Search results

To this date, research on tensions has been carried out on business networks and value co-creation, with no studies exploring tensions within the marketing services context. This study aims to use the three tension categories proposed by Toth et al. (2018) and Pressey and Vanharanta (2006) to address this gap by identifying the tensions experienced in the market research agency (MRA), creative agency (CA) and client relationship, as well as the processes that increase or minimize these tensions.

A total of 25 in-depth interviews were carried out with MRA, CA and client employees. NVivo 12 was used to conduct a thematic analysis to identify the overarching processes that influenced tensions.

Six second-order codes were identified, designating processes that exacerbated or minimized each of the three tensions experienced. Two new processes were identified (“adopting governance processes” and “aspects of identity formation”) which have not been previously reported. An empirical framework was developed pinpointing processes that influenced each tension category, also highlighting complex interdependencies between behavioral, emotional and structural tensions.

This study presents the perspectives of all actors within the marketing services triad providing a more nuanced understanding of tensions at the triadic level, as previous literature predominantly focused either on dyads or on networks. Furthermore, this study highlights important interdependencies between tension categories, providing novel contributions, as well as directions for future research.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: to analyse what theories assume about multinational enterprises (MNEs) when they claim these are superior and to discuss possible explanations for why MNE superiority seems to be dominant in the international business (IB) research field.

A common theme in mainstream IB theories is that multinational enterprises (MNEs) are superior in terms of cost efficiency and innovativeness compared with other types of organizations. A closer look at transaction cost economics (TCE)/internalization theory, evolutionary theory and dynamic capability theory reveal a bias toward MNE supremacy because of how MNEs are conceptualized as firms and therefore fail to explain the essence of “multinational advantage”. These revelations and the strong dependence on the benevolence to provide unbiased data means that MNE supremacy posited by mainstream IB theories is as much a rationalized myth as an empirical fact.

Although mainstream theories differ when it comes to the building blocks that constitute MNE supremacy, they have one attribute in common: they are silent as to why MNEs are superior compared with, for example, domestic firms or other types of economic agents. Irrespective of whether the focus is the strength of the hierarchy, the skill of managers or a common identity, nothing in the theories tells us that these factors are more pronounced in MNEs than in other types of economic actors.

The paper deals with the issue of multinational advantage. It claims that mainstream theories of MNEs tend to assume, explicitly or implicitly, that MNEs are superior in terms of cost efficiency and innovativeness compared with other types of economic agents. The analysis demonstrates that this tendency is a consequence of how MNEs are conceptualized as firms in the different theories as well as of the strong dependence in IB research on the benevolence of MNEs to provide unbiased data. It is concluded that MNE supremacy posited by mainstream IB theories is as much a rationalized myth as an empirical fact.

In February 2018, Jerome Powell had taken over as chair of the FOMC. At first glance, the macroeconomic conditions inherited by Powell appeared favorable for continued stability: unemployment and inflation were low, and the economy had been steadily growing for nearly a decade. Yet despite the appearance of stability, the economy faced significant risks that required the Federal Reserve's attention. Was an uptick in inflation imminent, and if so, should Powell raise rates to limit any inflationary pressure? Or was the economy still operating below capacity, and if so, should the Federal Reserve take a more accommodative stance? To gain perspective, Powell needed to look back at the past fifty years of monetary policy in the United States.