Search results

This paper addresses the reasons why Chinese businesses have long been identified as subordinate to world‐class brand owners; why “global” own brand developments are considered to be beyond their competence.

In this paper, we use an institutional perspective to examine the difficulties faced by Chinese firms in own brand development, using empirical data derived from a research project into the business strategies of Hong Kong firms, and contrasting these with the case of what is one of China's most successful foreign ventures, Haier.

The familial form appears to be transforming, due to the employment of a growing stratum of professional middle managers and Chinese family business firms appear to be developing into fully functionally integrated hierarchies capable of product and market development of own branded products. Three institutional supports make this possible. First, the development of parts of the People's Republic of China (PRC) into a quasi‐market economy created a regionally close and large market. Second, technology transfers from leading overseas consumer product brand owners’ supported the development of more sophisticated products and firm capabilities. Third, a steady supply of skilled graduates from Hong Kong and the mainland enabled firms to move further up the value chain and exert more control over their manufacturing and related activities. To go truly global, however, more is required: social capital that connects the firm to the local and national party elites, something that mainland firms may find easier than those from Hong Kong.

Gaining the data meant negotiating access through young professional managers now emerging from Hong Kong universities and was achieved through personal contacts; thus the sample is a small four‐case study. The counterfactual case of Haier is derived not from original research but from website material.

Successful original equipment manufacturing business that goes global will, in addition to the institutional supports identified in the Hong Kong cases, also require elite patronage, social capital and political support.

The paper is of value to managers and consultants interested in international business in China.

This chapter introduces human resource practices in contemporary knowledge-based organizations of today’s fast moving sectors. Such organizations are called ‘knowledge intensive firms’ (KIFs) which are distinct from traditional organizations as their main focus is innovation. These firms employ knowledge-oriented workers named as ‘knowledge workers’ (KWs) whose main task is to find creative solutions to complex problems and create new knowledge. Knowledge workers are well-educated experts and their nature of work includes complexity, creativity and analytical thinking. Such workers are the most important resource of KIFs, as they own the means of production. In this regard, attracting, retaining and motivating KWs have become crucial for knowledge intense firms to gain competitive advantage. Having these workers in hand, human resource management practices also differ in knowledge-oriented organizations. This chapter aims to introduce such contemporary practices and inform the reader about the strategies in attracting, retaining and motivating KWs in organizations.

Immigrant groups often pursue entrepreneurial endeavors in their new home country. Even though both immigrant entrepreneurship and organizational identity have received scholarly attention, there has been little systematic exploration of identity strategies pursued by immigrant-owned organizations. In this article, we develop a theoretical framework that draws on the concepts of liability of foreignness and social identity theory in the context of immigrant entrepreneurship. Our framework explores how immigrant entrepreneurs may negotiate identities for their firms through the development of specific identity strategies that confirm or underplay their national/ethnic identities in order to survive in their immediate environment. We develop a model that shows how these confirmations or underplaying strategies work both for firms that have an individualistic entrepreneurial orientation, as well as those with a collective/associative entrepreneurial orientation. We also suggest two contextual moderators to this relationship: (1) the image of the founder's country of origin, and (2) the presence of immigrant networks in the host country, which may alter the effectiveness of identity strategies in terms of organizational mortality outcomes.

This chapter begins with a comprehensive review of the study on terrorism that has emerged in the last two decades and the consequences of terrorism in terms of economic theory. It aims to highlight the potential influence of terrorism on the distribution of military expenditure among different countries across the world. Moreover, the chapter seeks to shed light on the evolution of economic theories and models for explaining terrorism in a strategic environment to indicate the research gap in this field and presents an attempt to measure the impact of terrorism on the economic growth by considering the connection between the intensity of military expenditure made by a country and the security it faces as impinges by terrorist activities.

Mats Alvesson is professor of business administration at the University of Lund, Sweden and at University of Queensland Business School, Australia. Research interests include critical theory, gender, power, management of knowledge intensive organizations, leadership, identity, organizational image, organizational culture and symbolism, qualitative methods and philosophy of science. Recent books include Interpreting Interviews (Sage, 2011), Metaphor We Lead By: Understanding Leadership in the Real World (Routledge, 2011, edited with Andre Spicer), Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies (Oxford University Press, edited with Todd Bridgman and Hugh Willmott), Understanding Gender and Organizations (Sage, 2009, 2nd edition edited with Yvonne Billing), Reflexive Methodology (Sage, 2009, 2nd edition edited with Kaj Skoldberg), Changing Organizational Culture (Routledge, 2008, edited with Stefan Sveningsson) and Knowledge Work and Knowledge-Intensive Firms (Oxford University Press, 2004).

Early paradox research in organization theory contained a remarkable breadth of inspirations from outside disciplines. We wanted to know more about where early scholarship found inspiration to create what has since become paradox theory. To shed light on this, we engaged seminal paradox scholars in conversations: asking about their past experiences drawing from outside disciplines and their views on the future of paradox theory. These conversations surfaced several themes of past and future inspirations: (1) understanding complex phenomena; (2) drawing from related disciplines; (3) combining interdisciplinary insights; and (4) bridging discourses in organization theory. We end the piece with suggestions for future paradox research inspired by these conversations.