Search results

Most years, several AIB members are elected as AIB Fellows on account of their excellent international business scholarship, and/or past service as AIB President or Executive Secretary. The Fellows are in charge of electing Eminent Scholars as well as the International Executive and International Educator (formerly, Dean) of the Year, who often provide the focus for Plenary Sessions at AIB Conferences. Their history since 1975 covers over half of the span of the AIB and reflects many issues that dominated that period in terms of research themes, progresses and problems, the internationalization of business education and the role of international business in society and around the globe. Like other organizations, the Fellows Group had their ups and downs, successes and failures – and some fun too!

The Fellows of the Academy of International Business provide the institutional memory for the Academy of International Business. Through their awards in recognition of practitioners who have made outstanding contributions to the practice of international business, of scholars who have produced pioneering social-science studies that provide new research perspectives for scholars of international business, and of Business-School Deans who have built outstanding academic programs in international business, the AIB Fellows also help to legitimize the field of international business. Among its members, it counts the founders of the field of international business as well as an increasing number of senior scholars whose research has helped to build international business as an acknowledged and renowned academic field of study.

This study aims to discuss an argument that the social value creation of multinational enterprises (MNEs), beyond creating economic value for the shareholders, could be the next “big question” for international business (IB) research. The authors also provide examples of promising research topics associated with this research agenda.

The paper is conceptual.

Although a new paradigmatic question for IB in terms of social value creation would lead IB outside familiar territory in terms of the previous focus on financial performance, IB scholars are well equipped to take on this broader question. IB scholars arguably have their key strengths in understanding the inner workings of firms, as well as in understanding the role of context for business. Moreover, to the extent that this new agenda requires IB scholars to acquire new capabilities and form new partnerships with relevant disciplines, this could contribute to revitalising the IB field. As illustrated by the suggested topics, such an agenda could both increase the relevance of IB research and contribute to theory development.

The paper is amongst the first to explore the notion that a broader view of the outcome of MNE activities, beyond MNEs’ own financial outcomes, should be a key goal of future IB research.

This chapter complements the one that appeared as “History of the AIB Fellows: 1975–2008” in Volume 14 of this series (International Business Scholarship: AIB Fellows on the First 50 Years and Beyond, Jean J. Boddewyn, Editor). It traces what happened under the deanship of Alan Rugman (2011–2014) who took many initiatives reported here while his death in July 2014 generated trenchant, funny, and loving comments from more than half of the AIB Fellows. The lives and contributions of many other major international business scholars who passed away from 2008 to 2014 are also evoked here: Endel Kolde, Lee Nehrt, Howard Perlmutter, Stefan Robock, John Ryans, Vern Terpstra, and Daniel Van Den Bulcke.

John Dunning introduced the OLI (Ownership‐Location‐Internalization) paradigm 37 years ago to explain the origin, level, pattern, and growth of MNEs’ offshore activities. Over the years, OLI has developed into perhaps the dominant paradigm in international business (IB) studies. However, the costs of being a paradigm are reflected in Dunning’s efforts to include an ever‐expanding array of IB theories and phenomena under the OLI “big tent.” In this paper, we focus specifically on the O in the OLI paradigm, tracing the history of Dunning’s ownership advantages. We argue that the modifications of O advantages over the past 37 years, as Dunning attempted to bring all IB phenomena and IB‐related theories under the OLI “big tent,” has had mixed results. However, we continue to believe that the typology of ownership advantages retains its relevance for IB scholars; that O advantages cannot and should not be subsumed within internalization advantages; and that O advantages are necessary for explaining the existence and success of the MNE as an organizational form

Purpose — We investigate the contribution of international business as a distinct academic area whose domain spans comparative and cross-border environments and institutions and the business behaviour of their major players.

Methodology/approach — We investigate knowledge flows into and from international business, using cross-citations between the Journal of International Business Studies (JIBS) and leading management journals over a 13-year period.

Findings — We find JIBS to be a net importer, especially of strategy; however, in the most recent period, the journal has become a net knowledge exporter. Despite the improvement over time in JIBS' network position, international research published in JIBS appears to have less impact on management knowledge than management outlets have on international business research.

Practical implications — Findings confirm that international business is at a crossroads and international business scholars would do well to capitalise on global presence, by expanding into areas of growth and developing integration and cross-fertilisation capabilities. Specifically, international business should build on its comparative advantages to develop theory that is useful to scholars in other areas through multidisciplinary research.

Originality/value of chapter — This study is a pioneering attempt to extensively review and conduct an aggregate analysis of all papers in a range of journals in order to identify the narratives that comprise the field of international business.

International business as a field values perspectives from various contexts, but scholars from emerging markets face a number of often-unseen challenges preventing them from fully contributing to the field. This study aims to explain those challenges and what the author has done to manage them.

This is a Reflexive piece in which the author makes sense of her own experience as a scholar not only of but also in an emerging market, as well as the experiences at her school in seeking to develop a high-quality doctoral program.

When leading scholars interact, whether in writing or in person, they tend to be in academically and otherwise well-resourced locations. This is true even for the leading international business scholars of emerging markets, and it imposes time and financial costs on scholars located in emerging markets wanting to participate in such conversations. Having experienced such challenges, the author worked with colleagues to design a doctoral program that could nurture rich scholarly conversations at the school. However, there remains a clear and pervasive tension between the inclusive aspirations of the field and the tendency for cutting-edge academic conversations to be concentrated in the developed world.

The experiences of emerging market scholars remain underrepresented in the field. By drawing on her own experience, both as a scholar and the head of the doctoral program at her school, the author provides suggestions for how to think about and develop a more inclusive scholarly conversation.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse international business (IB) scholarship and present current gaps and new realities to enhance scholarly discourse.

The paper divides the scholarship into three distinct sections. First, it interrogates the changing definitions of the field from the 1880s to date. Secondly, IB paradigms are cross-examined while highlighting the understudied emerging interaction paradigm. Lastly, literature gaps, methodological gaps and new realities in IB are presented.

This research shows that IB inquiry has concentrated on firm-level paradigms, leaving the emerging interaction paradigm understudied. As a result, there is a deficit of novel ideas and limited research on critical emerging issues affecting IB. Further, simplistic methodologies are prevalent, making IB scholarship weak. Additionally, a majority of studies concentrate on the Americas, Europe and Asia, leaving Africa understudied.

This research augments the need for scholars to cross-examine the best approach to apply in IB discourse and presents gaps calling for new insights and future research directions.

Before joining the faculty of the Eli Broad College of Business in 1990, Myron had 35 years as what some might call a “practioner” in business (interrupted for two years to serve in U.S. Army Counterintelligence, itself a great learning experience). Over those years, he had a wide array of experience that gave him a broad base of knowledge in international business.

I am proud to be joining the many colleagues who appear in this volume, many younger but some more experienced in the marketing and the international business disciplines, honoring S. Tamer Cavusgil's retirement from Michigan State University. I am proud for many reasons, but mainly because throughout the years I have observed how Tamer's contributions to our professional and personal lives have shaped our growth as a fraternity of business scholars and teachers. I feel very fortunate to have grown as Tamer's colleague through the many papers we have published, the many doctoral students we have mentored, and the many service contributions we have made to the international business field during the past 30 years. I feel luckier, however, that I have come to know this remarkable person as a friend.