused upon sufficiently in extant research. Furthermore, extant research is relatively silent regarding the overall structuring of HQ activities. In fact, much of the empirical and theoretical work in the past has used a relatively simple concept of the HQ frequently viewing it as a single, identifiable unit at the apex of the organization at one particular location. This work has produced very valuable insights but the assumption of the HQ as a single, identifiable unit located at one particular location seems to be increasingly at odds with reality.
What is the impact of relaxing this assumption for our theories that explain vertical relationships within firms, the way how hierarchy functions, and the way how responsibilities are distributed between headquarters and subunits? Given the trend towards more disaggregated and dispersed HQ activities we may suffer from a reductive fallacy that impairs our understanding of the way contemporary firms are managed.

The objective of this special issue is to address the lack of attention to such complex HQ configurations. The contributions we envision would have to explicitly break with the dominant literature viewing the HQ as a single, identifiable unit located at one specific location. We call for contributions to the special issue that could significantly enhance our understanding around the nature and the consequences of complex HQ configurations, building on the notion of increasing disaggregation and dispersion that we borrow from the extensive work on value chain activities.
While we are interested in gaining a deeper understanding of the phenomenon we are also interested in receiving manuscripts that make substantial theoretical contributions. That is, we think that many theories could benefit from being exposed to the complexity of contemporary HQ configurations which allows for testing, verifying, and fine-tuning of these theories.
Note that we do not favor any particular epistemological or theoretical perspective and we wish to attract a diverse range of papers. We anticipate submissions focusing on a variety of analysis levels. We also think that the Special Issue topic is conducive to multilevel methodologies. Thus, investigations could focus on and combine HQ activity levels such as corporate HQs, divisional HQs, executive teams, individual HQ or subunit managers, or the entire HQ system. Questions that papers might explore include, but are not limited to:

Determinants and nature of complex configurations of HQ activities

• What are the circumstances under which complex HQ configurations occur more frequently?
• Are there institutional or industry-specific pressures for particular types of configurations?
• How and why do HQ configurations evolve over time?
• How are complex HQ configurations linked to a firm’s boundary decisions?

Value-creation (or destruction) by complex HQ configurations

• How are value-adding functions, including coordination, control, and entrepreneurial roles, influenced?
• How do geographically distant divisional headquarters activities complement corporate-level headquarters activities and how is this coordinated?
• How do dispersed executive teams coordinate their work to influence their businesses? How are potential drawbacks of such configurations kept at bay?
• What is the role played by temporarily assigned headquarters-roles to specific subunits such as centers of excellence?
• What are the potential parenting advantages and disadvantages of complex HQ configurations?
• How does the changing configuration of HQ activities shape corporate vs. decentralized strategic initiatives and attention-processes?
• How are inter-dependencies between dispersed HQ activities managed?

Consequences of complex HQ configurations

• How does the level of complexity of the HQ configuration influence HQ-subsidiary relationships in multinational companies?
• How are internal dynamics in the firm, such as resource allocation or internal bargaining processes, affected?
• What is the effect of institutional distances between HQ activities on the legitimacy of the headquarters both within and outside the firm? How does this influence modes of control or the adoption of corporate practices?
• How are information asymmetries, principal-agent relationships, or parenting capabilities affected by disaggregation and dispersion of HQ activities?

SUBMISSION PROCESS AND DEADLINES

• Papers will be reviewed following the JMS double-blind review process.
• Submissions should be prepared in accordance with the JMS Style Guide for Authors (see http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/pdf/JMS_Prep_of_Manuscripts.pdf).
• Manuscripts should be electronically submitted by e-mail to JMSComplexHQ@wu.ac.at.

The deadline for submissions is June 30, 2015

• Papers will be reviewed by the editors as soon as they are received and, if suitable for the special issue, immediately entered into double-blind review processes in accordance with JMS standard procedures.
• Please direct any questions regarding this Special Issue to the guest editors Phillip Nell (phillip.nell@wu.ac.at), Philip Kappen (pka.smg@cbs.dk), or Tomi Laamanen (tomi.laamanen@unisg.ch)

Manuscript Development Workshop

• The guest editors of this special issue are planning to hold a manuscript development workshop on January 28-29, 2016 in Vienna, Austria.
• Those authors who receive an invitation for an R&R will be invited to attend this workshop.
• Please note that the participation at the workshop does not guarantee acceptance of the paper in the special issue. Furthermore, attendance is also not a prerequisite for publication.

Guest editors

Shasha Zhao, Middlesex University, London, United Kingdom
Paul N Gooderham, NHH Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, Norway 
Anne-Wil Harzing, Middlesex University, London, United Kingdom
Marina Papanastassiou, Middlesex University, London, United Kingdom

About critical perspectives on international business

The mission of cpoib is to exclusively support critical reflections on the nature and impact of contemporary international business (IB) activities around the globe from inter-, trans- and multidisciplinary perspectives. The journal places a special emphasis on scholarly works that question the hegemony of multinational enterprises (MNEs) and evaluate the effects of their IB activities on the global economy and national societies.

Scope and Rationale of the Special Issue

CPOIB invites the submission of articles that address the theme: “Do Multinational Enterprises Contribute to, or Reduce Global Inequality?”. The term ‘inequality’ refers to various societal and economic phenomena inside or across nation states, such as income, gender, social class, economic conditions, welfare, as well as other wider developmental issues. 

Although the relationship between nation states and MNEs has been historically important, dominant IB thinking has traditionally paid considerably greater attention to firm level factors of MNEs such as strategy, structure, and performance. With some exceptions such as Ackroyd and Murphy (2013), Lee and Gereffi (2015), and Roberts and Dörrenbächer (2016), IB scholars have shown relatively sparse interest in the societal, economic, and cultural consequences of the emergence and growth of MNEs. However, a recent study by Piketty (2014) suggests that the world is witnessing rising inequalities in both advanced and emerging economies, a reversal of the post Second World War trend towards greater equality and integration. A critical question worth asking is what role (if any) MNEs play in the development of this trend. In April 2017 this question was a core plenary theme at the Academy of International Business UKI Chapter Conference. Panelists and delegates were divided on the issue, but several presenters argued that MNEs operating in contexts of institutional voids generally generate significant inequality. 

MNEs are facing an increasingly competitive and crowded global market, which has led to a rapid expansion of dispersed value-chain activities in search of greater and more sustainable competitive advantages. Two related developments contribute to the necessity and opportunity for greater dispersion. At the firm level, we see an intensified exercise by MNEs to fine-slice and (re)locate global value-chain activities to the most advantageous locations (Buckley 2009; Mudambi and Santangelo, 2016). At the country level, we note dynamic and heterogeneous shifts in market and institutional conditions of home and foreign nation states. For instance, some recent evidence shows that, for the first time in history, a significant growth in advanced-economy MNE innovation investment is taking place in emerging economies (Awate et al., 2015; Jha et al., 2015). This is predominantly due to institutional improvements in these countries and preferential government policies for promoting and supporting innovation activities (Liu et al., 2011). Similarly, continuous technological development and changes in manufacturing capabilities in the case of advanced economies as well as improvement in market and institutional conditions in the case of emerging economies are seen to create new learning and growth opportunities for emerging-economy MNEs. UNCTAD (2015) reports that the largest outward investment from emerging economies to advanced economies as well as other emerging economies has occurred in the past five years. As such, nation states around the world are experiencing the most extensive and dynamic MNE activities in their local territories to date (Clougherty et al., 2017). 

However, negative outcomes of MNE activities are increasingly noted. For instance, MNEs that were once trusted are found to act illegitimately across host countries. A recent case is the Volkswagen ‘Dieselgate’. In September 2015, the company admitted to cheating official environmental standard requirements by installing software inside each vehicle to falsify system information (Howe, 2015). A survey initiated by Legatum Institute London, an international think tank for promoting policies to address poverty, reveals that the public holds largely negative views of MNEs (Withnall, 2015). The survey covered seven nations, including advanced (Britain, USA, and Germany) and emerging economies (Brazil, India, Indonesia, and Thailand) and revealed that 90 per cent of respondents believe MNEs are not ‘clean’ and a substantial majority agree that MNE actions in host countries contribute to a growing inequality gap. Some other worth noting examples include the case of Bangladesh where Lim and Prakash (2017) find that Western brand owners often pressurise local suppliers to fulfill orders, causing the suppliers to sustain wages to bare minimum and ignore extremely poor working conditions. This subsequently led to the collapse of a factory building where over 1,000 workers (mostly female) died. In the case of the UK, Taylor and Driffield (2005) find empirical evidence which shows that inward investment by MNEs leads to 11 per cent increase in wage inequality because of shift in demand for new labour skills. On the other hand, some positive cases remain. For example, in a similar study on wage and labour skill, but in the case of Ireland, Figini and Görg (1999) find that the rise in wage inequality because of inward investment is temporary and drops eventually. In the case of China, Greaney and Li (2016) find no evidence that MNEs are to be blamed for the prominent issue of urban-rural income inequality. 

Going beyond these scattered examples as to how MNEs contribute to inequality, this special issue seeks papers which conceptually or empirically advance the debate on the relationship between MNEs and inequality. Whilst papers that argue in favor of MNEs contributing to equality are welcome, we are particularly keen to see papers which offer new theoretical or empirical angles useful in discussing the role of MNEs in contributing to inequality.

Papers focusing on the following specific themes should consider submitting to the special issue

However the list is by no means exhaustive or restrictive:

• Whether and how do MNEs contribute to (or reduce) inequality in income, gender, social class, economic development, welfare, or other wider developmental issues?
• Whether and to what extent does MNEs’ foreign direct investment (FDI) impact on multi-level factors of host countries (macro-level: e.g. culture, institutions; micro-level: e.g. individual, family)?
• Whether and how do MNEs contribute to (or reduce) subnational inequality in the case of emerging economies? What can be learnt from possible inter-regional differences?
• Whether and how do MNEs contribute to (or reduce) subnational inequality in the case of advanced economies? What can be learnt from possible inter-regional differences?
• What, if any, are the similarities or differences between advanced-economy MNEs and emerging-economy MNEs in terms of their contribution to (or reduction of) inequality? What can be learnt from these similarities or differences?
• Whether and to what extent do emerging economies and advanced economies experience different or similar impact of MNE FDI activities? That is, do emerging economies benefit or suffer more in comparison to advanced economies, or vice versa?
• What methodological challenges and solutions exist when collecting empirical data in relation to MNEs and inequality (and equality)? What are the methodological considerations when measuring impact of MNE activities in host economies?
• What indigenous insights can enrich the existing literature on the relationship between MNEs and inequality to inform managerial practices and future research?
• What are new conceptual or empirical insights into policy-making or managerial challenges in inequality reduction? What theoretical and practical lessons can be learnt from cases of a reduction or increase in inequality? What can be useful policy frameworks that effectively address the impact of MNEs on inequality? 

Submission Process and Deadlines

Submission Instructions

• All papers will be subjected to double-blind peer review.

• Please use the Author guidelines
• Papers will be reviewed in accordance with cpoib guidelines. Submissions to this special issue of cpoib are made using ScholarOne Manuscripts portal

Deadlines

• Submission deadline: 31st December 2017
• Estimated publication date: late 2018 or early 2019

More Information

Enquiries about the special issue should be directed to the guest editors –

Shasha Zhao (s.zhao@mdx.ac.uk)
Paul N. Gooderham (Paul.Gooderham@nhh.no) 
Anne-Wil Harzing (anne@harzing.com) 
Marina Papanastassiou (m.papanastasiou@mdx.ac.uk)

References

Ackroyd, S. and Murphy, J. (2013) Transnational corporations, socio-economic change and recurrent crisis, Critical Perspectives on International Business, 9 (4): 336-357.
Awate, S., Larsen, M. M., and Mudambi, R. (2015) Accessing vs sourcing knowledge: A comparative study of R&D internationalization between emerging and advanced economy firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 46 (1): 63-86.
Buckley, P. J. (2009) The impact of the global factory on economic development. Journal of World Business, 44 (2): 131-143.
Clougherty, J. A., Kim, J. U., Skousen, B. R., and Szücs, F. (2017) The foundations of international business: Cross‐border investment activity and the balance between market‐power and efficiency effects. Journal of Management Studies, 54 (3): 340-365
Figini, P., and Görg, H. (1999) Multinational companies and wage inequality in the host country: The case of Ireland. Review of World Economics, 135 (4): 594-612.
Greaney, T.M. and Li, Y. (2017) Multinational enterprises and regional inequality in China Journal of Asian Economics, 48: 120–133 
Howe, B. (2015) Volkswagen scandal: 5 scary numbers, CNN Money, 4th November, accessed on 16/05/2017, [available at: http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/04/news/companies]
Jha, S., Dhanaraj, C., and Krishnan, R. (2015) How does multinational R&D evolve in emerging markets? Working Paper, International Institute for Management Development, 2015-02
Lee, J. and Gereffi, G. (2015) Global value chains, rising power firms and economic and social upgrading, Critical Perspectives on International Business, 11 (3/4): 319-339
Lim, S. and Prakash, A. (2017) Four years after one of the worst industrial accidents ever, what have we learned? The Washington Post, the monkey cage section, accessed on 12/05/2017, [available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage]
Liu, F. C., Simon, D. F., Sun, Y. T., and Cao, C. (2011) China's innovation policies: Evolution, institutional structure, and trajectory. Research Policy, 40(7): 917-931.
Mudambi, R., and Santangelo, G. D. (2016) From shallow resource pools to emerging clusters: The role of multinational enterprise subsidiaries in peripheral areas. Regional Studies, 50(12): 1965-1979.
Piketty, T. (2014) Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
Roberts, J., and Dörrenbächer, C. (2016) Renewing the call for critical perspectives on international business: towards a second decade of challenging the orthodox. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 12(1): 2-21.
Taylor, K., and Driffield, N. (2005) Wage inequality and the role of multinationals: Evidence from UK panel data. Labour Economics, 12 (2): 223-249.
UNCTAD (2015) World Investment Report, United Nations Publications: Geneva
Withnall, A. (2015) 2 charts that show what the world really thinks about capitalism, The Independent, 3rd November, accessed on 14/05/2017, [available at: www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news]

About the Special Issue Editors

Shasha Zhao is Senior Lecturer (Associate Professor) of International Business and Global Innovation at Middlesex University Business School, London. She received her Ph.D. from Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, UK, and previously held positions at Royal Holloway College, University of London, and Plymouth University, UK. Her research focuses on MNE subsidiary role, MNE innovation strategy, and impact of MNE FDI on host economies. Her research has been published in journals such as Human Resource Management Journal, and International Marketing Review. She also acts as a regular reviewer for a number of journals such as Asian Business & Management, Human Resource Management Journal, and Journal of Knowledge Management. Her latest research focuses on MNE innovation activities in emerging economies, and possible social and political implications. 

Paul N. Gooderham is Professor of International Management and Head of the Department of Strategy & Management at NHH: Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen. He is also an adjunct professor at Middlesex University. His research interests are concentrated on international and comparative management. He has published over 80 books, book chapters, and academic articles in journals such as Journal of World Business, Journal of Management, Journal of Management Studies, Journal of International Business Studies, Strategic Management Journal, Human Relations and Administrative Science Quarterly. Among his books are a co-authored textbook, International Management: Theory and Practice (Edward Elgar) published in 2013. Paul is on the senior advisory board of Journal of Organizational Effectiveness and a regular reviewer of journals including Journal of World Business, Human Resource Management Journal, and Human Relations. Since 1994, he has been a member of Cranet the largest comparative HRM research network in the world. 

Anne-Wil Harzing is Professor of International Management at Middlesex University, London. Previously, she was Professor and Associate Dean Research at the University of Melbourne, Australia. Her research interests include international HRM (e.g. gender issues), headquarter-subsidiary relationships, the role of language in international business, and the quality and impact of academic research. She has been an associate editor of management journals and a current editorial board member of 13 management journals including Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of World Business, and International Business Review. Anne-Wil has published more than 100 books, book chapters, and academic papers in journals such as Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of World Business, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Human Resource Management, Organization Studies, and Strategic Management Journal. More than a dozen of her articles have won research awards or distinctions. Anne-Wil has been listed on Thomson Reuter's Essential Science Indicators top 1% most cited academics in Economics & Business worldwide since 2007. 

Marina Papanastassiou is Professor of International Business and Innovation at Middlesex University Business School, London. She was also the Head of Department of International Management and Innovation at Middlesex University Business School (2014-16). Marina received her Ph.D. from the University of Reading and previously held positions such as research professor at Copenhagen Business School, Denmark and University of Athens, Greece. Her research focuses on MNE FDI strategy. Marina has published in a number of related journals including Journal of World Business, Management International Review, R&D Management, and Research Policy. Her latest research includes FDI in emerging economies. She is a regular reviewer of journals such as Management International Review, and R&D Management. She is also a Fellow of the European International Business Academy.

Emerald Publishing Limited, Registered Office: Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA
United Kingdom. Registered in England No. 3080506, VAT No. GB 665 3593 06

Scholars, generally agree, that good governance influences national competitiveness. This, however, has not been documented and debating it has become an imperative scholarly task. How we manage our nation state or govern ourselves in a broad sociopolitical environment directly affect economic performance.

This issue has been underscored in the public forums conducted by the International Monetary Fund, United Nations, World Bank, World Economic Forum, etc. World Bank annually evaluates over 200 countries of the world with its governance indicators. World Economic Forum considers global governance as one of the major public discourse issue.

Possible topics are as follows.

• Theoretical and empirical models explaining how governance affects competitiveness at macro (national) and micro (industry specific) level.
• Understand governance as an independent, dependent or mediating construct—variables closely related to it are geopolitics, size of the nation, geographic location, globalization, democracy, economic freedom, environment or culture.
• Policy measures governments could take for better governance resulting higher competiveness.
• Methodological difficulties in measuring governance and its relationship with national competitiveness.
• Influence of governance on international trade, direct investment, and production decisions of the multinational corporations.

The special issue aims at investigating the relationship between governance and competitiveness, and, offer policy suggestions. Authors are encouraged to submit both conceptual and empirical papers. Use APA Style in preparing the manuscript.

Submit manuscripts to the guest editor electronically via email at waheed@tamucc.edu. Authors from developing countries are especially encouraged to submit. Dr. Abu N. M. Waheeduzzaman is a Professor of Marketing and International Business, College of Business, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi.

East Asian Wisdom and its impact on business culture and performance in a cross-cultural context

Co Guest-Editors:

Chris Baumann, Macquarie University, Sydney Australia, and Seoul National University (SNU), Korea

Hume Winzar, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia 

Tony Fang, Stockholm Business School, Stockholm University, Sweden

Summary

There is growing recognition that we can learn a lot from the East to inspire and enrich our mainstream theory and practice (Chen, 2010a, 2010b). Can we make good use of East Asian wisdom in cross-cultural and strategic management? For example, the teachings of Confucius have allegedly contributed to remarkable economic growth across East Asia, and Western researchers have struggled for decades on what it means and how to leverage Confucianism, Daoism, Buddhism, and Yin Yang thinking into the generation of fresh theoretical and practical insights on research and business practices, respectively. It is not clear among commentators whether such perspectives are pure philosophy, religion, or ideology (Fingarette, 1972) or a combination thereof. In the context of cross-cultural management and strategy, how do these questions affect business culture and performance?

Hofstede and Bond’s study (1988) showed that countries in the Confucian orbit have experienced the fastest rate of growth since the 1950-60s. Winzar (2015) pointed out from the 1970s, Individualist economies (Europe and the US) outperformed Collectivist economies (China and Korea), and commentators argued that Collectivism holds Asian countries back. But by the 2000s similar commentators argued that Collectivism was responsible for the growth of the Tiger Economies. The situation has changed again as Chinese, Japanese and Korean technology (including innovation and, to a degree, brand building and management) now equal or exceed European and US companies on many measures. It has also been found that East Asia performs ahead of Europe, the rest of Asia, and South/Central America both academically (in terms of PISA) and in competitiveness (Baumann and Winzar, 2016). Much of our understanding of East-Asian cultures has been framed with Western-designed instruments (Fang, 2003), and too often we make broad conclusions along the lines of, for example, “Chinese managers are different from US managers, so Confucianism, and other orientations, must be responsible”. We make such broad inferences about the role of East Asian wisdom without attempting to “deconstruct” the construct. We can do better.

The discussion of the role of East Asian wisdom on management and related disciplines is not new. In this journal, several publications have paid attention to these issues, including Li’s (2016) theoretical explication of the Eastern Yin Yang frame and its application to paradox management, Fang’s (2012) conceptualization of culture in the age of globalization, as well as HR implications of Eastern values (Jiang, Gollan & Brooks, 2015; Chin, 2014), Western explorations of acculturation of expatriates and migrant managers in Asia (Selmer and Lauring, 2014), cultural differences and the aesthetics of product design (Shin, 2012), and ethical perspectives of Chinese and American managers (Pan et al. 2010). Elsewhere, we have seen seminal contributions on management practice in Confucian societies (Yeung and Tung, 1996), and important work on changing cultural values, behaviour and ethical conduct (Faure and Fang, 2008; Tung and Verbeke, 2010; Woods and Lamond 2011), along with valuable critical reviews highlighting the paradoxical nature of culture (Fang, 2003, 2006, 2010, 2012), the influence of Confucian perspectives on Western leadership and management education (Manarungsan and Tang, 2012), the implication of strategic thought in East Asian for business and management (Fang, 1999; Tung, 1994), and the evolution of institutional approaches to education more broadly (Baumann, Hamin and Yang, 2016). Further afield, in other disciplines, we see very comprehensive perspectives on the role of East Asian wisdom on political philosophy (Rozman, 1993), competitiveness and economic growth (Hofstede and Bond, 1988) and influences on Western philosophy generally (Wilhelm, 1972). Confucianism and countries in the ‘Confucian Orbit’ (Baumann, Hamin, Tung and Hoadley, 2016) have a new found focus in scholarly work on competitiveness, but equally so, scholars in multiple fields are curious about the roles of Daoism (Woolley, 2016), Buddhism (Vallabh and Singhal (2014) and Yin Yang (Fang, 2012).

For the purposes of cross-cultural and strategic management, is East Asian wisdom a social and psychological framework that may vary across different cultural groups, or is it a constant that is manifested in different ways according to economic and social conditions? For example, does it make sense to say that one group is “more Confucian” than another? Or on one dimension or another? If so, then how do we derive empirical measures of the various facets of Confucianism?

These and many other questions niggle at Western (and Eastern) scholars as they try to understand how to better communicate, conduct business and formulate strategies across countries.

Topics

We are interested in any and all articles, so long as they address issues relating to East Asian Wisdom and cross-cultural management and strategy.

Topics can include, but are not limited to:

• Conceptualisation and measurement of aspects of East Asian Wisdom, such as Confucianism, at the individual (micro), group (meso), and national (macro) levels.
• Historical interrelationships between East Asian Wisdom and PEST (Political, Economic, Social, Technological) environments – antecedent or consequent relationships.
• Interrelationships between East Asian Wisdom and Management, Business, Performance and Competitiveness.
• Differences in East Asian Wisdom in the East Asia Region (e.g. China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Vietnam).
• Differences in East Asian Wisdom among members of the East Asian diaspora – Contribution to intra-national diversity.
• Mediating and/or moderating role of East Asian Wisdom in Cross-cultural research.
• The role of East Asian Wisdom in the provision of services, product design and development.
• The interplay between East Asian Wisdom and management and strategy.
• Role of East Asian Wisdom (e.g., Yin Yang) in cross-cultural innovation and in the formation of competitiveness and economic outcomes.

East Asian Wisdom is multi-faceted and multi-layered, and we are interested in papers which address areas and concepts not usually found in the literature, or areas that are severely undeveloped or inaccurate in our current understanding. We are living in an era that has transitioned from “West leads East” to “West meets East” (Chen, 2010a, 2010b). Our theories and practices need to be and can be inspired by this historical transition.

Submission instructions

All manuscripts will undergo a double-blind review process. Submissions should be between 5,000-9,000 words, including references, figures and tables, and follow the manuscript requirement outlined on the journal’s website: http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/author_guidelines.htm. The submission deadline is January 1, 2017. Please direct queries to: 

Associate Professor Chris Baumann, e mail: chris.baumann@mq.edu.au;

Associate Professor Hume Winzar, e mail: hume.winzar@mq.edu.au; and

Professor Tony Fang, Stockholm Business School, e-mail: tony.fang@sbs.su.se 

References

Baumann, C., Hamin, H., Tung, , R. L. and S. Hoadley, S. (2016), Competitiveness and workforce performance: Asia vis-à-vis the “West”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28 (11).

Baumann, C., H. Hamin and S. J. Yang (2016). "Work ethic formed by pedagogical approach: evolution of institutional approach to education and competitiveness." Asia Pacific Business Review, 22 (3).

Baumann, C., and Winzar, H. (2016). The role of secondary education in explaining competitiveness. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36 (1).

Chen, M.-J. (2010a). West Meets East: Enlightening, balancing, and transcending. Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management. June 14, http://aom.org/Meetings/annualmeeting/past-meetings/theme2011.aspx

Chen, M.-J., & Miller, D. (2010b). West meets East: Toward an ambicultural approach to management. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(4): 17-24.

Chin, T. (2014). "Harmony as means to enhance affective commitment in a Chinese organization." Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal 21(3): 326-344.

Fang, T. (1999). Chinese business negotiating style. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Fang, T. (2003). "A Critique of Hofstede’s Fifth National Culture Dimension." International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 3(3): 347-368.

Fang, T. (2006). From “Onion” to “Ocean”: Paradox and Change in National Cultures. International Studies of Management and Organizations 35(4): 71-90.

Fang, T. (1999): Chinese Business Negotiating Style. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Fang, T. (2010). Asian management research needs more self-confidence: Reflection on Hofstede (2007) and beyond. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 27: 155-170.

Fang, T. (2012). Yin Yang: A new perspective on culture. Management and Organization Review, 8(1): 25-50.

Faure, G. O., & Fang, T., (2008). Changing Chinese values: Keeping up with paradoxes. International Business Review, 17(2): 194-207.

Fingarette, H. (1972). Confucius -- The Secular as Sacred, New York: Harper and Row

Hofstede, G. and M. H. Bond (1988). "The Confucius connection: From cultural roots to economic growth." Organizational Dynamics 16(4): 5-21.

Li, P. P. (2016). "Global implications of the indigenous epistemological system from the east: How to apply Yin-Yang balancing to paradox management." Cross Cultural & Strategic Management 23(1): 42-77.

Jiang, Z., P. J. Gollan and G. Brooks (2015). "Moderation of Doing and Mastery orientations in relationships among justice, commitment, and trust: A cross-cultural perspective." Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal 22(1): 42-67.

Manarungsan, S. and Z. Tang (2012). “Integrating Oriental Wisdom in MBA Education: The Case of Confucianism.” Leadership through the Classics. G. P. Prastacos, F. Wang and K. E. Soderquist, Springer Berlin Heidelberg: 377-387

Pan, Y., X. Song, A. Goldschmidt and W. French (2010). "A cross‐cultural investigation of work values among young executives in China and the USA." Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal 17(3): 283-298.

Vallabh, P., & Singhal, M. (2014). “Buddhism and decision making at individual, group and organizational levels.” Journal of Management Development, 33(8/9), 763-775.

Rozman, G., Ed. (1993). The East Asian Region - Confucian Heritage and Its Modern Adaptation, Princeton Univ. Press.

Selmer, J. and J. Lauring (2014). "Self-initiated expatriates: An exploratory study of adjustment of adult third-culture kids vs. adult mono-culture kids." Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal 21(4): 422-436

Shin, D. H. (2012). "Cross‐analysis of usability and aesthetic in smart devices: what influences users' preferences?" Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal 19(4): 563-587

Tung, , R. L.  (1994). Strategic Management Thought in East Asia. Organizational Dynamics, 22(4): 55 -65. 

Tung, R. L. and A. Verbeke (2010). "Beyond Hofstede and GLOBE: Improving the quality of cross-cultural research." Journal of International Business Studies 41(8): 1259-1274.

Tung, R. L. and C. Baumann (2009). "Comparing the attitudes toward money, material possessions and savings of overseas Chinese vis-à-vis Chinese in China: convergence, divergence or cross-vergence, vis-à-vis ‘one size fits all’ human resource management policies and practices." The International Journal of Human Resource Management 20(11): 2382-2401

Wilhelm, R., (1972). Confucius and Confucianism: Translated into English by George H. Danton and Annina Periam Danton. Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Winzar, H. (2015). "The ecological fallacy: How to spot one and tips on how to use one to your advantage." Australasian Marketing Journal 23(1): 86-92

Woods, P. and D. Lamond (2011). "What Would Confucius Do? – Confucian Ethics and Self-Regulation in Management." Journal of Business Ethics 102(4): 669-683

Woolley, N. (2016). The Emergence of Daoism: Creation of a Tradition, By Gil Raz. Routledge Studies in Taoism. London: Routledge, 2012 (paper 2014). Religious Studies Review, 42(1), 58-58.

Yeung, I. Y. M. and R. L. Tung (1996). "Achieving Business Success in Confucian Societies: The Importance of Guanxi (Connections)." Organizational Dynamics 25(2): 54-65

Invitation to submit articles for the upcoming

Vol. 3 No 1. Spring 2016 issue

Submission Deadline:  January 17, 2016

The Journal of Eastern European and Central Asian Research (JEECAR) is a multi-disciplinary, scholarly, high quality, double-blind peer-reviewed journal, with topics concerning:

• Economics
• Finance
• Management
• Marketing
• International Affairs

The main focus is in the Eastern European and Central Asian business and national political economies. The Journal is registered by the Library of Congress, listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), indexed with EBSCO, Ulrich, Google Scholar, OAI WorldCat Digital Collection, included in the EconBib index, and evaluated for an Impact Factor by CiteFactor.org, and each article has assigned an individual CrossReff DOI address.

The Editorial Board consists of distinguished experts among academics and practitioners who specialize in business topics within the Easter European and Central Asian regions. The latest journal issue with articles can be obtained online at: http://ieeca.org/journal/index.php/JEECAR/issue/archive.

The primary focus of the Journal is to provide an intellectual forum in theory, as well as practice, and to explore issues relevant to newly emerging nations. Submissions may include theoretical issues, new business model ideas, methodological issues, empirical studies, or case studies in the field of enterprise management or new developments of multinational corporations in the specific global economies.

Complete information about the submission guidelines is available at the JEECAR website: http://ieeca.org/how-to-submit-article

The JEECAR journal is published by the Institute of Eastern Europe and Central Asia with the support and cooperation of Webster University in St. Louis, MO.

Nikolay Megits, Ph.D.

Editor-in-Chief

Journal of Eastern European and Central Asian Research

ISSN 2328-8272 (print)

ISSN 2328-8280 (online)

nmegits@ieeca.org

Guest Editors:

• Douglas Cumming (Florida Atlantic University, USA, cummingd@fau.edu)
• Sofia Johan (Florida Atlantic University, USA, sjohan@fau.edu)
• Zaheer Khan (University of Kent, UK, z.a.khan@kent.ac.uk)
• Martin Meyer (University of Kent, UK, m.s.meyer@kent.ac.uk)

Background and rationale for the focused issue

The rise of digitization and ICTs-enabled technologies have played an important role in overcoming cross-border transactions costs, thus offering significant opportunities and benefits to firms to compete on a global scale. The growth and widespread diffusion of internet have created numerous opportunities for firms to provide products and services across both developed and developing markets.

Current research has focused on examining e-commerce strategy; the barriers and adoption related challenges of e-commerce (see Agarwal and Wu, 2015 for an overview), among others. Within the international business field, one stream of research has applied Dunning’s OLI paradigm to explain the rise of e-commerce firms (e.g., Singh and Kundu, 2002). Recent IB scholarships have focused on examining the rise of platform-based firms and highlighted the importance of direct and indirect networks effect in explaining the internationalization and cross-border activities of platform-based firms (e.g., Brouthers et al., 2016; Chen et al., 2019; Zeng, Khan & De Silva, 2019). Despite the contributions of extant literature, there has been limited discussions around e-commerce related policy and how it affects the international business activities, as well as global value chains of multinational enterprises. 

The aim of this focused issue is to encourage scholars to explore the following research questions at the intersections of international business, public policy and legal aspect of e-commerce. We would like to receive both conceptual and empirical papers.

Research Questions

Papers for the focused issue could fall within the following questions and related topic areas:

1. How does e-commerce affect global capital flows to emerging and developed markets?
2. What are the ways that SMEs can use crowdfunding to internationalize?
3. How are multinationals affected by e-commerce policy?
4. How does e-commerce policy affect the IB and SME ecosystem?
5. How does e-commerce affect trade flows in different institutional contexts?
6. What is the role of WTO in shaping e-commerce policy, and how does regulatory harmonization affect e-commerce policies?
7. Does e-commerce policy affect cross-border investment from venture capitalists and private equity funds?
8. How do regulatory changes affect e-commerce policies and adoption of e-commerce across different countries?
9. How does e-commerce policy affect multinational value chains?
10. How does e-commerce policy affect the link between SMEs and multinationals?

Submission Guidelines

Papers for this focused issue should be prepared in accordance with the MIR’s submission guidelines available at: https://www.springer.com/business+%26+management/journal/11575?detailsPage=pltci_2329480

Papers should be submitted directly to the guest editors at ecommibpol@gmail.com by the deadline of August 31, 2020.  All paper will go through the MIR regular double-blind review process.

References

Agarwal, J., & Wu, T. (2015). Factors influencing growth potential of e‐commerce in emerging economies: An institution‐based N‐OLI framework and research propositions. Thunderbird International Business Review, 57(3), 197-215.

Brouthers, K.D., Geisser, K.D., & Rothlauf, F. (2016). Explaining the internationalization of ibusiness firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(5), 513-534.

Chen, L., Shaheer, N., Yi, J., & Li, S. (2019). The international penetration of ibusiness firms: Network effects, liabilities of outsidership and country clout. Journal of International Business Studies, 50(2), 172-192.

Singh, N., & Kundu, S. (2002). Explaining the growth of e‐commerce corporations: An extension and application of the eclectic paradigm. Journal of International Business Studies, 33, 679-697.

Zeng, J., Khan, Z., & De Silva, M. (2019). The emergence of multi-sided platform MNEs: Internalization theory and networks. International Business Review, in press.

China’s success in integrating itself into the world economy has attracted worldwide attentions. Developing nations are particularly impressed with the way that China mobilizes its resources for rapid economic growth. China’s cautious and gradual approach to economic reform may provide useful experience to countries in economic transition. The outstanding performance of China’s economy in responding to the global financial crisis has been catalytic to the economic recovery in the United States and the European Union. To evaluate the sustainability of the emerging Chinese model of economic development an important aspect is to understand to what extent productivity growth has contributed to China’s spectacular economic growth in the past three decades. The Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies (JCEBS) henceforth calls for contributions to the 2011 Special Issue on Chinese Productivity.

The complexity and enormous scale of China’s economy require methodologies that can be used for systemic investigations of productivity performance. The special issue encourages empirical studies within the neo-classical framework of Solow, which is still considered as the core of modern growth theory in the literature. While imposing a basic structure on a macro economic model of general equilibrium nature, the Solow framework can be applicable to both well-developed market economies and planned economies. To accommodate significant differences in total factor productivity across countries and regions efforts in the exploration of its cross-sectional implications are also welcome.

The rapid economic growth in China would have not been possible had there not been the tremendous development of a vibrant Chinese business sector. China’s businesses have experienced an early stage of gradual reform in the state sector, followed by the dramatic expansion of the rural industries and a surge in the privatization of state and collective firms. While China was becoming the most attractive destination for foreign direct investment in the process, Chinese firms in recent years have started to acquire foreign companies and attempted to build up their own brand names. To make the presence of the Chinese firms sustainable internationally, innovation and productivity improvement are crucial to their continued success abroad. Submissions in the related areas of business studies will be appreciated.

In recent years, there seems to have been a consensus between scholars of growth empirics and applied productivity analysts that improving productivity estimations and better analysis to identify determinants of the productivity performance are the two areas to which major research efforts should be devoted. One direction we suggest is the study of the “knowledge production function.” This approach is to be attractive in an empirical sense that the techniques of applied productivity analysis might be effective in investigations on the determinants of innovation and economic growth.

China’s industrialization process has basically followed the historical path of the developed nations. However, the limitation of this traditional approach is that it exerts enormous pressure on the natural environment. In many circumstances, the environmental issues can be studied under the standard framework of applied productivity analysis, which is based on well-founded economic theory of production. Submissions of papers in this area are highly recommended.

Contributions concerning productivity performance of service and agricultural sectors are also very welcome. Papers comparing China and India or Brazil, the former Soviet Union or Russia, the United States or the European Union, and South and East Asia including Japan are particularly interesting to the special issue. Studies on trade and productivity with firm heterogeneity, structural time series models of aggregate productivity, and real business cycle related productivity issues are all suitable for submission.

Papers should be submitted in Word or PDF format via email to Jinghai Zheng (Guest Editor) Department of Economics University of Gothenburg Sweden
Email: Jinghai.Zheng@gmail.com<mailto:Jinghai.Zheng@gmail.com>

Submitted papers will normally be reviewed by two independent referees as well as by the Guest Editor. Deadline for submission is 20th May 2010.

Growing economic inequality in society has become a serious concern for both developed and developing countries. This special issue is based on the premise that a better understanding of the relationship between business and society is possible by examining it within the context of rising economic inequality. We are interested in a broad range of issues focused on linking business, society, and economic inequality.

Organizational research devoted to examining the firm-inequality relationship is at a very nascent stage and needs to draw on established research in other disciplines, as well as develop new theories by making broad connections between previously unexamined phenomena. Similarly, empirical examinations might have to make use of publicly available data and established methods, as well as creatively generate new data and methods to study this complex phenomenon. Therefore, we invite conceptual and empirical papers that offer substantial potential to result in high quality publications.

SUBMISSION PROCESS AND DEADLINES

Interested authors are encouraged to submit a 6-page proposal (excluding references and exhibits) to Hari Bapuji (inequalitysi.2014@gmail.com) through email by November 30, 2014. The guest editors will provide developmental feedback and invite authors of suitable proposals to submit a full paper to the special issue. In addition, potential authors may contact any of the guest editors to discuss initial ideas for papers. While interested authors are encouraged to make use of the guidance of the guest editors before submitting full papers, full papers may be submitted (and will be equally welcomed) even without prior consultation with guest editors.

The deadline for submission of all full papers (including papers that received feedback on their proposals) will be June 30, 2015.Authors should submit their manuscripts through ScholarOne Manuscripts at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/bas. Manuscripts should be prepared following the Business and Society author guidelines: http://www.sagepub.com/journals/Journal200878/manuscriptSubmission.

Submission Deadline: December 31, 2016

Guest Editor: Abu Waheeduzzaman, Ph.D.

The Journal of Euromarketing is the official Journal of the International Management Development Association (IMDA) published by IMDA Press. It is a premier publication outlet in international marketing with a focus on Europe, emerging nations and other countries. It serves the academics, practitioners, and public policymakers on issues pertaining to marketing and related disciplines.

Economic integration can be achieved at three levels: (1) global level under WTO, (2) regional level through in various regions of the world (e.g., EU, NAFTA, ASEAN, MERCOSUR, or TPP), and (3) bilateral level between nations through free trade agreements. Manuscripts pertaining to integration and marketing at all three levels are welcome.

Possible topics are as follows.

• Investigate how economic integration affects marketing at macro (national) and micro (industry specific) level. Relate geopolitics, size of the nation, geographic location, globalization, democracy, economic freedom, environment or culture to the phenomenon.
• Discuss the effect of “trade creation” and “trade diversion” in marketing.
• Determine the effect of economic integration on international trade, direct investment, and marketing decisions of the multinational corporations.
• Examine the relationship between integration and various concepts in marketing, viz., country of origin, consumption convergence, standardization-adaptation, or marketing productivity.
• Offer policy suggestions for business and governments pertaining to integration and marketing. Is more integration good for marketing?
• Study methodological issues in measuring economic integration and relate them to marketing.

The Special Issue on Economic Integration and Marketing invites manuscripts focusing on the impact of economic integration in marketing. The manuscripts should be no longer than 9000 words, double spaced (including references, tables, figures and abstracts) with a margin of at least one inch (2.54 cm) on all sides. Each manuscript has to be accompanied by a statement that it has not been published and has not been submitted simultaneously for publication elsewhere. Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce copyrighted material from other sources. All accepted manuscripts, artwork, and photographs become the property of the publisher. Authors are encouraged to submit both conceptual and empirical papers. Use APA Style in preparing the manuscript. Submit manuscripts to the guest editor electronically via email at waheed@tamucc.edu. Hard copy submissions can also be sent to the following address. Authors from emerging and developing nations are encouraged to submit. Abu N. M. Waheeduzzaman, Ph.D. College of Business Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi 6300 Ocean Drive, OCNR 319, Unit 5808 Corpus Christi, Texas 78412 USA

Special issue guest editors

Cristiano Bellavitis (Higher School of Economics, National Research University)

Igor Filatotchev (Cass Business School, City University London, and Vienna University of Economics and Business)
Dzidziso Samuel Kamuriwo (Cass Business School, City University London)
Tom Vanacker (Ghent University)

Introduction

Entrepreneurial firms are the backbone of economies and drivers of both economic development and employment. Young and innovative entrepreneurial firms are germane to the creation, development and growth of new technologies, industries and markets and create the most jobs. Yet, these firms often need considerable amounts of financial capital to sustain their growth. Over the last decades, the entrepreneurial finance literature emphasized the importance of business angels and venture capital investors.

However, despite the relevance of angel and venture capital financing, in recent years a whole set of relatively new sources of financing have emerged (e.g., Bruton, Khavul, Siegel and Wright, 2014). Entrepreneurs in science and technology start-ups can raise financing from numerous sources, such as accelerators and incubators, proof-of-concept centres, university-based seed funds, crowdfunding platforms, and IP-backed financial instruments. Moreover, contrary to common accounts of startup activity, research further shows that new entrepreneurial firms heavily rely on external debt sources, including bank financing (e.g., Robb and Robinson, 2014). Others argue that entrepreneurs can create and grow flourishing firms without raising the external financing that other firms consider to be essential, for instance, through financial bootstrapping and bricolage (e.g., Baker and Nelson, 2005; Winborg and Landström, 2001).

Considering the importance of entrepreneurial firms for the overall economic system, there is a need for research on these distinct sources of financing to understand how they impact start-ups (Fraser, Bhaumik and Wright, 2015). Extant research has only skimmed the surface in terms of exploring the ways (a) entrepreneurs rely on these relatively new sources of financing, (b) entrepreneurs use more traditional sources of financing (such as bank debt), which are typically assumed to be unavailable to early stage entrepreneurial firms, and (c) entrepreneurs use more or less creative strategies to realize “more with less”.

Furthermore, the entrepreneurial finance literature is largely segmented by the source of financing from which entrepreneurs obtain their financing. As highlighted by Cosh, Cumming and Hughes (2009) entrepreneurial finance studies focus, almost exclusively, on a single source of financing. Largely separate streams of literature have emerged in bank finance, lease finance, business angel finance, venture capital, private equity, supplier finance and more recently, crowdfunding. However, in practice, entrepreneurs often raise financing from a multitude of sources. Hence, we need a better understanding of how these various sources of financing interact and how different combinations support (or harm) entrepreneurial firms (Hanssens, Deloof and Vanacker, 2015).

Research topics
The special issue intends to further our knowledge of the latest trends in entrepreneurial finance, including the emergence of relatively new sources of finance, generally ignored sources of financing and strategies entrepreneurs can implement to realize more with less need for external financing. We also would like to explore how distinct sources of financing interrelate with each other and with more “classic” sources of entrepreneurial financing. We welcome papers adopting a multitude of methods, both empirical and theoretical contributions. Topics of interest include but are not restricted to the following:

• What is the effect of being embedded in multiple funding networks to firm outcomes?
• Are new sources of entrepreneurial financing going to replace or complement venture capital and angel finance? If so, how?
• For which firms each funding source is more accessible?
• What can firms do to increase the probability of raising new sources of entrepreneurial financing?
• When and for which type of companies is each funding source more advantageous in boosting performance (e.g. survival, growth, M&A, IPO)?
• And what is the ideal combination of funding sources for entrepreneurial firms performance?
• How can entrepreneurs grow their firms without raising additional external financing?
• Are there geographical differences in relation to entrepreneurial financing?
• What sources of financing are available in developing countries?

Paper submission procedure

All submissions will be subject to the standard review process followed by Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance. All manuscripts must be original, unpublished works that are not under review for publication elsewhere. Papers for the Special Issue should be prepared and formatted according to the Journal’s Instructions to Contributors and should be sent as a Word file to: Cristiano Bellavitis, Higher School of Economics, National Research University, Russia at CBellavitis@hse.ru

Key dates

The deadline for the submission of papers is 31 December 2015. We expect the following timing in between initial submission and publication of the Special Issue:
- 31st of March 2016: Completion of first round reviews
- 30th of April 2016: Decisions notified to authors
- 30th of September 2016: Revised submissions due
The Special Issue is scheduled for publication in early 2017. To support the development of papers, the editorial team is available at AOM (Vancouver).

Over the last decade emerging market multinationals (EMNCs) have become important players in the world economy. This has led to increased interest in their behavior by academics and policy makers alike who are beginning to come to grips with the most important analytical and policy issues that affect the world economy due to the rise of EMNCs. A lively debate in the literature is discussing the applicability of lessons from the study of developed country multinationals to EMNCs, and the contributions that the study of EMNCs can offer to theories of the multinational enterprise in general.

Studies from developed economy multinationals recognize that both firm-specific and environmental factors help explain international diversification. Over the last decade, increasing attention has been given to the drivers of internationalization strategies of firms from emerging economies and evidence on the relationship between EMNCs’ competitive advantages and the nature of their internationalization strategies is beginning to emerge. In this context, extant literature has focused on aspects of home country environments as potential determinants of EMNCs’ advantages and internationalization processes. Erramilli, Agarwal and Kim (1997) observed “that firm-specific advantages are molded by home-country environment has received some empirical scrutiny and support.” Yet, there remain significant unresolved questions in the international business and strategic management literatures as to how the home environment of a firm impacts its international strategies and operations. The substantial increase in outward foreign direct investment from countries such as China and India emphasizes the importance of this question.

The global economy is shifting in ways that offer new opportunities and new challenges for firms from emerging economies. These firms often originate from institutional environments which are heterogenic and segmented, have co-evolved their structures and practices within idiosyncratic institutional environments, and need to overcome differences between diverse institutional settings in their foreign direct investments. These challenges are often compounded by limited organizational and managerial experience and capabilities to internationalize.

We believe that there are significant opportunities for improving our understanding of how home country environment affects various processes and outcomes that drive EMNCs, and thus to advance theories of the multinational enterprise. Consequently, we are soliciting empirical and theoretical work addressing these complex relationships between various forms of home country environmental heterogeneities and EMNCs. This special issue provides an opportunity to bring together the research of scholars from a diverse range of disciplinary traditions such as economics, sociology and political science. As such, the following list of potential research questions is merely illustrative of the broad range of studies that could fit in the special issue of Asia Pacific Journal of Management (APJM):

• How do EMNCs leverage political and social ties at home to gain access to and/or leadership in foreign markets, especially developed country markets?
• How do the institutional framework and the resource endowment of the home country influence the patterns and processes of organizational learning and capability building that enable investments abroad?
• From a co-evolutionary perspective, what are the dynamics of the interrelationship between institutional change and corporate strategy? How do EMNCs leverage their experience abroad to impact institutional development at home?
• What is the extent and modalities through which emerging market governments influence the operations of EMNCs?
• What distinguishes international investment strategies by state-owned by privately-owned EMNCs? Is government ownership enabler or liability in internationalization?
• What role do country of origin formal (regulatory) and informal (cultural) institutions play in pace of internationalization and degree of international commitments?
• How do governance structures, such as ownership and managerial incentives, affect internationalization decisions and the success or failure of overseas operations?

All papers are to be submitted to the APJM website http://apjm.edmgr.com. The deadline for receipt of papers for this special issue is December 1, 2013. The format of submissions must comply with submission guidelines posted at the APJM website, and we have a marked preference for submissions which debate with, extend, and/or refute the indicative literature cited below. Please indicate that your submission is to be reviewed for the Special Issue on Emerging Economy Multinationals (choose that in the “article type” item during the submission process).

Papers will be double-blind peer-reviewed. We will make initial editorial decisions by June, 2014. Authors invited to revise and resubmit their work will be invited to present the papers at the APJM special issue workshop to be held at the conference on “Emerging Economy Multinationals” at Copenhagen Business School in Copenhagen, Denmark.

The papers accepted and presented at the workshop will be considered for publication in a special issue of the APJM. Presentation at the workshop does not necessarily guarantee publication in the special issue. The combination of a workshop and a special issue nevertheless follows a highly successful APJM initiative to bring out the full potential of authors and papers. For questions about the special issue, please contact Bersant Hobdari, Guest Editor, at bh.int@cbs.dk.
 
Indicative Contemporary Literature

Bhaumik, S.K., Driffield, N. & Pal, S., 2010. Does ownership structure of emerging market firms affect their outward FDI? The case of the Indian automotive and pharmaceutical sectors, Journal of International Business Studies, 41: 437-450.
Boisot, M. & Meyer, W. 2008. Which way through the open door? Reflections on the internationalization of Chinese firms, Management and Organization Review 4(3): 349-366.
Buckley P.J., Clegg J., Cross A., Rhodes, H., Voss H. & Zheng, P. 2008. Explaining China's outward FDI: an institutional perspective', in: Sauvant, K. ed., The rise of transnational corporations from emerging markets, Cheltenham: Elgar.
Chen Y.Y. & Young, M.N. 2010. Cross-border mergers and acquisitions by Chinese listed companies: A principal–principal perspective, Asia Pacific Journal of Management 27(3): 523-539.
Cui, L. & Jiang, F. 2012. State ownership effect on firms’ FDI opwnership decisions under institutional pressure: A study of Chinese outward-investing firms, Journal of International Business Studies, online advance.
Dunning, J.H., 2006. Comment on ‘dragon multinationals: New players in 21st century globalization’, Asia Pacific Journal of Management 23, 139-142.
Erramilli, M. K., Agarwal S. & Kim S. 1997. Are Firm-Specific Advantages Location-Specific Too, Journal of International Business Studies 28(4), 735-757.
Filatotchev, I., Strange, R., Piesee, J. & Lien, Y.C. 2007. FDI by firms from newly industrialized economies in
emerging markets: Corporate governance, entry mode and location, Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4): 556-502.
Gammeltoft, P. 2008. Emerging multinationals: Outward FDI from the BRICS countries, International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 4(1): 5-22.
Gubbi, S.R. Aulakh, P., Ray, S., Sarkar, M.B. & Chitoor, R. 2010. Do international acquisitions by emerging-economy firms create shareholder value? The case of Indian firms, Journal of International Business Studies 41, 397–418.
Jormanainen, I. & Koveshnikov, A. 2012. International activities if emerging market firms: A critical assessment of research in top management journals, Management International Review, advance online.
Lin, W.-T., & Cheng, K.-Y. 2012. The effect of upper echelons’ compensation on firm internationalization. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. doi:10.1007/s10490-011-9261-9.
Luo Y.D., Xue Q. & Han B. 2010. How emerging market governments promote outward FDI: Experience from China. Journal of World Business 45(1): 68-79.
Mathews, J. A. 2006. Dragon multinationals: New players in 21st century globalization. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23: 5-27.
Meyer, K.E. & Thaijongrak, O. 2013. The dynamics of emerging economy MNEs: How the internationalization process model can guide future research, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, in press.
Morck R., Yeung B. & Zhao M. 2008. Perspectives on China's outward foreign direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies 39(3): 337-350.
Ramamurti, R. 2012. What is really different about emerging market multinationals? Global Strategy Journal 2(1): 41-47.
Tan, D. & Meyer, K.E. 2010. Business groups’ outward FDI: A managerial resources perspective, Journal of International Management, 16(2): 154-164.
Yang, H., Sun, S. L., Lin, Z., & Peng, M. W. 2011. Behind M&As in China and the United States: Networks, learning, and institutions. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 28(2): 239-255.

Multinational companies from emerging economies (EMNCs) are becoming major players in the globalized world economy and wield growing influence on economic dynamics in developed, emerging and developing countries alike. The foreign presence and operations of EMNCs are becoming increasingly intertwined with innovation and knowledge generation processes both at home and abroad.

While the extant literature tends to build on the assumption that firms internationalize on the basis of innovations carried out at home, EMNCs often engage in international activities with the intent to access technologies they lack or to acquire resources enabling them to strengthen their innovative capabilities.

There are a range of challenges associated with such activities. Identifying, assessing, accessing and absorbing technology and knowledge from abroad is rife with challenges. Compounding these challenges, EMNCs are often engaging asymmetrically with foreign partners much stronger than themselves in a particular technological domain. Vice-versa, relinquishing technology to EMNCs may pose dilemmas to incumbents as well as nations.

At a more aggregate level, innovation-related outward foreign direct investment is contingent upon and in turn influences the broader institutional innovation system in which the investing firm is embedded. For example, competitive dynamics at home may drive firms to seek technology abroad; successful absorption of foreign technology may require an enabling knowledge infrastructure at home; and technologies acquired abroad may in turn spill over into the wider domestic innovation system.

In host economies, innovation-related investments by EMNCs may bring about synergies and infuse local firms with required capital and market access, while at the same time intensifying competition in technological domains. Where high-tech clusters in developed economies are concerned, the nature and impact of EMNC presence remains insufficiently analyzed.

This special issue solicits papers related to the broad theme of the relationship between emerging economy multinationals and innovation and knowledge flows, whether perceived at micro, meso or macro level. Conceptual, representative and case-based papers alike are welcomed.

Subject Coverage

Topics include but are not limited to:

• Which roles of outward foreign direct investment (OFDI) are coming to play in the innovation processes of EMNCs, at both strategic and operational levels?
• Why, how and with which outcomes are EMNCs engaging in innovation-related OFDI?
• What are the implications for incumbent MNCs in developed countries, e.g. in terms of competitive and collaborative dynamics?
• How do host governments respond to technology-seeking investments by EMNCs? To which extent do they promote them, and what may be appropriate facilitating frameworks?
• What are the macroeconomic and institutional contingencies and implications for home economies of innovation-related investments?
• What are the opportunities and threats for host economies of these investments?

Notes for Prospective Authors

Submitted papers should not have been previously published nor be currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. (N.B. Conference papers may only be submitted if the paper was not originally copyrighted and if it has been completely re-written).

All papers are refereed through a peer review process. A guide for authors, sample copies and other relevant information for submitting papers are available on the Author Guidelines page.

Editors and Notes

All papers must be submitted online. To submit a paper, please read our information on preparing and submitting articles. If you experience any problems submitting your paper online, please contact submissions@inderscience.com, describing the exact problem you experience. Please include in your submission the title of the Special Issue, the title of the Journal and the names of the Guest Editors.

Editors

James Agarwal, Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary, Canada

Terry Wu, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Canada

We invite academics and practitioners who are interested in the area of global marketing to submit book chapters for possible publication in the proposed book entitled "Emerging Issues in Global Marketing: A Shifting Paradigm".  This book is expected to be published in early 2018 by Springer. 

Brief Description

The increasing global competition for goods and services has led many business firms to develop international marketing strategies as part of their corporate mandate and corporate strategy. While previously the focus of international marketing was largely focused on the cultural and institutional differences, there has been an exponential growth in innovation and technological advances (e.g., social media and big data) especially in emerging markets that is impacting the approach to global marketing as business firms reach out to potential customers globally. Simultaneously, signs of new market potential with authoritarian regimes are promising as embargoes are lifted (e.g., normalized US-Cuba relations).  However, at the same time, emerging political risks and security concerns are changing the global game plan as countries weaken their commitment to regional trade blocs (e.g., UK and Brexit) and economies falter under populist leadership (e.g., Venezuela). The traditional approach to global marketing is no longer sufficient to address the emerging issues in global markets for the 21st century. Global companies need to take a new look at the contemporary threats and opportunities in markets, institutions, and technology and how they affect entry and expansion strategies through careful marketing-mix combinations.

Against this background, this book aims to address the paucity of research that currently exists in this area. In particular, this book will cover both the emerging theories and applications of global marketing for the 21st century. It aims to be of relevance to both academic researchers and practitioners globally such as CEOs and chief marketing officers as well as government officials and policy makers interested in formulating strategies/policies for global marketing activities in the face of a globalized economy.

With this perspective in mind, we invite you to submit a chapter that will offer new insights into emerging and cutting-edge issues in global marketing and highlight how global marketing strategies are changing in a globalized and digital economy that is fast changing.  The objective of this book is to present emerging issues and shifting paradigms in global marketing. Both conceptual and empirical (quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods) papers are welcome. Potential topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following topics: 

• Globalization, Regionalization, De-Regionalization: Emerging Theoretical Frameworks in the Context of Emerging Economies (e.g., BRICS, Brexit)
• Marketing Issues, Impact, and Implications of WTO on Globalization
• Political Risk for Global Marketers in Populist, Xenophobic, and Authoritarian Regimes
• Emerging Frameworks of Political Risk, Corruption, and CSR Strategies in Global Markets
• Emerging Theories of Cultural and Institutional Distance:  Concepts, Dynamics, Crossvergence, and Measurement Issues
• Global Marketing Research: Sampling Equivalence, Measurement Equivalence, Levels of Analysis, Hierarchical Modeling, Big Data and Customer Analytics and Techniques
• Emerging Theories on Global Entry Strategies: Exporting, Contractual Agreements, and FDI
• Lead Markets and Clusters of ‘R&D’ Innovation in Global Markets
• Global, Regional, Local Branding Strategies in an Age of Growing Counterfeit Markets
• Firm, Market, and Government Policy Factors in Global Pricing
• Traditional versus Social Media Advertising: New Trends and Budget Allocation
• Changing Nature of Global Retail Landscape
• E-Commerce and M-Commerce (social media): New Global Marketing Challenges and Strategies
• International Entrepreneurial Firm Growth and Expansion Strategies: Firm Specific and Country Specific Advantages
• Global Marketing in Services (Deregulation, WTO, Sector Specific Issues)

Timeline

• Submit a book chapter proposal: November 15, 2016
• Notice of accepted chapter proposal: December 15, 2016
• Submission of full book chapter: June 15, 2017
• Final chapter submission after revisions: August 15, 2017 

Submission Process

Chapter proposals must be submitted by November 15, 2016 to be considered.  We will make initial editorial decisions on chapter proposals by December 15, 2016.  Authors of accepted proposals will be invited to submit their full book chapters by June 15, 2017.  All submissions will be double-blind peer-reviewed.  Contributors may be asked to serve as reviewers.  

• You are invited to submit a 2-3 page chapter proposal 
• Manuscripts must be original, and should not have been previously published or currently under consideration by other books or journals.
• Please submit your chapter proposals via email to both editors: James Agarwal, james.agarwal@haskayne.ucalgary.ca; Terry Wu, terry.wu@uoit.ca.
• All submissions must follow the format and reference styles from the Journal of International Business Studies.   

Any questions pertaining to the book chapters, please contact the co-editors:

Dr. James Agarwal: james.agarwal@haskayne.ucalgary.ca

Dr. Terry Wu: terry.wu@uoit.ca

References:    

Agarwal, James and Terry Wu (2015), “Factors Influencing Growth Potential of E-Commerce in Emerging Economies: An Institution-Based N-OLI Framework,” Thunderbird International Business Review, 57(3), 197-215.

Agarwal, James and Dorothee Feils (2007), “Political Risk and the Internationalization of Firms: An Empirical Study of Canadian-based Export and FDI Firms,” Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 24, No. 3, 165-181.

Agarwal, James and Terry Wu (2004), “China's Entry to WTO: Global Marketing Issues, Impact, and Implications,” International Marketing Review, 21(3), 279-300.

Agarwal, James, Naresh K. Malhotra and Ruth N. Bolton (2010), “A Cross-National and Cross-Cultural Approach to Global Market Segmentation: An Application Using Consumers’ Perceived Service Quality,” Journal of International Marketing, 18(3), 18-40.

Antia, Kersi D., Mark Bergen and Shantanu Dutta (2004), “Competing with Gray Markets,” MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 46, No. 1, 63-69.

Coviello, Nicole (2015), “Re-Thinking Research on Born Globals”, Journal of International Business Studies, 46, 17-26.

Malhotra, N. K., Agarwal, James & Ulgado, Francis. M. (2003). Internationalization and Entry Modes: A Multitheoretical Framework and Research Propositions. Journal of International Marketing, 11(4), 1-31.

Meyer, Klaus E. and Mike W. Peng (2016), “Theoretical Foundations of Emerging Economy Business Research,” Journal of International Business Studies, 47, 3-22.

Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict (2014), “How Global Brands Create Firm Value: The 4V Model” International Marketing Review, Vol. 31. No. 1, 5-29.  

Van Hoorn Andre and Robert Maseland (2016), “How Institutions Matter for International Business: Institutional Distance Effects vs. Institutional Profile Effects,” Journal of International Business Studies, 47, 374-381.

Over the last decade the significance of emerging economies in Africa, Asia-Pacific and Latin-/ South America in global logistics and supply chain management (LSCM) has been increasing. Using these regions as a context, research attention is beginning to be devoted to a market commonly known as the “Base of the Pyramid” or BOP. The BOP includes the majority of the world’s population, predominately residing in the least developed countries, who make up the bottom of the world’s economic pyramid. Involving the BOP as a pool of potential customers requires vigorous private and public partnerships that are willing to assume shared responsibility and implement sustainability practices beyond narrowly defined economic/productivity-based goals. It is therefore time for LSCM researchers to consider emerging issues related to BOP markets.

The objective of this STF is to raise awareness of the BOP market, and to encourage ground-breaking research in this domain. While current research is scarce in this area, we believe in the great potential of this domain. Desired topics include, but are not limited to the following:

1. Impact of trade agreements on LSCM strategic practices involving BOP markets.
2. Conceptual frameworks that examine complexity related to sustainable LSCM involving BOP customers.
3. Empirical examinations of the role of LSCM in achieving competitive advantage for BOP markets.
4. Theories and models that integrate LSCM principles (e.g. quality management, outsourcing, innovation, supplier development) within the BOP context.
5. Interdisciplinary analyses of techno-culture interactions in LSCM for BOP entities.
6. Critical roles of global LSCM for building sustainable environments for BOP entities.
7. Case studies and theoretical frameworks in LSCM related to building products and services involving BOP markets.

All topically appropriate papers will go through JBL’s double-blind review process. Submission will be accepted between March 1 and March 31, 2016. You can learn more by e-mailing one of the guest editors at hult@broad.msu.edu, Paul.Hong@Utoledo.Edu, or Schoenherr@broad.msu.edu. Please submit your paper via Manuscript Central. Note that it is a special topic forum submission.

This special issue aims to enhance the understanding of the contemporary role of politics in the global economy and its significance for international business. At a more general level, the special issue aspires to contribute to a better integration of the role of politics and of non-markets strategies into international business theories, dimensions that have so far not been subjected to much systematic treatment.

The focus on outward investment from emerging economies and emerging market multinational enterprises (EMNEs) supports this agenda particularly well. It serves as a laboratory or extreme case to bring out more clearly the different dimensions of the special issue theme and their implications. Issues of politics, policies and institutions are often especially pronounced, both in home and host countries, when we consider EMNEs relative to multinationals from advanced economies (AMNEs). EMNE strategies are becoming entwined with those of governments, political parties, lobbyists, and other formal and informal institutions, in a variety of constellations. In emerging-economy home countries, where market failures and institutional voids tend to be widespread, the state more often than not plays a relatively active role in the economy and EMNE strategies and operating modes are more conditioned by politics, policies and non-market considerations. In advanced-economy host countries, there are often more sensitivities associated with EMNEs than with AMNEs, and political and regulatory responses are more pronounced. In both emerging and developing economy host countries, it is not uncommon for EMNE activities to be underpinned and conditioned by formal or informal interactions between home and host country governments. This special issue aspires to shed more light on the multi-level interrelationships between politics and EMNEs’ internationalization and the non-market agenda for their international strategy.

Over the last decade, outward investment from emerging economies has been steadily rising as a share of total outward investment (Goldstein & Shaw, 2007; Gammeltoft, 2008). Recent backlashes notwithstanding, more and more EMNEs are becoming competitive in an increasing number of markets and sectors on the basis of accumulated technological and managerial skills and abilities to manage global supply chains (Ramamurti & Singh, 2009; Gammeltoft, Barnard & Madhok, 2010). Yet, over the course of the same decade, the conditions for operating across borders have undergone significant changes. Succeeding the global financial crisis, national governments have resorted to interventionist and protectionist measures to safeguard domestic jobs and the competitiveness of national firms. Deglobalization rhetoric has been pronounced in a number of countries where nationalist and populist parties and individuals have elicited significant electoral support. However, the resort to measures impeding the flow of goods, capital, people and information has not been confined to individual countries. Other contemporary events such as the US-China trade and technology war, sanctions against Russia, Brexit, and the Covid-19 pandemic have further compounded some of these challenges.

More generally, the global economy has witnessed a widespread resurgence of politics in the wake of the environmental changes such as the global financial crisis, electoral support for nationalist governments, and the Covid-19 pandemic. This represents a marked shift from the preceding period from the 1990s onward, where neoliberal policies were dominant and there was more widespread consensus about the rules, norms and principles that would promote growth and stability. Today, with a considerably more entropic world order, the models and theories applied for a couple of decades to global economic change may benefit from reconsideration and extension to better take the new political circumstances into account. In recent years, international business theory has developed a much better appreciation of the importance of institutions. Yet, the role of politics and policies is yet to be systematically theorized and has so far been treated primarily as a source of risks and costs.

The increasing role of politics has been particularly pronounced where EMNEs’ expansion and performance are concerned. In the global economy, the locus of financial and political power is shifting towards emerging economies and in emerging economies, both state ownership and political support are essential pillars for the success of many EMNEs (Panibratov & Michailova, 2019). Political and institutional factors over time become embedded within EMNEs, transforming country-specific advantages into firm-specific ones. These political and policy issues associated with EMNEs meet with concern and policy responses, e.g. regarding their motives and competitive behavior (Panibratov, 2012), which leads to the increase of political bargaining between EMNEs and host countries’ governments, with examples such as Huawei in the US, or Gazprom in the EU. Ability to leverage politics constitutes a competitive advantage for EMNEs adding to their competitiveness and flexibility in their cross-border operations. Although economic motivations of EMNEs continuously develop and get more sophisticated, political factors remain an important tool to facilitate their expansion.

The resurgence of politics is manifest at multiple institutional levels, viz. firms, organizations, states, and multinational regimes. Most evidently, national governments have become less intent on integrating with other economies and international regimes and more intent on devising policies to better promote their own national interests, e.g. through protectionist measures and subsidies (Evenett, 2019). Abroad, governments mobilize representations, diplomacy and debt and aid conditionalities in support of commercial goals. More heavy-handed national regulation and incentives in home and host countries affects flows of goods, capital, people and information through both push and pull effects (Avioutskii & Tensaout, 2016). Hence, the global economy has become more adversarial and shifted from a more rule-based and transparent environment towards one that is more transactional and opaque.

At the level of firms, in many countries, the international competitiveness of national firms is more and more becoming a government rather than just a private concern, in particular of course where state-owned companies are involved (Cuervo-Cazurra et al., 2014; Panibratov & Michailova, 2019). EMNEs adjust their strategies to better deal with the new and more volatile political and regulatory environment and attendant risks and uncertainties (John & Lawton, 2017; Globerman, 2017; Stoian & Mohr, 2016; Villa, Rajwani & Lawton, 2015). The ability to leverage politics is becoming more important for the competitive advantage of EMNEs and firms are increasingly engaging in and formalizing political activities through lobbyism, political advocacy, CSR and other nonmarket strategies (Doh, Lawton, & Rajwani, 2012; White, Hemphill, Joplin, & Marsh, 2014).

At the level of international regimes, multiple international agreements, organizations, partnerships etc., such as the WTO, the TPP and the TTIP, have lost momentum and stagnated or even receded and in some domains new and contesting international regimes are being introduced, e.g. the AIIB, RCEP, BRICS and SCO, challenging those which were for a while hegemonic. At the level of civil society organizations and the general public, populist and anti-globalization movements have gained more strength and influence in a variety of countries and domains.

In addition to the distinct institutional levels, the special issue theme can be approached from different topical perspectives, for example:

Political risk perspective: Host country political risk has been widely analyzed in the literature. Home country political risk, on the other hand, has been less scrutinized. Companies may over time accumulate capabilities in managing political risks and hence may lower their overall exposure to them or mitigate them better. We encourage authors to address the issue of the political risk and respective political strategies of EMNEs in host countries, developed as well as developing.

Political capital perspective: While prior research has recognized the value of firms’ political capital in the home country and demonstrated that political connections provide firms with a favorable access to home country resources (Goldman, Rocholl, & So, 2013; Zhu & Chung, 2014), benefits (as well as liabilities) of political capital can also appear in host markets. We invite papers studying EMNEs’ internationalization through the lenses of political power balances and distribution, bargaining, and other basic features of political markets integrated in the IB context.

Non-market strategy / corporate political activity (CPA) perspective: The wide range of political strategies used by MNEs to influence host government decision-making is one of the cornerstones of the CPA concepts, and has raised a significant interest recently from international business and political economy scholars (Akbar & Kisilowski, 2015; Doh, Lawton, & Rajwani, 2012; Hillman, 2005). It is important to study further how the non-market mechanisms (e.g. CPA or lobbyism) affect the internationalization of EMNEs and OFDI from emerging economies.

Geopolitical perspective: EMNEs may occasionally serve as conduits for home country government influence over certain regions for socio-cultural or historical reasons and governments in emerging economies can leverage strategic partnerships in neighboring regions to strengthen their position in international political and economic relations (Maksakova, 2014). We seek papers addressing geopolitical issues of EMNE-host country relations such as the rise of economic nationalism (Zhang & He, 2014), the role of supranational institutions (Weinberg, 2016), and the involvement of politics in economic relations in general.

More generally, this special issue seeks contributions, which extend the understanding of the multi-level interplay between political processes, governance and policies and the internationalization of emerging market multinationals and the implications it holds for firms, governments and international regimes. This broader theme spans a wide range of specific topics and can be approached with different disciplinary, theoretical and empirical lenses. Hence, the editors welcome both theoretical and empirical papers, applying qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods, and encourage contributions from a range of disciplines, such as international business, strategy and organization, political science, political economy, economic geography, regional studies, economic sociology, as well as cross-disciplinary contributions. Papers aimed at advancing the theoretical frontier of the understanding of the significance of politics and policies for EMNEs and outward investment from emerging economies are particularly welcome.

Extending the understanding of the role of politics in the internationalization of EMNEs imposes few restrictions on the international business themes that may be addressed: most conventional IB themes may be subjected to a deeper and more explicit analysis of how they may be conditioned by politics. At the firm level, analysis may pertain to governance, strategies, and operations of firms alike. Firms’ more prevalent non-market strategies partly reflect, partly shape political processes and policy outcomes. At the level of governments, interventions in both domestic (e.g. factor and product) and international (e.g. trade and investment) markets impact on EMNE internationalization, and at the supranational level, trade and investment regulation and agreements is an important theme along with the dynamics with which these regimes evolve, partially under the influence of multinational firms and national governments.

Indicative but by no means exhaustive issues pertaining to the theme of the special issue include the following:

• How and with which outcomes do home governments support the internationalization of EMNEs, both domestically and abroad?
• What are the roles of diplomacy and soft power in EMNE internationalization?
• How do dynamics between different levels of government in home countries, e.g. central vs regional, affect EMNE internationalization?
• How and with which effects do host governments seek to capture the opportunities and mitigate the risks from the increasing presence and strengths of EMNEs?
• Which non-market strategies do EMNEs deploy to mobilize the support of or to mitigate the adverse effects of governments in home and host countries?
• How and to which extent do EMNEs respond to political changes in host countries’ institutional and governmental system in their corporate political activity?
• Do EMNEs' non-market strategies vary systematically with firm characteristics such as forms of ownership, governance, nationality, industry or certain types of capabilities?
• How do protectionist measures and increasing regulatory scrutiny in host economies influence international strategies and supply chain organization of EMNEs?
• How do EMNEs manage increasing political risk and regulatory uncertainty?
• How have supranational institutions and international regimes evolved to shape EMNE internationalization? How do firms and governments seek to actively influence their evolution?
• How do civil society organizations, popular movements and the media shape the responses to EMNE internationalization?

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Please address your questions to the guest editors: pg.egb@cbs.dk; panibratov@gsom.spbu.ru

Call for papers at the IBR website: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-business-review/call-for-papers/emerging-market-multinationals

REFERENCES

Akbar, Y.H. and Kisilowski, M. (2015), ‘Managerial agency, risk, and strategic posture: Nonmarket strategies in the transitional core and periphery’, International Business Review, 24(6): 984-996.

Avioutskii, V. and Tensaout, M. (2016), ‘Does politics matter? Partisan FDI in Central and Eastern Europe’, Multinational Business Review, 24(4): 375-398.

Cuervo-Cazurra, A., Inkpen, A., Musacchio, A., & Ramaswamy, K. (2014), ‘Governments as owners: State-owned multinational companies’, Journal of International Business Studies, 45(8): 919-942.

Doh, J. P., Lawton, T. C. and Rajwani, T. (2012), ‘Advancing nonmarket strategy research: Institutional perspectives in a changing world’, Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(3): 22-39.

Evenett, S. (2019), ‘Protectionism, state discrimination, and international business since the onset of the global financial crisis’, Journal of International Business Policy, 2(1): 9-36.

Gammeltoft, P. (2008), 'Emerging multinationals: outward FDI from the BRICS countries', International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 4(1): 5-22.

Gammeltoft, P., Barnard, H. and Madhok, A. (2010), ’Emerging multinationals, emerging theory: Macro- and micro-level perspectives’, Journal of International Management, 16(2): 95-101.

Globerman, S. (2017), ‘A new era for foreign direct investment?’, Multinational Business Review, 25(1): 5-10.

Goldman, E., Rocholl, J. and So, J. (2013), ‘Politically connected boards of directors and the allocation of procurement contracts’, Review of Finance, 17(5): 1617-1648.

Goldstein, A. and Shaw, T.M. (2007), Multinational Companies from Emerging Economies: Composition, Conceptualization and Direction in the Global Economy, London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hillman, A. (2005), ‘Politicians on the board of directors: Do connections affect the bottom line?’, Journal of Management, 32(3): 464-481.

John, A. and Lawton, T. C. (2017), ‘International political risk management: Perspectives, approaches and emerging agendas’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(4): 847-879.

Maksakova, M. (2014), ‘Vozvrashchenie Rossii na Balkany: ehkonomicheskij aspect’, Observer, 9: 50-63.

Panibratov, A. (2012), Russian Multinationals: From Regional Supremacy to Global Lead, London, New York: Routledge.

Panibratov, A. and Michailova , S. (2019), ‘The role of state ownership and home government political support in Russian multinationals’ internationalization’, International Journal of Emerging Markets, 14(3): 436-450.

Ramamurti, R. and Singh, J.V. (eds.) (2009), Emerging Multinationals in Emerging Markets, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stoian, C. and Mohr, A. (2016), ‘Outward foreign direct investment from emerging economies: escaping home country regulative voids’, International Business Review, 25(5): 1124-1135.

Villa, M.A. De, Rajwani, T. and Lawton, T. (2015), ’Market entry modes in a multipolar world: Untangling the moderating effect of the political environment’, International Business Review, 24(3): 419-429.

Weinberg, J. (2016). ‘European Union member states in cross-national analyses: The dangers of neglecting supranational policymaking’, International Studies Quarterly, 60(1),1: 98–106.

White, G. O., Hemphill, T. A., Joplin, J. R. W. and Marsh, L. A. (2014), ‘Wholly owned foreign subsidiary relations-based strategies in volatile environments’, International Business Review, 23(1): 303-312.

Zhang, J. and He, X. (2014), ‘Economic nationalism and foreign acquisition completion: the case of China’, International Business Review, 23(1): 212-227.

Zhu, H. and Chung, C. (2014), ‘Portfolios of political ties and business group strategy in emerging economies: Evidence from Taiwan’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(4): 599.

“Name some Brazilian multinationals. Even harder than "famous Belgians", isn't it? Despite Brazil being the world's eighth-largest economy, with plenty of big, profitable firms, few of them have a reasonable share of their operations abroad and are thus genuinely multinational.” The Economist, Sept 21, 2000.

 “For the first time Brazil has a crop of companies that can be described as multinationals. Some of them are already well known outside Brazil: Petrobras; Vale, one of the world’s largest mining companies; and Embraer, the world’s third-largest maker of passenger jets.” The Economist, November 12, 2009.

These two quotes from the British newspaper The Economist reflect the change in view about Multilatinas, or Latin American multinational companies. The reason is not that there were no Multilatinas before 2000. In fact, there have been Multilatinas for over a century. For example, the Argentinean shoemaker Alpargatas was created in 1885 and established subsidiaries in Uruguay in 1890 and in Brazil in 1907. The reason is that there were few studies analyzing Multilatinas before the 2000s. This was part of a general trend in the international business literature that appeared to have ignored the region. For example, a review of articles in two leading journals in the field of international business (Journal of International Business Studies and Management International Review) in the period 1987-1997 indicated that fewer than 6% of the articles mentioned Latin America (Elahee and Vaidya, 2001). This paucity of studies on the region had not changed in recent times. A review of studies in four leading international business journal (Journal of International Business Studies, Management International Review, Journal of World Business, and International Business Review) in 2001-2005 indicated that only 2.75% of articles studied firms in the region (Perez-Batres, Pisani and Doh, 2010). Nevertheless, a few analyses of multinationals have indicated that firms from this region are becoming multinational rapidly and some of them are becoming leaders in their industries (Casanova, 2009; Cuervo-Cazurra, 2008,; Fleury and Fleury, 2010; Santiso, 2013).

In this special issue we plan to take stock of what is known about these firms and identify potential avenues for future research. Other special issues of the Journal of World Business have analyzed various regions of the world such as India (Varma and Budhwar, 2012), China (Laforet, Paliwoda and Chen, 2012), Africa (Kamoche, 2011), the Middle East (Mellahi, Demirbag and Riddle, 2011), and Korea (Paik and Lee, 2008). This special issue contributes to the global scope of the Journal of World Business by studying firms from Latin America, which have, thus far, been underrepresented in the management and business literature (Brenes, Montoya and Ciravegna, 2014).  With this special issue, we aim to not only increase our understanding of Multilatinas, but also to identify the particular characteristics of their internationalization and how it compares with the internationalization of firms from other regions.

The rise of emerging market multinationals has been well documented (for example see the papers in the special issues edited by Aulakh, 2007; Cuervo-Cazurra, 2012; Gammeltoft, Barnard and Madhok, 2010; Luo and Tung, 2007; and in the books edited by Cuervo-Cazurra and Ramamurti, 2014; Ramamurti and Singh, 2007, Sauvant, 2008; Williamson et al., 2013), yet the literature on emerging market multinationals has thus far focused mainly on firms from regions other than Latin America. With this Special Issue of Journal of World Business, we aim to fill this gap, contributing to the international business literature and the body of knowledge documenting the practices of multinational companies.

This call is an attempt to integrate different aspects that might have influenced the growth and internationalization of Latin American firms. We welcome theoretical, empirical, methodological and case studies submission addressing, but not limited to, the following issues:

• Successful Multilatinas expanding outside their region
• Comparative ownership advantages/disadvantages of Multilatinas
• Internationalization patterns of Latin American firms
• The internationalization of state-owned Latin American firms
• Institutional constraints for Latin American companies to internationalize
• Foreign performance of Latin American firms
• Effects of exports promotion agencies on the internationalization of Latin American firms
• Governance in Multilatinas
• The internationalization of Latin American business groups  
• Global leadership in Multilatinas
• Dimensions of management diversity in Multilatinas
• Determinants of outward FDI from Latin America
• The role of governments in Latin American International Business
• Corporate social responsibility and sustainable practices in Multilatinas
• The role of family-owned business conglomerates in Multilatinas
• Oligopolistic structures and internationalization in Multilatinas
• Multilatinas and economic and political crises
• Cultural challenges in doing business from Latin America
• The role of Latin American diaspora and returning emigrants in international business

Submission process:

By May 4, 2015, authors should submit their manuscripts online via the new Journal of World Business EES submission system. The link for submitting manuscript is: http://ees.elsevier.com/jwb. 

To ensure that all manuscripts are correctly identified for consideration for this Special Issue, it is important that authors select ‘SI: Latin American MNCs’ when they reach the “Article Type” step in the submission process

Manuscripts should be prepared in accordance with the Journal of World Business Guide for Authors available at http://www.elsevier.com/journals/journal-of-world-business/1090-9516/guide-for-authors. All submitted manuscripts will be subject to the Journal of World Business’s blind review process.

We may organize a workshop designed to facilitate the development of papers. Authors of manuscripts that have progressed through the revision process will be invited to it. Presentation at the workshop is neither a requirement for nor a promise of final acceptance of the paper in the Special Issue.

Questions about the Special Issue may be directed to the guest editors:

• Ruth V. Aguilera, Northeastern University, United States (r.aguilera@neu.edu)
• Luciano Ciravegna, King’s College, London, UK, (Luciano.ciravegna@kcl.ac.uk)
• Alvaro Cuervo-Cazurra, Northeastern University, United States (a.cuervocazurra@neu.edu)
• Maria Alejandra Gonzalez-Perez, Universidad EAFIT, Colombia (mgonza40@eafit.edu.co)

References:

Aulakh, P. S. (2007). Emerging multinationals from developing economies: motivations, paths, and performance. Journal of International Management, 13, 338-355.

Brenes, E. R., Montoya, D., & Ciravegna, L. (2014). Differentiation strategies in emerging markets: The case of Latin American agribusinesses. Journal of Business Research, 67, 847-855.

Casanova, L. (2009). Global Latinas: Latin America's emerging multinationals. Palgrave Macmillan.

Cuervo-Cazurra, A. (2008). The multinationalization of developing country MNEs: The case of Multilatinas. Journal of International Management, 14, 138-154.

Cuervo-Cazurra, A. (2012). How the analysis of developing country multinational companies helps advance theory: Solving the Goldilocks debate. Global Strategy Journal, 2, 153-167.

Cuervo-Cazurra, A., & Ramamurti, R. (2014). Understanding multinationals from emerging markets. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Economist. (2001). Brazil's Gerdau: Who dares wins. The Economist. www.economist.com/node/374586

Economist. (2009). Special Reports Economist Brazil. The Economist. www.economist.com/node/14829517

Elahee, M. N., & Vaidya, S. P. (2001). Coverage of Latin American business and management issues in cross-cultural research: An analysis of JIBS and MIR 1987-1997. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior, 4, 21-31. 

Fleury, A. & Fleury, M. T. L. (2011). Brazilian multinationals: Competences for internationalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Gammeltoft, P., Barnard, H., & Madhok, A. (2010). Emerging multinationals, emerging theory: macro- and micro-level perspectives. Journal of International Management, 16, 95-101.

Kamoche, K. (2011). Contemporary developments in the management of human resources in Africa. Journal of World Business, 46, 1-4.

Laforet, S. Paliwoda, S. and Chen, J. (2012). Introduction. Journal of World Business, 47, 1-3.

Luo, Y., & Tung, R. L. (2007). International expansion of emerging market enterprises: A springboard perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 38, 481-498.

Mellahi, K., Demirbag, M., & Riddle, L. (2011). Multinationals in the Middle East: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of World Business, 46, 406-410.

Paik, Y., & Lee, S. H. (2008). Introduction. Journal of World Business, 43, 1-4.

Pérez-Batres, L.A., Pisani, M.J., & Doh, J.P. (2010). Latin America’s Contribution to IB Scholarship. Academy of International Business Insights, 10, 3-7. 

Ramamurti, R., & Singh, J. V. (eds). (2009). Emerging multinationals from emerging markets. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Santiso, J. (2013). The decade of the Multilatinas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sauvant, K. P. (ed). (2008). The rise of transnational corporations from emerging markets: Threat or opportunity? Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

Varma, A., & Budhwar, P. (2012). International Human Resource Management in the Indian context. Journal of World Business, 47, 157-338.

Williamson, P., Ramamurti, R., Fleury, A., & Fleury, M. T. (eds). (2013). Competitive advantages of emerging country multinationals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Objective

Emerging markets firms venturing into advanced economies has received increasing attention from both academics and practitioners (Atsmon, Kloss, & Smit, 2012; Luo & Tung, 2007). Although existing research has examined various aspects of this important phenomenon, such as the role of government (Luo, Xue, & Han, 2010), ownership and entry mode choice (Cui & Jiang, 2012), and absorptive capacity and overseas acquisitions (Deng, 2010; Liu & Woywode, 2013), there is the need to unpack contextual factors and to explore how context can influence the business leader’s decision making and managerial practices amid the venturing abroad phenomenon by emerging market enterprises.

Context matters a great deal for international business research and practices, such as the multiple embeddeness of multinational enterprises and local contexts (Meyer, Mudambi, & Narula, 2011). Cultural difference has an important bearing for emerging market firms venturing abroad. For instance, favours are a medium of exchange for social capital and prevalent in business in emerging markets (Teagarden & Schotter, 2013). However, such business practices might not be available in advanced economies which might become obstacles for emerging markets firms, or induce misunderstanding and confusion for Western managers. Despite under the same umbrella concept of emerging economies (Hoskisson, Wright, Filatotchev, & Peng, 2013), yet, emerging markets can vary on most significant dimensions—institutionally, economically, culturally, socially, technologically (Teagarden, 2013). Hence, there is the need to delineate and specify the contextual factors and boundary conditions with respect to emerging markets firms venturing into advanced economies. Furthermore, marketing practices in emerging markets may challenge the assumptions of received body of knowledge (Sheth, 2011).

The international marketing strategy of emerging market firms might pursue different strategy against the conventional wisdom (Vrontis, 2003; Vrontis, Thrassou, & Lamprianou, 2009). Mergers & Acquisitions (M&A) is a complex and sophisticated international management topic which involves multi-faceted challenges for managers in both emerging and developed markets (Weber, Tarba, & Oberg, 2014). M&A was identified as one primary market entry mode for emerging markets firms venturing abroad (Deng, 2012; Gomes, Angwin, Weber, & Tarba, 2013). One recent study shows that Chinese firms adopted an innovative post- acquisition integration approach largely due to the influence of contextual factors (Liu & Woywode, 2013). In addition, the ambidexterity perspective might largely advance our understanding of multinational enterprises from emerging economies (Chebbi, Yahiaoui, Thrassou, & Vrontis, 2014; Luo & Rui, 2009).

We embrace a pluralist view on emerging markets (Von Glinow & Teagarden, 2009) and encourage scholars to gain a nuanced contextualized understanding of emerging markets firms venturing into advanced economies through a comparative international management perspective (Luo, Sun, & Wang, 2011). Therefore, we seek for thought-provoking research on contexts and emerging markets firms venturing into advanced economies, and welcome both empirical (qualitative as well as quantitative) and conceptual contributions. Especially, we hope to highlight the practical implications derived from rigorous scholarship, to inform practice and provide insights for business practitioners and/ or policy makers. It is of significant importance to nurture future business leaders with a global mindset (Javidan, Teagarden, & Bowen, 2010), and we suggest a better understanding of emerging market firms venturing into advanced economies can help business leaders as well.

This SI aims to attract a variety of papers that can move the exciting research agenda further. Topics appropriate include, not limited to, the following:

• Institutions (formal and/ or informal) impact on emerging markets firms venturing abroad
• Commonalities and differences among emerging markets firms venturing abroad, BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) countries and beyond
• Standardization vs. adaptation of international marketing of emerging markets firms
• Learning and (reverse) knowledge transfer of emerging markets firms venturing abroad
• International marketing practices and market entry strategy
• Ambidexterity, HRM and leadership practices
• Strategic management from a comparative international perspective
• Community involvement and non-market strategy

We encourage cross-fertilization approach by blending different theoretical lenses (Oswick, Fleming, & Hanlon, 2011), and we particularly welcome scholars from strategy and international business to join our stimulating discussions. Submitted papers should not have been previously published nor be currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. All papers are refereed through a double-blind peer review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submitting papers are available on the Author Guidelines page. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117946257/grouphome/ForAuthors.html

Important Dates

• Submission deadline: November 1, 2014
• Publication release: 2016

Articles must be submitted through Thunderbird International Business Review’s Manuscript Central electronic submission system: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/tibr

Please ensure your article abides by the scope and formatting conditions of this journal, which are detailed at http://www.thunderbird.edu/knowledge_network/tibr/submission.htm When submitting your article, please specify in your cover letter that you are submitting to the special issue on “Emerging Markets Firms Venturing into Advanced Economies”.

For additional information, please contact the special issue editors: Demetris Vrontis, School of Business, University of Nicosia, vrontis.d@unic.ac.cy, Yipeng Liu, Kent Business School, University of Kent, Y.P.Liu@kent.ac.uk

References

Atsmon, Y., Kloss, M., & Smit, S. 2012. Parsing the Growth Advantage of Emerging-Market Companies. Mckinsey Quarterly, 3: 10-14. Chebbi, H., Yahiaoui, D., Thrassou, A., & Vrontis, D. 2014. Building Multi-Unit Ambidextrous Organizations - A Transformative Framework. Human Resource Management: Forthcoming. Cui, L., & Jiang, F. 2012. State ownership effect on firms' FDI ownership decisions under institutional pressure: a study of Chinese outward-investing firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(3): 264-284. Deng, P. 2010. What determines performance of cross‐border M&As by Chinese companies? An absorptive capacity perspective. Thunderbird International Business Review, 52(6): 509-524. Deng, P. 2012. The Internationalization of Chinese Firms: A Critical Review and Future Research*. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14: 408-427. Gomes, E., Angwin, D. N., Weber, Y., & Tarba, S. Y. 2013. Critical Success Factors through the Mergers and Acquisitions Process: Revealing Pre‐and Post‐M&A Connections for Improved Performance. Thunderbird International Business Review, 55(1): 13-35. Hoskisson, R. E., Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., & Peng, M. W. 2013. Emerging Multinationals from Mid‐Range Economies: The Influence of Institutions and Factor Markets. Journal of Management Studies, 50(7): 1295-1321. Javidan, M., Teagarden, M., & Bowen, D. 2010. Making it overseas. Harvard Business Review, 88(4): 109-113. Liu, Y., & Woywode, M. 2013. Light-touch Integration of Chinese Cross-Border M&A: The Influences of Culture and Absorptive Capacity. Thunderbird International Business Review, 55(4): 469-483. Luo, Y., & Rui, H. 2009. An ambidexterity perspective toward multinational enterprises from emerging economies. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(4): 49-70. Luo, Y., Sun, J., & Wang, S. L. 2011. Comparative strategic management: An emergent field in international management. Journal of International Management, 17(3): 190-200. Luo, Y., & Tung, R. L. 2007. International expansion of emerging market enterprises: A springboard perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4): 481-498. Luo, Y., Xue, Q., & Han, B. 2010. How emerging market governments promote outward FDI: Experience from China. Journal of World Business, 45(1): 68-79. Meyer, K. E., Mudambi, R., & Narula, R. 2011. Multinational enterprises and local contexts: the opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness. Journal of Management Studies, 48(2): 235-252. Oswick, C., Fleming, P., & Hanlon, G. 2011. From borrowing to blending: Rethinking the processes of organizational theory building. Academy of management review, 36(2): 318-337. Sheth, J. N. 2011. Impact of emerging markets on marketing: Rethinking existing perspectives and practices. Journal of Marketing, 75(4): 166-182. Teagarden, M. B. 2013. Not All Emerging Markets Are Created Equal. Thunderbird International Business Review, 55(3): 235-236. Teagarden, M. B., & Schotter, A. 2013. Favor prevalence in emerging markets: A multi-level analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(2): 447-460 Von Glinow, M. A., & Teagarden, M. B. 2009. The future of Chinese management research: rigour and relevance redux. Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 75-89. Vrontis, D. 2003. Integrating adaptation and standardisation in international marketing: the AdaptStand modelling process. Journal of Marketing Management, 19(3-4): 283-305. Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A., & Lamprianou, I. 2009. International marketing adaptation versus standardisation of multinational companies. International Marketing Review, 26(4/5): 477-500. Weber, Y., Tarba, S. Y., & Oberg, C. 2014. A Comprehensive Guide to Mergers and Acquisitions: Managing The Critical Success Factors Across Every Stage of The M&A Process. USA & UK: Pearson & Financial Times.

The rise of multinational corporations (MNCs) from emerging markets has been a major development during the last decade. Publications such as the UNCTAD Global Investment Report and the FT Global 500 indicate the increasing share of these companies among the world’s largest multinationals. This development not only relates to the BRICs, but also comprises companies from countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, Saudi-Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Taiwan, Turkey and others. Explaining the rather sudden rise of these companies has become somewhat of a growth industry over the last years. (Brennan 2011, Sauvant et al. 2010). Various International Business scholars have developed or modified long established analytical instruments in order to account for the rise of these companies. Theories such as the Eclectic Paradigm (Dunning 1986) or the Product Cycle Model (Wells 1983) have been extended in order to account for the rise of these companies while others such as the Linking, Leverage, Learning-approach (Mathews 2002) have been proposed to address this novel phenomenon.

However, many of these approaches do not fully take into account that the institutional and political background in the home states of these companies may be quite different from the ones within most countries of the established centre of the world economy and that this background may be a very important one for understanding the transnational activity of these corporations (Goldstein 2007, Ramamurti 2008). Moreover, literature has only begun to address the implications of this institutional background for the global economic order (Nölke and Taylor 2010, Nölke 2011).

This call for papers is based on the assumption that a major feature of emerging market MNCs appears to be their close relationship with their home country states. To be sure, many Western MNCs cultivate close relationships with their home states as well (as, for instance, recently witnessed in the financial sector), but this special issue will investigate whether and where there is a special quality of relationship between the state and major corporations stemming from countries outside of the recent centre of the world economy, as well as explore how this special quality affects the cross-border activities of these corporations.

In order to study this claim, a number of topics may be highlighted that might form the focus of individual contributions, both comprising of specific public policies and more general structural issues. A first set of topics looks at the role of (partial) state ownership/(former) public enterprises among emerging markets MNCs, direct financial support by (para-) state bodies, such as development banks or pension funds, as well as the importance of close, formal or informal inter-personal networks between major corporations and public officials in these countries, as far as this proximity and these support measures directly effect the cross-border operations of emerging market MNCs.

The close relationship between emerging markets multinationals and their home states may, however, not be limited to a domestic issue. Corporations and governments may also cooperate quite closely with regard to trans-/international relations. A number of issues could be explored in this context:

•       Close relations between corporations and governments for gaining access to natural resources in other countries.
•       Cooperation between emerging market MNCs and home state governments with regard to negotiations about global/regional economic regulation, e.g. with regard to the selective protection of intellectual property rights or to competition policies that are geared towards the support of emerging “national champions”.
•       The non-enforcement of international regulations by home state governments, e.g. accounting and auditing standards or corporate governance regulations that prevent unfriendly take-overs, particularly by rival multinationals.
•       The different role of these MNCs with regard to private transnational governance, e.g. with regard to social and environmental standards.
•       The degree of integration of emerging market MNC managers in transnational organizations of the global capitalist class – vis-à-vis their primary identification with domestic state-based class networks.
Generally, the close relationship between these corporations and their home states may be considered as a problematic affair, not only from the perspective of liberals that despise any intervention of the state in economic affairs. We welcome papers that give special attention to the potential effects of this relationship with regard to:
•       The concentration of economic and political power due to the collusion of public officials and MNC owners/managers and its effect for the cross-border operation of firms.
•       Public policies that are biased towards the transnational expansion of big companies, thereby disadvantaging broad social groups (e.g. high consumer prices due to weak competition policies).
•       The emergence of international tensions, due to the use of governments in order to further company strategies (or the use of corporations for political strategies).
In order to study the agenda outlined above, we seek contributions by political scientists, political economists and critical business scholars, but also from scholars with a background in sociology, geography or business history. Moreover, we are seeking contributions from all regions of the world, in particular from emerging market economies.

Time schedule

The submission of manuscripts will follow a two step-approach. The first round is based on an initial call for abstracts (300 – 5000 words) with a deadline of 15 March 2012. A selected number of authors will subsequently be invited for an authors’ workshop on 18/19 June 2012 in Parma/Italy, sponsored by the COST Action IS 0905 “The Emergence of Southern Multinationals and their Impact on Europe”. Participation will be open to both members of the COST Action and other scholars. Papers for this workshop will be due 31 May 2012.

The submission deadline for manuscripts with CPoIB will be 1 December 2012, with initial reviewing to be completed by 28 February 2013, revisions due by 1st May 2013, final decisions by 1 August 2013, and anticipated publication in early 2014. Submission of manuscripts will be open to all scholars, not limited to participants of the authors’ conference in June 2012.

Submissions should follow the author guidelines for Critical Perspectives on International Business which can be found at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/cpoib.htm.

Please direct questions, proposals and papers to the special issue Guest Editor at: a.noelke@soz.uni-frankfurt.de.

About the Guest Editor

Dr. Andreas Nölke is Professor of Political Science, with a special focus on International Relations and International Political Economy at Goethe University, Frankfurt. His research interests include comparative capitalism, emerging markets, financialization, deep integration, private governance and transnational policy networks. He has published articles in leading journals such as World Politics, Review of International Political Economy, Journal of Common Market Studies and Business and Politics.

References

Brennan, L. ed. (2011), The Emergence of Southern Multinationals: Their Impact on Europe, London/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dunning, J. H. (1986) “The Investment Development and Third World Multinationals,” in K. M. Khan (ed.) Multinationals of the South: New Actors in the International Economy, London/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Goldstein, A. (2007), Multinational Companies from Emerging Economies, London/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mathews, J. A. (2002) “Competitive Advantages of the Latecomer Firm: A Resource-Based
Account of Industrial Catch-Up Strategies,” Asia Pacific Journal of Management 19: 467-488.
Nölke, A (2011) “Non-triad Multinational Enterprises and Global Economic Institutions, in: D. H. Claes and C. H. Knutsen (ed.), Governing the Global Economy. Politics, Institutions, and Economic Development, London/New York: Routledge.
Nölke, A and H. Taylor (2010), Non-triad Multinationals and Global Governance: Still a North-South Conflict?, in: M. Ougaard/A. Leander (eds.), Business and Global Governance, London/New York: Routledge.
Ramamurti, R. (2008) “What Have We Learned about Emerging-Market MNEs?,” Paper
Prepared for Conference on Emerging Market Multinationals: Outward FDI from Emerging and Developing Economies, 9-10 October 2008, Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School.
Sauvant, K. and G. McAllister with M. Maschek eds. (2010), Foreign Direct Investments from Emerging Markets, London/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wells, L. T. (1983) Third World Multinationals: The Rise of Foreign Investment from Developing Countries, Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.

The study of a multinational company (MNC) has been a fundamental component of the international business literature. While there have been significant variations in the strategies and structures of MNCs from different advanced regions, they have tended to share technological, marketing, and managerial strengths, enabling them to overcome the so-called liability of foreignness in a variety of markets. They have invested for the most part in wholly or majority-owned subsidiaries, transferred technology, products, and knowledge from headquarters to their operations around the world, and relied on elaborate bureaucratic mechanisms and financial controls (Guillen and Garcia-Canal, 2009).
Recent years have seen the emergence of a growing number of MNCs from emerging economies as diverse as Brazil, China, Korea, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Russia, Singapore, Taiwan, and Turkey (Goldstein et al, 2006). Whereas these firms have essentially had humble beginnings, some of them have become global leaders in the meantime (Li and Kozhikode, 2008; Guillen and Garcia-Canal, 2009). The new MNCs operate internationally using entry modes such as alliances, joint ventures and wholly owned subsidiaries. Some of them are small and product focused and others are large and diversified (Guillen and Garcia-Canal, 2009). The literature has referred to them as “thirdworld multinationals” (Wells, 1983), “latecomer firms” (Mathews, 2002), “unconventional multinationals” (Li, 2003), “challengers” (BCG, 2008), and “emerging multinationals” (Accenture, 2008; Goldstein, 2007).

In spite of the interest in the topic of emerging multinationals as such, the academic literature is still based on the observation of firms from the so-called Triad (i.e. US, EU and Japan). Only recently a growing strand of literature has begun to question the phenomenon (Li, 2003). The Journal of International Business Studies (2007), the Journal of International Management (2007), the International Journal of Technology and Globalization (2008) and Industrial and Corporate Change (2009), for example, have dedicated special issues to the topic (Amighini et al, 2007). Although these issues have indeed published some very interesting pieces of work on emerging multinationals, those studies have largely focused on the nature of their competitive advantage, motivations, investment development paths and internationalization patterns (Amighini et al, 2007). This has also been the case for books published on the topic. For example, while Sauvant (2009) has comprehensively analyzed the rise and features of emerging multinationals, managerial aspects typical in these types of companies have not explicitly been dealt with. Also Ramamurti and Singh (2009) have asked why so many firms in emerging economies have internationalized so aggressively in the last decade, what competitive advantages these firms enjoy, and what the origins of those advantages are; however, their work has also largely neglected numerous management perspectives.
In academic studies, attempts to understand emerging multinationals have originated primarily from the “developed world” towards “developing countries”. Developing economies have been studied in their relation to investors and corporations expanding into them. Radhakrishnan (1994) has referred to this focus as the “I think therefore you are” syndrome. Genuine developments of emerging multinationals have been subsumed under the overarching explanatory power of Western theories. This attitude has inadvertently affected management and leadership studies. Western management has been regarded as a universal norm, and non-western management practices have been judged against this norm. The proponents of the so-called convergence hypothesis (e.g., Kerr et al, 1960) have argued that management systems would converge towards the models originating from the U.S. From this starting point, patterns in other countries have been viewed either as derivative of, or deviations from, the U.S. model (Locke et al, 1995). MNCs from developed countries have been given the status of ‘mainstream’, and emerging multinationals have been regarded as ‘unconventional’.

In recent years, it has been realized that many of the Western management practices and managerial styles cannot be transplanted exactly in the same manner to other culture and country contexts. Western management literature presents a model of organizational life that may or may not be appropriate in a non-Western business context. This is especially true for emerging multinationals. When Western management theories are applied directly, they may not match the local and cultural understanding of managerial problems and functions in non-Western MNCs. For example, unlike Western management theories, which emphasize delegation, empowerment, and power sharing as key component of effective leadership, research in many developing countries show that a more directive and autocratic management style is accepted and even legitimized (Badawy, 1980; Hofstede, 1984, Dia, 1994). Whereas especially the American view on management tends to overplay the influence of the top manager (Meindl, Ehrlich, and Dukerich, 1985; Meindl and Ehrlich, 1987), paternalism is valued and found in many developing nations (e.g., Dorfman and Howell, 1988). Similarly, counter to Western management paradigms which emphasize consistency and logic, research on management in many developing countries shows that behaving in accordance with the manager's beliefs, personalized and informal methods of conducting interpersonal business affairs and face saving are accepted as personal qualities of effective leaders (Abdullah, 1996).
In this book, we aspire to provide a new vantage point to management in emerging multinationals. Our aim is to create a state-of-the-art overview of management in emerging multinationals, from the point of view of these organizations themselves. We want to identify an analytic typology of cultural characteristics in order to interpret differing approaches to rationality, motivation, ethics and interpersonal relationships in a managerial context. We aim to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of various managerial approaches in different national contexts. Readers of the book will better understand the interplay among country and company cultures, corporate strategy, as well as individual differences in an emerging country´s MNCs. We will also be able to evaluate the generalizability of models from Western cultures in a more balanced manner. To summarize, in Marsden’s words (1991, p. 36), it is our aim to “… begin from where the people are, rather than from where development (and management) experts would like them to be…”.

The chapters included in this book can potentially make significant contributions to the theory and practice of management of MNCs by facilitating our understanding of universally applicable theories and concepts. The book will target students and researchers of international business and postgraduate students in such courses as international management, cross-cultural studies, and international business.

Topics covered include but are not limited to:

• Cultural congruence and cultural differences in the interpretation of management in emerging country MNC’s
• Traits, skills and styles of managers in emerging country MNC’s
• General leadership styles of managers from emerging multinationals
• Motivation techniques of managers from emerging multinationals
• Communication and decision making styles
• Control mechanisms (management of processes and outputs)
• Value orientations and ethical dimensions of managers from emerging multinationals
• Negotiation styles of and between managers in emerging multinationals
• Multinational applications of generic strategies in emerging multinationals
• Societal culture: Influences on organizational culture in emerging multinational contexts

We are looking to include both conceptual and empirical papers in this edited book. Relevant case study examples are also welcome.

Notes for Potential Authors
Submitted papers should not have been previously published nor be currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. All papers are refereed through a peer-review process. Please be prepared to review and comment on some of the submitted articles for this book.

Important Dates
Deadline for submissions of extended abstracts: March 30, 2010
Deadline for submissions of completed papers: July 1, 2010
Double blind review of papers and feedback from review given to the author(s) by: September 30, 2010
Deadline for final submission of corrected papers: December 15, 2010
No changes can be made to the papers after: January 15, 2011

Editors and Notes
You may send one copy in the form of an MS Word file attached to an e-mail (details in Author Guidelines) to both the following:
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Dilek Zamantili Nayir (dznayir@marmara.edu.tr)
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Vlad Vaiman (vlad@ru.is)


References
Abdullah, A. (1996), Going Glocal: Cultural Dimensions in Malaysian Management, Malaysian Institute of Management, Kuala Lumpur.

Accenture. (2008). The rise of the emerging-market multinational. Retrieved December 3rd, 2009 from http://www.accenture.com/Global/Accenture_Blogs/Accenture_High_Performance_Business_Blog/January_2008/The+Rise+of+the+Emerging+Market+Multinational.htm

Amighini A., Sanfilippo M. and Rabellotti R. (2007), Emerging economic regional powers and local systems of production: new threats or new opportunities?, WP SERIES – N. 04/09 The rise of multinationals from emerging countries. A review of the literature

Badawy, M.K. (1980), Styles of mid-eastern managers, California Management Review 22 (2), 51-58.

BCG. (2008). The 2008 BCG 100 new global challengers: How top companies from rapidly developing economies are changing the world. Retrieved November 20th, 2009 from http://www.asiaing.com/how-100-top-companies-from-rapidly-developing-economies-are-changing-the-world-a-bcg-r.html.

Dia, M. (1994), Indigenous management practices: lessons for Africa's management in the '90s, in Serageldine, I. and Taboroff, J. (Ed.), Culture and Development in Africa, World Bank, Washington, DC. 165-191.

Dorfman, P.W. and Howell, J.P. (1988), Dimensions of national culture and effective leadership patterns: Hofstede revisited, Advances in International Comparative Management 3, 127-150.

Goldstein A., Bonaglia F. and Mathews J. (2006), Accelerated internationalization by emerging multinationals: The case of white goods,
Working paper, retrieved on October 12th, 2009 from http://dea2.univpm.it/quaderni/pdf/270.pdf.

Guillen M.F. and Garcia-Canal E. (2009), The American model of the multinational firm and the “new” multinationals from emerging economies, Academy of Management Perspectives 23 (2), 23-35.

Goldstein, A. (2007). Multinational companies from emerging economies. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hofstede, G. (1984), Cultural dimensions in management and planning, Asia Pacific Journal of Management 1, 81-99.

Kerr, C., Dunlop, J. T., Harbison, F., and Myers, C. A. (1960). Industrialism and industrial man: The problems of labour and the management of economic growth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Li, P. P. (2003). Toward a geocentric theory of multinational evolution: The implications from the Asian MNEs as latecomers. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 22(2), 217–242.

Li J. and Kozhikode R. K. (2008), Knowledge management and innovation strategy: The challenge for latecomers in emerging economies, Asia Pacific Journal of Management 25, 429–450.

Locke, R., Piore, M., and Kochan, T. (1995). Introduction. In R. Locke, T. Kochan, and M. Piore (Eds.), Employment relations in a changing world economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Mathews, J. A. (2002). Dragon multinationals: A new model of global growth. New York: Oxford University Press.

Meindl, J.R. and Ehrlich, S.B. (1987). The romance of leadership and the evaluation of organization performance. Academy of Management Journal, 30 (9), 91 - 109.

Meindl, J.R., Ehrlich, S.B. and Dukerich, J,M. (1985). The romance of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30, 78-102.

Marsden, D. (1991). Indigenous management. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2(1), 21–38.

Radhakrishnan, R. (1994). Postmodernism and the rest of the world. Organization, 1: 305–340.

Ramamurti R. and Singh J. V. (2009), Emerging multinationals in emerging markets, Cambridge University Press; 1 edition.

Wells, L. T. (1983). Third world multinationals: The rise of foreign investment from developing countries. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.