Search results

This paper seeks to develop a theoretical explanation of conflicts and incompatible interpretations of events between agents of multinational corporations (MNCs) and actors present in certain host countries. It aims to situate the argument in comparative economic systems as a part of a broader social system. The socio‐economic system can be modeled using institutional theory, particularly using Scott's three pillars and the concept of formal and informal institutions. Within different socio‐economic systems a dominant logic is developed, and this becomes internalized among actors and agents as behavioral scripts.

The paper uses a multi‐level and multi‐disciplinary conceptual analysis, developing a model of dominant logic and behavioral scripts with MNC agents and traditional emerging economy actors.

MNC agents and traditional emerging economy actors have difficulty comprehending the logic of the other, creating a fertile context for conflict.

An ideal type template is developed that can be used for empirical investigations focusing on situations where disagreement and conflict occur when MNCs operate in traditional emerging economies.

By integrating the authors' conceptualization into training for expatriate managers, the potential for conflict can be reduced.

This multi‐level and multi‐disciplinary model allows grounded development of understanding of conflicts or potential conflicts in the MNC agent‐traditional emerging economy actor context.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a new theoretical framework called the “extended dual economy model”. Based on the seminal work of Lewis (2014), the author uses it to explain the sectoral specialisation of home countries and their firms and MNEs.

The paper is multi-disciplinary and entirely conceptual, with cool ideas but very few numbers and equations.

Emerging economies exhibit a “duality” in their economic structure that reflects itself in two largely different sets of location (L) characteristics. They are simultaneously home to both “traditional” sectors, which are resource and labour intensive, as well as “modern” sectors, which are knowledge and capital intensive, each of which can be analysed as having two sub-economies. These different sets of location advantages shape the firm-specific advantages of EMNEs and their FDI.

This analysis helps to underline what shapes the ability of home countries to “emerge”, and the ability of their firms to grow and their MNEs to become internationally competitive. Few EMNEs can thrive in international markets without concurrent growth in their domestic markets. Maintaining the appropriate location assets to optimally support both types of sectors is costly. Each type of sub-economy requires different kinds of support sectors, infrastructure and policies, with little overlap. Weaknesses in its home country L advantages hinder the long-term competitiveness of their EMNEs.

Few EMNEs can thrive in international markets without concurrent growth in their domestic markets. Weaknesses in its home country L advantages hinder the long-term competitiveness of their EMNEs.

The extension of the Lewisian dual economy model allows a number of interesting new insights because it allows us to consider firms, non-firms, informality and the bottlenecks associated with promoting knowledge-intensive sectors in a globalised world. It emphasises structural change, and the need to manage pathways and effectively channel growth.

The purpose of this paper is to identify and delineate research directions that guide future empirical studies exploring how engagement platforms facilitate value co-creation and actor engagement in the context of the sharing economy.

The authors adopt a midrange theorizing approach with service-dominant logic as the integrating meta-theoretical perspective to develop a theoretical framework about service platforms, engagement platforms, and actor engagement in information communication technology (ICT) mediated environments. The authors then contextualize the framework for the sharing economy.

The authors introduce 20 unique research questions to guide future studies related to service ecosystems, engagement platforms, and actor engagement practices in the context of the sharing economy.

The sharing economy is an emerging phenomenon that is driven by the development and proliferation of engagement platforms. The engagement platform concept therefore provides a novel perspective for exploration of how ICT can be utilized to facilitate value co-creation and engagement amongst interdependent economic actors in a service ecosystem.

The purpose of this paper is to guide future academic research, rather than managerial practice. Future research based on the framework can help guide decision-makers to implement and use engagement platforms more effectively.

This paper offers new insight into the important intersection of ICT and service research, and guides future studies exploring the role of engagement platforms in the context of the sharing economy.

This paper aims to determine the essential “collective goods” which a foreign multinational enterprise (MNE) must have before production can start in a remote area of an emerging economy, and to consider the alternative governance modes available to procure or create these goods.

This purpose is examined conceptually and theoretically. First, the concept of “collective goods” is presented, followed by a consideration of the traditional “buy, ally or make” contractual approaches available to obtain goods and services. These approaches are repositioned in the context of an “emerging economy” so that alternative “ordering systems” as well as “non-contractual” means of obtaining things have to be considered in the context of internalization and reciprocity theories.

It is difficult to obtain collective goods in remote areas of emerging economies where private ordering prevails and even succeeds but at high transaction costs and with substantial government intervention. However, the use of non-contractual modes of exchange such as reciprocity is available to facilitate exchanges between market MNEs and nonmarket state offices and civil-society associations such as non-governmental organizations with which collaboration is necessary but which cannot be acquired or controlled by MNEs. However, market firms can use philanthropy and lobbying to obtain the help of these nonmarket actors who know how to operate under private and state-ordering systems.

Theoretical implications: Internalization theory explains why MNEs are able to obtain collective goods by providing them “in-house”, while reciprocity theory exemplifies how non-contractual modes of exchange can substitute for the traditional but contractual “buy, ally and/or make”.

Managerial implications: In terms of the organizational structure of the subsidiary of an MNE operating in an emerging economy, it appears that the line functions of procurement, engineering and production may rely more on contractual exchanges with foreign suppliers, while the staff functions of public affairs, government relations and human resources may be more adept at using reciprocal exchange with local suppliers.

The provisioning of the collective goods when a firm builds its facilities in a remote and underdeveloped part of an emerging economy has hardly received any research attention nor have the non-contractual ways – such as reciprocity – available in the context of private ordering to obtain these goods.