A new Zeitgeist for international business activity and ... - InderScience

More documents

Recommendations

Info

A new Zeitgeist for international business activity and scholarship 299 Solow, R.M. (1985) ‘Economic history and economics’, American Economic Review, Vol. 75, No. 2, pp.328–331. Stiglitz, J.E. (2002) Globalization and its Discontents, Allen Lane, London. Sullivan, D.P. and Daniels, J.D. (2005) ‘Defining international business through its research’, in Buckley, P. (Ed.): What it International Business?, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp.68–84. Sullivan, D.P. and Daniels, J.D. (2007) ‘International business studies: episodic or evolutionary?’, in Dunning, J.H. and Lin, T-M. (Eds.): Multinational Enterprises and Emerging Challenges of the 21st Century, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK. Toyne, B. and Nigh, D. (1997) International Business: An Emerging Vision, University of South Carolina Press, Columbia SC. UNCTAD (2006) World Investment Report: FDI from Developing and Transition Economies. Implications for Development, UN, New York and Geneva. Williamson, O. (2000) ‘The new institutional economics: taking stock looking ahead’, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. XXXVIII, September, pp.595–613. Xu, D. and Shenkar, O. (2002) ‘Institutional distance and the multinational enterprise’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp.608–618. Notes 1 A good deal of the contents and recommendations of this paper is also applicable to international management although it is primarily concerned with some of the broader issues of, and challenges posed by IB activity. 2 And, indeed, IM scholarship. 3 A theme explored at some length by Levy et al. (2007), in their attempts to identify the constructs underpinning the concept and practice, of a global mindset. After a useful review of the cultural, strategic and multinational aspects of the global mindset of managers they go on to present an integrative theoretical framework which embraces both its cognitive complexity and the cosmopolitan attributes. 4 In his recent book, North (2005) refers to a non-ergodic world in which the future cannot be predicted on the probability that past events may reoccur. He goes on to assert that the fundamental assumptions and methodology of neoclassical economics rests on the validity of the ergodic hypothesis – as, indeed, do those of the physical and biological science. In this paper we shall eschew this particular language and instead refer to unforeseeable or unpredictable future events. 5 In short, this hypothesises that the amount, form or geography of the foreign value-added activities of firms will be dependent on (a) the extent and quality of the competitive or ownership (O) advantages, (b) the relative location (L) attractions of particular countries in which they are contemplating an FDI and (c) the extent to which they find it desirable to access or exploit their O advantages themselves rather than sell the right to do so to other firms (their I advantages). 6 Although not included in Table 4, the influences of supranational entities, e.g., the European Union, NAFTA, the World Bank, the UN and a host of private interest organisations (e.g., NGOs) on the content and exploitation of resources, capabilities and markets by particular firms and countries can be considerable and extensive. The World Bank and IFC, for example, are both major suppliers of finance for developing countries. 7 To these authors the management of globalisation and the changing human environment is an entrepreneurial challenge, the success of which is dependent on vision, will and daring as much as on carefully crafted strategy. 8 Such as Peter Buckley and Mark Casson, Jean Francois Hennart and Alan Rugman. 9 It is interesting that Coase entitled his Nobel Laureate Lecture in 1991 The Institutional Structure of Production (Coase, 1992).
300 J.H. Dunning 10 See, for example, Grosse and Trevino (2005) and several essays in Grosse (2005), Jensen (2006) and Dunning and Lin (2007). 11 The implicit incorporation of institutions into the resource based theory of the firm is a case in point. 12 This thrust for a new research agenda which embraces the volatility and complexity of the IB environment was also recommended by Buckley and Casson (2003) and Safarian (2003). 13 An attempt to do just this is contained in a number of visionary and all encompassing papers by Howard Perlmutter, the main contents of which are summarised, and are worthy of serious consideration, in Perlmutter (2007). Bibliography Arrow, K. (1951) ‘Alternative approaches to the theory of choice in risk-taking situations’, Econometrica, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp.404–437. Deligonul, S.Z., Cavusgil, S.T. and Hult, G.T.M. (2006) Emerging Frontiers in International Business Research and Theory, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. Donaldson, T. (1996) ‘Values in tension: ethics away from home’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 48, No. 62, September–October, pp.48–67. Dunning, J.H. (Ed.) (2003) Making Globalization Good, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Glaeser, E.L., La Porta, R., Lopez-de Silanes, F. and Shleifer, A. (2004) Do Institutions Cause Growth?, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 10568, Cambridge, MA. Jansson, H. (2006) International Business Strategy in Emerging Country Markets, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK. Kasper, W. (2002) ‘Rapid growth, institutional evolution and corporate governance in Asia’, Paper presented at Annual Meeting of Asian Development Bank: Forum on Corporate Governance in Asia, May. Kasper, W. and Streit, M.E. (1998) Institutional Economics: Social Order and Public Policy, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK. Kogut, B. (1993) ‘Learning or the importance of being inert: country imprinting and international competition’, in Ghoshal, S. and Westney, E. (Eds.): Organization Theory and the Multinational Corporation, Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp.53–77. Lodge, G. and Wilson, C. (2006) A Corporate Solution to Global Poverty, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Mudambi, R. and Navarra, P. (2002) ‘Institutions and international business: a theoretical overview’, International Business Review, Vol. 11, pp.635–646. Pauly, L.W. and Reich, S. (1997) ‘National structures and multinational corporate behaviour: enduring differences in age of globalization’, International Organization, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp.1–30. Peng, M.W., Lee, S-H. and Wang, D.Y.L. (2005) ‘What determines the scope of the firm over time? A focus on institutional relatedness’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp.622–633. Porter, M.E. (2000) ‘Attitudes, values, beliefs and the microeconomics of prosperity’, in Harrison, L.E. and Huntington, S.P. (Eds.): Culture Matters, Basic Books, New York, pp.14–28. Redding, G. (2005) ‘The thick description and comparison of societal systems of capitalism’, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp.123–155. Roll, R. and Talbot, J.R. (2001) Why Many Developing Countries Just Aren’t, Anderson School Working Paper, University of California, Los Angeles.
Page 1 and 2: 278 European J. International Manag
Page 3 and 4: 280 J.H. Dunning • We live in a w
Page 5 and 6: 282 J.H. Dunning • Health matters
Page 7 and 8: 284 J.H. Dunning not only have thes
Page 9 and 10: 286 J.H. Dunning Table 2 The human
Page 11 and 12: 288 J.H. Dunning Table 3 Recent cha
Page 13 and 14: 290 J.H. Dunning influence the acce
Page 15 and 16: 292 J.H. Dunning Accepting the meri
Page 17 and 18: 294 J.H. Dunning • An acceptance
Page 19 and 20: 296 J.H. Dunning 8 Conclusions In c
Page 21: 298 J.H. Dunning Grosse, R. and Tre

A new Zeitgeist for international business activity and ... - InderScience

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?