Search results

The flexibility of corporations to adapt their strategy to a fast-changing environment can be a major source for competitive advantage and survival. While research mainly focuses on outcomes of this ability, little is known of how to foster it in organizations. Thus, by building on the upper echelons theory, the authors assume that the strategic flexibility of the company depends on the willingness and permission to change of the chief executive officer (CEO). To support the hypotheses, the authors apply the dimensions of commitment to change and work autonomy to the CEO and test for moderation under conditions of technological turbulence. The authors’ results based on medium-sized organizations in Germany show significant effects of both dimensions on strategic flexibility. In particular, under conditions of high technological turbulence, commitment based on loyalty and not on pressure together with autonomy on control and evaluation criteria is best suited to increase strategic flexibility. These insights extend the research literature and provide guidelines for CEOs and their supervisors alike.

The rising opportunities in emerging countries have attracted numerous multinational corporations to invest in the new regimes. Knowledge management between headquarters and their foreign subsidiaries, thus, becomes particularly crucial in navigating host country environmental uncertainties. Despite its criticality, how foreign subsidiaries can benefit from effectively managing knowledge remains unclear. This study examines the extent to which market and technological turbulences influence two specific knowledge management platforms, knowledge transfer and knowledge codification, and subsequently, market responsiveness of foreign subsidiaries. Results from a survey of 140 foreign subsidiaries in China show that knowledge transfer and knowledge codification serve as two important platforms to mitigate the effects of environmental turbulence on local market responsiveness.

The stable and predictable agricultural, infrastructure, manufacturing, and energy economies of hard products have been followed by economies that offer softer products such as services, information, knowledge, health care, digitization, networking, globalization, entertainment, sustainability, and currently, well-being and happiness. Such soft market products are loaded with buyer–seller information asymmetries (BSIA) that create market risk, market uncertainty, market chaos, and ambiguity – all of which are specific types of market turbulence. In this context, this chapter investigates the phenomena of turbulence, specifically environmental turbulence whose major subsets are technological turbulence and market turbulence. We cite several recent geopolitical variables and events that have aggravated market turbulence such as Chinese economic invasion of global markets, global climate change, Brexit, international asylum-seeking migrations, artificial intelligence, and demonetization. We also define market turbulence as varied forms of BSIA for which both marketers and consumers must have appropriate joint responsibility. In addition, we focus on ethical and moral marketing responsibilities for reducing BSIA under each type of turbulence.

With this chapter, we seek to shed light on the question how headquarters (HQ) can cope with geographic distance and effectively transfer relevant knowledge to their subsidiaries. By constructing a mediating model, we aim at disentangling the effects of geographic distance on the relevance of HQ knowledge to their subsidiaries, via the creation of a shared context between HQ and their subsidiaries. We tested our hypotheses using partial least squares based structural equation modelling on a sample of 124 European subsidiaries. We did not find a significant direct relationship between geographic distance and HQ knowledge relevance. Yet, we found support for our mediation hypotheses that geographic distance makes it more difficult for HQ to establish a shared normative and operational context, but that both dimensions of shared context can help HQ to transfer relevant knowledge to their subsidiaries. We contribute to the research on knowledge flows in multinational corporations (MNC) by investigating knowledge relevance directly rather than knowledge flows as such. We also advance our understanding of shared context in HQ-subsidiary relationships by showing that shared context comprises an operational and a normative dimension. Moreover, we contribute to social learning theory in basing our reasoning on the idea that shared practices and social relationships help overcoming distance to manage knowledge transfer more effectively. Finally, we add to the research of distance in international business by conceptualizing space, organizational context and knowledge transfer in one comprehensive model.

I got a phone call. A call on a Sunday morning! It was just like any other Sunday when my family and I had gotten ready for Sunday church service until I received this phone call from Dr. Cavusgil two days after my brief visit to the Michigan State University (MSU) campus, meeting a few faculty members. The phone call was to offer an admission to the doctoral program. It was the pivotal moment that turned my career route from a salary man to a scholar that I never thought would be what it turned out to be later.

For various reasons consumers find some innovations undesirable. These are identified as resistant innovations or those innovations that consumers are unable or unwilling to readily embrace, such as screw caps on fine wines, hybrid automobiles and nanotechnology-based products. What makes these types of innovations undesirable to consumers? How should marketers introduce into the marketplace these types of innovations? These questions are the foundation of my ongoing research. In reflecting on my research decisions for the past ten years, I came upon my application for PhD programs. In 1997, I wrote:“The past ten years I have been focused on product development for telecom firms, including five years as an entrepreneur. As I've worked, questions have frequently surfaced about the slow acceptance in the marketplace of some telecommunication offerings; Why has ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) not taken off? Why did 30,000 perfectly functioning Newton PDAs (Personal Digital Assistant) end up at the Los Angeles dump? Did AT&T misjudge the market timing for videophones? What role, if any, did marketing play in these product mis-launches?”…I have explored disruptive technologies with Christensen (1997), crossed the chasm with Moore (1991), searched for the sources of innovation with Von Hippel (1988), and evaluated Roger's diffusion theories (1995) looking for direction. These investigations have led to more questions.

Many studies have proven that innovation performance is an important factor that increases corporate’s performance. In this context, companies need to be successful in innovation management, and they need to innovate. The technological turbulence that may occur in the sector where the companies are located will affect the innovation performance negatively if the companies fail to manage innovation. As a result of factors such as increasing competitive pressure with globalization, the elimination of time and space obstacles of technology, expanding purchasing alternatives, and increasing awareness levels, the newest products bring the highest revenues. These developments have led to a dramatic increase in the importance of developing new products as a competitive weapon, making product innovation an important element of the organizational strategy. Therefore, innovation strategies to be implemented and dynamic skills that are owned are needed to be managed correctly by companies. In this study, innovation management, technological turbulence, innovation strategies, and dynamic capabilities are examined.

Firm’s operating contexts and asymmetric perspectives of success versus failure outcomes are two essential features typically absent in research on firms’ implemented strategies. The study here describes and provides examples of formal case-based models (i.e., constructing algorithms) of firms implemented strategies within several of 81 potential context (task environments) configurations – large vs small, service vs production orientation, low vs high competitive intensity, low vs high technological turbulence, and ambiguous settings for each. The study applies the tenets of complexity theory (e.g., equifinality, causal asymmetry, and single causal insufficiency). The study proposes a meso-theory and empirical testing position for solving “the crucial problem in strategic management” (Powell, Lovallo, & Fox, 2011, p. 1370) – firm heterogeneity – why firms adopt different strategies and structures, why heterogeneity persists, and why competitors perform differently. A workable solution is to identify/describe implemented executive capability strategies that identify firms in alternative specific task environments which are consistently accurate in predicting success (or failure) of all firms for specific implemented capabilities/context configuration. The study shows how researchers can perform “statistical sameness testing” and avoid the telling weaknesses and “corrupt practices” of symmetric tests such as multiple regression analysis (Hubbard, 2015) including null hypothesis significance testing. The study includes testing the research issues using survey responses of 405 CEO and chief marketing officers in 405 Hungarian firms. The study describes algorithms indicating success cases (firms) as well as failure cases via deductive, inductive, and abductive fuzzy-set logic of capabilities in context solutions.

Purpose – The purpose of this chapter is to study how dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation (competitive aggressiveness, proactiveness and risk taking) affect international performance in competitive and technology-intensive international environments.

Methodology/approach – To address the research questions, structural equation modelling is applied to Finnish survey data (N=271).

Findings – Our findings reveal that the dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation are differentially related to international performance, and that their effect is contingent on moderating variables.

Research limitations – One limitation is the use of cross-sectional data as it limits the possibility of drawing strong conclusions from the development of the relationships between the different constructs. Also the fact that the study was conducted in a single-country setting is a limitation.

Practical implications – Results indicate that entrepreneurial behaviour is of importance for international business managers. However, results imply that prior to striving for proactive behaviour, competitive aggressiveness and venturesome risk taking managers should study their international market environments carefully and truly understand the nature of these turbulent markets, as in many occasions strong emphasis on entrepreneurial behaviour did not contribute positively to the international performance indicators, such as increasing sales and profits.

Originality/value of the chapter – Present study extends the works of Zahra and Garvis (2000), Lumpkin and Dess (2001) and Wiklund and Shepherd (2005), for example, by (a) applying entrepreneurial orientation on international business, (b) examining the effects of different dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation on a firm's international performance and (c) extending the research of the role of moderating effects on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance.

A common weakness of most growth models is the assumption that growth is a desired objective for entrepreneurs (see, e.g. Bird, 1989). However, not all entrepreneurial firms seek growth as their primary objective (Covin, Slevin, & Covin, 1990; Porter, 1996), and further there is no reason to expect that all entrepreneurs want their businesses to grow in similar ways (Liao & Welsch, 2003). Thus, in many cases researchers have separated growth orientation from actual growth. In previous studies growth orientation has been defined as precondition to growth (see, e.g. Autio et al., 2000). Growth orientation is an attitudinal concept based on subjective evaluation (Nummela, Puumalainen, & Saarenketo, 2005) and is considered to be particularly important for international growth (Yli-Renko et al., 2002). IGO is thought to be a useful construct for differentiating companies according to their motivation to seek growth in international markets, and also for identifying the factors behind the chosen growth strategies (Nummela et al., 2005).