Search results

This study aims to help develop “business principles for stakeholder capitalism” in two steps. First, the study defines internal logic of three theories of capitalism and two variants within each theory. Second, it examines approaches to integration into modern democratic capitalism. Treating the three theories as substitutes identifies relative strengths and weaknesses; complementarity and partial overlap approaches to integration study the institutional settings within which stakeholder capitalism operates. Empirical outcomes reflect competition between market and stakeholder businesses for participants, with institutional conditions determining the scope of collective action.

The approach aligns three typologies in a unique conceptual arrangement defining the three theories of capitalism: forms of capitalism, potential failures of each form and associated types of goods. The first method examines the internal logic of each theory of capitalism. The second draws on traditional narrative review of references documenting each theory of capitalism and variants together with modern Marxist anti-capitalism.

Three typologies align uniquely with the theories of capitalism, each having two variants. Both variants of stakeholder capitalism are compatible with compassionate capitalism, constitutional government or polycentric governance but not with self-interest capitalism, dictatorship or Marxism. A theory of modern democratic capitalism allocates roles for private, club and social goods with empirically variable mixes occurring across countries. Competition among different types of enterprises provides an empirical test for comparative advantages of stakeholder capitalism. Future research should consider approaches for testing the proposed conceptual scheme in practice concerning capacity to deal with grand challenges, wicked problems and black swan events.

Research approach is limited to logical examination of theories and literature documentation without direct empirical confirmation. The study does not address practical implications for managers and public officials or social implications concerning private incentives, stakeholder cooperation or collective action.

Originality lies in shifting terms of debate about stakeholder capitalism from advocacy of substitute theories to understanding of its relationship to market capitalism and collective action capitalism. Value lies in explaining desirability of theoretical integration of three types of capitalism into a comprehensive framework for modern democratic capitalism.

This paper aims to extend some of the theoretical propositions of Michael Power’s (1997) audit society thesis by exploring the capacity of organisations to push back against external accountability pressures. The paper positions the literature on non-governmental organisation (NGO) accounting and accountability as a “case study” against which the notion of the audit society is put to the test.

A qualitative meta-synthesis of the accounting literature is used to analyse how NGOs have responded to audit society pressures – most notably funder pressures to adopt formalised accountability mechanisms. The different responses of NGOs to funder accountability demands are analysed using Christine Oliver’s (1991) typology of strategic responses to institutional processes.

This review of the accounting literature unveils that NGOs can adopt a range of strategic responses to funder accountability pressures that vary from passive conformity to proactive manipulation. The findings confirm that NGOs often perceive acquiescence to funder accountability demands as necessary to ensure organisational survival. Yet, the author also found that NGO resistance to funder accountability pressures is more common than previously assumed. Five dominant forms of “accountability resistances” emerged from the analysis: evading accountability, disguising accountability, shielding accountability, negotiating accountability and shaping accountability.

By conducting a qualitative meta-synthesis of the accounting literature, the author was able to integrate the findings of prior research on NGO resistance to funder accountability demands, guide future research and extend Michael Power’s (1997) work by developing a more nuanced understanding of how organisations respond to external accountability pressures.

This paper aims to explore how firms enter or exit B Corp certification faced with the tension between local and B Corp institutions, providing a better understanding of the unique impact of institutional complexity on B Corps' decision-making.

This paper applies multi-case analysis to 20 Chinese firms in various stages of B Corp certification, including eight certified B Corps, six decertified firms and six candidates. The qualitative data was used to code separately for two research questions.

The study findings reveal that: (1) Participants who can obtain expected social and economic benefits by innovating their operational mode to efficiently deal with this tension attempt to continuously pursue B Corp certification. A self-renewal model was developed to show how firms hybridize the two institutional logics; (2) Participants who find it hard to mitigate this tension tend to compromise with the local institution and conform less with the B Corp institution due to high opportunity and accounting costs, low short-term benefits and collective culture.

By highlighting the different responses of firms to institutional complexity, this study contributes to B Corp research, social identity theory and institutional complexity, providing practical implications for B Lab strategies in China.

This study explores the relationship between economic freedom and gender ideologies on the allocation of women’s opportunity-to-necessity entrepreneurship across countries. Opportunity entrepreneurship is typically understood as one’s best option for work, whereas necessity entrepreneurship describes the choice as driven by no better option for work. Specifically, we examine how economic freedom (i.e. each country’s policies that facilitate voluntary exchange) and gender ideologies (i.e. each country’s propensity for gendered separate spheres) affect the distribution of women’s opportunity-to-necessity entrepreneurship across countries.

We construct our sample by matching data from the following country-level sources: the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor’s Adult Population Survey (APS), the Fraser Institute’s Economic Freedom Index (EFI), the European/World Value Survey’s Integrated Values Survey (IVS) gender equality index, and other covariates from the IVS, Varieties of Democracy (V-dem) World Bank (WB) databases. Our final sample consists of 729 observations from 109 countries between 2006 and 2018. Entrepreneurial activity motivations are measured by the ratio of the percentage of women’s opportunity-driven total nascent and early-stage entrepreneurship to the percentage of female necessity-driven total nascent and early-stage entrepreneurship at the country level. Due to a first-order autoregressive process and heteroskedastic cross-sectional dependence in our panel, we estimate a fixed-effect regression with robust standard errors clustered by country.

After controlling for multiple macro-level factors, we find two interesting findings. First, economic freedom positively affects the ratio of women’s opportunity-to-necessity entrepreneurship. We find that the size of government, sound money, and business and credit regulations play the most important role in shaping the distribution of contextual motivations over time and between countries. However, this effect appears to benefit efficiency and innovation economies more than factor economies in our sub-sample analysis. Second, gender ideologies of political equality positively affect the ratio of women’s opportunity-to-necessity entrepreneurship, and this effect is most pronounced for efficiency economies.

This study offers one critical contribution to the entrepreneurship literature by demonstrating how economic freedom and gender ideologies shape the distribution of contextual motivation for women’s entrepreneurship cross-culturally. We answer calls to better understand the variation within women’s entrepreneurship instead of comparing women’s and men’s entrepreneurial activity. As a result, our study sheds light on how structural aspects of societies shape the allocation of women’s entrepreneurial motivations through their institutional arrangements.

Collaboration in agricultural value chains (AVCs) has the potential to increase smallholders’ participation in international value chains and increase their benefits from participation. This scoping review explores existing collaboration models among stakeholders of AVCs in developing countries, examines enablers and constraints of collaboration and identifies policy gaps.

We systematically searched three databases, CAB Abstracts, Econlit (EBSCO) and Agricola, for studies published between 2005 and 2023 and included 59 relevant studies on AVC collaboration.

The primary motivations for collaboration are to enhance market access and improve product quality. Key outcomes of collaboration include improvements in farmers’ welfare, market participation and increased production; only a few studies consider improved risk management as an important outcome. Robust support from government and non-governmental entities is a primary enabler of collaboration. Conversely, conflicts of interest among stakeholders and resource limitations constrain collaboration possibilities. Collaboration involving high-value crops prioritizes income increases, whereas collaboration involving staple crops focuses on improving household food security.

This study may have publication bias as unsuccessful instances of collaboration are less likely to be published.

This study is unique in highlighting collaboration models’ characteristics and identifying AVC policy and programmatic areas where private firms, farmers’ groups, local governments and donor agencies can contribute.

This study aims to explore when and under what conditions state-owned enterprises (SOEs) become important players in orchestrating the global climate action and what their roles are as domestic or international (de)carbonizers.

This is a conceptual paper that aims to advance understanding of the role of SOEs in addressing the global climate challenge. The authors build on the institutional theory to capture the importance of home-country climate regulation mechanisms and advance knowledge on the internationalization of SOEs. The authors review the literature on the institutional boundaries that shape the environmental activities of firms at home and abroad and develop the argument on the influence of home country institutions and internationalization on the role of SOEs in the global climate agenda.

In this study, the authors elaborate the SOEs’ climate action matrix and offer three propositions based on the fact that SOEs’ environmental strategies are driven by the interests of the state as owner and the scope of SOEs’ internationalization. First, the authors propose that the level of home country’s climate policy ambition explains SOEs’ stance on climate action. Second, scope of internationalization explains SOEs’ stance on climate action. Third, the progressive/increasing involvement of SOEs in climate action enhances the country’s climate stance.

The authors incorporate the climate argument into international business (IB) studies of SOEs’ internationalization, a novel approach that helps us to advance the knowledge on the complex issue of corporate climate action. The authors argue for a dynamic and reciprocal relationship between home/host countries and SOEs’ climate engagement. In doing this, the authors contribute to the IB research and policy agenda by exploring SOEs’ engagement in advancing the global climate agenda.

Training activities organized by maker-spaces have become the most important channel through which makers acquire new external knowledge related to problem solving and thus contribute significantly to makers' innovation performance. Is it true that the more training activities in which makers participate, the better their innovation performance? Following the logic of process analyses, this paper empirically verifies the effects of the scope and frequency of makers' participation in training activities on their innovation performance.

Based on a survey of 134 makers in China, this paper employed the procedure recommended by Preacher and Hayes (2008) to empirically test the total effects, direct effects and indirect effects of the scope and frequency of participation in training activities on makers' innovation performance via their ability to exploit new knowledge.

The research findings show that the scope (frequency) of participation in training activities has a positive (negative) effect on makers' innovation performance via the mediating effect of the makers' ability to exploit new knowledge. Time pressure acts as a negative moderator.

This paper sheds light on a considerably overlooked research area by investigating the effects of the scope and frequency of makers' participation in training activities on their innovation performance. The authors further identify and empirically test the theoretical mechanism by considering the mediating effect of makers' ability to exploit new knowledge. The research findings also provide a managerial training activity arrangement strategy for makerspaces and government.

Despite the popularity of the entrepreneurial ecosystem (EE) concept, research on its value-adding activities receives less attention. Thus, in this article, the authors investigate the role of EEs in supporting global value chain (GVC) activities.

The authors employ the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) technique to identify practical configurations of EE’s framework and systemic conditions spurring GVC activities in 80 countries.

The findings suggest different configurations of EE`s framework and systemic conditions necessary for various GVC activities regarding input-output structure, geographical scope, upgrading, and forward and backward participation.

This study contributes to the extant literature by pioneering the EE approach to explaining GVC development. Moreover, the findings provide novel insights for understanding the EE – GVC interplay. As a result, the study offers a more nuanced understanding of how the EE supports GVC activities.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the symbiotic evolution decisions of digital innovation enterprises, research institutes and the government in the digital innovation ecosystem.

Based on innovation ecosystem theory and an evolutionary game model, this study constructs a tripartite symbiotic evolution game model of digital innovation ecosystems with digital innovation enterprises, research institutes and the government as the main bodies and analyzes the influencing factors as well as the evolution paths of the different behavioral strategies of each subject through numerical simulation.

The research shows that the digital innovation ecosystem has the characteristic of self-organization, which requires the symbiotic cooperation of each subject. The government plays an active role in any stage of symbiotic evolution, and the system cannot enter symbiosis under a low level of subsidies and penalties. Only when the initial willingness to cooperate of digital innovation enterprises and scientific research institutes is at a medium or high level is the system likely to become symbiotic. While digital innovation enterprises are more sensitive to government subsidies and punishments, scientific research institutes are more sensitive to the distribution proportion of cooperation income.

This study includes government regulation into the research scope, expands the research mode of the digital innovation ecosystem and overcomes the difficulties of empirical research in collecting dynamic large sample data. It vividly and systematically simulates the symbiotic evolution process of the digital innovation ecosystem, which provides a theoretical and practical reference for digital innovation ecosystem governance.