Search results

The purpose of this paper is to determine if high versus low ethnocentric consumers differ in their attitudes toward buying domestic and foreign brands of underwear that are made domestically or in foreign countries.

Australian residents recruited through a mall intercept participated in this study through a self‐completed questionnaire. Fishbein's Multi‐Attribute model was used as the measure, along with repeated‐measures ANOVA and t‐tests, to examine whether the groups differed in their attitudes toward buying underwear with “Made in Australia”, “Made in the USA”, and “Made in China” labels.

The findings generally indicated that there is no significant difference between high and low ethnocentric consumers in attitude towards underwear that are made in Australia and the USA. On the other hand, high ethnocentric consumers viewed domestically made and branded underwear as more durable, easier to care for, better priced, more colourful, more attractive, more fashionable, of stronger brand name, more appropriate for occasions, and more choices of styles. Domestically‐made but foreign‐branded underwear is viewed as easier to care for and better priced.

The study suggests that China should improve its country image as compared to such developed nations as Australia and the USA in terms of production and manufacturing standards. The study also purports that American underwear brands with strong presence in the global fashion world that have not already established operation in Australia can consider entering the market.

The paper fills the gap in the ethnocentrism literature by validating the study in Australia and focusing on the attitudes of high ethnocentric (and low ethnocentric) consumers. It also examines underwear, which is a common product category in apparels but inherently deficient in the literature.

The purpose of this paper is to propose an alternative perspective on Zhong-Yong that is different from the notion of “Yin-Yang balancing” and apply it to understand the issue of balancing the top-down and bottom-up processes in strategy making.

The authors adopt a “West meets East” mindset and approach to develop an alternative perspective on Zhong-Yong, and then apply this perspective to understand the issue of balancing the top-down and bottom-up processes in strategy making. There are three steps in the process of developing the alternative perspective. First, the authors argue that the essence of “Yin-Yang balancing” is a ratio-based solution to paradoxical balancing, which is in fact equivalent to Aristotle’s doctrine of the mean and compatible with some western management scholars’ approaches to solving paradox. Second, the authors identify a different generic solution to paradoxical balancing implicit in the western management literature. Third, the authors find in the original text of Zhong-Yong equivalent ideas to the identified different generic solution and then propose an alternative perspective on Zhong-Yong that is fundamentally different from the notion of “Yin-Yang balancing.”

Applied to the issue of balancing the top-down and bottom-up processes in strategy making, the new perspective on Zhong-Yong provides us with the following prescriptive insights from the life-wisdom of eastern philosophy: first, top management (e.g. Shun as the sage-king) must listen to various views and opinions also from employees and low-level managers at the bottom of the organization to be better informed about complex issues. Second, top management must analyze the diverse elements of the various views and opinions they collect and synthesize by taking the good from the bad to find smarter solutions and make decisions with better outcomes. Third, abiding by a set of (more or less) cohesive values help top managers be open and receptive to information and insights from low-level organizational members and enhancing unbiased information.

This paper is mainly a theoretical perspective. Empirical work is needed to test the prescriptions offered in this paper.

Practitioners may learn new perspectives from ancient Chinese philosophies on how to balance.

This paper applies a new perspective on Zhong-Yong to an important paradox in strategic management.

Although Asia's rise in the global economy is increasingly recognized, international business (IB) interactions between Japan and India remain under-commented. These interactions are especially salient due to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 17 (UN SDG 17), which focuses on partnerships. This study updates and analyzes the strategic orientation of Japanese multinational enterprises (MNEs) in India.

Following a subjectivist approach, this study employs a constructivist epistemology. Utilizing mixed methods, it obtains primary data from interviews and informal conversations with senior personnel from Japan and India and secondary data from archives. These data then undergo manual organic thematic analysis.

The study reveals instances of Japanese MNEs diverging from traditional ethnocentric orientations, such as senior management's growing commitment to India. The findings also indicate that the transformation to a polycentric orientation remains incomplete.

The study uncovers themes impeding a polycentric transformation, offering insights for strengthening international partnerships and emphasizing the necessity of prioritizing local demands and cultural expectations.

Clues to strengthening IB contribute to attain UN SDG 17, especially given the advanced-emerging characteristics of the Japan–India dyad.

This study’s research makes a novel contribution to the literature on international strategic orientations by providing insights into a rare dyad – namely, Japanese MNE expansion in India. It is also a valuable and timely addition consistent with current beyond-China business diversification trends.

This chapter describes a theory of intergroup leadership. Research on reducing prejudice and intergroup conflict identifies a number of conditions, such as empathy, shared goals, crossed categorization, recategorization, and intergroup contact, which can be beneficial. It also identifies social identity threat as a stumbling block – processes intended to reduce conflict often threaten people’s sense of having a unique and distinctive social identity and thus provoke a defensive reaction that sustains conflict. But social psychology says little about the role of group leadership in conflict resolution.

I summarize what we know from social psychology about conditions that attenuate intergroup conflict; then focus on social identity and influence processes to present a new theory of leadership across conflicting groups.

Prejudice and intergroup conflict reduction rests on effective messaging and influence, which is often a matter of intergroup leadership where a leader must bridge and integrate warring factions within a superordinate entity. The challenge of intergroup leadership is to construct an intergroup relational identity that focuses on collaboration and avoids identity threat. I describe a model of intergroup leadership and discuss strategies, such as identity rhetoric, boundary spanning and leadership coalition-building, that such leadership should adopt to effectively reconstruct social identity to reduce conflict and prejudice between groups.

This is a development and extension of a more narrowly focused theory of intergroup leadership in organizational contexts. It will be of value to social psychology, the behavioral and social sciences, and those seeking to reduce prejudice and intergroup conflict through leadership.