Search results

The literature on foreignness has, to date, stressed the liability of foreignness (LOF) and the advantage of foreignness (AOF). Drawing on industrial organisation theory, institutional theory, the resource-based view of the firm and the literature on networking, the authors’ research develops an integrated framework to explore the impact of foreignness on internationalisation depth from the perspective of the duality of foreignness (LOF versus AOF) within multiple dimensions. These dimensions are isomorphism, home country of origin, institutional distance and dual embeddedness of multinational enterprises (MNEs).

In this study, the authors empirically test hypotheses arising from this new theoretical framework by examining the characteristics of a sample of 324 Chinese MNEs (CMNEs) that were operating in 63 countries from 1999 to 2018. Employing regression analysis on a panel of 9,410 observations, the results show that foreignness does exhibit multilevel complexity and duality.

The authors’ empirical results show that isomorphism pressures, country of origin and institutional distance have a negative effect on internationalisation depth (as an outcome of LOF) but that dual embeddedness, on the part of MNEs, exerts a positive impact on internationalisation depth (as an outcome of AOF). The implications for research on multilevel complexity and the duality of foreignness are discussed, and managerial implications are outlined.

The implications of the authors’ findings for MNEs should not be generalised to developed countries without examining the characteristics of both China as an emerging country and its MNEs. The second limit is regarding ownership; this framework has limitations due to choosing China and its OFDIs for testing internationalisation depth. Finally, for subsequent research, examining the dynamics of foreignness completes the nature of multicomplexity, defined by external and internal factors of foreignness changing over time and space.

CMNE managers are advised to actively scrutinise their behaviours in the local country to overcome the differences in routines, values and practices inherent in local institutions (Chen et al., 2019). The results imply that CMNEs should be careful not to overuse their home country image when penetrating a new market. Thus, a strategy to reduce a home government's hegemonic or otherwise negative image may be wise when operating abroad. Finally, the authors’ model suggests that CMNEs equipped with great RCN CIPs for identifying, scanning and interpreting local institutions can enhance internationalisation depth.

The authors’ research contributes to research on foreignness by emphasising foreignness as a construct of multilevel complexity. The authors argue that foreignness arises due to varying factors at the host, home, host-home levels and at the level of the organisational entity. The authors’ definition of foreignness and empirical results supports the notion that isomorphism pressures (host country-level factors), country-of-origin of home country (home country-level factors) and institutional distance (host-home country-level factors) are inextricably negatively linked with internationalisation depth (as effects of LOF). By contrast, the dual embeddedness of MNEs (the factor of organisational level) represents a positive relationship with internationalisation depth (as effects of AOF).

Introducing the concepts of equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI), the chapter provides an overview of frameworks and approaches used to manage workforce diversity. First, the authors introduce the notion of the old deal based on the uneven relationship between human diversity, nature, and technological innovation. The chapter then explores the new deal between humans, nature, and technology. The authors are providing cases from the EU, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Iceland to show the emergence of the new deal in managing diversity.

Despite a large volume of theoretical and empirical research, defining the ‘entrepreneur’ and ‘entrepreneurship’ within the cultural and creative sector, a sector with high heterogeneity in organisational and other aspects across its various segments remains challenging. In this regard, there should be a wide variety of differences in the characteristics and challenges of cultural entrepreneurs across industries, countries and regions. Nonetheless, the key role of the arts and cultural sector has increasingly piqued the interest of policymakers and the private sector, and it has been recognised for its importance within the South African economic landscape; as a result, the government has prioritised arts and culture as a pillar in their development strategies. Furthermore, while there has been some consensus over the past decade on what constitutes a creative industry, many questions about defining arts and cultural entrepreneurship still need to be answered, necessitating further definitional and policy coherence. As a result, some efforts at definitions are required to advance the sector and develop useful knowledge in policy formulation.

This chapter proposes an understanding of arts and cultural entrepreneurship as an exploration of a person, a community or a network's artistic resources (arts, creative and cultural) in value creation. It utilises meta-analysis, a non-empirical method, to review and analyse the existing literature. Further research is needed to investigate and evaluate the efficacy of established arts incubators, and the extent to which perceived entrepreneurial competencies affect organisational performance. Moreover, additional research is required to examine the entrepreneurial factors inhibiting or stimulating the influence on start-up financing (capital acquisition) in the South African arts and cultural industry.

Central to the fit concept is that congruence between individual and environmental attributes leads to improved outcomes. However, when discussing fit, researchers often describe congruence as alignment between distinctive or unique individual and environmental attributes. We suggest that current approaches to examining fit do not adequately account for this assumption of distinctiveness because they fail to consider normative expectations and preferences. As such, we propose an alternative theoretical and methodological approach to conceptualizing and measuring fit.

We introduce the normative theory of fit, outline how researchers can decompose fit into distinctive and normative components and identify areas for future research.

Management researchers have largely ignored the importance of decomposing fit into distinctive and normative components. This shortcoming necessitates additional research to ensure a more accurate understanding of fit and its relationship with outcomes.

We provide a clarification and critical examination of a pervasive construct in the field of management by introducing the normative theory of fit, identifying areas where researchers can employ this theoretical lens and suggesting a reevaluation of the importance placed on differentiation that is traditionally employed in practice.