Search results

Does the mobility of engineers facilitate international knowledge spillovers and help newly industrializing countries catch up with developed countries? This study attempts to answer this question by tracing knowledge flows through the international mobility of semiconductor engineers. The paper uses patent data to track the mobility paths of engineers to examine whether knowledge flows occurred more than expected. The study finds that engineers who moved from the U.S. to Korea or Taiwan built their subsequent innovations based upon the knowledge of their previous firms in the U.S. Case studies based on field interviews further suggest that these mobile engineers have played significant roles in the technological catching-up of Korea and Taiwan.

The purpose of this paper is to explore organizational factors that affect the transfer of subsidiary knowledge to both parent companies and peer subsidiaries.

The hypotheses are tested using multivariate regression, based on a survey of 81 foreign subsidiaries in South Korea.

The findings show that organizational factors that affect the transfer of subsidiary knowledge differ according to whether the recipient is the parent or the peer subsidiary. Subsidiary‐to‐parent knowledge flow is facilitated by establishing efficient formal mechanisms such as an expatriation policy, a subsidiary performance evaluation system, etc., whereas knowledge transfer to peer subsidiaries is enhanced by the length of a subsidiary's operation period and the frequency of its managers' communications with other managers in peer subsidiaries.

This analysis suggests that managers of multinational companies should apply different approaches in managing these two distinct knowledge flow patterns in the MNC network.

This study offers new insights into the challenges of global learning by highlighting the difficulty of transferring subsidiary knowledge to peer subsidiaries through formal organizational apparatuses.

Based on fifteen years of data on the annual Academy of International Business (AIB) best dissertation Farmer Award finalists, we find that these dissertations were done at a range of North American universities. Interestingly, dissertation topics differed from the topics covered in the three top IB journals with five‐sixths of the topics in management, organization, economics, or finance and two‐thirds set in a single country or region (U.S., Japan, North America, and Western Europe). Survey research is the most common methodology but analysis of secondary data is growing. As expected, the finalists are on average an extraordinarily prolific group.

The purpose of this paper is to examine if global and situational support for police use of force vary across first-generation immigrants, second-generation immigrants and native-born Americans.

Drawing on data from the 2012 General Social Survey, multivariate logistic regression models are performed to predict each of the three binary outcome variables (e.g. support for police use of reasonable force or excessive force) depending on immigrant generation status.

Results indicate that, compared with native-born individuals, first-generation immigrants express less global support for police use of force and less support for police use of reasonable force. In contrast, the first-generation group is more supportive of police use of excessive force compared to the second-generation group and native-born group.

Much research on immigrants’ perceptions of the police has yielded conflicting findings. Part of the reason has been attributed to failure to distinguish first-generation immigrants from successive generations of immigrants. The present study fills a gap in this line of research by assessing the extent to which there is a disparity in support for police use of force between different generations of immigrants and native-born individuals.

Previous scholars have assumed that multinational enterprises (MNEs) can reduce the liability of foreignness and increase profitability by investing in corporate social responsibility (CSR). However, empirical validation of this assumption has rarely been attempted. This study aims to provide empirical evidence that the adoption of multi-stakeholder initiatives, which are globally recognized as signals of CSR, helps MNEs increase profits from internationalization.

Fixed effect models, which address model misspecification problems, and instrumental variable estimation, which controls for the endogeneity in firms’ choice of internationalization, offer empirical evidence supporting the moderating effects of global multi-stakeholder initiatives on the relationship between internationalization and firm performance.

This study examines the moderating role of multi-stakeholder initiatives in the relationship between internationalization and firm performance, drawing on signaling and stakeholder theories. The results suggest that the signaling effect of multi-stakeholder initiatives can help MNEs overcome the liability of foreignness and, therefore, profit from overseas markets.

Although the internationalization–firm performance relationship has been a subject of debate in the field of international business, the role of firms’ stakeholder engagement in this relationship has been largely overlooked in previous studies. In this study, the authors explore the impact of multi-stakeholder initiatives on the internationalization–firm performance relationship. Our primary contention is that multi-stakeholder initiatives have moderating effects on this relationship by reducing the liability of foreignness experienced by MNEs in host countries. Furthermore, the findings suggest that active engagement in multi-stakeholder initiatives significantly contributes to the financial success of MNEs as they internationalize.