journal of management

Journal of Management 2002 28(3) 277–305

Recent Developments in InternationalManagement Research: A Review of

20 Top Management Journals

Steve Werner∗Department of Management, University of Houston, C.T. Bauer College of Business,

334 Melcher Hall, Room 315, Houston, TX 77204-6021, USA

Received 26 April 2001; received in revised form 20 October 2001; accepted 29 October 2001

This review analyzes recent trends in the international management (IM) literature from 1996to 2000. The 271 articles located in 20 top management (and management related) journalsare categorized into 12 distinct topics: (1) the global business environment; (2) international-ization; (3) entry mode decisions; (4) international joint ventures; (5) foreign direct investment(FDI); (6) international exchange; (7) transfer of knowledge; (8) strategic alliances and net-works; (9) multinational enterprises; (10) subsidiary-headquarters relations; (11) subsidiaryand multinational team management; and (12) expatriate management. Research in each ofthese areas is presented and linkages between the areas are reviewed. Concluding thoughtsare offered relating to the pervasiveness, methodologies, and levels of analysis of IM research,as well as potential areas for future research. © 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.

As business becomes more global and international management (IM) issues play a morecentral role in business practice, the importance and relevance of IM research increases. IMresearch may be divided into three categories. The first category is comprised of studiesthat look at the management of firms in a multinational context. Stated differently, thisresearch emphasizes the international aspects of management that do not exist in domesticfirms (Ricks, 1991). This includes studies looking at the internationalization process, entrymode decisions, foreign subsidiary management, expatriate management, etc. For a lack ofa better term, I call these studies pure IM research. The second category consists of studiesthat compare the management practices of different cultures (cross-cultural studies) andnations (cross-national studies) (Ricks, Toyne & Martinez, 1990). These studies are knownas comparative management studies (Ricks, 1985). The third and final category consists of

∗ Tel.: +1-713-743-4672; fax:+1-713-743-4652.E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Werner).

0149-2063/02/$ – see front matter © 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.PII: S0149-2063(02)00129-0

278 S. Werner / Journal of Management 2002 28(3) 277–305

studies that look at management in a specific nation outside of North America. Becausemost research has a North-American bias, management studies done in other countries aresometimes considered within the domain of IM (Pierce & Garven, 1995). These studies areknown as foreign domestic studies (Ricks, 1985).

This review of IM research followsRicks et al.’s (1990)objective of identifying “therecent literature on the basic issues so that the reader can be brought up to date and guidedtowards what can be read in order to obtain the depth of understanding desired.” A systematicreview of the mass of IM and comparative management research within the length of ajournal article is not possible (Schollhammer, 1994). Thus, I have narrowed the scopeof this review in three ways. First, this review will focus on pure IM research, and notaddress comparative management research or foreign domestic studies. Second, this reviewwill focus on relatively recent research, specifically from 1996 to 2000 inclusive. Third,this review will focus on research that was published in top management journals. Thisresearch is grouped into 12 categories developed from reading the literature. The reviewfocuses primarily on the research within and across each of these categories, but descriptiveinformation about IM research in the top journals first will be discussed.

IM Research in 20 Top Journals

The first step in reviewing the IM research in top journals from 1996 to 2000 was toidentify top journals. I used the list established byGomez-Mejia and Balkin (1992), whichis comprehensive in that it includes journals from related organizational sciences. This listwas developed using previous published rankings and surveying management departmentchairpersons. This list has been consistently cited in articles on journal quality (e.g.,Johnson& Podsakoff, 1994; Kacmar & Whitfield, 2000; Van Fleet, McWilliams & Siegel, 2000)and includes all academic journals reported in a more recent list (Tahai & Meyer, 1999).Gomez-Mejia and Balkin’s (1992)list included 21 journals (because the 20th and 21st weretied). Because this review focuses on academic research, I eliminated theHarvard BusinessReview from the list leaving a total of 20 top journals.

It should be noted that of these 20 journals only one,The Journal of International Busi-ness Studies, is an international research journal. Thus, this review is primarily of articles inmainstream management journals, rather than international journals,per se. This is a con-sequence of focusing on top quality management journals and is consistent with researchshowing that the quality of theJournal of International Business Studies is substantiallygreater than any other international journal (Dubois & Reeb, 2000). The list, along withthe number of pure international articles published in each journal from 1996 to 2000, isreported inTable 1.

All the articles in these 20 top journals from 1996 to 2000 were examined for IM content.Articles were considered within the domain of IM if they related to the management of firmswith a multi-national perspective. FollowingRicks et al. (1990)comparative management(comparisons between countries) and cross-cultural management (comparison between cul-tures) studies were not included because of the great variety in those studies. Of course,cross-national/cultural studies were included if the comparison was of some aspect of man-aging abroad (e.g., a comparison of Japanese and US expatriate training methods). Articles

S. Werner / Journal of Management 2002 28(3) 277–305 279

Table 1Top 20 management and management related academic journalsa and the number of pure international managementarticles from 1996 to 2000

Journals Number ofstudies

Academy of Management Journal 24Academy of Management Review 6Administrative Science Quarterly 2Decision Sciences 5Human Relations 4Industrial and Labor Relations Review 6Industrial Relations 2Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences 1Journal of Applied Psychology 3Journal of International Business Studies 128Journal of Management 5Journal of Management Studies 19Journal of Occupational Psychology 0Journal of Organizational Behavior 5Journal of Vocational Behavior 0Management Science 6Organizational Behavior and Human Dec. Processes 0Personnel Psychology 2Psychology Bulletin 0Strategic Management Journal 53

a FromGomez-Mejia and Balkin (1992).

from multi-disciplinary journals such asJournal of International Business Studies were notincluded if they clearly fell outside of the management domain (e.g., international financearticles, international accounting articles, etc.).

Of the 4884 articles examined (book reviews and editorials were not included), 271 or5.5% were categorized as within the domain of pure IM. To see if the increasing globalizationof business is reflected in academic research, I also looked at the articles in the 20 journalsfrom 20 years earlier, 1976–1980. In the 20 years prior, the number of total articles wasrelatively similar at 4877, but the number of IM articles was only 90. Thus, the percentageof articles on IM topics in the top 20 journals has gone from 1.8% to 5.5% over the last 20years. In other words, over 20 years the percentage of management articles covering pureIM has more than tripled. Clearly, IM topics are more prevalent in our top journals todaythan 20 years ago, although they still play a minor role compared to the relevance of IM tobusinesses today.

Research Areas of IM

The 271 articles from 1996 to 2000 in the 20 top journals were then grouped into 12naturally occurring categories. These categories were createdpost hoc, based on my initialreading of the 271 articles. Because no formal content coding method was used, these

280S.W

erner/JournalofM

anagement2002

28(3)277–305


categories should be treated as an organizing tool rather than a definitive classification ofthe body of research.Table 2lists the categories, dominant topics included in the category,and the number of articles within each category. Of the 12 areas, foreign direct investment(FDI) had the most articles with 37, while International Exchange had the least with 15.Figure 1provides a graphical representation of the 12 categories.Figures 2–6report thetopic, sub-topic, and focus of each of the 271 studies.

Global Business Environment

This area of IM includes studies on the global economy, market structure, political andregulatory environments, and international risk (seeFigure 2). Studies on the global econ-omy have examined likely future changes in the international business environment, factorsinfluencing CEOs’ perceptions of the environment, and resulting social conflict. Severalstudies have looked at causes and consequences of global market structures, showing thatgreater competition appears to force better management practices. Studies have consideredthe effects of government type and environmental regulations, as well as the effects of tradepolicies on firms andvice versa. The remaining studies on the global business environmentlooked at environmental risk (including measurement issues), risk rating agencies, and themanagement of international and exchange rate risk. Overall, the regulatory environmentappears to be the current dominant focus of global environmental research, but interestinglythese papers are usually theoretical, suggesting a need for more empirical research in thisarea.

Internationalization

This area of IM includes studies on the descriptions and measurement of international-ization, antecedents of internationalization, and consequences of internationalization (seeFigure 2). A few studies have attempted to describe or refine the measure of a firm’s in-ternationalization. Some researchers on the antecedents of internationalization have lookedat firm and management team variables, while others have focused on the level and speedof internationalization. Most research looking at the consequences of internationalizationrelate it to firm performance, suggesting that internationalization interacts with other vari-ables (e.g., product diversity, technological investment, managerial incentive alignment,CEO international experience, time-based experience, cultural distance, timing of entry orwithdrawal, psychic distance, and cultural diversity) in predicting performance. Althoughconsequences of internationalization is the most heavily researched sub-topic, studies havefocused exclusively on firm performance and top management variables, suggesting thatcross-level (employee, industry, and country) and firm consequences other than performance(i.e., growth, survival, etc.) appear to be potential research areas not currently addressed intop management journals.

Entry Mode Decisions

This area of IM includes the predictors of entry mode choices, predictors of interna-tional equity ownership levels, and consequences of entry mode decisions (seeFigure 3).


Figure 1. Current themes in pure international management research.

Predictors of a firm’s entry mode choice or level of equity ownership include host countryfactors (such as restrictiveness, cultural distance, market structure, location costs, and expro-priation hazards), multinational enterprise (MNE) factors (such as firm specific advantages,strategies, strategic options, experience, structure, financial factors, visual identity, and or-ganizational capabilities), transaction costs, home country factors, and industry. Similar


Figure 2. Research on the global business environment and internationalization.

to internationalization, most research looking at the consequences of entry mode choicesrelates it to firm performance (with some looking at longevity). Performance was directlyrelated to entry mode, as well as its fit with strategy, firm capabilities, entry mode order,and ownership, locational, and internalization variables. With most research focusing on


Figure 3. Research on entry mode decisions and international joint ventures.


predictors, and the remaining looking at consequences, topics such as the measurement,description, and processes of entry mode appear to be potential research areas not currentlyaddressed in top management journals.

International Joint Ventures

This area of IM includes motivations of international joint ventures (IJV) partner selec-tion, IJV partner relations, and consequences of IJVs (seeFigure 3). Both national (e.g.,geographical proximity, risk conditions) and firm factors (e.g., strategic motivation, size)appear to affect partner selection. Studies looking at IJV partner relations have primarilyfocused on the stability of the relationship. Much of the IJV research looks at outcomesof IJVs and factors that affect those outcomes. IJV survival (failure and longevity) is themost common outcome investigated, but a number of studies also have looked at economicperformance. Survival and economic performance appear to be affected by numerous firm(e.g., experience, size), partner (e.g., business relatedness), venture (e.g., equity, timing),and country (e.g., cultural distance) factors. As with internationalization, consequences arethe most researched area, with employee, industry, and firm consequences (other than sur-vival or performance) appearing to be potential research areas not currently addressed intop management journals.

Foreign Direct Investment

This area of IM includes timing of FDI, motivations of FDI, location of FDI, and firmand host country consequences of FDI (seeFigure 4). Timing of FDI appears to be relatedto reversibility or delayability of decisions, business strength, market opportunities, firmcapabilities, strategic assets, and size. The motivations of FDI include the preservation ofexport established foreign markets, the gaining of country-specific advantages, and domes-tic inter-firm rivalry. Motivations are an important factor in cross-national FDI location,as well as firm (specific assets, experience, firm size, and dependence) and country factors(location characteristics, network linkages, political risk, culture, trade policies, educationlevel, union penetration, and workplace regulations). Intra-national location factors includeagglomeration economies, coastal locations, labor factors, and trade missions. The researchon the consequences of FDI has focused on the host country (spillover effects, importsand exports, industry agglomeration, productivity), the firm (performance, top manage-ment turnover, competitive advantage, organizational form and resource deployment), theacquisition (survival, performance, management style, profit variance, and value creation),and moderator variables (country type, experience, effective integration, product diversifi-cation, cultural compatibility, and autonomy). Again consequences is the most researchedsub-topic, with timing the least researched. Thus, timing of FDI (such as the nature offirm/industry/national FDI life cycles), appears to be a potential research area infrequentlyaddressed in top management journals.

International Exchange

This area of IM includes exchange overviews, determinants of exporting, export inter-mediaries, and consequences of exporting (seeFigure 4). The determinants of exporting


Figure 4. Research on foreign direct investment and international exchange.

behaviors include firm (export marketing orientation, intermediate imports, size, owner-ship advantages, level of cross-national production, interpersonal links), and home and hostlocation (market size, income level) factors. The use, performance, and service offeringsof export intermediaries also have been explored. Several studies have looked at factors


affecting export performance including keiretsu membership, the fit between export strat-egy and economic level of host country, gray market activity, firm market share, and relativesize of firms. The research in this area has largely focused on exports, suggesting that otherexchange mechanisms (e.g., imports, franchising) are potential research areas not frequentlyaddressed in top management journals.

Transfer of Knowledge

This area of IM includes antecedents of knowledge transfer, processes of knowledge trans-fer, and consequences of knowledge transfer (seeFigure 5). The antecedents of the varioustypes of knowledge transfer include various firm, partner, and venture factors. Transactioncost models, organizational forms, and the use of experts have been shown to relate to theprocesses of knowledge transfer. The consequences of knowledge transfer include general,business, and HR performance, information processing, cycle times, efficiency, ventureoutcomes, firm value, relationship commitment, and customer satisfaction. Again, conse-quences are the most studied sub-topic. However, a wide range of firm level consequenceshas been explored. International barriers to knowledge transfer is a potential research areanot frequently addressed in top management journals.

Strategic Alliances and Networks

This area of IM includes strategic alliance relationships, business networks, and out-comes of strategic alliances (seeFigure 5). A number of environmental, firm and alliancefactors have been found to affect various aspects (e.g., trust, reciprocity, negotiation tactics,compensation structures, relationship stability) of the strategic alliance relationship. Net-works of strategic alliances have been found to relate to value creation, greater profits,price and cost fluctuations, and negotiation outcomes. Strategic alliances have been foundto affect firms’ technological position, innovative capabilities, performance through socialmonitoring mechanisms, information exchange, continuity expectations, and reflexivity.Interestingly, the area of strategic alliance relationships are the most researched sub-topic,while the area of consequences is the least researched sub-topic. Specifically, the impact offoreign partners on firm performance is a potential research area not frequently addressedin top management journals.

Multinational Enterprises

This area of IM includes MNE policies, MNE strategies, and models and descriptionsof the MNEs (seeFigure 5). MNE policy research generally has explored the relationshipbetween environmental policies and firm performance. Research on MNE strategies, themost researched sub-topic, has looked at strategic processes (e.g., flexibility, change), out-comes (e.g., performance), and factors that moderate the strategy/performance relationship(e.g., national stereotypes). Models and descriptors of MNEs have focused on classifica-tions, flexibility, legitimacy, and structural changes. Unlike most other topics, this area hasa substantial percentage of theoretical papers (25%) and case studies (25%).


Figure 5. Research on transfer of knowledge, strategic alliances and networks, and multinational enterprises.

Subsidiary-Headquarters Relations

This area of IM includes subsidiary role, subsidiary control, and subsidiary performance(seeFigure 6). Subsidiary roles, mandates, and initiatives have been found to be affected by


Figure 6. Research on subsidiary-HQ relations, subsidiary and multinational team management, and expatriatemanagement.


subsidiary (leadership, entrepreneurial culture), MNE (capabilities, specialized resources),and environmental (industry globalization) factors. The degree and type of control MNEsexert on their subsidiaries is related to subsidiary (unit role, interdependence, functional area,level of ownership, and profitability) and MNE (sales, commitment, and nationality) factors.Subsidiary performance and survival is related to the intensity and diversity of the MNCshost country experience, having few foreign competitors, and the fit between compensationstrategy and subsidiary factors. Subsidiary role is the most researched sub-topic, whileperformance is the least researched sub-topic.

Subsidiary and Multinational Team Management

This area of IM includes subsidiary human resource management practices, subsidiarybehaviors, multinational negotiations, and multinational team management (seeFigure 6).Most studies of foreign subsidiary human resource management (HRM) practices and othersubsidiary behaviors compare them to the practices of domestic firms. Differences betweenforeign owned firms and domestic firms include the use of high-commitment HR practices,pension and welfare benefits, gender discrimination, work values, high performance work-place practices, management succession, management styles, and product introductions.

Studies of cross-national negotiations have looked at negotiator’s affect, negotiation mod-els, and differences in inter- and intranational negotiations. Studies of managing cross-national teams have looked at patterns of relationships in multinational teams, businessrelationships, multinational group conflict resolution, team performance and team hetero-geneity. Interestingly this is the only area that includes non-case study qualitative research.

Expatriate Management

This area of IM includes expatriate HRM, issues for expatriates, and expatriate and repatri-ate reactions (seeFigure 6). Studies looking at the HRM aspects of expatriates have focusedon assignment acceptance, identifying expatriate potential, expatriate trainability, and expa-triate performance appraisals. Other expatriate issues studied include expatriate’s influencestrategies, expatriate mentoring, conflicts involving expatriates, and the over-qualificationof expatriates. Most studies looked at various expatriate reactions, which included con-cerns and expectations of dual-career expatriates, adjustment, psychological withdrawal,pre-departure thoughts, commitment, and perceptions of justice of local workers. Whileexpatriate and repatriate reactions is the most researched sub-topic, unlike other topics, fewstudies have looked at expatriate performance or other behavioral consequences.

Linkages between IM Areas

Although much of the research reviewed fits neatly within one of the areas describedearlier, numerous studies explore linkages between areas. A number of the areas can bethought of as inclusive within others (for example, internationalization involves entry modeschoices, which are FDI, joint ventures, or exchange) and thus are substantially linked.Similarly, transfer of knowledge is closely associated with strategic alliances and networks.


Most non-inclusive areas are linked to others by some research (as represented with solidarrows inFigure 1), but some have received considerably less attention (as represented withdashed arrows). Examining these linkages will help integrate this large body of researchand hopefully provide a framework to help future researchers identify potential researchareas not currently addressed in top management journals.

Global Business Environment & Internationalization

As would be expected, the global business environment appears to be pervasive in itsinfluence across areas. Numerous studies on environmental factors have linked with othertopics including internationalization (e.g.,Sarkar, Cavusgil & Aulakh, 1999), MNEs (e.g.,Denison, Dutton, Kahn & Hart, 1996), and subsidiary management (Yahya-Zadeh, 1998).Interestingly, two areas with less research related to the global business environment appearto be transfer of knowledge and expatriate management. One would expect environmentalvariables such as economic factors, government regulations, exchange rate risk, and politicalrisk to affect the use, processes, and effectiveness of knowledge transfer as well as themanagement and reactions of expatriates. These appear to be potential research areas notcurrently addressed in top management journals.

Much of the internationalization research and its inclusive topics relate to firm char-acteristics and how they affect internationalization (e.g.,Hitt, Hoskisson & Kim, 1997),entry modes (e.g.,Davis, Desai & Francis, 2000), and mode outcomes (e.g.,Brouthers,Brouthers & Werner, 1999). A number of the mode studies (particularly IJV studies) arerelated to strategic alliances and networks (e.g.,Pan, 1997), knowledge transfer (e.g.,Park & Ungson, 1997), and to a lesser extent subsidiary-HQ relations (e.g.,Inkpen &Beamish, 1997). However, little research appears to link internationalization and its inclu-sive areas with subsidiary or expatriate management. How the level and speed of interna-tionalization, choice of entry modes, levels of ownership, and nature of JV partners relateto subsidiary HRM practices and behaviors, team management, and the management andreactions of expatriates also appear to be potential areas for future research.

Other Linkages

A number of studies involving the two related areas of knowledge transfer and strate-gic alliances also have included MNE characteristics (e.g.,Grosse, 1996), and aspects ofsubsidiary-HQ relations (e.g.,Aulakh, Kotabe & Sahay, 1996), but few have focused onsubsidiary or expatriate management. How subsidiary and expatriate management can affectknowledge transfer and strategic alliances andvice versa also appear to be potential areasfor future research. Expatriate reactions have been linked with both MNE (e.g.,Gregersen& Black, 1996) and subsidiary factors (e.g.,Bolino & Feldman, 2000), but less so withsubsidiary-HQ relations. How expatriates relate to subsidiary control, performance, androles also appears to be a potential area for future research.

In this brief exploration of the research between topics inFigure 1, I have pointed out anumber of linkages that have received little recent attention in the top management journals.Of course, this does not mean that those that have received considerable attention do notdeserve further exploration. There are likely numerous unexplored relationships between


various sub-topics across linked and inclusive areas that warrant research, but exploringthese is beyond the scope of this review. Also, to simplify the analysis of linkages, I havefocused exclusively on the relationships between two different topics. Further interestingand fruitful areas of research might involve three or more of these areas and the variousinteractions between them. For example, how does the global environment interact withMNE factors and entry mode choice to predict consequences of knowledge transfers? Ileave it to the future researchers to explore the ways many of the topic areas can interact toaffect other topics, processes, and consequences.

Concluding Thoughts

While writing this review a number of thoughts about the current state of research in IMcame to mind. These thoughts concern the pervasiveness of IM, the methodologies of IMresearch, levels of analysis of IM research, and additional potential areas for future research.

Pervasiveness of IM

As shown earlier, the percentage of articles in the top management journals that can beclassified as pure IM research has tripled over the last 20 years. Nonetheless, the percentageof articles over the last 5 years that are pure IM (5.5%) is still small. This is particularlysurprising when one considers that every sub-area within the domain of management hasthe potential to have an international aspect to it. For example, analyzing how multinationalcorporations differ from domestic firms on any aspect of management is a viable IM topic.Yet, we find that only about one out of twenty studies focuses on such international aspects.Clearly, as the business environment becomes more global, we would expect managementresearch to do the same.

Methodologies of IM Research

A number of scholars have suggested that because the field of IM (and internationalbusiness) is relatively young, more qualitative methodologies are necessary because theyfacilitate grounded theory building (Mendenhall, Beaty & Oddou, 1993; Schollhammer,1994; Wright, Lane & Beamish, 1988). Several years ago,Mendenhall et al. (1993)foundthat very little research was qualitative or joint method (qualitative and empirical). In thelast 5 years in 20 top journals, 13% of the studies were theoretical, 2.5% used mathematicalmodeling, 6.3% used case study methodology, and 2.2% used other qualitative methodsexclusively. Thus, case studies and other qualitative methodologies are still not frequentlyused. It is not clear whether this is because of the inherent difficulties of qualitative research(Wright et al., 1988), because of the dominant philosophical position of the superiority ofthe quantitative method, or because of some other reason.

Levels of Analysis of IM Research

Levels of analysis in IM research include countries, states, industry clusters, industries,firms, strategic business units, subsidiaries, teams, and individuals. After reviewing this


research, it is apparent that most IM research over the last 5 years has been at the macrorather than micro level. Specifically, the firm appears to be the dominant level of analysis,while only a small minority of studies is at the individual level. Further, very few seem tobe cross-level or meso studies (seeKlein, Tosi & Cannella, 1999). Of the 12 categories,only two (subsidiary and multinational team management and expatriate management) arepredominantly researched at the micro level. Numerous micro and cross-level internationaltopics appear to be potential research areas not currently addressed in top managementjournals.

Additional Areas for Future Research

Numerous scholars have in the recent past provided suggestions for areas in IM that areripe for more extensive research (Caves, 1998; Schollhammer, 1994; Spivey & Thomas,1990; Wright & Ricks, 1994). In looking at their suggestions, it is clear that many of therecommendations have been followed. For example, several mentioned the need for moreresearch in knowledge transfer, strategic alliances, market structures, and environmentalpolicies, areas that received considerable research attention over the last 5 years. However,some areas have still not received much attention in top management journals, and whileacknowledgingCaves’ (1998)warning that attempting to point out fruitful areas for futureresearch is a fool’s errand, there are a number of broad themes not addressed earlier thatappear to be worthy of more concentrated research efforts for publication in the leadingmanagement journals. They include multinational micro level research, societal factors ofthe global environment, and multinational enterprise strategies.

Multinational micro level research. As previously mentioned, international micro levelresearch seems to be overlooked in the leading management journals. Although some re-search has looked at multinational teams and multinational negotiation, very little has fo-cused on international issues such as leadership of multinational employees, multinationalcommunication, multinational motivation, multinational conflict resolution, or multina-tional team-building. As organizations become comprised of more multinational employeesand form more multinational partnerships, we need to know more about how to effectivelymanage multinational employees, teams, and divisions.

Societal factors of the global environment. Although a few studies in this review focusedon environmental policies, almost no research considered other aspects of a multinational’sinfluence on societal issues andvice versa. AlthoughSchollhammer (1994)andWright andRicks (1994)called for more of this research, little has been published in the leading man-agement journals. Research looking at topics such as the ethics, societal effects, stakeholderimplications, and performance implications of MNC labor policies, MNC discrimination,MNC legal compliance or MNC political actions would be welcome.

MNC strategies. As evident from this review, other than the areas of strategic al-liances and entry mode strategies there is very little research on MNC strategies. Pastreviews have called for more research on determining optimum MNC strategies, MNC de-cision making strategies, strategic options, strategy formation, and competitive processes


(Caves, 1998;Schollhammer, 1994; Spivey & Thomas, 1990 Wright & Ricks, 1994). Basedon the lack of current research in the leading management journals in these areas, it appearsthey are still deserving of a more concentrated research focus.

Conclusion

The organizing framework presented here was not meant to be the definitive classificationsystem of IM research. Numerous studies provide linkages between different topics, andsome sub-topics could stand on their own. This framework was presented to assist the readerin organizing the considerable number of studies reviewed and to aid readers in identifyingpotential areas for future research and areas where considerable progress has been made.Over the last 20 years the top management journal space devoted to IM has substantiallyincreased; however, it is still only a small percentage. Numerous questions remain. Althoughthe field of IM has advanced considerably, it has raised as many questions as it has answered.The challenge remains to continue answering the emerging questions.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Lance Brouthers, Robert Konopaske, Keith Brouthers, and MichaelDutch for their helpful comments and assistance on previous drafts of this manuscript. Iwould also like to thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive andinsightful comments.

References

Adler, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. I. 1997. Ergonomics, employee involvement, and the Toyota productionsystem: A case study of NUMMI’S 1993 model introduction.Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 50:416–437.

Almeida, P. 1996. Knowledge sourcing by foreign multinationals: Patent citation analysis in the US semiconductorindustry.Strategic Management Journal, 17: 155–165.

Anand, J., & Delios, A. 1997. Location specificity and the transferability of downstream assets to foreignsubsidiaries.Journal of International Business Studies, 28: 579–603.

Anand, J., & Kogut, B. 1997. Technological capabilities of countries, firm rivalry and foreign direct investment.Journal of International Business Studies, 28: 445–465.

Andersson, T., & Fredriksson, T. 1996. International organization of production and variation in exportation fromaffiliates.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 249–263.

Appold, S. J., Siengthai, S., & Kasarda, J. D. 1998. The employment of women managers and professionals inan emerging economy: Gender inequality as an organizational practice.Administrative Science Quarterly, 43:538–565.

Aram, J. D. 1997. Challenges to the social foundations of capitalism in an age of global economics.HumanRelations, 50: 967–986.

Arora, A., & Fosfuri, A. 2000. Wholly owned subsidiary vs. technology licensing in the worldwide chemicalindustry.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 555–572.

Arora, A., & Gambardella, A. 1997. Domestic markets and international competitiveness: Generic andproduct-specific competencies in the engineering sector.Strategic Management Journal, 18: 53–74.


Aryee, S., Chay, Y. W., & Chew, J. 1996. An investigation of the willingness of managerial employees to acceptan expatriate assignment.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17: 267–283.

Athanassiou, N., & Nigh, D. 1999. The impact of US company Internationalization on top management teamadvice networks: A tacit knowledge perspective.Strategic Management Journal, 20: 83–92.

Athanassiou, N., & Nigh, D. 2000. Internationalization, tacit knowledge and the top management team of MNCs.Journal of International Business Studies, 3: 471–487.

Aulakh, P. S., Cavusgil, S. T., & Sarkar, M. B. 1998. Compensation in international licensing agreements.Journalof International Business Studies, 29: 409–420.

Aulakh, P. S., Kotabe, M., & Sahay, A. 1996. Trust and performance in cross-border marketing partnerships: Abehavioral approach.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 1005–1032.

Aulakh, P. S., Kotabe, M., & Teegen, H. 2000. Export strategies and performance of firms from emergingeconomies: Evidence from Brazil, Chile, and Mexico.Academy of Management Journal, 43: 342–361.

Autio, E., Sapienza, H. J., & Almeida, J. G. 2000. Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity and imitability oninternational growth.Academy of Management Journal, 43: 909–942.

Balabanis, G. I. 2000. Factors affecting export intermediaries’ service offerings: The British example.Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 31: 83–99.

Banerji, K., & Sambharya, R. B. 1996. Vertical keiretsu and international market entry: The case of the Japaneseautomobile ancillary industry.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 89–113.

Barkema, H. G., Bell, J. H. J., & Pennings, J. M. 1996. Foreign entry, cultural barriers, and learning.StrategicManagement Journal, 17: 151–166.

Barkema, H. G., Shenkar, O., Vermeulen, F., & Bell, J. H. 1997. Working abroad, working with others: How firmslearn to operate international joint ventures.Academy of Management Journal, 40: 426–442.

Barkema, H. G., & Vermeulen, F. 1997. What differences in the cultural backgrounds of partners are detrimentalfor international joint ventures?Journal of International Business Studies, 28: 845–864.

Barkema, H. G., & Vermeulen, F. 1998. International expansion through start-up or acquisition: A learningperspective.Academy of Management Journal, 41: 7–26.

Birkinshaw, J. 1996. How multinational subsidiary mandates are gained and lost.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 27: 467–495.

Birkinshaw, J. 1997. Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: The characteristics of subsidiary initiatives.Strategic Management Journal, 18: 207–229.

Birkinshaw, J., Bresman, H., & Håkanson, L. 2000. Managing the post-acquisition integration process: How thehuman integration and task integration processes interact to foster value creation.Journal of ManagementStudies, 37: 395–425.

Birkinshaw, J., & Hood, N. 1998. Multinational subsidiary evolution: Capability and charter change inforeign-owned subsidiary companies.Academy of Management Review, 23: 773–795.

Birkinshaw, J., & Hood, N. 2000. Characteristics of foreign subsidiaries in industry clusters.Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 31: 141–154.

Birkinshaw, J., Hood, N., & Jonsson, S. 1998. Building firm-specific advantages in multinational corporations:The role of subsidiary initiative.Strategic Management Journal, 19: 221–241.

Bogner, W. C., Thomas, H., & McGee, J. 1996. A longitudinal study of the competitive positions and entry pathsof European firms in the US pharmaceutical market.Strategic Management Journal, 17: 85–107.

Bolino, M. C., & Feldman, D. C. 2000. The antecedents and consequences of underemployment among expatriates.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21: 889–911.

Borkowski, S. C. 1999. International managerial performance evaluation: A five country comparison.Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 30: 535–555.

Brannen, M. Y., & Salk, J. E. 2000. Partnering across borders: Negotiating organizational culture in aGerman-Japanese joint venture.Human Relations, 53: 451–487.

Bresman, H., Birkinshaw, J., & Nobel, R. 1999. Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions.Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 30: 439–462.

Brett, J. M., & Okumura, T. 1998. Inter- and intracultural negotiation: US and Japanese negotiators.Academy ofManagement Journal, 41: 495–510.

Brouthers, K. D., & Bamossy, G. J. 1997. The role of key stakeholders in international joint venture negotiations:Case studies from Eastern Europe.Journal of International Business Studies, 28: 285–308.


Brouthers, K. D., & Brouthers, L. E. 2000. Acquisition or Greenfield start-up? Institutional, cultural and transactioncost influences.Strategic Management Journal, 21: 89–97.

Brouthers, L. E., Brouthers, K. D., & Werner, S. 1999. Is Dunning’s eclectic framework descriptive or normative?Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 831–844.

Brouthers, L. E., Werner, S., & Matulich, E. 2000. The influence of triad nations’ environments on price-qualityproduct strategies and MNC performance.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 39–62.

Brouthers, L. E., Werner, S., & Wilkinson, T. J. 1996. The aggregate impact of firms’ FDI strategies on the tradebalances of host countries.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 359–373.

Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. C. 1996. An economic model of international joint venture strategy.Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 27: 849–876.

Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. C. 1998a. Analyzing foreign market entry strategies: Extending the internalizationapproach.Journal of International Business Studies, 29: 539–562.

Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. C. 1998. Models of the multinational enterprise.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 29: 21–44.

Busija, E. C., O’Neil, H. M., & Zeithaml, C. P. 1997. Diversification strategy, entry mode, and performance:Evidence of choice and constraints.Strategic Management Journal, 18: 321–327.

Butler, K. C., & Joaquin, D. C. 1998. A note on political risk and the required return on foreign direct investment.Journal of International Business Studies, 29: 599–608.

Cadogan, J. W., Diamantopoulos, A., & De Mortanges, C. P. 1999. A measurement of export market orientation:Scale development and cross-cultural validation.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 689–707.

Caligiuri, P. M., Hyland, M. M., Joshi, A., & Bross, A. S. 1998. Testing a theoretical model for examining therelationship between family adjustment and expatriates’ work adjustment.Journal of Applied Psychology, 83:598–614.

Campa, J. M., & Guilléen, M.F. 1999. The internalization of exports: Firm- and location-specific factors in amiddle-income country.Management Science, 45: 1463–1478.

Capron, L. 1999. The long-term performance of horizontal acquisitions.Strategic Management Journal, 20: 987–1018.

Capron, L., Dussauge, P., & Mitchell, W. 1998. Resource redevelopment following horizontal acquisitions inEurope and North America, 1988–1992.Strategic Management Journal, 19: 631–661.

Caves, R. E. 1998. Research on international business: Problems and prospects.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 29: 5–19.

Celly, K. S., Spekman, R. E., & Kamauff, J. W. 1999. Technological uncertainty, buyer preferences and supplierassurances: An examination of Pacific Rim purchasing arrangements.Journal of International Business Studies,30: 297–316.

Chang, S., & Rosenzweig, P. M. 1998. Industry and regional patterns in sequential foreign market entry.Journalof Management Studies, 35: 797–822.

Chang, E., & Taylor, M. S. 1999. Control in multinational corporations (MNCS): The case of Korean manufacturingsubsidiaries.Journal of Management, 25: 541–565.

Chen, H., & Chen, T. J. 1998. Network linkages and location choice in foreign direct investment.Journal ofInternational Business studies, 29: 445–468.

Chi, T., & McGuire, D. J. 1996. Collaborative ventures and value of learning: Integrating the transaction cost andstrategic option perspectives on the choice of market entry modes.Journal of International Business Studies,27: 285–307.

Chikudate, N. 1999. Generating reflexivity from partnership formation.The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,35: 287–305.

Child, J., Faulkner, D., & Pitkethly, R. 2000. Foreign direct investment in the UK, 1985–1994: The impact ondomestic management practice.Journal of Management Studies, 37: 141–166.

Choi, C. J., Lee, S. H., & Kim, J. B. 1999. A note on countertrade: Contractual uncertainty and transactiongovernance in emerging economies.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 189–202.

Contractor, F. J., & Kundu, S. K. 1998. Modal choice in a world of alliances: Analyzing organizational forms inthe international hotel sector.Journal of International Business Studies, 29: 325–358.

Cooke, W. N. 1997. The influence of industrial relations factors on US foreign direct investment abroad.Industrialand Labor Relations Review, 51: 3–17.


Czaban, L., & Whitley, R. 2000. Incremental organizational change in a transforming society: Managing turbulencein Hungary in the 1900s.Journal of Management, 37: 371–393.

Czinkota, M. R., & Ronkainen, I. A. 1997. International business and trade in the next decade: Report from aDelphi study.Journal of International Business Studies, 28: 244–287.

Daily, C. M., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, D. R. 2000. International experience in the executive suite: Path to prosperity?Strategic Management Journal, 21: 515–523.

Das, A., Handfield, R. B., Calantone, R. J., & Ghosh, S. 2000. A contingent view of quality management: Theimpact of international competition on quality.Decision Sciences, 31: 649–689.

Davis, P. S., Desai, A. B., & Francis, J. D. 2000. Mode of international entry: An isomorphism perspective.Journalof International Business Studies, 31: 239–258.

Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. 1999a. Geographic scope, product diversification, and the corporate performance ofJapanese firms.Strategic Management Journal, 20: 711–727.

Delios, A., & Beamish, P. W. 1999. Ownership strategy of Japanese firms: Transactional, institutional, andexperience influences.Strategic Management Journal, 20: 915–933.

Delios, A., & Henisz, W. J. 2000. Japanese firms’ investment strategies in emerging economies.Academy ofManagement Journal, 43: 305–323.

Denison, D. R., Dutton, J. E., Kahn, J. A., & Hart, S. L. 1996. Organizational context and the interpretation ofstrategic issues: A note on CEOs’ interpretations of foreign investment.Journal of Management Studies, 33:453–474.

Doeringer, P. B., Evans-Klock, C., & Terkla, D. G. 1998. Hybrids or hodgepodges? Workplace practices of Japaneseand domestic startups in the Unites States.Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 51: 171–186.

Doh, J. P. 2000. Entrepreneurial privatization Strategies: Order of entry and local partner collaboration as sourceof competitive advantage.Academy of Management Review, 25: 551–571.

Doucet, L., & Jehn, K. A. 1997. Analyzing harsh words in a sensitive setting: American expatriates in communistchina.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18: 559–582.

Dowell, G., Hart, S., & Yeung, B. 2000. Do corporate global environmental standards create or destroy marketvalue?Management Science, 46: 1059–1074.

Doz, Y. L. 1996. The evolution for cooperation in strategic alliances: Initial conditions or learning processes.Strategic Management Studies, 17: 55–83.

Driffield, N., & Munday, M. 2000. Industrial performance, agglomeration, and foreign manufacturing investmentin the UK.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 21–37.

Dubois, F. L., & Reeb, D. M. 2000. Ranking the International Business Journals.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 31: 689–704.

Dunning, J. H. 1998. Location and the multinational enterprise: A neglected factor?Journal of InternationalBusiness Studies, 29: 45–66.

Dussauge, P., Garrette, B., & Mitchell, W. 2000. Learning from competing partners: Outcomes and durations ofscale and link alliances in Europe.Strategic Management Journal, 21: 99–126.

Dyer, J. H., & Chu, W. 2000. The determinants of trust in supplier-automaker relationships in the US, Japan, andKorea.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 259–285.

Dyer, J. H., & Nobeoka, K. 2000. Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: TheToyota case.Strategic Management, 21: 345–367.

Earley, P. C., & Mosakowski, E. 2000. Creating hybrid teams cultures: An empirical test of transnational teamfunctioning.Academy of Management Journal, 43: 26–49.

Edwards, C. T., & Samimi, R. 1997. Japanese interfirm networks: Exploring the seminal sources of their success.Journal of Management Studies, 34: 489–510.

Elg, U. 2000. Firms’ home-market relationships: Their role when selecting international alliance partners.Journalof International Business Studies, 31: 169–177.

Ellis, P. 2000. Social ties and Foreign market entry.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 443–469.Eriksson, K., Johanson, J., Majkgård, A., & Sharma, D. D. 1997. Experiential knowledge and cost in the

internationalization process.Journal of International Business Studies, 28: 337–360.Erramilli, M. K. 1996. Nationality and subsidiary ownership patterns in multinational corporations.Journal of

International Business, 27: 225–248.Erramilli, M. K., Agarwal, S., & Kim, S. 1997. Are firm-specific advantages location-specific too?Journal of

International Business Studies, 28: 735–757.


Feldman, D. C., Folks, W. R., & Turnley, W. H. 1999. Mentor-protégé diversity and its impact on internationalinternship experience.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20: 597–611.

Ferner, A. 2000. The underpinnings of ‘bureaucratic’ control systems: HRM in European multinationals.Journalof Management Studies, 37: 321–539.

Fiegenbaum, A., Shaver, J. M., & Yeung, B. 1997. Which firms expand to the Middle East: The experience of USmultinationals.Strategic Management Journal, 18: 141–148.

Gamble, P. R., & Gibson, D. A. 1999. Executive values and decision making: The relationship of cultural andinformation flows.Journal of Management Studies, 36: 217–240.

Garonzik, R., Brockner, J., & Siegel, P. A. 2000. Identifying international assignees at risk for premature departure:The interactive effect of outcome favorability and procedural fairness.Journal of Applied Psychology, 85: 13–20.

George, J. M., Jones, G. R., & Gonzalez, J. A. 1998. The role of affect in cross-culture negotiations.Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 29: 749–772.

Geringer, J. M., Tallman, S., & Olsen, D. M. 2000. Product and international diversification among Japanesemultinational firms.Strategic Management Journal, 21: 51–80.

Glaister, K. W., & Buckley, P. J. 1996. Strategic motives for international alliance formation.Journal ofManagement Studies, 33: 301–332.

Globerman, S., & Shapiro, D. M. 1999. The Impact of government policies on foreign direct investment: TheCanadian experience.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 513–532.

Gomes, L., & Ramaswamy, K. 1999. An empirical examination of the form of the relationship betweenmultinationality and performance.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 173–188.

Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Balkin, D. B. 1992. Determinants of faculty pay: An agency theory perspective.Academyof Management Journal, 35: 921–955.

Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Palich, L. E. 1997. Cultural diversity and the performance of multinational firms.Journalof International Studies, 28: 309–335.

Graham, E. M. 1998. Market structure and the multinational enterprise: A game-theoretic approach.Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 29: 67–83.

Gregersen, H. B., & Black, J. S. 1996. Multiple commitments upon repatriation: The Japanese experience.Journalof Management, 22: 209–229.

Gregersen, H. B., Hite, J. M., & Black, J. S. 1996. Expatriate performance appraisal in US multinational firms.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 711–734.

Gregersen, H. B., & Stroh, L. K. 1997. Coming home to the arctic cold: Antecedents to Finnish expatriate andspouse repatriation adjustment.Personnel Psychology, 50: 635–654.

Griffith, D. A., Hu, M. Y., & Ryans, J. K., Jr. 2000. Process standardization across intra- and inter-culturalrelationships.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 303–324.

Grosse, R. 1996. International technology transfer in services.Journal of International Business Studies, 27:781–800.

Grosse, R., & Trevino, L. J. 1996. Foreign direct investment in the United States: An analysis by country of origin.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 139–155.

Guillén, M.F. 2000a. Organized labor’s images of multinational enterprise: Divergent foreign investment ideologiesin Argentina, South Korea, and Spain.Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 53: 419–442.

Guillén, M.F. 2000. Business groups in emerging economies: A resource-base view.Academy of ManagementJournal, 43: 362–380.

Gupta, A., & Govindarajan, V. 2000. Knowledge flows within multinational corporations.Strategic ManagementJournal, 21: 473–496.

Gupta, A., Govindarajan, V., & Malhotra, A. 1999. Feedback-seeking behavior within multinational corporations.Strategic Management Journal, 20: 205–222.

Hagedoorn, J., & Narula, R. 1996. Choosing organizational modes of strategic technology partnering: Internationaland sectoral differences.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 265–284.

Hanson, G. H., & Harrison, A. 1999. Trade liberalization and wage inequality in Mexico.Industrial and LaborRelations Review, 52: 271–288.

Harvey, M. 1997. Dual-career expatriates: Expectations, adjustment and satisfaction with international relocation.Journal of International Business Studies, 28: 627–658.


Harzing, A. 2000. An empirical analysis and extension of the Bartlett and Ghoshal typology of multinationalcompanies.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 101–120.

Hejazi, W., & Safarian, A. E. 1999. Trade, foreign direct investment, and R&D spillovers.Journal of InternationalBusiness Studies, 30: 491–511.

Hendry, C. 1996. Continuities in human resource processes in internationalization and domestic businessmanagement.Journal of Management Studies, 33: 475–494.

Hennart, J., & Larimo, J. 1998. The impact of culture on the strategy of multinational enterprises: Does nationalorigin affect ownership decisions?Journal of International Business Studies, 29: 515–538.

Hennart, J., & Reddy, S. 1997. The choice between mergers/acquisitions and joint ventures: The case of Japaneseinvestors in the United States.Strategic Management Journal, 18: 1–12.

Hennart, J., & Reddy, S. 2000. Digestibility and asymmetric information in the choice between acquisitions andjoint ventures: Where’s the beef?Strategic Management Journal, 21: 191–193.

Hennart, J., Roehl, T., & Zietlow, D. S. 1999. ‘Trojan horse’ or ‘workhorse’? The evolution of US–Japanese jointventures in the United States.Strategic Management Journal, 20: 15–29.

Hitt, M. A., Dacin, M. T., Levitas, E., Arregle, J., & Borza, A. 2000. Partner selection in emerging and developedmarket contexts: Resource-based and organizational learning perspectives.Academy of Management Journal,43: 449–467.

Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Kim, H. 1997. International diversification: Effects on innovation and firmperformance in product-diversified firms.Academy of Management Journal, 40: 767–798.

Holm, D. B., Eriksson, K., & Johanson, J. 1996. Business networks and cooperation in international businessrelationships.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 1033–1053.

Holm, D. B., Eriksson, K., & Johanson, J. 1999. Creating value through mutual commitment to business networkrelationships.Strategic Management Journal, 20: 467–486.

Hooley, G., Cox, T., Shipley, D., Fahy, J., Beracs, J., & Kolos, K. 1996. Foreign direct investment in Hungary:Resource acquisition and domestic competitive advantage.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 682–709.

Hubbard, A. S. 1999. Cultural and status differences in intergroup conflict resolution: A longitudinal study of aMiddle East dialogue group in the United States.Human Relations, 52: 303–325.

Hult, G. T. M. 1998. Managing the international strategic sourcing process as a market-driven organizationallearning system.Decision Sciences, 29: 193–216.

Hult, G. T. M., Hurley, R. F., Giunipero, L. C., & Nicholas, E. L., Jr. 2000. Organizational learning in globalpurchasing: A model and test of internal user and corporate buyers’.Decision Sciences, 31: 293–325.

Hundley, G., & Jacobson, C. K. 1998. The effects of the keiretsu on the export performance of Japanese companies:Help or Hindrance?Strategic Management Journal, 19: 927–937.

Inkpen, A. C., & Beamish, P. W. 1997. Knowledge, bargaining power, and the instability of international jointventures.Academy of Management Journal, 22: 177–202.

Isobe, T., Makino, S., & Montgomery, D. B. 2000. Resource commitment, entry timing, and market performanceof foreign direct investments in emerging economies: The case of Japanese international joint ventures in China.Academy of Management Journal, 43: 468–484.

Ito, K. 1997. Domestic competitive position and export strategy of Japanese manufacturing firms: 1971–1985.Management science, 43: 610–622.

Johnson, J. L., Cullen, J. B., Sakano, T., & Takenouchi, H. 1996. Setting the stage for trust and strategic integrationin Japanese-US cooperative alliances.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 981–1004.

Johnson, J. L., & Podsakoff, P. M. 1994. Journal influence in the field of management: An analysis using Salancik’sindex in a dependency network.Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1392–1407.

Kacmar, K. M., & Whitfield, J. M. 2000. An additional rating method for journal articles in the field of management.Organizational Research Methods, 3: 392–406.

Kashlak, R. J., Chandran, R., & Di Benedetto, C. A. 1998. Reciprocity in international business: A study oftelecommunications alliances and contracts.Journal of International Business Studies, 29: 281–304.

Katrishen, F. A., & Scordis, N. A. 1998. Economies of scale in services: A study of multinational insurers.Journalof International Business Studies, 29: 305–324.

Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. A. 1996. procedural justice and managers’ in-role and extra-role behavior: The caseof the multinational.Management Science, 42: 499–515.


Klein, K. J., Tosi, H., & Cannella, A. A., Jr. 1999. Multilevel theory building: Benefits, barriers, and newdevelopments.Academy of Management Review, 24: 243–248.

Kogut, B. 2000. The network as knowledge: Generative rules and the emergence of structure.Strategic ManagementJournal, 21: 405–425.

Kostova, T., & Zaheer, S. 1999. Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of themultinational enterprise.Academy of Management Review, 24: 64–81.

Krug, J. A., & Hegarty, W. H. 1997. Post acquisition turnover among U.S. top management teams: An analysis ofthe effect of foreign vs. domestic acquisitions of US targets.Strategic Management Journal, 18: 667–675.

Kuemmerle, W. 1999. The drivers of foreign direct investment into research and development: An empiricalinvestigation.Journal International Business Studies, 30: 1–24.

Kuruvilla, S. 1996. Linkages between industrialization strategies and industrial relations/human resource policies:Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, and India.Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 49: 635–657.

Kwok, C. C. K., & Reeb, D. M. 2000. Internationalization and firm risk: An upstream-downstream hypothesis.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 611–629.

Langfield-Smith, K., & Greenwood, M. R. 1998. Developing co-operative buyer-supplier relationships: A casestudy of Toyota.Journal of Management Studies, 35: 331–353.

Lawler, J. J., & Bae, J. 1998. Overt employment discrimination by multinational firms: Cultural and economicinfluences in a developing country.Industrial Relations, 37: 126–149.

Lee, T., & Caves, R. E. 1998. Uncertain outcomes of foreign investment: Determinants of the dispersion of profitsafter large acquisitions.Journal of International Business Studies, 29: 563–582.

Leiba-O’Sullivan, S. 1999. The distinction between stable and dynamic cross-cultural competencies: Implicationsfor expatriate trainability.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 709–725.

Leonidou, L. C., & Katsikeas, C. S. 1996. The export development process: An integrative review of empiricalmodels.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 517–551.

Lessard, D. R., & Zaheer, S. 1996. Breaking the silos: Distributed knowledge and strategic responses to volatileexchange rates.Strategic Management Journal, 17: 513–533.

Leung, K., Smith, P. B., Wang, Z., & Sun, H. 1996. Job satisfaction in joint venture hotels in China: Anorganizational justice analysis.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 947–962.

Liang, N., & Parkhe, A. 1997. Importer behavior: The neglected counterpart of international exchange.Journalof International Business Studies, 28: 495–530.

Liesch, P. W., & Knight, G. A. 1999. Information internationalization and hurdle rates in small and mediumenterprise internationalization.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 383–394.

Lin, X., & Germain, R. 1998. Sustaining satisfactory joint venture relationships: The role of conflict resolutionstrategy.Journal of International Business Studies, 29: 179–196.

Liu, X., Siler, P., Wang, C., & Wei, Y. 2000. Productivity spillover from foreign direct investment: Evidence fromUK industry level panel data.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 407–425.

Lord, M. D., & Ranft, A. L. 2000. Organizational learning about new international markets: Exploring the internaltransfer of local market knowledge.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 573–589.

Luo, Y. 1998. Timing of investment and international expansion performance in China.Journal of InternationalBusiness Studies, 29: 391–408.

Luo, Y. 1999. Time-based experience and international expansion: The case of an emerging economy.Journal ofManagement Studies, 36: 505–534.

Luo, Y., & Peng, M. W. 1999. Learning to compete in a transition economy: Experience, environment, andperformance.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 269–296.

Lyles, M. A., & Salk, J. E. 1996. Knowledge acquisition from foreign parents in international joint ventures: Anempirical examination in the Hungarian context.Journal of International Business Studies, 26: 877–903.

Madhok, A. 1997. Cost, value and foreign market entry mode: The transaction and the firm.Strategic ManagementJournal, 18: 39–61.

Madhok, A., & Osegowitsch, T. 2000. The international biotechnology industry: A dynamic capabilitiesperspective.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 325–335.

Mair, A. 1999. Learning from Honda.Journal of Management Studies, 36: 25–44.Makhija, M. V., Kim, K., & Williamson, S. D. 1997. Measuring globalization of industries using a national industry

approach: Empirical evidence across five countries and over time.Journal of International Business Studies,28: 679–710.


Makino, S., & Beamish, P. W. 1998. Performance and survival of joint ventures with non-conventional ownershipstructures.Journal of International Business Studies, 29: 797–818.

Makino, S., & Delios, A. 1996. Local knowledge transfer and performance: Implications for alliance formationin Asia.Journal of International Business Studies, 26: 905–927.

Makino, S., & Neupert, K. E. 2000. National culture, transaction costs, and the choice between joint venture andwholly owned subsidiary.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 705–713.

Malnight, T. W. 1996. The transition from decentralized to network-based MNC structures: An evolutionaryperspective.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 43–65.

Markoczy, L. 2000. National culture and strategic change in belief formation.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 31: 427–442.

Martin, X., Swaminathan, A., & Mitchell, W. 1998. Organizational evolution in the interorganizationalenvironment: Incentives and constraints on international expansion strategy.Administrative Science Quarterly,43: 566–601.

Mascarenhas, B. 1996. The founding of specialist firms in a global fragmenting industry.Journal of InternationalBusiness Studies, 27(1): 27–42.

Mata, J., & Portugal, P. 2000. Closure and divestiture by foreign entrants: The impact of entry and post-entrystrategies.Strategic Management Journal, 21: 549–562.

McDougall, P. P., & Oviatt, B. M. 2000. International entrepreneurship: The intersection of two research paths.Academy of Management Journal, 43: 902–906.

McGee, J. 1998. Commentary on ‘Corporate strategies and environmental regulations: An organizing framework’by A.M. Rugman and A. Verbeke.Strategic Management Journal, 19: 377–387.

McNamara, G., & Vaaler, P. M. 2000. The influence of competitive positioning and rivalry on emerging marketrisk assessment.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 337–347.

Melewar, T. C., & Saunders, J. 1999. International corporate visual identity: Standardization or localization?Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 583–598.

Mendenhall, M., Beaty, D., & Oddou, G. R. 1993. Where have all the theorists gone? An archival review of theinternational management literature.International Journal of Management, 10: 146–153.

Merchant, H., & Schendel, D. 2000. How do international joint ventures create shareholder value?StrategicManagement Journal, 21: 723–737.

Meschi, P. 1997. Longevity and cultural differences of international joint ventures: Toward time-based culturalmanagement.Human Relations, 50: 211–226.

Meznar, M. B., Nigh, D., & Kwok, C. C. Y. 1998. Announcements of withdrawal from South Africa revisited:Marking sense of contradictory event study findings.Academy of Management Journal, 41: 715–730.

Miller, S. R., & Parkhe, A. 1998. Patterns in the expansion of US banks’ foreign operations.Journal of InternationalBusiness Studies, 29: 359–390.

Miller, K. D., & Reuer, J. J. 1998. Asymmetric corporate exposure to foreign exchange rate changes.StrategicManagement Journal, 19: 1183–1191.

Mishra, C. S., & Gobeli, D. H. 1998. Managerial incentives, internalization and market valuation of multinationalfirms.Journal of International Business Studies, 29: 583–598.

Money, R. B. 1998. International multilateral negotiations and social networks.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 29: 695–710.

Moon, C. W., & Lado, A. A. 2000. MNC-host government bargaining power relationship: A critique and extensionwithin the resource-based view.Journal of Management, 26: 85–117.

Morosini, P., Shane, S., & Singh, H. 1998. National culture distance and cross-border acquisition performance.Journal of International Business Studies, 29: 137–158.

Murtha, T. P., Lenway, S. A., & Bagozzi, R. P. 1998. Global mind-sets and cognitive shift in a complex multinationalcorporation.Strategic Management Journal, 19: 97–114.

Myers, M. B. 1999. Incidents of gray market activity among US exporters: Occurrences, characteristics, andconsequences.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 105–126.

Nachum, L. 2000. Economic geography and the location of TNCS: Financial and professional service FDI to theUSA. Journal of International Studies, 31: 367–385.

Nehrt, C. 1996. Timing and intensity effects of environmental investments.Strategic Management Journal, 17:535–547.


Nehrt, C. 1998. Maintainability of first mover advantages when environmental regulations differ between countries.Academy of Management Review, 23: 77–97.

Newburry, W., & Zeira, Y. 1999. Autonomy and effectiveness of equity international joint ventures (EIJVs): Ananalysis based on EIJVs in Hungary and Britain.Journal of Management Studies, 36: 263–285.

Newman, K. L., & Nollen, S. D. 1996. Culture and congruence: The fit between management practices and nationalculture.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 753–779.

Nobel, R., & Birkinshaw, J. 1998. Innovation in multinational corporations: Control and communication patternsin international R&D operations.Strategic management Journal, 19: 479–496.

Nordberg, M., Campbell, A. J., & Verbeke, A. 1996. Can market-based contracts substitute for alliances in hightechnology markets?Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 963–979.

O’Donnell, S. W. 2000. Managing foreign subsidiaries: Agent of headquarters, or an interdependent network?Strategic Management Journal, 21: 525–548.

O’Grady, S., & Lane, H. W. 1996. The psychic distance paradox.Journal of International Business Studies, 27:309–333.

Oliver, E. G., & Cravens, K. S. 1999. Cultural influences on managerial choice: An empirical study of employeebenefit plans in the United States.Journal of International Management, 30: 745–762.

Ostry, S. 1998. Technology, productivity and the multinational enterprise.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 29: 85–99.

Padmanabhan, P., & Cho, K. R. 1999. Decision specific experience in foreign ownership and establishmentstrategies: Evidence from Japanese firms.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 25–44.

Palich, L. E., & Gomez-Mejia, L. E. 1999. A theory of global strategy and firm efficiencies: Considering the effectsof cultural diversity.Journal of Management, 25: 587–606.

Pan, Y. 1996. Influences on foreign equity ownership level in joint ventures in China.Journal of InternationalBusiness Studies, 27: 1–26.

Pan, Y. 1997. The formation of Japanese and US equity joint ventures in China.Strategic Management Journal,18: 247–254.

Pan, Y., & Chi, P. K. 1999. Financial performance and survival of multinational corporations in China.StrategicManagement Journal, 20: 359–374.

Pan, Y., & Li, X. 2000. Joint venture formation of very large multinational firms.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 31: 179–189.

Pan, Y., Li, S., & Tse, D. K. 1999. The impact of order and mode of market entry on profitability and market share.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 81–104.

Pan, Y., & Tse, D. K. 1996. Cooperative strategies between foreign firms in an overseas country.Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 27: 929–946.

Pan, Y., & Tse, D. K. 2000. The hierarchical model of market entry modes.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 31: 535–554.

Park, S. H., & Ungson, G. R. 1997. The effect of national culture, organizational complementarily, and economicmotivation on joint venture dissolution.Academy of Management Journal, 40: 279–307.

Peng, M. W., Hill, C. W., & Wang, D. Y. L. 2000. Schumpeterian dynamics vs. Williamsonian considerations: Atest of export intermediary performance.Journal of Management Studies, 37: 167–184.

Peng, M. W., & Ilinitch, A. Y. 1998. Export intermediary firms: A note on export development research.Journalof International Business Studies, 29: 609–620.

Penner-Hahn, J. D. 1998. Firm and environmental influences on the mode and sequence of foreign research anddevelopment activities.Strategic Management Journal, 19: 149–168.

Pierce, B., & Garven, G. 1995. Publishing international business research: A survey of leading journals.Journalof International Business Studies, 26: 69–89.

Pornpitakpan, C. 1999. The effects of cultural adaptation on business relationships: Americans selling to Japaneseand Thais.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 317–338.

Punnett, B. J., & Shenkar, O. 1994. International management research: Toward a contingency approach.Advancesin International Comparative Management, 9: 39–55.

Ramaswamy, K., Kroeck, K. G., & Renforth, W. 1996. Measuring the degree of internationalization of a firm: Acomment.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 167–177.

Rangan, S. 1998. Do multinationals operate flexibly? Theory and evidence.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 29: 217–237.


Rangan, S. 2000. Search and deliberation in international exchange: Microfoundations to some macro patterns.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 205–222.

Rao, A., & Hashimoto, K. 1996. Intercultural influence: A study of Japanese expatriate managers in Canada.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 443–466.

Rao, A., & Schmidt, S. M. 1998. A behavioral perspective on negotiating international alliances.Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 29: 665–694.

Reuber, A. R., & Fischer, E. 1997. The influence of the management team’s international experience on theinternationalization behavior of SMES.Journal of International Business Studies, 28: 807–825.

Reuer, J. J. 2000. Parent firm performance across international joint venture life-cycle stages.Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 31: 1–20.

Reuer, J. J., & Koza, M. P. 2000a. Asymmetric information and joint venture performance: Theory and evidencefor domestic and international joint ventures.Strategic Management Journal, 21: 81–88.

Reuer, J. J., & Koza, M. P. 2000. On lemons and indigestibility: Resource assembly through joint ventures.StrategicManagement Journal, 21: 195–197.

Reuer, J. J., & Leiblein, M. J. 2000. Downside risk implications of multinationality and international joint ventures.Academy of Management Journal, 43: 203–214.

Reuer, J. J., & Miller, K. D. 1997. Agency costs and the performance implications of international joint ventureinternationalization.Strategic Management Journal, 18: 425–438.

Ricks, D. A. 1985. International business research: Past, present, and future.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 16: 1–4.

Ricks, D. A. 1991. Letter from the Editor-in-Chief.Journal of International Business Studies, 22: 1–4.Ricks, D. A., Toyne, B., & Martinez, Z. 1990. Recent developments in international management research.Journal

of Management, 16: 219–253.Rivoli, P., & Salorio, E. 1996. Foreign direct investment and investment under uncertainty.Journal of International

Business Studies, 27: 335–357.Roth, K., & O’Donnell, S. W. 1996. Foreign subsidiary compensation strategy: An agency theory perspective.

Academy of management Journal, 39: 678–703.Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 1998a. Corporate strategies and environmental regulations: An organizing

framework.Strategic Management Journal, 19: 363–375.Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 1998. Multinational enterprises and public policy.Journal of International Business

Studies, 29: 115–136.Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 1998. Corporate strategy and international environmental policy.Journal of

International Business Studies, 29: 819–834.Salk, J. E., & Brannen, M. Y. 2000. National culture, networks, and individual influence in a multinational

management team.Academy of Management Journal, 43: 191–202.Sambharya, R. B. 1996. Foreign experience of top management teams and international diversification strategies

of U.S. multinational corporations.Strategic Management Journal, 17: 739–746.Sanders, W. G., & Carpenter, M. A. 1998. Internationalization and firm governance: The roles of CEO

compensation, top team composition, and board structure.Academy of Management Journal, 41: 158–178.Sarkar, M. B., Cavusgil, S. T., & Aulakh, P. S. 1999. International expansion of telecommunication carriers:

The influence of market structure, network characteristics, and entry imperfections.Journal of InternationalBusiness Studies, 30: 361–382.

Schollhammer, H. 1994. Strategies and methodologies in international business and comparative managementresearch.Management International Review, 34: 5–20.

Schuler, D. A. 1996. Corporate political strategy and foreign competition: The case of the steel industry.Academyof Management Journal, 39: 720–737.

Selmer, J., & De Leon, C. 1996. Parent culture control though organizational acculturation: HCN employeeslearning new work values in foreign business subsidiaries.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17: 557–572.

Seth, A., Song, K. P., & Pettit, R. 2000. managerialism or hubris? An empirical examination of motives for foreignacquisitions of U.S. firms.Journal of International Business Studies, 31: 387–405.

Shaffer, M. A., & Harrison, D. A. 1998. Expatriates’ psychological withdrawal from international assignments:Work, nonwork, and family influences.Personnel Psychology, 51: 87–118.

Shaffer, M. A., Harrison, D. A., & Gilley, K. M. 1999. Dimension, determinants, and differences in the expatriateadjustment process.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 557–581.


Shan, W., & Song, J. 1997. Foreign direct investment and the sourcing of technological advantage: Evidence formthe biotechnology industry.Journal of International Business Studies, 28: 267–284.

Shaver, J. M. 1998. Do foreign-owned and U.S.-owned establishments exhibit the same location pattern in U.S.manufacturing industries?Journal of International Business Studies, 29: 469–492.

Shaver, J. M., & Flyer, F. 2000. Agglomeration economies, firm heterogeneity, and foreign direct investment inthe United States.Strategic Management Journal, 21: 1175–1193.

Shaver, J. M., Mitchell, W., & Yeung, B. 1997. The effect of own-firm and other-firm experience on foreign directinvestment survival in the United States, 1987–1992.Strategic Management Journal, 18: 811–824.

Shrader, R. C., Oviatt, M. B., & McDougall, P. P. 2000. How new ventures exploit trade-offs among internationalrisk factors: Lessons for the accelerated internationalization of the 21st century.Academy of ManagementJournal, 43: 1227–1247.

Simonin, B. L. 1999. Transfer of marketing know-how in international strategic alliances: An empiricalinvestigation of the role and antecedents of knowledge ambiguity.Journal of International Business Studies,30: 463–490.

Soutar, G. N., Grainger, R., & Hedges, P. 1999. Australian and Japanese stereotypes: A two country study.Journalof International Business Studies, 30: 203–216.

Spivey, W. A., & Thomas, L. D. 1990. Global management: Concepts, themes, problems, and research issues.Human Resource Management, 29: 85–97.

Spreitzer, G. M., McCall, M. W., & Mahoney, J. D. 1997. Early identification of international executive potential.Journal of Applied Psychology, 82: 6–29.

Steensma, H. K., & Lyles, M. A. 2000. Explaining IJV survival in a transitional economy through social exchangeand knowledge-based perspectives.Strategic Management Journal, 21: 831–851.

Stuart, T. E., & Podolny, J. M. 1996. Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities.StrategicManagement Journal, 17: 21–38.

Sullivan, D. 1996. Measuring the degree of internationalization of a firm: A reply.Journal of International BusinessStudies, 27: 179–192.

Swan, P. F., & Ettlie, J. E. 1997. U.S.-Japanese manufacturing equity relationships.Academy of ManagementJournal, 40: 462–479.

Syam, S. S. 2000. Multiperiod capacity expansion in globally dispersed regions.Decision Sciences, 31: 173–196.Taggart, J. H. 1997. Autonomy and procedural justice a framework for evaluating subsidiary strategy.Journal of

International Business Strategies, 28: 51–76.Taggart, J. H. 1998. Strategy shifts in MNC subsidiaries.Strategic Management Journal, 19: 663–681.Tahai, A., & Meyer, M. J. 1999. A revealed preference study of management journals’ direct influences.Strategic

Management Journal, 20: 279–296.Tallman, S., & Li, J. 1996. Effects of international diversity and product diversity on the performance of

multinational firms.Academy of Management Journal, 39: 179–196.Tan, B., & Vertinsky, I. 1996. Foreign direct investment by Japanese electronics firms in the United States and

Canada: Modeling the timing of entry.Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 655–681.Taylor, B. 1999. Patterns of control within Japanese manufacturing plants in China: Doubts about Japanization in

Asia.Journal of Management Studies, 36: 853–873.Taylor, S., Beechler, S., & Napier, N. 1996. Toward an integrative model of strategic international human resource

management.Academy of Management Review, 21: 959–985.Thompson, A. G. 1996. Compliance with agreements in cross-culture transactions: Some analytical issues.Journal

of International Business Studies, 27: 375–390.Tihanyi, L., Ellstrand, A. E., Daily, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. 2000. Composition of the top management team and

firm international diversification.Journal of Management, 26: 1157–1177.Tolich, M., Kenney, M., & Biggart, N. 1999. Managing the managers: Japanese management strategies in the

USA. Journal of Management Studies, 36: 587–607.Tse, D. K., Pan, Y., & Au, K. Y. 1997. How MNCS choose entry modes and form alliances: The China experience.

Journal of International Business Studies, 28: 779–805.Tsurumi, Y., & Tsurumi, H. 1999. Fujifilm-Kodak duopolistic competition in Japan and the United States.Journal

of International Business Studies, 30: 813–830.Uhlenbruck, N., & De Castro, J. O. 1998. Privatization from the acquirer’s perspective: A mergers and acquisitions

based framework.Journal of Management Studies, 35: 619–640.


Uhlenbruck, K., & De Castro, J. O. 2000. Foreign acquisitions in Central and Eastern Europe: Outcomes ofprivatization in transitional economic.Academy of Management, 43: 381–402.

Van Fleet, D. D., McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. S. 2000. A theoretical and empirical analysis of journal rankings:The case of formal lists.Journal of Management, 26: 839–861.

Very, P., Lubatkin, M., Calori, R., & Veiga, J. 1997. Relative standing and the performance of recently acquiredEuropean firms.Strategic Management Journal, 18: 593–614.

Walsh, J. 1996. Multinational management strategy and human resource decision making in the single Europeanmarket.Journal of Management Studies, 33: 633–648.

Weber, Y., Shenkar, O., & Raveh, A. 1996. National and corporate cultural fit in mergers/acquisitions: Anexploratory study.Management Science, 42: 1215–1227.

Wells, L. T., Jr. 1998. Multinationals and the developing countries.Journal of International Business studies, 29:101–114.

Werner, S., Brouthers, L. E., & Brouthers, K. D. 1996. International risk and perceived environmental uncertainty:The dimensionality and internal consistency of Miller’s measure.Journal of International Business strategies,27: 571–587.

Wilkinson, T. J., & Brouthers, L. E. 2000. Trade shows, trade missions and state governments: Increasing FDI andhigh-tech exports.Journal of International Business studies, 31: 725–734.

Wood, S. 1996. How different are human resource practices in Japanese “transplants” in the United Kingdom?Industrial Relations, 35: 511–525.

Wright, L. L., Lane, H. W., & Beamish, P. W. 1988. International management research: Lessons from the field,International Studies of Management .International Studies of Management and Organization, 18(3): 55–71.

Wright, R. W., & Ricks, D. A. 1994. Trends in international business research: Twenty-five years later.Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 25: 687–713.

Yahya-Zadeh, M. 1998. A risk-sharing approach to transfer pricing and incentive compensation problems underexchange rate uncertainty.Decision Sciences, 29: 377–404.

Yan, A. 1998. Structural stability and reconfiguration of international joint ventures.Journal of InternationalBusiness Studies, 29: 773–796.

Yan, A., & Zeng, M. 1999. International joint venture instability: A critique of previous research, areconceptualization, and directions for future research.Journal of International Business Studies, 30: 397–414.

Zaheer, A., & Zaheer, S. 1997. Catching the wave: Alertness, responsiveness, and market influence in globalelectronic networks.Management Science, 43: 1493–1509.

Zaheer, S., & Mosakowski, E. 1997. The domestics of the liability of foreignness: A global study of survival infinancial services.Strategic Management Journal, 18: 439–464.

Zahra, S. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hitt, M. A. 2000. International expansion by new venture firms: Internationaldiversity, mode of market entry, technological learning, and performance.Academy of Management Journal,43: 925–950.

Steve Werner is an Associate Professor in the Department of Management at the C.T. BauerCollege of Business, University of Houston. He received his Ph.D. from the Universityof Florida. His research interests include international human resource management andinternational compensation issues.

journal of management

Documents

Transcript of journal of management