CfPs: Management and Internationalization of Latin America´s Firms

International Journal of Business and Emerging Markets (IJBEM)

ISSN print: 1753-6219 | ISSN online: 1753-6227

Call for Papers for the Special IJBEM Issue on

Management and Internationalization of Latin America's Firms

Submission deadline: October 31, 2015

Guest Editors: Dr. Ilan Avrichir (iavrichir@espm.br) and Dr. Felipe Borini
Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing – ESPM, São Paulo, Brazil


Latin America (LA) grows faster, attracts more foreign domestic investment (FDI), and is more populous than the European Union and North America. Though its stock of inward FDI matches that of China, top management journals have given little attention to the region, while conferences, journals, and specialists on China abound. Even when scholars have examined LA, they have focused more on addressing disciplinary issues than on providing insights about the region’s specific issues.

The purpose of this special issue is therefore to promote research that focuses on the economic, cultural, geographical, and/or social conditions specific to LA. We seek articles that test the validity of results obtained in other contexts or that develop or empirically verify new concepts and hypotheses concerning conditions particular to LA.


Suitable questions for these topics would include, but are not limited to, the following:

• · What challenges and opportunities do the relatively low levels of economic and institutional development, as well as high dependence on commodity exports, that predominate in the region confront and offer to companies operating in it? 
• · What managerial and leadership styles are compatible with the scarcity of resources that tend to be significantly greater in LA than in most economically advanced regions? What are characteristics of these styles, and how can they be developed and/or promoted? 
• · What managerial and leadership styles are compatible with features such as orality, informality, and flexibility that research indicates characterize LA’s cultural cluster? Does speaking about a Latin American way of management make sense? Or, is it reasonable to expect one to develop? 
• · Why are negative phenomena such as corruption and the low level of innovation so common, and what measures and experiences have been successful in confronting and mitigating these phenomena? 
• · In what ways and to what extent are the characteristics of the internationalization of LA firms similar or different to those of other regions? How and why is entrepreneurial orientation related to these characteristics? 
• · Do social, economic, and environmental sustainability assume different significance in the context of the region? If so, in what ways should firms seeking to be sustainable act differently in LA than in other locations? 
• · Why have some firms in LA been successful amid international competition despite the adverse circumstances that they must negotiate? How do these firms circumvent the liability of origin? Is their performance linked to comparative advantages? What lessons can be learned from their experiences? 

Important Dates

• · Submission of manuscripts: October 31, 2015 
• · Comments to authors: January 31, 2016 
• · Revised paper submission: April 30, 2016 
• · Publication in late 2016 or early 2017 

Paper submissions

All papers must be submitted online. For more details and the submission link, please see the web page http://www.inderscience.com/info/ingeneral/cfp.php?id=2913.

If you experience any problems submitting your paper online, please contact the publishers via e-mail at submissions@inderscience.com – describing the exact problems you are experiencing. Include in your message: the title of the Special Issue; the title of the Journal; the name of the Guest Editor; your name and your return e-mail address.

Notes for Authors

• · Submitted papers should not have been previously published nor be currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. (N.B. Conference papers may only be submitted if the paper was not originally copyrighted and if it has been completely re-written). 
• · All papers are refereed through a peer review process. A guide for authors, sample copies and other relevant information for submitting papers are available on the Author Guidelines page. 
• · All authors must declare that they have read and agreed to the content of the submitted article. Here is a full statement of our Ethical Guidelines for Authors page. 

Call for Papers: Annals in Social Responsibility

Annals in Social Responsibility

Co-Editors: Timothy M Devinney (Leeds) & Marc Orlitzky (South Australia)

Annals in Social Responsibility is a new journal published once annually. We are currently seeking proposals for manuscripts to be included in the second volume or to be published in subsequent editions.

Journal Description & What Do We Publish?

Annals in Social Responsibility (ASR) publishes articles covering the significant developments in the area of Social Responsibility. ASR is a multi-disciplinary journal that publishes work arising from traditions in management, operations & supply chain management, marketing, economics, accounting & finance, sociology, psychology, political science, law, philosophy and other social and physical sciences that relate to the role that individuals, groups and institutions play in understanding of responsibilities and roles in society. Topics covered in the journal include major theoretical and methodological developments as well as current research in the aforementioned disciplines. Articles typically pertain to issues of corporate social responsibility, environmental and organizational sustainability, economic, corporate, social and political development, corporate, institutional and societal governance, property rights, social institutions and NGOs, and global issues of peace, conflict and human rights. Articles published appeal to a broad intellectual audience in their respective fields.

To be accepted for publication a paper must make a significant contribution to advancing knowledge about social responsibility through new theoretical insights, managerial application, methodology/data—or some combination thereof.

ASR has a particular interest in publishing the following types of manuscripts:

• 1. Comprehensive, state-of-the-art literature reviews that integrate diverse research streams and identify promising directions for future investigations
• 2. Analytical essays that offer new conceptual models or theoretical perspectives and use these frameworks as a foundation for developing research propositions
• 3. Empirical articles that report results from exploratory or hypothesis-testing studies based on quantitative and/or qualitative methodologies
• 4. Methodological papers that refine existing methodologies or develop new ones for investigating particular issues or topics central to the fields of inquiry listed above.

ASR Editorial Review Board

Herman Aguinis (Indiana, USA) – Human Resources, Modelling
Ruth Aguilera (Illinois, USA) – Governance, Intl Business
Pat Auger (Melbourne, AUSTRALIA) – Marketing, Modelling
Pratima Bansal (Ivey-UWO, CANADA) – Management, Sustainability
Michael Barnett (Rutgers, USA) – Management, Sustainability
Russell Belk (York, CANADA) – Marketing, Consumer Behaviour
Gordon Clark (Oxford, UK) – Earth Sciences, Sustainability
Jonathan Doh (Villanova, USA) – Politics, NGOs, Intl Business
Giana Eckhardt (London, Royal Holloway, UK) – Marketing, Consumer Behaviour
Jeffrey Harrison (Richmond, USA) – Strategy, Law
Stuart Hart (Cornell, USA) – Management, Innovation
Michael Hiscox (Harvard, USA) – Politics, Intl Relations
Ans Kolk (Amsterdam, NETHERLANDS) – NGOs, Development, Intl Business
Ted London (Michigan, USA) – NGOs, Development, Intl Business
Jeffrey Malpas (Tasmania, AUSTRALIA) – Ethics, Philosophy
Anita McGahan (Toronto, CANADA) – Strategy, Management
Joachim Schwalbach (Humboldt U-Berlin, GERMANY)
Donald Siegel (SUNY Albany, USA) – Strategy, Management, Governance
N. Craig Smith (Insead, FRANCE) – Strategy, Marketing
Tom Sorrell (Warwick, UK) – Philosophy, Politics
David Vogel (Berkeley, USA) – Economics, Politics
Richard Wilk (Indiana, USA) – Culture, Anthropology
Cynthia Williams (York, CANADA) – Law, Governance
Maurizio Zollo (Bocconi, ITALY) – Strategy, Sustainability

Submission Process

ASR does not accept article submissions without the initial submission of a proposal. The objective of the proposal process is to be efficient in the processing of articles. We want to know "what" you are going to say, "to whom" you are going to say it, "why" what you are saying is important, and "how" you are going to convince your audience of the veracity of your argument. This allows the editorial team to provide author(s) with information that facilitates the review process, while allowing us to be proactive in working with authors.

Proposals should be no longer than 5 pages single-spaced with standard 1-inch margins and in a 12-point font. The proposal must include the following information with the following headings.

The idea: The specific important and innovative idea that is going to be the focus of the article. This should not be long-winded literal description but be a clear and concise statement of the big/new idea that is at the core of what you are doing.

To whom is the article speaking: While ASR is clearly speaking to other scholars interested in issues of social responsibility, it is important to frame your paper in a specific topical and disciplinary area in the first instance. Hence, you need to outline who might be the primary audience for your article. For instance, is it the legal community, anthropologists, or marketing scholars (i.e., to what extent is it disciplinary?)? Is it those interested in human rights, CSR performance, or social innovation (i.e., to what extent is it phenomenon or topic based?)?

The importance of the idea: Why is your paper important? This needs to be understood as you address how you are going to take your specific knowledge and frame it in a way that resonates with your audience. In other words, why is it important to your readership and not just to you?

How are you going to justify, defend and communicate your idea: What is the theoretical and/or empirical evidence the article will be presenting in order to convince your audience of the veracity and importance of your idea? If you have specific data sources, outline what these are. If you are building a theoretical argument, then outline how you are going to logically justify and defend that argument. If your paper is empirical, provide a brief overview of your methods (e.g., experimental design, econometric model, statistical testing, etc.).

More information is available at: http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/asr.htm and submissions are done via manuscript central.

Volume 1 of the journal can be seen here: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/toc/asr/1/1

You can read an editorial discussing the philosophy of the journal here: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/ASR-06-2015-0005

Over time we will be holding a series of workshops on topics of specific interest. We plan to hold these workshops in conjunction with conferences plus also independently.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the editors.


Timothy M. Devinney

University Leadership Chair and Professor of International Business, Pro Dean of Research & Innovation
Leeds University Business School
Maurice Keyworth Building
University of Leeds | Leeds | LS2 9JT | UK

CfP: The creation and capture of entrepreneurial opportunities across national borders

CALL FOR PAPERS

Special Issue of the Journal of International Business Studies

THE CREATION AND CAPTURE OF ENTREPRENEURIAL OPPORTUNITIES ACROSS NATIONAL BORDERS

Special Issue Editors:

• · Gary Knight (Willamette University, USA, gknight@willamette.edu)
• · Peter Liesch (University of Queensland, Australia, p.liesch@uq.edu.au)
• · Lianxi Zhou (Brock University, Canada, lzhou@brocku.ca)
• · Rebecca Reuber (University of Toronto, Canada, reuber@rotman.utoronto.ca)

• Deadline for submission: November 16, 2015
• Tentative publication date: Spring 2017

Introduction

The goal of this special issue of JIBS is to encourage research that deepens knowledge of the creation and capture of entrepreneurial opportunities across national borders by diverse organizational types such as international new ventures (INVs), born global firms, micro-multinationals, corporate entrepreneurs, family businesses, and social and non-profit ventures (e.g., Arregle, Naldi, Nordqvist & Hitt, 2012; Coviello & Jones, 2004; Knight & Cavusgil, 2004; Oviatt & McDougall, 1994; McDougall & Oviatt, 2000; Zahra, 2005; Zahra & George, 2002; Zahra, Newey & Li, 2014).  

International entrepreneurship has been defined as “the discovery, enactment, evaluation, and exploitation of opportunities – across national borders – to create future goods and services” (Oviatt & McDougall, 2005: 7).  Recent commentaries on the field (e.g. Cavusgil & Knight, 2015; Coviello, 2015; Jones, Coviello & Tang, 2011; Keupp & Gassmann, 2009; Mathews & Zander, 2007; Zander, McDougall-Covin & Rose, 2015) have urged scholars to move beyond current understandings of early and accelerated internationalization through richer theoretical and empirical investigations of international entrepreneurship. There has long been consensus that the pursuit of opportunity is the core of entrepreneurship (e.g. Knight, 1921; Schumpeter, 1939; Shane & Venkataraman, 2000), whether opportunities are discovered or created (Alvarez, Barney & Anderson, 2013).   Scholars have identified important processes in this pursuit, including processes related to cognition (e.g. Grégoire, Barr & Shepherd, 2010), effectuation (e.g. Sarasvathy, 2001), and bricolage (e.g. Baker & Nelson, 2005; Garud & Karnoe, 2003), and an opportunity-focused perspective is being extended to international entrepreneurship (e.g. Bingham, 2009; Jones & Casulli, 2014; Mainela, Puhakka & Servais, 2014; Sarasvathy, Kumar, York & Bhagavatula, 2014).

Scholarship that integrates perspectives from entrepreneurship and international business, or spans disciplinary boundaries, can create new perspectives or frameworks that improve our understanding of the creation and capture of opportunities across national borders. We invite submissions that advance international business theory in this domain and, ideally, that also contribute to the entrepreneurship literature.

Possible Research Topics 

The proposed special issue focuses on the creation and capture of entrepreneurial opportunities across national borders. We seek papers that advance theoretical perspectives and provide valuable insights and new knowledge to enrich international entrepreneurship scholarship, and also that guide practitioners and policy-makers.  We invite submissions from scholars who, individually or collectively, draw on varied theoretical perspectives, adopt diverse empirical approaches, and investigate at multiple levels of analysis.  We particularly encourage submissions that provide conceptual clarity of international entrepreneurship as pursued by different types of market actors, and those that provide new empirical contributions.  Well-conceived submissions antithetical to this domain are welcome too, provided they make a meaningful contribution to the international business field more generally.  Examples of appropriate topics and research questions include, but are not limited to, the following:

• ·         How can perspectives from entrepreneurship and international business be integrated to create new perspectives or frameworks to enrich an opportunity-based understanding of international entrepreneurship, and unify and improve heterogeneous constructs and operational definitions?
• ·         What processes are involved in the creation and capture of entrepreneurial opportunities across national borders?   What accounts for variance in these processes and their outcomes?  What is the role in such processes of key IB concepts such as psychic distance, risk, uncertainty, or transnational communities?
• ·         How does the pursuit of international opportunities vary across categories of individuals?  What new concepts, relationships or processes are important in understanding the cognitions, behaviors and/or outcomes associated with the pursuit of international opportunities by focal categories of entrepreneurs (for example, immigrant entrepreneurs, ethnic entrepreneurs, transnational entrepreneurs or women entrepreneurs)?  
• ·         How does the pursuit of international opportunities vary across categories of organizations?  What new concepts, relationships or processes are important in understanding the cognitions, behaviors and/or outcomes associated with the pursuit of international opportunities by focal categories of organizations (for example startups, corporations, SMEs, family businesses, social ventures, not-for-profit ventures, governmental agencies, or non-governmental organizations)?
• ·         How are organizations managing the challenges of early and/or accelerated internationalization in pursuing international opportunities?  How do such firms manage costs, uncertainty and risks in such environments?  How do they overcome inherent liabilities to be perceived as legitimate and reputable?  What are their subsequent trajectories?  We particularly welcome research in this area on firms in emerging, rapid-growth and less-developed economies, and from disciplines that have been under-represented to-date such as human resource management, finance, accounting, operations and policy studies. 
• ·         How do advanced technologies and digitization provide new and enhanced prospects to create and capture international opportunities?  How does the sociomateriality of technologies impact interactions among market actors, and, for example, overcome the challenges of lack of a local presence?  What are trade-offs between scale and adaptation? 
• ·         How do cultures and institutions, such as governments, regulations, and industries, affect market and nonmarket approaches to the pursuit of international opportunities, and, in turn, how do entrepreneurial activities affect cultural and institutional contexts?  What institutional policies and practices impact, or are impacted by, the pursuit of international opportunities?  How does entrepreneurial internationalization vary across different cultural and institutional environments?

Submission Process

All manuscripts will be reviewed as a cohort for this special issue.  Manuscripts must be submitted in the window between November 2, 2015, and November 16, 2015, at 

http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jibs.  All submissions will go through the JIBS regular double-blind review process and follow the standard norms and processes.

For more information about this call for papers, please contact the Special Issue Editors or the JIBS Managing Editor (managing-editor@jibs.net).

References

Alvarez, S.A., Barney, J.B., & Anderson, P. 2013.  Forming and exploiting opportunities:  The implications of discovery and creation processes for entrepreneurial and organizational research.  Organization Science, 24(1): 301-317.

Arregle, J-L., Naldi, L., Nordqvist, M., & Hitt, M.A. 2012.  Internationalization of family-controlled firms: A study of the effects of external involvement in governance.  Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 36(6): 1115-1143.

Baker, T., & Nelson, R. 2005.  Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage.  Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3): 329-366.

Bingham, C. 2009.  Oscillating improvisation: How entrepreneurial firms create success in foreign market entries over time.  Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(4): 321-345.

Cavusgil, S.T., & Knight, G. 2015.  The born global firm:  An entrepreneurial and capabilities perspective on early and rapid internationalization.  Journal of International Business Studies, 46(1): 3-16.

Coviello, N. 2015.  Re-thinking research on born globals.  Journal of International Business Studies, 46(1): 17-26.

Coviello, N., & Jones, M. 2004.  Methodological issues in international entrepreneurship research.  Journal of Business Venturing, 19(4): 485–508. 

Garud, R., & Karnoe, P. 2003.  Bricolage versus breakthrough: Distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship.  Research Policy, 32: 277-300.

Grégoire, D.A., Barr, P.S., & Shepherd, D.A. 2010.  Cognitive process of opportunity recognition:  The role of structural alignment.  Organization Science, 21(2): 413-431.

Jones, M.V., & Casulli, L. 2014.  International entrepreneurship:  Exploring the logic and utility of individual experience through comparative reasoning approaches.  Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 38(1): 45-69.

Jones, M. V., Coviello, N., & Tang, Y. K. 2011.  International entrepreneurship research (1989-2009): A domain ontology and thematic analysis.  Journal of Business Venturing, 26(6): 632-659.

Keupp, M., & Gassmann, O. 2009.  The past and the future of international entrepreneurship: A review and suggestions for developing the field.  Journal of Management, 35(5): 600-633. 

Knight, G., & Cavusgil, S.T. 2004.  Innovation, organizational capabilities, and the born global firm.  Journal of International Business Studies, 35(2): 124-141.

Knight, F.H. 1921.  Risk, Uncertainty and Profit.  New York:  Houghton Mifflin.

Mainela, T., Puhakka, V., & Servais, P. 2014. The concept of international opportunity in international entrepreneurship:  A review and research agenda.  International Journal of Management Reviews 16(1): 105-129.

Mathews, J., & Zander, I. 2007.  The international entrepreneurial dynamics of accelerated internationalization.  Journal of International Business Studies, 38(3): 387-403.

McDougall, P., & Oviatt, B. 2000.  International entrepreneurship: The intersection of two research paths.  Academy of Management Journal, 43(5): 902–906.

Oviatt, B., & McDougall P. 1994.  Toward a theory of international new ventures.  Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1): 45–64.

Oviatt, B. & McDougall, P. 2005.  The internationalization of entrepreneurship.  Journal of International Business Studies, 36(1): 2-8.

Sarasvathy, S.D. 2001.  Causation and effectuation:  Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency.  Academy of Management Review, 26(2): 243-263.

Sarasvathy, S., Kumar, K., York, J.G., & Bhagavatula, S. 2014.  An effectual approach to international entrepreneurship: Overlaps, challenges, and provocative possibilities.  Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 38(1): 71-93.

Schumpeter, J.A. 1939.  Business cycles:  A Theoretical, Historical, and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process.  New York: McGraw-Hill.

Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. 2000.  The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research.  Academy of Management Review, 25(1): 217-226.

Zahra, S. 2005.  A theory of international new ventures: A decade of research.  Journal of International Business Studies, 36(1): 20–28.

Zahra, S., & George, G. 2002.  International entrepreneurship: The current status of the field and future research agenda. In M. Hitt, R. Ireland, M. Camp, & D. Sexton (Eds.) Strategic leadership: Creating a new mindset: 255–288. London: Blackwell.

Zahra, S., Newey, L., & Li, Y. 2014.  On the frontiers:  The implications of social entrepreneurship for international entrepreneurship.  Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 38(1): 137-158.

Zander, I., McDougall-Covin, P., & Rose, E.L. 2015.  Born globals and international business: Evolution of a field of research.  Journal of International Business Studies, 46(1): 27-35.

Special Issue Editors

Gary Knight is the Helen Jackson Chair in International Management at Willamette University in Salem and Portland, Oregon, USA, and Visiting Professor at the University of Southern Denmark.  He is Chair of the Western United States Chapter of the Academy of International Business.  He has published widely on born globals and international entrepreneurship, including several articles in JIBS.  His 2004 co-authored article on born globals won the 2014 JIBS Decade Award.  Co-authored books include Born Global Firms: A New International Enterprise.  He is currently an editor of the International Business book collection at Business Expert Press.  He testified on firm internationalization before the US House of Representatives Small Business Committee.  He was inaugural Chair of the “SMEs, Entrepreneurship, and Born Global” track of the Annual Meeting of the Academy of International Business.  His co-authored textbook with S. Tamer Cavusgil and John Riesenberger, International Business: Strategy, Management, and the New Realities, 3rd Ed, is published by Pearson Prentice-Hall.  His PhD in international business is from Michigan State University.  Prior to academia, he was the export manager of an internationalizing SME.  

Peter Liesch is Professor of International Business in the UQ Business School at The University of Queensland, Australia.  He has published extensively on small firm internationalization and born global firms.  He co-edited a special issue on early internationalization at the Journal of World Business, and jointly won an Australia Research Council Grant on born globals.  Funded by the Australia Business Foundation, he jointly produced Born to be Global: A Closer Look at the International Venturing of Australian Born Global Firms.  His publications have appeared in the Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Journal of World Business, and others.  Currently Associate Editor, Strategy and International Business with the Australian Journal of Management, he was also Senior Editor of the Journal of World Business.  He served as Vice-President (Administration) of the Academy of International Business and Vice-President of the Australia and New Zealand International Business Academy.  A Fellow of the Australian Institute of Management and a Professional Member of the Economics Society of Australian (Qld) Inc., his Ph.D. is from the School of Economics at The University of Queensland.

Lianxi Zhou is Professor of Marketing and International Business in the Goodman School of Business (GSB) at Brock University, Canada.  He is also a Visiting Professor at the Nottingham University Business School (NUBS) China, and has served as Chair Professor in the School of Management and Economics at Shaoxing University and Honorary Professor in the MBA School of Management Zhejiang Gongshang University, China. Previously he taught at the University of Guelph, Canada and Lingnan University in Hong Kong. His recent research on international entrepreneurship has focused on born globals and international new ventures. He brings perspectives from international marketing, entrepreneurship, and IB theories to the study of international entrepreneurship. He has published extensively in refereed journals, including Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of Business Venturing, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, International Business Review, Journal of International Marketing, Journal of World Business, and others. Also, he has taught for MBA and EMBA programs in a number of leading universities across Canada, Hong Kong, and the Chinese Mainland. He is currently in the Editorial Board for the Journal of International Marketing. He received his PhD in Marketing from Concordia University in Montreal, Canada.

Rebecca Reuber is Professor of Strategic Management at the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management, and Area Editor for International Entrepreneurship at JIBS.  Her recent IE research has focused on the internationalization of internet-based new ventures.   She sits on the editorial boards of Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, and recently completed three terms as Associate Editor at Family Business Review.  She has held visiting positions at the University of Adelaide, the University of Glasgow, the University of Victoria, The Australian National University, and Dartmouth College.  She has also conducted policy-oriented research in the international entrepreneurship area, in collaboration with the Conference Board of Canada, Industry Canada, the Department of Foreign Affairs & International Trade Canada, and the Commonwealth Secretariat.  

CfP: Location, Collocation and Innovation across National Borders

Call for Papers

Special issue of Industry and Innovation

“Location, Collocation and Innovation across National Borders:
Connecting the International Business, Economic Geography and Innovation Communities”

Full papers deadline: 31 December 2015

Guest Editors

Ram Mudambi, Fox School of Business, Temple University (USA), Rajneesh Narula, Henley Business School, University of Reading (UK), and Grazia D. Santangelo, University of Catania (Italy)

The distribution of economic value creating activities across space has intrigued scholars since at least the nineteenth century. Over the course of the last century, this phenomenon has been studied from different perspectives with economic geographers and regional scientists leading the trend. The growing interest in geography in the international business community is reflected in a number of special issues in IB journals. This special of Industry and Innovation seeks to expand the understanding of cross-border innovative activities along at least two dimensions.

First, traditionally international business scholars have focused on the organization of economic activities and less so on the characteristics of places (Beugelsdijk et al., 2010). In other words, economic geography has focused on the location, while international business scholars have examined the (multinational) firm. Second, the recent debate on the propensity of firms to collocate innovative activity remains lively. In particular, multinationals face collocation advantages and disadvantages when crossing international borders and selecting host locations (Narula and Santangelo, 2009, 2012). On the one hand, multinationals may wish to collocate with unaffiliated firms (e.g. suppliers, competitors, or customers) to internalize L-advantages in order to enhance and create firm-specific advantages. On the other, firms may either deliberately avoid collocating (Alcacer, 2006) or resort to strategies to monitor collocated partners (Narula and Santangelo, 2009) in order to limit dissipation of unintended knowledge flows. Both collocation advantages and disadvantages are not automatic and critically depend on the public goods nature of the Ladvantagesto be internalized, the level of competition, MNC technological leadership and insidership in the host location (Alca´cer, 2006; Alca´cer and Chung, 2007; Cantwell and Mudambi, 2011). Embeddedness in multiple local contexts creates opportunities, but also raises challenges, particularly in terms of stressing the bandwidth of managers who must handle the increasing complexity (Meyer et al., 2011). We are still missing a clear picture and a full understanding of the boundary conditions of collocation advantages and disadvantages. 

This special issue intends to offer a further forum bridging the international business community with economic geography, and start a new forum where these two communities could connect with innovation scholars. The ultimate aim is to achieve a fruitful cross-fertilization of the three fields in order to gain a more comprehensive knowledge of the organizational and geographical dimension of cross-border innovative activities. 

The special issue welcomes both theoretical and empirical contributions, which draw on different theoretical streams. Research adopting a variety of research methodologies is welcome, including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed- method approaches. Empirical studies should explicitly contribute to a theoretical agenda, and preferably be based on novel and exclusive data. Papers that are primarily descriptive are not welcome. Possible topics and research questions that would be appropriate for this special section would include, but would not be limited to, the following list:

1. What are the implications of the rise of knowledge-intensive intangibles for MNEs’ location and organizational strategies? Does this phenomenon provide new advantages for international new ventures? Does the rise of knowledge-intensive intangibles shift collocation advantage in disadvantages and vice versa?
2. Do MNEs exposed to multiple sources of knowledge dissipation need new strategies to protect their ownership advantages? Is modularity a panacea?
3. Would the nature of collocation advantages and/or disadvantages MNEs face in emerging markets be different than in advanced economies? Would the boundary conditions for collocation advantages be different in emerging market clusters?

Submission Process

Manuscripts of a maximum of 6,000 words should be prepared in accordance with Industry and Innovation guidelines and submitted by December 31, 2015 via the online journal submission system by selecting this special issue title. The online submission system for the special issue will open on December 15, 2015. No earlier submissions will be accepted.

References

Alcacer, J. 2006. “Location Choices across the Value Chain: How Activity and Capability Influence Collocation.” Management Science 52: 1457–1471.

Alcacer, J., and W. Chung. 2007. “Location strategies and knowledge spillovers.” Management Science 53: 760–776.

Beugelsdijk, S., P. McCann, and R. Mudambi. 2010. “Introduction: Place, space and organization— economic geography and the multinational enterprise.” Journal of Economic Geography 10: 485–493.

Cantwell, J. A., and R. Mudambi. 2011. “Physical attraction and the geography of knowledge sourcing in multinational enterprises.” Global Strategy Journal 1: 206–232.

Meyer, K., R. Mudambi, and R. Narula. 2011. “Multinational enterprises and local contexts: The opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness.” Journal of Management Studies 48: 235–252.

Narula, R., and G. D. Santangelo. 2009. “Location, collocation and R&D alliances in the European ICT industry.” Research Policy 38: 393–403.

Narula, R., and G. D. Santangelo. 2012. “Location and collocation advantages in international innovation.” Multinational Business Review 20: 6–25.



Professor Grazia Santangelo
Jean Monnet Chair International Business for European Union (IB4EU)
Department of Political and Social Science
University of Catania
Via Vittorio Emanuele II, 8
95131 Catania
ITALY

http://www.dsps.unict.it/content/scheda-docente?cf=U05UR1pENzNBNDlHMzcxSA==

Call for papers. New advantage and liability sources in entrepreneurial firms:

Group & Organization Management 

Call for Papers for a Special Issue

NEW ADVANTAGE AND LIABILITY SOURCES IN ENTREPRENEURIAL FIRMS: ASSESSING PROGRESS AND EXPLORING POSSIBILITIES

Submission Period: June 30, 2015-August 31, 2015

Guest Editors:

Hans Landström, Lund University Franz Lohrke, Samford University

Background and Special Issue Purpose

2015 marks the 50th anniversary and 2016 the 30th anniversary, respectively, of Stinchcombe’s (1965) landmark work on liabilities of newness and Auster and Aldrich’s (1986) seminal work on liabilities of smallness. Do new ventures (NVs) still face the same daunting survival odds scholars first asserted a half century ago or are they innovative, flexible organizations that attract customers, suppliers, and investors? Are small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) unable to compete effectively with or can they respond to changing competitive environments better than their larger counterparts? Extant research provides ample evidence that both these contrasting views may be valid.

On the one hand, scholars have found a positive relationship between firm newness and failure, often referred to as ‘liabilities of newness.’ These findings support the long-standing hypothesis that factors related to newness, such as low organizational legitimacy with external stakeholders, may contribute to high NV financial distress and failure rates (DeVaughn & Leary, 2010). Similarly, scholars have noted that SMEs face size disadvantages (i.e., ‘liabilities of smallness’), including inabilities to capture economies of scale, develop a strong brand name, attract top managerial talent, or gain bargaining power with key stakeholders (Strotmann, 2007).

On the other hand, other theoretical and empirical studies have suggested that NVs and SMEs may actually enjoy important strategic advantages. For example, NVs may enjoy ‘assets of newness’ resulting from high strategic flexibility and attractiveness to early adopters (Choi & Shepherd, 2005). In addition, SMEs may be able to avoid organizational inertia and respond more quickly than large enterprises can to competitive threats in dynamic environments (Chen & Hambrick, 1995).

These latter perspectives may be enhanced by recent innovations and other trends that could boost NV and SME advantages and/or partially mitigate their disadvantages. For example, NVs and SMEs can now build a brand name and find critical human resources talent via social media, access essential software via cloud computing, prototype products with 3D printing, outsource production to overcome capacity constraints, run geographically dispersed operations with virtual teams, and raise capital for new business ideas through crowdfunding. In addition, national and local governments have often tried to support entrepreneurship by passing favorable legislation and establishing incubation facilities. These innovations and policies have lowered industry entry barriers as well as enhanced the ability of NVs and SMEs to compete on a more equal footing with their more established and larger counterparts.

Although research has provided insights into some innovations and trends affecting liabilities of newness and smallness, studies of other topics remain extremely limited. For example, although a large body of work exists examining the value of incubation facilities, only a handful of studies, to date, have examined advantages entrepreneurs can gain from employing social media, 3D printing, virtual teams, and crowdfunding to help overcome their firms’ respective liabilities.

Accordingly, this special issue seeks to examine if and how critical issues related to liabilities of newness and liabilities of smallness have changed, given recent technological innovations and other trends. We believe that a special issue devoted to these topics is especially timely, not only because this research can inform current management theory, policy, and practice but also because it has now been five and three decades, respectively, since the publication of Stinchcombe’s (1965) and Auster and Aldrich’s (1986) seminal works. These anniversaries provide an ideal time to reflect on findings, to date, and examine future research avenues.

Possible Research Questions

For this special issue, we are looking for submissions that provide important conceptual and empirical insights about liabilities of newness or smallness that would be of interest to a wide range of organizational scholars. Appropriate topics might include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Entrepreneurship and innovation: Do NVs and SMEs implement organizational changes required by the advent of new technologies more easily than their older and larger counterparts? How are NVs structurally “imprinted” by their founding during times when new technologies develop? Does adopting new technologies enhance NV or SME innovation? What role does absorptive capacity in these firms have on their ultimate success with innovations? 
• Strategic management: What specific strategies can firms use to overcome liabilities of newness and smallness? How and when can NVs exploit ‘assets of newness’ to develop competitive advantages? How will recent innovations affect the overall entrepreneurship process of opportunity identification, evaluation, and exploitation? 
• Public policy: How can government policies help mitigate liabilities of newness and smallness? What role do institutions such as business incubator and university technology transfer programs have in reducing these liabilities? How could lower entry barriers resulting from these technologies and trends impact industry structure and, in turn, NV and SME performance? 
• Technology and innovation: What impact will new technologies and trends have on NV and SME access to critical resources such as capital and human resources talent? Can these firms use technologies developed externally to build a sustainable competitive advantage? 
• Social entrepreneurship: Do key success factors for employing new technologies differ between public organizations and private firms? Do non-profits and socially missioned for-profit firms have any advantages or disadvantages relative to traditional for-profit firms in using new technologies like crowdfunding?
• International management and entrepreneurship: How will these innovations impact the process of creating and managing new international ventures? Can small companies employ innovations such as virtual teams to expand their operational scope internationally? 
• Behavioral issues: Are NVs and SMEs with higher entrepreneurial orientation more likely to adopt and successfully exploit new technologies? What linguistic cues and other actions can entrepreneurs use to enhance the probability of successful crowdfunding campaigns? 
• Ethical and legal issues: What ethical issues arise for entrepreneurs when employing technological advances such as 3D printing, social media, and crowdfunding? What impact will these technologies have on the value of patents and copyrights? 

Deadlines, Submission, and Review Process

Submissions should be prepared in accordance with Group & Organization Management guidelines. The submission window will be open between June 30 and August 31, 2015. For additional guidelines, please see ‘Manuscript Submission” at http://www.sagepub.com/journals/Journal200823/ manuscriptSubmission.

Further Information

For questions regarding the content of this special issue, please contact the guest editors:

• Hans Landström, Lund University, hans.landstrom@fek.lu.se  
• Franz Lohrke, Samford University, ftlohrke@samford.edu

References

• Auster, E. R. & Aldrich, H. (1986). Even dwarfs started small: Liabilities of age and size and their strategic implications. Research in Organizational Behavior, 8: 165-198. 
• Chen, M.-J. & Hambrick, D. C. (1995). Speed, stealth, and selective attack: How small firms differ from large firms in competitive behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 453-482. 
• Choi, Y. R., & Shepherd, D. A. (2005). Stakeholder perceptions of age and other dimensions of newness. Journal of Management, 31, 573-596. 
• DeVaughn, M. L., & Leary, M. M. (2010). Antecedents of failure for newly chartered banks in the U.S. banking industry. Group & Organization Management, 35, 666-695. 
• Stinchcombe, A. (1965). Organizations and social structure. In J. G. March (ed.), Handbook of organizations, pp.142-193. Chicago: Rand McNally. 
• Strotmann, H. (2007). Entrepreneurial survival. Small Business Economics, 28, 84-101.

Call for chapters: Dead Firms: Causes and Effects of Cross-Border Corporate Insolvency

Call for Book Chapters

Dead Firms: Causes and Effects of Cross-Border Corporate Insolvency

Advanced Series in Management

Co-edited volume by:

• · Miguel Torres, Leeds University, UK
• · Virginia Cathro, University of Otago, New Zealand 
• · Maria Alejandra Gonzalez-Perez, Universidad EAFIT, Colombia

New deadline for chapter’s proposal (Up to 300 words): 8 October 2015

New possibility for mini-cases on:

· Internationalised versus failed to internationalise firms

· Company autopsy: Case studies that speak from the grave

New deadline for submission of full chapters: 15 December 2015

In general lines, insolvency is a state in which the debtor is proven unable to pay corporate debtors. We aim to explore the contemporary causes and effects of corporate cross-border insolvency (CCBI). This state occurs when the debtor’s assets or liabilities are located by virtue of being cross-border in more than one country, or if the debtor is subject to the jurisdiction of courts from two or more countries (UNCITRAL, 2014). In the realms of international business, CCBI could be mediated by events experienced during the internationalization of the firm, which may encompass a loss of capital, loss of revenue and loss of credit. Problems experienced that ‘drag on’ and are exacerbated by a tangled web of interconnected occurrences, like credit problems resulting from waiting for promised payments that never happen, accumulating unpaid bills and the accrual of situations that reduce the firm’s credit at home and abroad. The potential for small events to compound and morph in firms that control and manage production establishments located in two (or more) countries is greater than the same potential for those that keep a domestic profile (Teece, 1985; UNCITRAL, 2014). If unaddressed, these ‘business, as usual’ issues reach a point where a viable organisation is transformed into a dead firm. Although many businesses are too well aware of these potential problems, some (albeit perhaps in hindsight) fail to deal with these issues effectively. This is conceivably a result of the lack of applied literature on this topic. Academic literature points to a significant number of firms are unable to deal with these types of obstacles and as a result die prematurely (Boswell, 1972; Cressy, 2006; Mata & Portugal, 1994; Saridakis, Mole & Hay, 2013). These obstacles which might be called ‘contributing factors’ or ‘cause of death’ in a post mortem are in the context of business a lack of productivity (Frazer, 2005), financial constraints (Musso & Schiavo, 2008; Bridges & Guariglia, 2008), failure of effective institutions (Girma, Gorg & Strobl, 2007), absence of functioning markets or lack of competitiveness (Johnson, Price & Vugt, 2013), population density at the time of founding (Utterback & Suárez, 1993), lack of innovation (Fernandes & Paunov, 2014) and obsolesce (Ramseyer, 1981). These contributing or attributable factors that explain CCBI and ‘organisational death’, is the “raw material” of this edited volume that aims to achieve and answer to the bigger picture question of “Why do firms die?” This volume seeks to explore international and cross-disciplinary perspectives, if you like a forensic examination, autopsy or post mortem of ‘how and why’ companies die. This alternate perspective flips the focus on survival, as all existing firms are in truth survivors, to consider through the metaphors of death, (with forensic analysis, autopsy, post mortems and crime scene investigations) the lessons ‘dead firms’ might offer. Contributions to this volume could herald from a range of different literatures including, but possibly not limited to, management, international business, economics, and international law. Empirical analyses based on primary and secondary data from different countries that add value to comtemporary understanding of CCBI are encouraged. 

Theoretical contributions will also be considered, along with contributions considering the ‘cold-blooded murder’ of a cross-border company ensuing mergers and acquisitions.


Topics that may fit this volume’s editorial intentions include (but are not limited to) the following:

• • The Nature and Impact of “Death Firms” on International Business
• • Causes and effects of death of internationalized firms
• • State-of-the-Art in Death Firms
• • Internationalised versus failed to internationalise firms
• • Company autopsy: Case studies that speak from the grave

As a volume in the Advanced Series in Management, this scholarly book will contribute to researchers’ understanding of the development, antecedents, processes and consequences of corporate insolvency around the world. It may also be used as a reference in executive education programs or as a textbook in graduate (or advanced undergraduate programmes) in Business Schools.

Full chapters are expected to have between 10,000 and 12,000 words; and mini cases around 4,000 words ( (including references, figures, and tables). Only original work whose copyright is owned (or cleared) by the chapter authors, and not considered for publication elsewhere, can be considered for inclusion in the ASM series.
Scholars whose work is likely to fit this call for chapters are invited to contact the editors via email (miguel.torres@ua.pt; virginia.cathro@otago.ac.nz; mgonza40@eafit.edu.co) to discuss their ideas and in preliminary form assess whether their contribution would be included. Brief descriptions (300 words or less) of the main contents of their chapter, their methodology and about 200-word author(s)’ bio(s) highlighting their expertise in the area should be sent to all editors for initial consideration, before October 8, 2015.

Important deadlines

• Preliminary screening of ideas for chapters: 8 October 2015 (up to 300 words abstract) 
• Full chapters: 15 December 2015 (around 10,000 words)
• Acceptance notifications or requests for revisions: about four weeks after full chapter manuscript is received; 
• Submission of revised manuscripts: No later than 20 January 2016. 

Publication of volume: about four months after final, revised chapters have been received by the volume editors; expected in  mid-2016.

Books in the Advanced Series in Management may be obtained in both electronic and paper form and are included in Thomson Reuters Book Citation Index. The Book Citation Index is a product within the Thomson Web of Science. Web of Science includes citation databases such as the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index. The Book Citation Index (BKCI) means that scholars can now access citation data across all major publication formats. This title is indexed in Scopus. For more information on the Advanced Series in Management, please visit: http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/books/series.htm?id=1877-6361

For information pertaining to Emerald’s style guide refer to http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/ebookseries/author_guidelines.htm.

References:

• Agarwal, R. & Audretsch, D. B. (2001). Does Entry size Matter? The Impact of Life Cycle and Technology on Firm Survival, Journal of Industrial Economics, 49(1), 21-43. 
• Audretsch, D. B. (1991). New-Firm Survival and the Technological Regime. Review of Economics and Statistics, 73(3), 441-450. 
• Audretsch, D. B. (1995). Innovation, Growth and Survival. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13(4), 441-457. 
• Audretsch, D. B. & Mahmood, T. (1995). New Firm Survival: New Results Using a Hazard Function. Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(1), 97-103. 
• Boswell, Jonathan (1972). The Rise and Decline of Small Firms. London, UK, George Allen & Unwin Limited. 
• Bridges, S. & Guariglia, A. (2008). Financial constraints, global engagement, and firm survival in the United Kingdom: evidence from micro data, Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 55(4), 444-464. 
• Cefis, E. & Marsili, O. (2006). Survivor: The Role of Innovation in Firms’ Survival. Research Policy, 35(5), 626-641. 
• Cressy, R. (2006). Why do most firms die young? Small Business Economics. 26(2), 103-106. 
• Fernandes, A. M. & Paunov, C. (2014). The risks of innovation: Are innovative firms less likely to die? The Review of Economics and Statistics (accepted for publication). 
• Frazer, G. (2005). Which firms die? A look at manufacturing firm exit in Ghana. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 53(3), 585-617. 
• Girma, S., Gorg, H. & Strobl, E. (2007). The Effects of Government Grants on Plant Survival: A Micro-Econometric Analysis, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 25(4), 701-720. 
• Johnson, D P., Price, M. E. & Van Vugt, M. (2013). Darwin’s invisible hand: Market competition, evolution and the firm. Journal of Economic Behaviour & Organization, 90(1), S128-S140. 
• Mata, José and Portugal, Pedro (1994). Life Duration of New Firms.Journal of Industrial Economics, 42(3), 227-245. 
• Musso, Patrick & Schiavo, Stefano (2008), The impact of financial constraints on firm survival and growth, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 18(2), 135-149. 
• Ramseyer, J. Mark (1981), Letting obsolete firms die: Trade adjustment assistance in the United States and Japan. Harvard International Law Journal, 22(3), 595-619. 
• Saridakis, G., Mole, K. & Hay, G. (2013), Liquidity constraints in the first year of trading and firm performance. International Small Business Journal. 31(5), 520-535. 
• Teece, D. (1985), Multinational Enterprise, Internal Governance, and Industrial Organization. The American Economic Review. 75(2), 233-238. 
• UNCITRAL (2014), UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency with Guide to Enactment and Interpretation, Vienna, Austria, United Nations. 
• Utterback, J. M. & Suárez, F. F. (1993), Innovation, competition and industry. Research Policy, 22(1), 1-21.

Call for papers. Special Issue: Global Entrepreneurship: Past, Present & Future

Call for Proposals

Advances in International Management 2016

Global Entrepreneurship: Past, Present & Future

Editors

• Timothy Devinney (University of Leeds)
• Gideon Markman (Colorado State University)
• Torben Pedersen (Bocconi University)
• Laszlo Tihanyi (Texas A&M University)

The role that small- and medium-sized enterprises play in the economic development and growth of cities, regions and nations has been an increasing subject of debate and study for the last half century. Concomitant with the concern with the larger social and economic impact of these firms there has been interest in the factors that lead to their formation, growth, and decline. We know that startups face daunting economic factors that result in their high failure rates. These risks are exacerbated by the economic developments over the last half century that have created conditions where the economic pressures facing small and medium sized firms have become increasingly global. Hence, it is critical that such firms account for how they can compete at larger scale more quickly and do so in a geographically wider domain. In addition, the increasing global nature of competition means that entrepreneurs need to develop business models that can thrive not just in their local markets, but also adapt to a variety of cultures, social, and economic ecosystems that might be quite different. In short, while the complexity of building a global startup and expanding a small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) globally are well appreciated, our understanding of these complexities remains quite limited.

The 2016 volume of the Advances in International Management—the most-downloaded annual scholarly publications in business and management—will focus on the opportunities and challenges that entrepreneurs and small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face in a world of global competitions. We have outlined four goals for this volume. First, we would like to provide an overview of successful strategies that global entrepreneurs and SMEs have employed that have allowed them to establish regional and international footprints. Second, we wish to examine how local resources, culture and managerial capabilities have contributed to startups’ global success (or the lack thereof). Third, we would like to study the interactions between SMEs and multinational enterprises (MNEs) both at the level of MNEs as incubators for entrepreneurial ventures and as competitors to those ventures. Fourth, we aim to publish a collection of chapters with original, even edgy ideas and theoretical advances that will provide the foundation for future doctoral dissertations and other research projects on international entrepreneurship.

We hope the volume will provide a forum for thought-provoking empirical research, theoretical ideas, discussions, and reviews owing to its format and our review process. We are open to theoretical papers and empirical submissions using different methodological approaches and diverse macro and micro perspectives.

Submission Information

• Authors should submit an electronic copy of their proposal (5 single-spaced pages) to the Editors of the volume (Adv.Intl.Mgt@gmail.com) by July 1, 2015. Our suggestion is to not submit your abstract before 1 June, as we will not be examining them in sequence.
• Workshop for abstracts accepted for consideration: 7-8 October 2015 (immediately following the SMS Conference). The workshop will be held in Denver.
• Submission deadline for full papers: November 15, 2015.
• Submission deadline for revised papers: February 10, 2016.
• Publication date of volume: July 1, 2016.

The Advances in International Management (AIM) is a research annual devoted to advancing the cross-border study of organizations and management practices from a global, regional, or comparative perspective, with emphasis on interdisciplinary inquiry. Information on past AIM volumes and contributors can be found at the following link:

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/books.htm?issn=1571-5027.

Timothy M. Devinney

University Leadership Chair and Professor of International Business
Leeds University Business School
Maurice Keyworth Building
University of Leeds | Leeds | LS2 9JT | UK

Call for papers: Special Issue on Public‐Private Collaboration, Hybrid Organizational Design and Social Value

Journal of Management Studies

Call for Papers

A Special Issue on Public‐Private Collaboration, Hybrid Organizational Design and Social Value

Submission Deadline: May 31st, 2015

Guest Editors:

• Bertrand V. Quélin, HEC Paris (quelin@hec.fr)
• Ilze Kivleniece, Imperial College London (ilze.kivleniece@imperial.ac.uk)
• Sergio Lazzarini, Insper (sergiogl1@insper.edu.br)

BACKGROUND TO THE SPECIAL ISSUE

In today’s economic environment, novel, innovative forms of collaboration between public and private organizational actors take an increasingly prominent place. Across the world, the provision of public goods and services increasingly relies on public-private sector interaction and cross-sector partnerships, involving firms, governmental or political actors, and social constituents. Industries and sectors as diverse as healthcare, education, defence, utilities and public infrastructure witness growing private sector participation. Likewise, addressing many of the world’s most pressing social concerns, such as poverty and disease eradication, humanitarian aid provision, increasingly falls under the realm of multi-actor constellations involving corporations, as well as non-governmental (NGOs) and citizen organizations. In all these domains, various hybrid organizational arrangements become common-place and raise important questions related to their governance, design, performance implications and effectiveness.

Some of the most critical questions raised revolve around the organizational design and governance mechanisms underlying these novel forms of public-private interaction. Likewise and, critically, they also put into spotlight important trade-offs that may exist between the pursuit of social or public welfare and private interests. As cross-sector collaboration becomes increasingly wide-spread, the capacities for such partnerships to generate and deliver value to underlying stakeholders - public bodies, private and social actors, become of a paramount concern. 

How are public-private or cross-sector contexts different from traditional purely private or for-profit settings? How are various public-private or hybrid organizational forms designed? How do they create economic and social value? Are public and private economic and social interests reconcilable in these settings and how? How are social value or certain public vs. private economic returns generated within such contexts, and distributed among underlying stakeholders?

These are some of the fundamental questions that this Special Issue aims to address. It seeks to tackle the theoretical challenges involved in the analysis of collaboration efforts across public and private domains, and to stimulate innovative research, based on novel conceptual frameworks and analytical tools. It calls for a renewed interest in research that stretches beyond the private interest or for-profit domains, and sheds lights on novel inter-organizational forms as important mechanisms bringing together diverse organizational actors, able to generate, potentially, important economic and social value, and offer solutions to pressing public welfare concerns.



TYPES OF SCHOLARLY CONTRIBUTIONS SOUGHT IN THE SPECIAL ISSUE

The scholarly contributions for this Special Issue are sought from management and organization science scholars working on any of the research areas that address organizational interactions taking place between firms, public sector actors and non-governmental organizations. In terms of specific theoretical domains, the aim is to draw together and cross-fertilize on the burgeoning strands of literature that exist, albeit, quite separately, on public-private interaction in management studies, sociology and organizational economics.

It welcomes scholarly contributions that draw upon and integrate latest research on areas such as the role of institutional environment, studies on managerial and political strategies, contractual and firm boundary theories, public entrepreneurship, and emergent streams of literature on public-private organizational design, governance and social value.



The spectrum of potential themes covered in the Special Issue includes the emergence and performance of novel boundary spanning organizational arrangements and structures between public and private sectors, such as public private partnerships (PPPs), cross-sector collaborative arrangements and social ventures, and their implications in terms of private as well as, critically, social or public value. The Special Issue, thus, represents a genuine invitation to address more rigorously the nature of ties and organizational forms emerging from the interplay between NGOs, public agencies, governments, private firms and funding institutions. It also invites scholars to shed light on important mechanisms and dynamics able to influence policy conclusions, effective delivery of public or social services, and governance mechanisms.


A list of potential topics that are suitable for this Special Issue includes (but is not limited to) the following:

• - Public-private partnerships and contractual ties,
• - Social value, its creation and appropriation,
• - Governance of multi-layer and multi-actor relationships in public-private context,
• - Public-private interactions: organizational resources, public and private capabilities and learning,
• - Innovative organizational design,
• - Social and/or public entrepreneurship,
• - Social value and new organizational forms.

A (non-exhaustive) list of specific research questions to be addressed includes:

• - What are the determinants that explain the emergence and rise of novel organizational forms that fuse and cross the well-established public and private sector boundaries?
• - How does a changing social context and demands for increasing corporate social engagement affect organizational design and appearance of new, multi-layer, multi-actor relationships?
• - How are these new forms of organizations designed or structured?
• - How are underlying public and private resources mobilized?
• - What are the capabilities required to succeed in managing such new organizational forms? How can public and private actors mutually learn and develop such capabilities? 
• - How able are such novel inter-organizational forms to change the social landscape in many countries?
• - Are these novel organizational forms always value-creating?
• - Under which conditions do they deliver public benefits as opposed to additional costs or welfare losses to both private actors and society as a whole?
• - What kind of value sharing mechanisms are present or put in place in these new boundary-spanning organizations to respond to broader social needs, as opposed to merely private value creation imperatives?

Both theoretically (or conceptually) as well as empirically-grounded manuscripts will be considered for the Special Issue, provided that underlying research has a potential to deliver significant implications for strategy, organization research and practice.

In line with the objectives for all manuscripts published in JMS, authors are expected to demonstrate solid, topical theory development as well as important empirical contributions. The manuscripts sought-after should demonstrate rigour in the analysis and conceptual development, along with a novelty and innovativeness in the research. Moreover, in the view of the socially significant nature of the phenomena covered by this Special Issue, as well as the emergent nature of the theory surrounding them, the solicited manuscripts are expected to move beyond the conventional knowledge and identify new, original avenues for future research, broaden the range of methodological perspectives and theoretical underpinnings.

In terms of geographical scope, this Special Issue is particularly aimed at attracting papers from a wide range of geographical locations. While the debates on public-private partnerships are especially pertinent in the European context, this Special Issue aims to address public and private sector collaboration as a topical or emergent area also in the Americas, Africa, and Asia and Pacific region. Any contributions from these regions are, hence, particularly welcome.

SUBMISSION PROCESS AND DEADLINES

All papers will be reviewed following the JMS double-blind review process.

The deadline for submitting the papers is May 31st, 2015 by midnight or 24.00 (GMT zone). The papers should be submitted by email to the guest editors using the following address: publicprivatecollaborationJMS@gmail.com.

All papers should be prepared and formatted following the standard JMS Editorial guidelines (see:www.blackwellpublishing.com/pdf/JMS_Prep_of_Manuscripts.pdf).



The guest editors also welcome informal inquiries related to the Special Issue, the underlying topics and potential fit with Special Issue objectives.

Contact Emails:

For inquiries related to submission opportunities and other questions related to the Special Issue, please contact Bertrand V. Quélin (quelin@hec.fr), Ilze Kivleniece (ilze.kivleniece@imperial.ac.uk), or Sergio Lazzarini (sergiogl1@insper.edu.br).



Margaret Turner
Editorial Office Coordinator & SAMS Administrator
Journal of Management Studies
Durham University Business School
Mill Hill Lane
Durham
DH1 3LB
UK
www.journalofmanagementstudies.com
Tel: +44 (0)191 334 5395

Call for special issue paper: Contextualizing Research: Rigor and Relevance

Call for Journal of World Business Special Issue

Contextualizing Research: Rigor and Relevance

Guest Editors: Mary B. Teagarden, Mary Ann Von Glinow and Kamel Mellahi

Deadline: 1 November 2015

Contextualizing international business research to achieve research rigor and practical relevance is a challenge faced by all sub-disciplines within the IB domain. Contextualizing IB research focuses on the big question, 'How do we identify and integrate context into our IB research?' and a corollary, 'Why should we identify and integrate context into our IB research?' We seek submissions for this special issue that explore the implications of context for IB theory building, research design and methodology including methodological approaches to build more robust IB theories; articles that focus on the conceptualization and meaning of context; and limitations of contextualization. Additionally, submissions that demonstrate novel methodological approaches for integrating context into IB theory building are welcome.

When Peter Buckley (2002) questioned the distinctiveness of IB research, he responded to his own question and argued for more integration of culture, more use of comparative studies and of distinctive methods in IB research. Many argue contextual dimensions are what differentiate domestic research from international business and international management research (Buckley, 2002; Child, 2009; Oesterle & Wolf, 2011). Oesterle and Wolf (2011) raised the question, 'how international are our international journals?' And concluded that context was not adequately or at best modestly addressed in most of our research. We concur.

Despite the urging of thought leaders in IB for more contextualization, our approaches to contextualization appear limited, for example, focusing on categorical data or concepts like country or nationality (Von Glinow & Shenkar, 1994). They are static since our methods do not appear to be changing despite calls to do so (Buckley, 2002; Child, 2009; Teagarden, et al. 1995). Perhaps, most importantly, the scope of IB is expanding dramatically and our research contextualization appears inadequate, given the shift in business from the United States and Europe toward more 'exotic' emerging markets in Asia, Latin America and Africa with more pronounced differences in business and cultural environments. For our IB research to remain relevant we must more adequately contextualize our theory building.

Contextualization has been viewed through many lenses, and at multiple levels of analysis. While focusing on theory building, Whetten (2009) and Tsui (2004) differentiate context-specific and context-bound theory development, and Child (2009) discusses an 'outside in' versus 'inside out' perspective of contextualization. Von Glinow, Shapiro and Brett (2004) and Shapiro, Von Glinow and Xiao (2007) suggest a more complex perspective when they contrast 'single contextuality' with 'polycontextuality' or the multiple and qualitatively different contexts embedded within one another. Each of these studies acknowledges that context is important in IB theory building and each offer prescriptive recommendations for incorporating context.

Strategists and behaviorists assert that location, one form of context, has an impact on theory (Gelfend, Erez & Aycan, 2007; Ricart et al., 2004; Rugman & Verbeke, 2001; Rousseau & Fried, 2001). Khanna (2002) explores institutions and institutional voids in locations. Ghemawat (2001, 2003) examines country differences and offers the CAGE (Culture, Administrative, Geographic and Economic) framework to guide analysis. Ghemawat (2007) argues that despite globalization, there are significant locational differences that must be considered. Cheng (1994) suggests that context-embedded research ought to include '…a nation's social, cultural, legal, and economic variables as predictors and organizational attributes as dependent variables. Enright (2002) urges the use of multilevel analysis including supranational, macro, meso, micro and firm levels in the integration of location into competitive strategy. House and colleagues (2004) in their seminal GLOBE study discuss societies and their impact on leadership. Von Glinow and colleagues (2002 a, 2002 b) and Von Glinow & Teagarden (1988, 1990) identify locational influences on human resource management best practices. Shapiro and colleagues (2007) identify numerous contextual variables, including location, that address the multiple and qualitatively different contextual variables that influence understanding behavior in China. Regardless of sub-discipline, there is ample opportunity to contribute to the IB research contextualization dialog.

Given the magnitude of possible contexts, researchers are challenged to comprehend the contextual and polycontextual dynamics in a limited number of cultures or societies. Tsui (2004) argues for inside-out, context specific indigenous research, and this represents one possible solution to the context challenge. Teagarden and Schotter (2013) and Enright (2002) argue for the importance of multilevel analysis to contextualize research and provide a deeper understanding of phenomena. Teagarden and colleagues (1995) suggest that team-based comparative-management studies provide the collective understanding to contextualize and make sense of multiple contexts in a single research project. There have been numerous examples that demonstrate the effectiveness of this latter approach (House, et al., 2004; Von Glinow, Teagarden & Drost, 2002a, 2002b). This highlights the opportunity to question the research methods currently used to contextualize IB research.

The list of topics below is merely suggestive of the range of topics appropriate for the Special Issue, which ideally seeks inputs from scholars across a number of disciplines related to conducting research on organizational, institutional and environmental contexts. Through contributions to this special issue, we aspire to expand the boundaries of rigor and relevance in international business research.


Contributors are invited to submit manuscripts focus on topics and themes such as:

• · How important is context to conducting IB research?
• · What are the various methodological approaches used to measure context?
• · How does indigenous research help us uncover multiple contexts?
• · What is context-embedded research, and why is it important?
• · What role do institutions and institutional voids play in establishing context in IB research?
• · How does the use (or abuse) of context affect rigor or relevance in our theory development?
• · How does the use of context help us expand theory in IB?
• · What research methods are most appropriate to uncovering the different and multiple contexts that underlie most international settings?

Submission process:

By November 1, 2015, authors should submit their manuscripts online via the new Journal of World Business EES submission system. The link for submitting manuscript is: http://ees.elsevier.com/jwb.

To ensure that all manuscripts are correctly identified for consideration for this Special Issue, it is important that authors select ‘SI: Contextualizing Research’ when they reach the “Article Type” step in the submission process

Manuscripts should be prepared in accordance with the Journal of World Business Guide for Authors available at http://www.elsevier.com/journals/journal-of-world-business/1090-9516/guide-for-authors. All submitted manuscripts will be subject to the Journal of World Business’s blind review process.

We may organize a workshop designed to facilitate the development of papers. Authors of manuscripts that have progressed through the revision process will be invited to it. Presentation at the workshop is neither a requirement for nor a promise of final acceptance of the paper in the Special Issue.

Questions about the Special Issue may be directed to the guest editors:

• Mary B. Teagarden, Thunderbird School of Management, Arizona State University, USA (mary.teagarden@asu.edu)
• Mary Ann Von Glinow, Florida International University, USA (vonglino@fiu.edu)
• Kamel Mellahi, Warwick Business School, UK (Kamel.Mellahi@wbs.ac.uk)

References:

• Buckley, P.J. (2002) 'Is the international business research agenda running out of steam?', Journal of International Business Studies, 33(2): 365-373.
• Cheng, J.L.C. (1994) 'On the concept of universal knowledge in organization science: implications for cross-national research', Management Science, 40: 162-168.
• Child, J. (2009) 'Context, Comparison, and methodology in Chinese Management Research', Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 57-73.
• Enright, M.J. (2002) 'Globalization, regionalization, and the knowledge-based economy in Hong Kong. In J.H. Dunning (ed.) Regions, Globalization and the Knowledge-based Economy, Oxford University Press: Oxford, pp. 381-406.
• Gelfend, M.J., Erez, M.and Aycan, Z. (2007) 'Cross-cultural organizational behavior', Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 479-514.
• Ghemawat, P. (2001) 'Distance still matters', Harvard Business Review, 79(8), September: 137-147.
• Ghemawat, P. (2003) 'Semiglobalization and international business strategy', Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2): 138-152.
• Ghemawat, P. (2007) 'Why the world isn't flat', Foreign Policy, March-April: 54-60.
• House, R. J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P.W. and Gupta, V. (2004) Culture, Leadership and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. Sage.
• Khanna, T. (2000) Local Institutions and Global Strategy, Harvard Business School: Boston, Harvard Business School Note No. 702-475.
• Oesterle, M.J. and Wolf, J.M. (2011) '50 years of MIR and IB/IM research; an inventory and some suggestions for the fields development',Management International Review, 51: 735-757.
• Ricart, J.E., Enright, M.J., Ghemawat, P., Hart, S.L., and Khanna, T. (2004) 'New frontiers in international strategy', Journal of International Business Studies, 35: 175-200.
• Rousseau, D.M. and Fried, Y. (2001) 'Location, location, location: contextualizing organizational research', Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22: 1-13.
• Rugman, A.M. and Verbeke, A. (2001) 'Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises', Strategic Management Journal, 23(3): 237-250.
• Shapiro, D.L., Von Glinow, M.A. and Xiao Z. (2007) 'Toward polycontextually sensitive research methods', Management and Organization Review, 3(1): 129-152.
• Shenkar, O. and Von Glinow, M.A. (1994) 'Paradoxes of organizational theory and research: using the case of China to illustrate national contingency', Management Science, 40: 56-71.
• Teagarden, M.B. and Schotter, A. (2013) 'Favor prevalence in emerging markets: a multi-level analysis of social capital', Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(2): 447-460.
• Teagarden, M.B., M.A. Von Glinow, D. Bowen, C. Frayne, S. Nason, P. Huo, J. Milliman, M.C. Butler, M.E. Arias, N.H. Kim, H. Scullion and K.B. Lowe (1995). 'Toward building a theory of comparative management research methodology: An idiographic case study of the best international human resources management project', Academy of Management Journal, 38(5): 1261-1287.
• Tsui, A.S. (2004) 'Contributing to global management knowledge: a case for high quality indigenous research', Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21: 491-513.
• Von Glinow, M.A. and Teagarden, M.B. (2009) 'The future of Chinese management research: rigor and relevance redux', Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 75-89.
• Von Glinow, M.A. and Teagarden M.B. (1990). 'Contextual determinants of human resource management effectiveness in international cooperative alliances: evidence from the People's Republic of China', International Human Resource Management Review, 1: 75-93.
• Von Glinow, M.A. and Teagarden M.B. (1988). 'The transfer of human resource management technology in Sino-U.S. cooperative ventures: problems and solutions', Human Resource Management, 27(2), Summer: 201-229.
• Von Glinow, M.A, Teagarden, M.B. and Drost E. (2002a). 'Converging on IHRM best practices: lessons learned from a globally-distributed consortium on theory and practice', Human Resource Management, Special Issue, 41(1): 123-140.
• Von Glinow, M.A, Teagarden, M.B. and Drost E. (2002b). 'Converging on IHRM best practices: lessons learned from a globally-distributed consortium on theory and practice', Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resource Management, Special Issue, 40 (1): 123-140.
• Whetten, D. (2009) 'An examination between context and theory applied to the study of organizations in China', Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 29-55.