Search results

Open access publishing is an increasingly popular trend in the dissemination of academic work, allowing journals to print articles electronically and without the burden of subscription paywalls, enabling much wider access for audiences. Yet subscription-based journals remain the most dominant in the social sciences and humanities, and it is often a struggle for newer open access publications to compete, in terms of economic, cultural, and symbolic capital (Bourdieu, 2004). Our study explores the meanings of resistance held by the editors of open access journals in the social sciences and humanities in Canada, as well as the views of university librarians. To make sense of these meanings, we draw on Lonnie Athens’ (2015) radical interactionist account of power, and expand on this by incorporating George Herbert Mead’s (1932, 1938) theory of emergence, arguing that open access is characteristic of an “extended rationality” (Chang, 2004) for those involved. Drawing on our open-ended interview data, we find that open access is experienced as a form of resistance in at least four ways. These include resistance to (1) profit motives in academic publishing; (2) access barriers for audiences; (3) access barriers for contributors; and (4) traditional publishing conventions.

This study examines the effect of host government interference with foreign investors’ assets on foreign direct investment (FDI) inflow. The author hypothesizes that the relationship between host government interference and FDI inflow takes the form of an inverted U shape. The author tests this hypothesis using data from the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes between 1996 and 2017. The results support the above hypothesis. While host government interference with the assets of a few foreign investors may not deter FDI inflow, frequent interferences, which result in an increasing number of host state–foreign investor disputes, reduces FDI inflow in a host country. The analysis also shows that when faced with an increasing host country uncertainty, investors adopt a wait and see strategy. However, how long investors wait depends on the economic situation of the host country. For high-income countries, investors wait until approximately 10 disputes before reducing investments level in a host country, while for low-income countries, this waiting period is a mere two disputes. The findings of this study suggest that countries seeking to attract more FDI should not interfere with the activities of foreign investors, however, if they do, disputes should be settled at home, not in international arbitration courts, because doing so frequently may poison the host environment and deter other foreign investors from investing in the host country.

This research seeks to understand the drivers of outward foreign direct investments (FDIs) by state-owned emerging economy firms, the characteristics of their overseas FDI projects and investment locations, and the effects of home and host institutions on the market entry strategies, taking into account the legitimacy of state ownership.

The discussion is based on a comprehensive review of conceptual and empirical literature, as well as case studies available from recognized journals in the field.

State-owned emerging economy firms pursue outward FDIs to respond to policy incentives of the home government and to reduce its political influence over the firm. FDI projects are often large and risky and have low business values. They often enter countries where state ownership is perceived as more legitimate while engaging in legitimacy-building activities in these countries. When their home country has a high level of institutional restrictions, they are less likely to use acquisitions or hold high levels of equity control in foreign subsidiaries. To strengthen local legitimacy, they often use greenfield investments or share equity control with local firms in foreign subsidiaries, particularly when the host country is endowed with strategic assets or when it has a high level of institutional restrictions. However, when having high levels of state ownership or strong political connections, they often commit a high level of resources and hold a high level of equity control in foreign subsidiaries.

The literature mostly investigates the FDI of firms that are structurally separate from the institutions. When the institutions are endogenous as presented in this research, their strategic choices are substantially influenced by noncommercial political motives and perception on their political image.

Multidimensional fit (MDF) has been coined as “elusive” and relevant to an individual’s social identity and self-concept, unfolding over time as individuals assess their fit relative to Person-Organization, Person-Vocation, Person-Job, and Person-Team Fit. In this chapter, the literature as it relates to the refugee employment journey, MDF, and HRM practices that facilitate or inhibit MDF is reviewed. Furthermore, in this study, the process-oriented view of the refuge path highlights the complexity of their experience, noting an array of antecedents as they relate to country, host country and individual differences, interventions through NGOs, refugee resettlement agencies, and organizations, as well as the less explored entrepreneurial path. These diverse paths and the process of finding fit, and the obstacles refugees face, are viewed through the lens of shocks and reassessment of MDF throughout their journey. Finally, the study’s outcomes illustrate individual wellbeing factors, organizational level benefits, as well as community level benefits to MDF.

Multinational corporations (MNCs) have increasingly sourced knowledge across borders, and foreign subsidiaries operations have played a critical role in MNC international knowledge sourcing strategies. The growing responsibility of foreign subsidiaries has paralleled an interest on the geography of this phenomenon by international business and international management scholars. In this chapter, we review this research. In addition, based on recent research in economics and management drawing on economic geography and innovation studies, we highlight possible avenues of research to enrich our understanding of the geographical aspects of international knowledge sourcing. In particular, we suggest three lines of research opportunities. A first opportunity relates to the explicit consideration of distance and border effects. A further research opportunity arises from investigating the geographical distance of heterogeneous host country knowledge sources from the foreign subsidiary. A final research opportunity we discuss is about the contribution of heterogeneous host country knowledge sources to the variety of knowledge developed by the foreign subsidiary.

Multinational corporations (MNCs) utilize corporate social responsibility (CSR) to govern their global economic activities. Yet CSR adoption is influenced by institutional diversity of both home and host countries. This article uses neoinstitutional and comparative capitalism theories to understand how CSR is shaped by different forms of stakeholder salience in diverse institutional contexts. Using data on labor rights CSR adoption by 629 European MNCs, our empirical results indicate that CSR complements institutionalized stakeholder power in home countries, but substitutes for its absence in host countries. Hence, CSR may paradoxically legitimate MNC behavior given both the presence and absence of stakeholder rights.

The costs of doing business abroad (CDBA) is a well-known concept in the international business literature, measuring the disadvantages or additional costs borne by multinational enterprises (MNEs) that are not borne by local firms in a host country. Recently, international management scholars have introduced a second concept, liability of foreignness (LOF). There is confusion in the two literatures as to the relationship between CBDA and LOF, as evidenced in a recent special issue on liability of foreignness (Journal of International Management, 2002). We argue that LOF stresses the social costs of doing business abroad, whereas CDBA includes both economic and social costs. The social costs arise from the unfamiliarity, relational, and discriminatory hazards that foreign firms face over and above those faced by local firms in the host country. Because the economic costs are well understood and can be anticipated, LOF becomes the core strategic issue for MNE managers. We argue that the key driver behind LOF is the institutional distance (cognitive, normative, and regulatory) between the home and host countries, and explore the ways in which institutional distance can affect LOF. We operationalize our arguments by showing how institutional distance and liability of foreignness can provide an alternative explanation for the MNE’s ownership strategy when going abroad.

Institutions and culture as well as their distance between home and host countries matter for international business activities. Yet, the exact nature of this influence is still not fully understood. In this chapter, we develop the concept of institutional and cultural compatibility and propose empirical measures of both to contribute to our understanding in this regard. We argue that the institutional and cultural profiles of home and host countries can create synergies that facilitate bilateral foreign direct investment (FDI) flows (that is being compatible) even if they are characterized by high distances. We apply our measures of compatibility to a sample of bilateral FDI flows between 127 host and 122 home countries over 12 years.

The purpose of the study is to develop an understanding of the interplay between multinational enterprises (MNEs) and informal institutions on a firm–industry level. “Interplay” here means how responses to institutions develop in a particular context and how this development is interrelated with stakeholders’ reactions and activities. To study this interplay between MNEs and informal institutions, the authors draw on literature on institutional complexity, as well as on a co-evolutionary perspective. Two case vignettes are presented on MNEs’ post-entry strategies and behaviors in their new host markets, with a view to understanding how and under what conditions informal institutions in the host market may compel MNEs to alter their initial strategies and behaviors in the market and, on the other hand, how and under what conditions MNEs’ strategies and behaviors may act as catalysts of change in these informal institutions.

This chapter discusses how firms can accrue unique advantages from their foreign status in the host country, with a particular focus on informal networks. Drawing on the literature on the liability and asset of foreignness, this chapter argues that foreign firms can be in a better position to balance between the bright and dark side of informal networks than local firms. Foreign firms can deviate from local isomorphic pressures to minimize potential involvement in negative sides. Moreover, they can build more instrumental informal networks in which the dark side of informal networking is better controlled and regulated without losing social cohesion, flexibility, and other benefits of the bright side. This chapter contributes to our understanding of how foreign firms can turn foreignness into assets from liabilities when managing their informal networks in the host country.