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.

Call for papers: International entrepreneurship: New perspectives in International Business Research

“Journal of Entrepreneurship Management and Innovation” (JEMI), vol. 10
http://jemi.edu.pl/
One of the special issue of 2015 will focus on:

International entrepreneurship: New perspectives in International Business Research 

The concept of 'international entrepreneurship' (IE), as one can assume, was used for the first time in the doctoral dissertation of Tomas Otto Kohn in 1988 at Harvard. It is most probably that it was published for the first time in the work of J.F. Morrow in the same year. A year later, this notion appears in scientific publications by various authors, including P.P. McDougall , who together with B.M. Oviatt developed this theory in the following years. It can therefore be assumed that the current international entrepreneurship as an area of research is only 25-30 years old, although its intensive development occurred only in the first decade of the 21st century, that is, de facto, a few years ago. IE has been developing very intensively, however it must be admitted that, apart from some elements of this school, it is still quite poorly explored and described field in the literature.
The special issue seeks papers that discuss and analyse:

• international entrepreneurship as a new field of research, 
• international entrepreneurship vs. international business,
• international entrepreneurship school vs. theory of internationalisation of firms
• traditional versus rapid internationalisation of firms, 
• role of the entrepreneur in the process of internationalisation of firms,
• internationalisation of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs vs. LEs),
• internationalisation of family businesses,
• recognising and exploring international business opportunities,
• entry modes and internationalisation patterns of firms, 
• international strategies of Central European small businesses (SMEs vs. LEs),
• international competitiveness of Central European small businesses (SMEs vs. LEs),
• internationalisation of Central European small businesses (SMEs vs. LEs),
• int’l entrepreneurship vs. int’l management and int’l marketing.

Contributors are welcome to propose other topics that meet the objectives of this issue.

Guest editor: 

Prof. Krzysztof Wach, PhD
Cracow University of Economics, Poland

Paper submission:

Papers should be submitted before the end of October 2014 to JEMI, at: jemi@wsb-nlu.edu.pl. They must be in sufficient detail for the referees to judge their meaning and value. Submissions must be in English, should normally be no more than 15 pages in length (up to 8000 words), and follow the submission requirements posted on the JEMI website at http://jemi.edu.pl/pl/submission.html. Notifications of acceptance will be sent to authors within one-two months.

Best regards,
Krzysztof Wach

------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. UEK dr hab. Krzysztof Wach
Associate Professor in International Entrepreneurship
Head of the Centre for Strategic & Int'l Entrepreneurship

Cracow University of Economics (CUE / UEK)
Faculty of Economics and International Relations
Department of Entrepreneurship and Innovation
ul. Rakowicka 27, 31-510 Krakow, Poland
tel. +48 12 293 5376, +48 12 293 5327, +48 12 29 35 363
fax +48 12 29 35 042

Call for chapters proposals: Business Development Opportunities and Market Entry Challenges in Latin America

Proposal Submission Deadline: May 30, 2014
Business Development Opportunities and Market Entry Challenges in Latin America
A book edited by

• Dr. Mauricio Garita (Universidad Rafael Landivar, Guatemala)
• Dr. José Godinez (Merrimack College, North Andover, USA)

To be published by IGI Global: http://bit.ly/1n4tuHc

Part of the Research Essentials Collection

Publications released as Research Essentials will offer a succinct discussion on niche topics in a wide variety of subjects. Sized and priced appropriately, these concise, advanced, and timely resources will be perfect for supplementary course usage, targeted towards instructors and students, as well as the independent researcher looking for the most recent and innovative research in their field.

Introduction

Latin America has been a region of conflict, economic growth and development. The region has also continued to be characterized by a wide range of social structures, political systems, and economic models. The region has seen a steady economic growth, which has caught the attention of international investors. In contrast, however, the region has also been characterized by a large economic disparity between its inhabitants.

Progressively, Latin America has been experiencing economic growth but with such growth several challenges are encountered. The proposed book’s aim is to analyze the economic changes in Latin America that have affected the countries in the region and the factors behind such changes as well as their consequences.

Objective of the Book

This comprehensive and timely publication aims to be an essential reference source, building on the available literature in the field of economic issues in Latin America and will provide further research opportunities in this dynamic field. It is hoped that this text will provide the resources necessary for policy makers and managers to understand economic policy in Latin America.

Target Audience

Policy makers, managers, academicians, researchers, advanced-level students, technology developers, and government officials will find this text useful in furthering their research exposure to pertinent topics in entry challenges and business developments in the region.

Recommended topics include, but are not limited to, the following:

• · Trust model – a conceptual framework
• · Trust in global networks
• · Trust in new economy
• · Trust and value creation in a network economy
• · Trust as capital
• · Improving market performance through trust
• · Trust as a management strategy
• · Trust from the perspective of knowledge management
• · Trust in public administration / sector

Submission Procedure

Researchers and practitioners are invited to submit on or before May 30, 2014, a 2-3 page chapter proposal clearly explaining the mission and concerns of his or her proposed chapter. Authors of accepted proposals will be notified by June 15, 2014 about the status of their proposals and sent chapter guidelines. Full chapters are expected to be submitted bySeptember 30, 2014. All submitted chapters will be reviewed on a double-blind review basis. Contributors may also be requested to serve as reviewers for this project.
Proposals should be submitted through the link at the bottom of this page.

Publisher

This book is scheduled to be published by IGI Global (formerly Idea Group Inc.), publisher of the Information Science Reference (formerly Idea Group Reference), Medical Information Science Reference, Business Science Reference, and Engineering Science Reference imprints. For additional information regarding the publisher, please visit www.igi-global.com. This book is anticipated to be released in 2015.

Important Dates

• Proposal Submission Deadline: May 30, 2014
• Full chapter Submission: September 30, 2014
• Review Process: September 30, 2014 –November 30, 2014
• Review Results to Authors: December 15, 2014
• Revised Chapter Submission: January 30, 2015
• Final Acceptance Notifications: February 15, 2015
• Submission of Final Chapters: February 28, 2015
• Final Deadline: March 30, 2015

Inquiries can be forwarded to
Dr. Mauricio Garita
Department of Business Economics
Universidad Rafael Landivar
E-mail: mgaritag@correo.url.edu.gt


Jose Godinez
Girard School of Business
Merrimack College
E-mail: godinezj@merrimack.edu

Call for papers: Theoretical and Empirical Research on the Internationalization of Latin American Enterprises

Theoretical and Empirical Research on the Internationalization of Latin American Enterprises

Call for Papers for a special issue of the Journal of Business Research

Guest Editors: 

• Luciano Ciravegna (King’s College, University of London; INCAE), 
• Sumit K. Kundu (Florida International University), 
• Luis Lopez (INCAE)

Deadline: September 15, 2014

Description:


Since 2008-2009 emerging markets generate the lion share of the world’s economic growth. As a result, managers and business scholars have focused their attention on studying the dynamics of emerging markets (Buckley, Clegg, Cross, Liu, Voss, and Zheng, 2007; Cavusgil, Ghauri, and Akcal, 2012; Guillen and Garcia-Canal, 2012; Khanna and Palepu, 2010: Ciravegna, Fitzgerald and Kundu, 2013; Wright, Filatotchev, Hoskisson, and Peng, 2005). The rise of multinational companies from emerging markets is becoming a major phenomenon (Ramamurti and Singh, 2009; Cuervo-Cazurra, 2012; Luo and Rui, 2009; Yamakawa, Peng and Deeds, 2008).

Emerging market multinationals (EMNEs) internationalize differently from developed economy multinationals (Guillén and García-Canal, 2009; Luo and Rui, 2009; Matthews, 2007; Yiu, Lau and Bruton, 2007). According to Luo and Tang’s (2007) “springboard perspective”, EMNEs internationalize before reaching a stage of maturity in domestic markets because internationalization nurtures the acquisition of capabilities and assets that they may lack. Some scholars reject this view, positing that EMNEs behave similarly to multinationals based in developed economies, only they have different sets of country specific and firm specific advantages (Narula, 2012). Finally, some scholars point that EMNEs may internationalize in order to escape from difficult conditions in their domestic economies or to pursue opportunities in an entrepreneurial fashion (Khanna and Palepu, 2010; Madhok and Keyhani, 2012).

Most of the studies on which EMNEs theories focus on a very small number of emerging markets especially China and India (Ciravegna, Fitzgerald, and Kundu, 2013). Several Latin American firms have internationalized in aggressive and innovative ways, often outcompeting established players (Casanova, 2009). Latin American firms are now among the world global players in several industries, ranging from cement (Cemex), to aerospace (Embraer), bread (Bimbo), sweets (Arcor), and wine (Concha y Toro) (Guillén and García-Canal, 2009). However, our understanding of internationalization strategy of Latin American firms remains shallow (Pérez-Batres, Pisani, & Doh, 2010). International business scholars point that Latin American firms internationalize rather regionally, though the number of empirical studies examining the phenomenon is limited, and tends to focus on a few well known cases, whereas the majority of Latin American firms, including mid-sized multinational companies, have thus far been under the radar of scientific research (Casanova, 2009; Lopez, Ciravegna and Kundu, 2009; Rugman and Verbeke, 2004). The result is an empirical gap with regards to the generalizability of EMNE theories to Latin American firms.

Do Latin American firms behave similarly to the Chinese and Indian firms that have been discussed more thorougly by the international business literature? Or do they behave more in line with developed economy multinationals, internationalizing gradually as they accumulate resources and capabilities?

This special edition of JBR aims to contribute to the debate on emerging market multinationals by inviting scholarly articles focusing on the internationalization of firms based in Latin America. We are particularly interested in new studies, which use fresh empirical evidence to examine whether and how the internationalization of Latin American firms corresponds to the EMNE theories (e.g. springboard perspective, institutional void perspective, linkage-leverage-learning perspective), or whether they follow conventional IB theories (e.g. eclectic paradigm, resource based view, gradual internationalization process model, internalization theory, and network theory).

The guest editors seek studies focusing on firm internationalization based on one or multiple countries of Latin America. The contributions can tackle, among others, the following research questions:

• Which theories from the international business, international entrepreneurship, and international marketing fields are suited to explain the internationalization of Latin American companies?
• Does the internationalization of Latin American enterprises contribute to the development of emerging markets multinational enterprises (EMNEs) internationalization theories? How?
• Do the springboard and linkage-leverage-learning perspectives apply to Latin American firms?
• What explains the speed and scope of internationalization of Latin American firms?
• What are the motives for internationalizing of Latin American firms?
• How important are ownership and the composition of the management team for the internationalization of Latin American firms?
• Does the eclectic paradigm explain the internationalization of Latin American firms?
• Do institutional characteristics contribute to explain the international behavior of Latin American companies?

To submit your work, please email your paper to Luciano Ciravegna atLuciano.ciravegna@incae.edu

All papers accepted in an initial screening will enter double-blind peer review process.

Submissions will be limited to 50 pages of text and up to ten figures and tables. Submissions must comply to the JBR style requirements. For JBR style requirements, go tohttp://cdn.elsevier.com/promis_misc/jbrrequirements.pdf.

References

Buckley, P. J., Clegg, L. J., Cross, A. R., Liu, X., Voss, H., & Zheng, P. (2007). The determinants of Chinese outward foreign direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 499-518.

Casanova, L. (2009). Global Latinas [Electronic book]: Latin America's emerging multinationals. Palgrave Macmillan.

Cavusgil, S. T., Ghauri, P. N., & Akcal, A. A. (2012). Doing business in emerging markets. Sage.

Ciravegna, L.; Fitzgerald, R., & Kundu, S. (2013) Operating in emerging markets. Financial Times (FT) Press, Pearson, New York, USA.

Ciravegna, L.; Lopez, L. & Kundu, S. (2013) “Country of origin and network effects on internationalization: A comparative study of SMEs from an emerging and developed economy”, Journal of Business Research,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.07.011

Ciravegna, L.; Lopez, L. & Kundu, S. (2009) “Born Global or Born Regional? Evidence from an exploratory study in the Costa Rican Software Industry”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 40 (7): 1228-1238.

Contractor, F. J., Kumar, V., & Kundu, S. K. (2007). Nature of the relationship between international expansion and performance: The case of emerging market firms. Journal of World Business, 42(4), 401-417.

Cuervo‐Cazurra, A. (2012). Extending theory by analyzing developing country multinational companies: solving the goldilocks debate. Global Strategy Journal, 2(3), 153-167.

Guillén, M. F., & García-Canal, E. (2009). The American model of the multinational firm and the “new” multinationals from emerging economies. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(2), 23-35.

Guillén, M. F., & García-Canal, E. (2012) Emerging markets rule. McGraw Hill, US.

Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. G. (2010). Winning in emerging markets: A road map for strategy and execution. Harvard Business Press.

Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Lau, C. M., & Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 249-267.

Luo YD, Rui HC. 2009. An ambidexterity perspective toward multinational enterprises from emerging economies. Academy of Management Perspectives 23(4): 49–70.

Luo, Y., & Tung, R. L. (2007). International expansion of emerging market enterprises: A springboard perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 481-498.

Mathews, J. A. (2006). Dragon multinationals: New players in 21st century globalization. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(1), 5-27.

Madhok, A., & Keyhani, M. (2012). Acquisitions as entrepreneurship: asymmetries, opportunities, and the internationalization of multinationals from emerging economies. Global Strategy Journal, 2(1), 26-40.

Narula, R. (2012). Do we need different frameworks to explain infant MNEs from developing countries? Global Strategy Journal, 2(3), 188-204.

Peng M.W., Wang D.Y.L., Jiang Y. 2008. An institution-based view of international business strategy: a focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies 39(5): 920–936.

Pérez-Batres, L.A., Pisani, M.J., & Doh, J.P. 2010. Latin America’s Contribution to IB Scholarship. Academy of International Business Insights, 10(1): 3-7.

Ramamurti, R., & Singh, J. V. (Eds.). (2009). Emerging multinationals in emerging markets. Cambridge University Press.

Ramamurti, R. (2012). What is really different about emerging market multinationals? Global Strategy Journal, 2(1), 41-47.

Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2004). A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(1), 3-18.

Yamakawa, Y., Peng, M. W., & Deeds, D. L. (2008). What drives new ventures to internationalize from emerging to developed economies? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 59-82.

Yiu, D. W., Lau, C., & Bruton, G. D. (2007). International venturing by emerging economy firms: the effects of firm capabilities, home country networks, and corporate entrepreneurship. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 519-540.

Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Hoskisson, R. E., & Peng, M. W. (2005). Strategy Research in Emerging Economies: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom*. Journal of Management Studies, 42(1), 1-33.

Call for conference Papers. AIB 2014

Academy of International Business

AIB 2014 Annual Meeting
Vancouver, Canada
June 23-26, 2014

For the full version of the Call for Papers, please visit http://aib.msu.edu/events/2014/CallforPapers.asp }
Call for Papers

Theme: Local Contexts in Global Business

Submission Deadline: Wednesday, January 15, 2014

Program Chair: Klaus Meyer, China Europe International Business School ( AIB2014@ceibs.edu )

Globalization is increasing opportunities for business to create value by bridging across different local contexts. At the same time, these local contexts retain their distinct characteristics in terms of, for example, culture, regulations, resources and human capital. Increasing interactions across nations, however, does not necessarily lead to convergence: Local communities retain their distinctiveness. In fact, for many, local identity may even become more important in response to the anonymous forces of globalization. On the other hand, some communities, such as our host city Vancouver, thrive on the interaction of people from a diversity of backgrounds, and become hubs of global business. Communities also build on local values, which can themselves become global. Vancouver, the home of Greenpeace, aspires to be the world's greenest city and the home to companies producing green technologies.

The tension between the globalizing and localizing forces in our societies create major challenges for businesses. For example, how do firms and individuals engage with the dual demands of acting both local and global? How do companies exploit the diversity of the world economy to gain competitive advantage in a variety of local markets? How do global (or regional) MNEs manage to deliver locally relevant products and services? How do MNE operations in multiple localities shape global innovation processes? How do local concerns about social or environmental issues in communities of place and indigenous societies get heard in a world of global business? How are global concerns, such as global warming, violent conflicts, and financial crises, reflected in local decisions by businesses?

This tension also creates profound challenges for how we do research in the field of international business. For example, how do we incorporate aspects of local context in our theorizing? How can we make highly abstract theories relevant for different local contexts? How can we derive relevant theoretical insights from single context studies? How can we ensure our measurements of abstract constructs are valid in different cultural contexts?
Paper and Panel Submissions

Paper and panel submissions for AIB 2014 need to be categorized into one of thirteen topical and two special tracks. Each paper or panel proposal must be submitted to only one track. Please select the track closest to your proposal from the list below. All single country studies must focus on IB-relevant topics such as MNCs, international institutions, trade, global value chains, etc.

1. People and Careers in Cross-Cultural Business
Track chair: Davina Vora, State University of New York at New Paltz, USA ( 2014track1@aib.msu.edu )

2. Entrepreneurship, SMEs, and Born Globals
Track chair: Shameen Prashantham, Nottingham University Business School China ( 2014track2@aib.msu.edu )

3. Organization, Management and Human Resources of the MNE
Track chair: Dana Minbaeva, Copenhagen Business School, Denmark ( 2014track3@aib.msu.edu )

4. Marketing and Consumers in IB
Track chair: Janet Y. Murray, University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA ( 2014track4@aib.msu.edu )

5. Global Value Chains and the Geography of IB
Track chair: Vikas Kumar, University of Sydney, Australia ( 2014track5@aib.msu.edu )

6. Innovation and Knowledge Management
Track chair: Felipe Monteiro, INSEAD, France ( 2014track6@aib.msu.edu )

7. Competition and Collaboration in IB
Track chair: Aya Chacar, Florida International University, USA ( 2014track7@aib.msu.edu )

8. Global Strategy, M&As and Competitiveness
Track chair: Jordan Siegel, Harvard Business School, USA ( 2014track8@aib.msu.edu )

9. Home Economies and the MNE
Track chair: Pavida Pananond, Thammasat University, Thailand ( 2014track9@aib.msu.edu )

10. Theories of the MNE and of FDI
Track chair: Gabriel Benito, BI Norwegian Business School, Norway ( 2014track10@aib.msu.edu )

11. Stakeholders, Responsible Leadership and Governance
Track chair: Sheila Puffer, Northeastern University, USA ( 2014track11@aib.msu.edu )

12. The Institutional and Political Environment of IB
Track chair: Pei Sun, Fudan University, China ( 2014track12@aib.msu.edu )

13. International Finance and Economics
Track chair: Lars Oxelheim, Lund University, Sweden ( 2014track13@aib.msu.edu )

14. Research Methodology in IB (Special Track)
Track chair: Timothy Devinney, University of Leeds, UK ( 2014track14@aib.msu.edu )

15. Teaching IB (Special Track)
Track chair: Andreas Schotter, Ivey Business School, Canada ( 2014track15@aib.msu.edu )


We will be accepting two types of submissions - papers and panels. Paper and panel submissions need to be categorized into one of the thirteen topical tracks or into one of the two special tracks described above. Each paper or panel proposal must be submitted to only one track. For the special tracks on teaching and research methods, please contact the track chairs to discuss the preferred format of the sessions.

All submissions will be handled through the AIB online submission system. All manuscripts and proposals must be submitted by January 15, 2014. Please refer to the detailed submission instructions page for additional information on how to prepare and submit your submission. For up-to-date information about the conference and related events, please check the conference website at http://aib.msu.edu/events/2014/. Any questions regarding this call for papers should be addressed to the track chairs or the Program Chair, Klaus Meyer.

Klaus Meyer
Program Chair, AIB 2014 Annual Meeting
China Europe International Business School, Shanghai
AIB2014@ceibs.edu

Call for papes: Theoretical and Empirical Research on the Internationalization of Latin American Enterprises

Theoretical and Empirical Research on the Internationalization of Latin American Enterprises

Call for Papers for a special issue of the Journal of Business Research

Guest Editors: 

• Luciano Ciravegna (Royal Holloway, University of London; INCAE), 
• Sumit K. Kundu (Florida International University), 
• Luis Lopez (INCAE)

Submission Deadline: September 15, 2014

Since 2008-2009 emerging markets generate the lion share of the world’s economic growth. As a result, managers and business scholars have focused their attention on studying the dynamics of emerging markets (Buckley, Clegg, Cross, Liu, Voss, and Zheng, 2007; Cavusgil, Ghauri, and Akcal, 2012; Guillen and Garcia-Canal, 2012; Khanna and Palepu, 2010: Ciravegna, Fitzgerald and Kundu, 2013; Wright, Filatotchev, Hoskisson, and Peng, 2005). The rise of multinational companies from emerging markets is becoming a major phenomenon (Ramamurti and Singh, 2009; Cuervo-Cazurra, 2012; Luo and Rui, 2009; Yamakawa, Peng and Deeds, 2008).

Emerging market multinationals (EMNEs) internationalize differently from developed economy multinationals (Guillén and García-Canal, 2009; Luo and Rui, 2009; Matthews, 2007; Yiu, Lau and Bruton, 2007). According to Luo and Tang’s (2007) “springboard perspective”, EMNEs internationalize before reaching a stage of maturity in domestic markets because internationalization nurtures the acquisition of capabilities and assets that they may lack. Some scholars reject this view, positing that EMNEs behave similarly to multinationals based in developed economies, only they have different sets of country specific and firm specific advantages (Narula, 2012). Finally, some scholars point that EMNEs may internationalize in order to escape from difficult conditions in their domestic economies or to pursue opportunities in an entrepreneurial fashion (Khanna and Palepu, 2010; Madhok and Keyhani, 2012).

Most of the studies on which EMNEs theories focus on a very small number of emerging markets especially China and India (Ciravegna, Fitzgerald, and Kundu, 2013). Several Latin American firms have internationalized in aggressive and innovative ways, often outcompeting established players (Casanova, 2009). Latin American firms are now among the world global players in several industries, ranging from cement (Cemex), to aerospace (Embraer), bread (Bimbo), sweets (Arcor), and wine (Concha y Toro) (Guillén and García-Canal, 2009). However, our understanding of internationalization strategy of Latin American firms remains shallow (Pérez-Batres, Pisani, & Doh, 2010). International business scholars point that Latin American firms internationalize rather regionally, though the number of empirical studies examining the phenomenon is limited, and tends to focus on a few well known cases, whereas the majority of Latin American firms, including mid-sized multinational companies, have thus far been under the radar of scientific research (Casanova, 2009; Lopez, Ciravegna and Kundu, 2009; Rugman and Verbeke, 2004). The result is an empirical gap with regards to the generalizability of EMNE theories to Latin American firms.

Do Latin American firms behave similarly to the Chinese and Indian firms that have been discussed more thorougly by the international business literature? Or do they behave more in line with developed economy multinationals, internationalizing gradually as they accumulate resources and capabilities?

This special edition of JBR aims to contribute to the debate on emerging market multinationals by inviting scholarly articles focusing on the internationalization of firms based in Latin America. We are particularly interested in new studies, which use fresh empirical evidence to examine whether and how the internationalization of Latin American firms corresponds to the EMNE theories (e.g. springboard perspective, institutional void perspective, linkage-leverage-learning perspective), or whether they follow conventional IB theories (e.g. eclectic paradigm, resource based view, gradual internationalization process model, internalization theory, and network theory).

The guest editors seek studies focusing on firm internationalization based on one or multiple countries of Latin America. The contributions can tackle, among others, the following research questions:

• Which theories from the international business, international entrepreneurship, and international marketing fields are suited to explain the internationalization of Latin American companies? 
• Does the internationalization of Latin American enterprises contribute to the development of emerging markets multinational enterprises (EMNEs) internationalization theories? How? 
• Do the springboard and linkage-leverage-learning perspectives apply to Latin American firms? 
• What explains the speed and scope of internationalization of Latin American firms?
• What are the motives for internationalizing of Latin American firms?
• How important are ownership and the composition of the management team for the internationalization of Latin American firms?
• Does the eclectic paradigm explain the internationalization of Latin American firms?
• Do institutional characteristics contribute to explain the international behavior of Latin American companies?

To submit your work, please email your paper to Luciano Ciravegna at Luciano.ciravegna@incae.edu

All papers accepted in an initial screening will enter double-blind peer review process.

Submissions will be limited to 50 pages of text and up to ten figures and tables. Submissions must comply to the JBR style requirements. For JBR style requirements, go to http://cdn.elsevier.com/promis_misc/jbrrequirements.pdf.

References

Buckley, P. J., Clegg, L. J., Cross, A. R., Liu, X., Voss, H., & Zheng, P. (2007). The determinants of Chinese outward foreign direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 499-518.

Casanova, L. (2009). Global Latinas [Electronic book]: Latin America's emerging multinationals. Palgrave Macmillan.

Cavusgil, S. T., Ghauri, P. N., & Akcal, A. A. (2012). Doing business in emerging markets. Sage.

Ciravegna, L.; Fitzgerald, R., & Kundu, S. (2013) Operating in emerging markets. Financial Times (FT) Press, Pearson, New York, USA.

Ciravegna, L.; Lopez, L. & Kundu, S. (2013) “Country of origin and network effects on internationalization: A comparative study of SMEs from an emerging and developed economy”, Journal of Business Research, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.07.011

Ciravegna, L.; Lopez, L. & Kundu, S. (2009) “Born Global or Born Regional? Evidence from an exploratory study in the Costa Rican Software Industry”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 40 (7): 1228-1238.

Contractor, F. J., Kumar, V., & Kundu, S. K. (2007). Nature of the relationship between international expansion and performance: The case of emerging market firms. Journal of World Business, 42(4), 401-417.

Cuervo‐Cazurra, A. (2012). Extending theory by analyzing developing country multinational companies: solving the goldilocks debate. Global Strategy Journal, 2(3), 153-167.

Guillén, M. F., & García-Canal, E. (2009). The American model of the multinational firm and the “new” multinationals from emerging economies. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(2), 23-35.

Guillén, M. F., & García-Canal, E. (2012) Emerging markets rule. McGraw Hill, US.

Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. G. (2010). Winning in emerging markets: A road map for strategy and execution. Harvard Business Press.

Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Lau, C. M., & Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 249-267.

Luo YD, Rui HC. 2009. An ambidexterity perspective toward multinational enterprises from emerging economies. Academy of Management Perspectives 23(4): 49–70.

Luo, Y., & Tung, R. L. (2007). International expansion of emerging market enterprises: A springboard perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 481-498.

Mathews, J. A. (2006). Dragon multinationals: New players in 21st century globalization. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(1), 5-27.

Madhok, A., & Keyhani, M. (2012). Acquisitions as entrepreneurship: asymmetries, opportunities, and the internationalization of multinationals from emerging economies. Global Strategy Journal, 2(1), 26-40.

Narula, R. (2012). Do we need different frameworks to explain infant MNEs from developing countries? Global Strategy Journal, 2(3), 188-204.

Peng M.W., Wang D.Y.L., Jiang Y. 2008. An institution-based view of international business strategy: a focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies 39(5): 920–936.

Pérez-Batres, L.A., Pisani, M.J., & Doh, J.P. 2010. Latin America’s Contribution to IB Scholarship. Academy of International Business Insights, 10(1): 3-7.

Ramamurti, R., & Singh, J. V. (Eds.). (2009). Emerging multinationals in emerging markets. Cambridge University Press.

Ramamurti, R. (2012). What is really different about emerging market multinationals? Global Strategy Journal, 2(1), 41-47.

Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2004). A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(1), 3-18.

Yamakawa, Y., Peng, M. W., & Deeds, D. L. (2008). What drives new ventures to internationalize from emerging to developed economies? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 59-82.

Yiu, D. W., Lau, C., & Bruton, G. D. (2007). International venturing by emerging economy firms: the effects of firm capabilities, home country networks, and corporate entrepreneurship. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 519-540.

Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Hoskisson, R. E., & Peng, M. W. (2005). Strategy Research in Emerging Economies: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom*. Journal of Management Studies, 42(1), 1-33.

Call for papers. Special issue on: Special Issue on Sustainability, Ethics, and Entrepreneurship

Journal of Management Studies
Special Issue on Sustainability, Ethics, and Entrepreneurship
Submission Deadline: January 15, 2015

Guest Editors:

• • Gideon Markman, Colorado State University, USA (gideon.markman@colostate.edu)
• • Dev Jennings, University of Alberta, Canada (devereaux.jennings@ualberta.ca)
• • Tom Lumpkin, Syracuse University, USA (lumpkin@syr.edu)
• • Johanna Mair, Hertie School of Governance, Germany (mair@hertie-school.org)
• • Mike Russo, University of Oregon, USA (mrusso@uoregon.edu)

Background

Environmental stewardship, social responsibility, and ethical decision-making are critical in many business activities and ignoring these principles is detrimental for the enterprising effort of every firm—cause-based startups, for-profit ventures, family businesses, and public firms. For example, firms often combine inputs through incrementally sequential, and well-synchronized procedures. This means that even small unethical choices in early value-chain activities can trigger devastating cascading effects that bring an otherwise smooth-running operation to a grinding halt, while undermining the reputation of a single firm, or worse, ravaging entire industries (e.g., tobacco industry). Of course, for startups and small family firms, the same poor choices might bring business disbandment. At the other end of the spectrum, social entrepreneurs and the sustainability movement are increasingly fashioning—and perhaps even leveraging on—businesses that are based on superior sustainability standards, strong social considerations, and deep ethical principles. These businesses are attractive to a significant, and growing, slice of consumers because the vales of such companies resonate with their own. Although it is clear that these are tectonic shifts that alter economic systems and social structures (e.g., social media and the Arab Spring), scholarly research and theory development on this tripartite topic are clearly lagging.
The areas of sustainability, society, ethics, and entrepreneurship motivates scholarship from diverse disciplines—e.g., management, finance, accounting, marketing, operations, supply chain, political science, sociology, psychology, and economics, to name a few. Each discipline makes significant contributions to this topical area. Also, most scholars recognize that cross-disciplinary research can be highly revelatory, but surprisingly, the number of truly cross-disciplinary studies, including in special issues, suggests the more can and should be done to intensity cross-boundary research. We think that—given the complexity and overlap of and interrelations between sustainability, society, business ethics, and entrepreneurship—it is even more important to feature manuscripts that are dedicated to exemplary cross-disciplinary studies on this multilateral topic.
The special issues (SI) calls for scholarship that is less concerned about disciplinary boundaries and more inspired to advance knowledge that sheds light on big questions related to these topical areas. We call for "edgy" scholarly work from thought leaders who dare to think "outside the sandbox" of traditional research. And we’re particularly interested in radical, controversial, novel, useful, and non-obvious scholarship that challenges research dogmas and is highly revelatory—even if not fully grounded in well-studied or well-validated theory. Of course, manuscript can't be merely descriptive or phenomenally driven, so a strong theoretical contribution is still a must.

Why the SI Needed and What Scholarship Would Fit the SI

The SI is need for several reasons, but three deserve greater attention:
First, not every scholar, manager, or company agrees on the connection between sustainability, ethics, and entrepreneurship. Recent research on the “green to be seen” perspective suggests that consumers are willing to pay extra for sustainable offerings, but only if there are overt status incentives or reputational outcomes that associated with such purchases (Griskevicius, Tybur, & Van den Bergh, 2010). Similarly, firms—large and small—are struggling with the concept of transparency; would the benefits of touting ethical practices be outweighed by the risk that comes from revealing product provenance (e.g., the mêlée of U.S. food companies on whether to label genetically modified products)? We call for conflicting perspectives on the areas of sustainability, ethics, and entrepreneurship, particularly if they offer fertile and provocative new areas of scholarly research.
Second, many manuscripts that survive the typical review process are often not too novel; their expansion of theory quite limited, and their empirical insights are usually narrow. This is not a criticism of the review process or published manuscripts. Far from it; this process is rigorous, which yields highly disciplined scholarship that collectively builds an important and trustworthy body of knowledge. Moreover, we will use the same rigorous review process as well. The difference, however, is that, as noted, we explicitly seek manuscripts that offer new, even radical theoretical perspectives; those that significantly expand existing theory; and/or those that bring breakthrough empirical insights by triangulating the domains of sustainability, ethics, and entrepreneurship.
Third, we also noticed submissions tend to homogenize; they usually follow similar empirical methodologies, converge around a dominant conceptual lens, and predictably, tackle similar research questions. This SI favors cross-disciplinary research and scholarly work that clearly shed light on both big conceptual questions and significantly practical problems that are related to these topical areas. We are especially interested in manuscripts that challenge research dogmas; scholarship that opens up new research frontiers or offers new insights that significantly enrich discussion and discourse, as well as research that addresses timely, and revelatory topics. Thus, we welcome a variety of theoretical, empirical, and cross-disciplinary approaches.
A suggestive but not exhaustive list of questions and topics includes:

• · How does strategy differ when firms are not constituted as vehicles of private wealth accumulation but are owned by communities of members or government?
• · How can research in other domains and disciplines—supply chain, accounting, governance, marketing, public policy, finance, and/or sociology—expand theory in the areas of sustainability, society, ethics, and entrepreneurship?
• · What is social value, what are the most useful measures of social impact, and how do social value and economic value interact and shape each other? How do social entrepreneurs and cause-based ventures impact for-profit entrepreneurs and established firms?
• · How is theory shaped by the dual movement of social entrepreneurship and sustainability?
• · What are most useful conceptual models and empirical analysis of the antecedents, consequences, and contingencies associated with the processes of sustainable, socially responsible, and ethical entrepreneurship? 
• Can social entrepreneurship combat poverty, and if so, who is winning and why?
• · What innovations do social and sustainable ventures bring to for-profit enterprises?
• · What can business models that employ Fair Trade, microfinance, crowd-funding, and/or green entrepreneurship teach management about social change, political impact, business ethics, and sustainability?
• · What are the antecedents and outcomes of new forms of governance of ventures, such as B Corps and “For Benefit” corporations? What are the implications for theory?
• · How bright is the line between non-profit organizations and ventures with missions that go beyond profit maximization?
• · How do entrepreneurs address the inevitable psychological, organizational, and strategic tensions between sustainability, ethical challenges, and profitability?

SUBMISSION PROCESS AND DEADLINE

Papers will be reviewed following the JMS double-blind review process. Papers should be submitted by the January 15th, 2015 deadline by e-mail to Gideon Markman (gideon.markman@colostate.edu). Papers should be prepared using the JMS Guidelines (http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/pdf/JMS_Prep_of_Manuscripts.pdf). The editors welcome informal enquiries related to proposed topics.

Special Issue Workshop: To help authors advance their manuscripts, a Special Issue Workshop will be held in May 2015 in Denver, Colorado. Authors of R&R manuscripts will be invited to present and discuss their papers during the workshop, but presentation at the workshop does not guarantee acceptance of the paper for publication in JMS. Attending the workshop is not a precondition for acceptance into the Special Issue.



Contact Emails:

• Gideon Markman, Colorado State University, USA (gideon.markman@colostate.edu)
• Dev Jennings, University of Alberta, Canada (devereaux.jennings@ualberta.ca)
• Tom Lumpkin, Syracuse University, USA (lumpkin@syr.edu)
• Johanna Mair, Hertie School of Governance, Germany (mair@hertie-school.org)
• Mike Russo, University of Oregon, USA (mrusso@uoregon.edu)

www.journalofmanagementstudies.com
Tel: +44 (0)191 334 5395

Call for papers: South Asian Diasporas: Facilitators of Trade, Investment, and National Competitive Advantage

South Asian Journal for Global Business Research 

Special Issue Call for Papers

South Asian Diasporas: Facilitators of Trade, Investment, and National Competitive Advantage

Guest Editors:

• Masud Chand (Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas, USA)
• Shaista E. Khilji (George Washington University, Washington DC, USA)
• Florian Täube (EBS Business School, Germany)
• Henry Chung (Massey University, New Zealand)

A 3-page abstract due: Dec 1, 2013

Full papers due: April 30, 2014

The countries that make up South Asia have some of the world’s largest and most geographically dispersed diasporas (Chand, 2013). While diasporas have existed for thousands of years, globalization and increasing human and capital mobility have enhanced their importance and left them uniquely positioned to act as facilitators of trade and investment between their countries of origin (COO) and their countries of residence (COR). Modern diasporas have played vital roles in facilitating trade and investments between their COO and COR, including direct activities such as investing in their COOs (Buckley, Wang, & Clegg, 2007; Geithner, Johnson, & Chen, 2005) as well as more indirect facilitation activities such as providing transnational social networks that serve as conduits for trade (Khanna, 2007; Saxenian, 2002; Chand, 2010), helping with institutional and human capital development in the COO (Saxenian, 2006), driving the ‘immigrant effect’ (Chung & Tung, 2013; Chung, Enderwick & Naruemitmongkonsuk, 2010), improving the image of the COO in the COR (Chand & Tung, 2011), introducing the culture of the COO in the COR (Chand, 2010), contributing to ‘soft power’ for the COO (Chand & Tung, 2011), and contributing to technology transfer and capacity development in the COO (Lin, 2010).

The roles of diasporas are undergoing important changes as the pressures of globalization on the one hand and the pull of the homeland on the other presents them with a unique set of challenges. While COOs try to leverage them as assets, there is also pressure to become a part of the COR, leading to emerging questions of cross-national and intra-national identity. The rising level of diaspora return to their COO and the increasing importance of brain circulation give this topic special importance in the twenty-first century. An organized diaspora community, particularly when augmented by large numbers and organizational resources, can command considerable political capital in a host country. This political capital can be used to help improve the nation brand of the COO and in improving its image in the COR.

This special issue call especially welcomes papers focusing on South Asian diasporas, but is not restricted to them. We are also open to conceptual/theoretical papers on diasporas that draw implications for South Asia and its relationship with its diasporas, and comparative research on other diaspora communities that can have lessons for South Asian businesses and policy makers.

Topics of interest include, but are not limited to:

• Comparisons of diaspora management across countries, with implications for the South Asian region 
• The genesis of individual country diasporas (for e.g., India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh) and their role in driving trade and investment between the COO and COR 
• Case studies of South Asian diaspora led organizations that span across multiple countries and explain how they help facilitate trade and FDI 
• Conceptual papers dealing with creating and managing diasporas from a COO perspective 
• The geopolitical importance of South Asian diasporas 
• Challenges of diasporas living in CORs, and its effects on transnational trade 
• Social networks of South Asian diasporas, and their effects on cross-border trade and investment 
• Diaspora led FDI and its effects on policy making in COOs 
• South Asian diasporas as agents of institutional and human capital development in their COO 
• The role of South Asian diasporas in driving the COO effect 
• Diasporas caused by ‘pull’ or ‘push’ effects 
• Conceptual papers on diasporas with implications for South Asian countries and their relationship with their diasporas 
• South Asia as ‘COR’ – intra-regional migration and implications for South Asian diasporas 
• Differences between South Asia and the West as COR 

The guest editors are happy to discuss initial ideas for papers and can be contacted directly via email.

Contributors should note: 

This call is open and competitive, and the submitted papers will be double-blind reviewed as per the editorial policies of the South Asian Journal of Global Business Research.
Submitted papers must be based on original material not accepted by, or under consideration with, any other journal or outlet.
For empirical papers based on data sets from which multiple papers have been generated, authors must provide the guest editors with copies of all other papers based on the same data.
The guest editors will select a limited number of papers to be included in the special issue. Other papers submitted to the special issue may be considered for publication in other issues of the journal at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.

Deadlines:

We invite authors to email their abstracts (up to 3 pages including references) to Masud Chand, Shaista E. Khilji, Henry Chung, or Florian Täube at: Masud.Chand@wichita.edu, shaistakhilji@gmail.com, H.Chung@massey.ac.nz, or Florian.Taeube@ebs.edu by December 1, 2013 for a review. Authors will be notified of a decision by early Jan 2014. Those invited to submit a full paper (8000 words) will be asked to meet the April 30, 2014 deadline. Please note that all full papers are to be submitted via ScholarOne, and subject to a double blind review before being accepted for publication. We are also open to authors submitting full papers without submitting an abstract first.

Anticipated Publication Date: 2015

About the South Asian Journal of Global Business Research (SAJGBR)

SAJGBR is multidisciplinary in scope. We accept submissions in any of the business fields—Accounting, Economics, Finance, Management, Marketing and Technology—and are open to other disciplines that enhance understanding of international business activity, including anthropology, political science, psychology and sociology, etc. However, authors must clearly underline how their study relates to the advancement of international business theory and/or practice. We are especially interested in manuscripts that integrate theories and concepts taken from different fields and disciplines.

We aim to publish high quality research articles, policy reviews, book reviews, country/practitioner/personal perspectives, conference reflections and commentaries, which contribute to the scholarly and managerial understanding of contemporary South Asian businesses and diaspora. We encourage authors to study relevance of mainstream theories or practices in their fields of interest, critique and offer fresh insights on South Asian businesses and diaspora, as well contribute to the development of new theories.

South Asian Journal of Global Business Research is published by Emerald Group Publishing Limited. For more information, please refer to: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/sajgbr.htm

References:

Buckley, P., Wang, C. and Clegg, J. (2007). The impact of foreign ownership, local ownership and industry characteristics on spillover effects from foreign direct investment in China. International Business Review, 16 (2): 142-158.

Chand, M. (2010). Diasporas as Drivers of National Competitiveness. In T.M. Devinney, T. Pedersen, & L. Tihanyi (2010), Advances in International Management: The Past, Present and Future of International Business and Management, Volume 23,(pp. 583-602). New York, NY: Emerald.

Chand, M. and Tung, R.L. (2011) Diasporas as the Boundary-Spanners: The role of Trust in Business Facilitation. Journal of Trust Research, 1 (1), 107-129.

Chung, H.F.L and Tung, R.L. (2013). Immigrant social networks and foreign entry: Australia and New Zealand firms in the European Union and Greater China. International Business Review, 22 (1): 18-31

Chand, M. (2013). The South Asian diaspora- knowledge flows in the age of globalization. In Globalization, change and learning in South Asia (Khilji, S.E., & Rowley, C). Chandos Publishing: Oxford.

Chung, H.F.L., Enderwick, P. and Naruemitmongkonsuk, J. (2010). Immigrant employee effects in international strategy: An exploratory study of international service firms. International Marketing Review, 27 (6): 652-675

Geithner, P., Johnson, P. & Chen, L. (Eds.) (2005). Diaspora philanthropy and equitable development in China and India. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Khanna, T. (2007). Billions of Entrepreneurs: How China and India are reshaping their futures- and yours. Harvard Business School Press, Harvard University Press, Boston, MA.

Kotabe, M., Riddle, L., Sonderegger, P. and Täube, F. (2013). Diaspora Investment and Entrepreneurship: The Role of People, Their Movements, and Capital in the International Economy, Journal of International Management, 19(1): 3-5.

Lin, X. (2010). The diaspora solution to innovation capacity development: Immigrant entrepreneurs in the contemporary world. Thunderbird International Business Review, 52 (2): 123-136.

Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs ( 2012). Annual Report 2011-2012. http://www.moia.gov.in/writereaddata/pdf/Annual_Report_2011-2012.pdf

Saxenian, A. (2002). Brain circulation: How high-skill immigration makes everyone better off. http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2002/winter_immigration_saxenian.aspx.

Saxenian, A. (2006). The new Argonauts: Regional advantage in a global economy. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Sonderegger, P. and Täube, F. (2010). Cluster lifecyle and Diaspora effects: evidence from the Indian IT cluster in Bangalore, Journal of International Management 16(4): 383-397.


___________________________________________

Brian Keilson

Editorial Coordinator

South Asian Journal of Global Business Research (SAJGBR)



www.emeraldinsight.com/sajgbr.htm