Search results

Here we consider the various ways in which airlines integrate their business activities. The thin markets, long distances, poor infrastructure, and challenging terrain over which many airlines based in developing countries operate can make it difficult to reap the economies of scale, scope, and density that carriers in more developed nations enjoy. There also remain institutional barriers to cross border trade in airline services. As a response to this, airlines from developing regions “cooperate” in a number of ways. This may involve multinational ownership, code sharing, or joint ventures. The rationale for these actions, together with discussion of the outcomes of some of them, is considered here.

Why is it that, despite repeated claims that digital-content firms and internet-based businesses can internationalize everywhere almost instantly, many seem unable to profitably expand outside their home markets? Why have emerging market firms (EMNEs) caught up with established developed-country multinationals (DMNEs) so much faster than expected? In this chapter, the author argues that the clue to these two puzzles lies in the realization that, contrary to the dominant view in the international business (IB) literature that focuses only on the intangibles exploited by DMNEs and assumes that these firms are free to unilaterally decide on their mode of entry and operation, doing business in a foreign country is only possible if intangibles are bundled with complementary local resources, usually held by local firms. Taking into account these complementary local resources and their owners makes it clear that DMNEs are not always free to choose their entry mode but must enlist the cooperation of local resource owners. The need of digital-content and internet-based firms for local complementary resources also explains why they sometimes experience problems when expanding abroad. Lastly, control of complementary local resources provides EMNEs with a home advantage against DMNEs competing with them in their home market. The author shows how EMNEs can capitalize on this advantage to obtain the intangibles they lack and need. The fact that these advantages are available on efficient global markets, while complementary local resources are not, explains the surprising speed of EMNE catch-up.

“First principles” of international business (IB) thinking should be applied systematically when assessing the functioning of internationally operating firms. The most important first principle is that entrepreneurially oriented firms seek to create, deliver and capture economic value through cross-border linkages. Such linkages invariably require complementary resources from a variety of parties with idiosyncratic vulnerabilities to be meshed. Starting from first principles allows bringing to light evidence-based insight. For instance, most companies are not global and even the world’s largest firms rarely change the location of key strategic functions. International new ventures (INVs), emerging economy multinational enterprises (MNEs) and family firms face unique vulnerabilities but also command resources that can be used to create value across borders. The quest for “optimal” international diversification appears to be a futile academic exercise, and in emerging economies with institutional voids, relational networks – and more broadly, informal institutions – are unlikely to function as scalable substitutes for formal institutions. In global value chains (GVCs), many lead firms and their partners have been able to craft governance mechanisms that reduce bounded rationality and bounded reliability challenges, and it is also critical for them to use governance as a tool to create entrepreneurial space. Finally, many of the world’s largest companies have been on successful trajectories toward reducing their climate change footprint for a few decades. But these firm-specific trajectories are fraught with challenges and cannot just be imposed via unilateral, macro-level targets decided upon by individuals and institutions lacking a clear understanding of innovation and capital expenditure processes in business.

This chapter focuses on the relationship between biotechnology start-ups and larger pharmaceutical corporations when they work as partners in innovation strategic alliances. For three decades, these companies have become major players in innovation in the health sector. This means that the development of many products is a result of the cooperation they carry out. However, due to the great differences between these companies, certain problems can often arise. More specifically, our analysis explores the perceptions of the achievement expected by each partner. This is an important aspect to determine the satisfaction of these firms among strategic alliance. The authors follow qualitative methods to address the topic, conducting personal interviews with managers of these companies. Our findings reveal the concrete facts that can prevent reaching the proposed goals of these partners as well as stress the crucial importance of the human aspect to mitigate potential problems.

In recent years, both academics and institutions have acknowledged the crucial role multinational enterprises (MNEs) can play in addressing the sustainability challenges, as formalized by the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Nevertheless, because of their extensiveness and their design as country-level targets, SDGs have proven challenging to operationalize at a firm level. This problem opens new and relevant avenues for research in international business (IB). This chapter attempts to frame the topic of extended value chain sustainability in the IB literature. In particular, it addresses a specific topic, that is, how sustainability and resilience-building practices interact in global value chains (GVCs). To do so, the present study develops the case of STMicroelectronics (ST), one of the biggest semiconductor companies worldwide.

The competitiveness of companies and their capacity to join markets have changed as a result of the digital economy. One of the reasons the European Commission will revise the rules governing block exemptions for R&D agreements and begin consulting stakeholders in March 2022 is the impact of digitalisation on markets. This chapter looks into how digitalisation has impacted the competitive analysis and evaluation that Moldovan businesses and the competition authority must conduct when looking at R&D collaborations.

For the purposes of the research in this chapter, we used methods such as analysis, deduction, induction, and synthesis of conceptual approaches to the digitalization of the competitive assessment, to elucidate the factors influencing competitiveness in R&D agreements. We also assessed the situation in the Republic of Moldova to formulate conclusions and own opinions about how the introduction of new processes and products on the market will stimulate competition among national firms and will strengthen their ability to compete in regional or even international markets. The recommendations and proposals for improving the management of competence to encourage businesses to innovate collaborate and exchange knowledge to produce innovative goods and services, including green economy solutions and initiatives with the security to comply with a competition policy adapted to the requirements of the new economy, as well as to the new changes in the European competition policy.

The objective of this chapter is to identify the key characteristics of Global Services businesses that will thrive and achieve success in the future. These factors are integrated into three main pillars, which we refer to as the Triple-Win. The first and most obvious pillar is technology as a tool. The second pillar is the design and sustainability of the business model, without which the previous factor would be merely a cost and not an investment. And last but not the least, there is the purpose which gives meaning to the proposal, focusing on the human being and their environment. The DIDPAGA business model sits at the intersection of these three elements.