Print

Print


*With Apologies for Cross-Posting)*

*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?

We encourage submissions that address the above – and other relevant 
topics – designed to shed light on the current and potential role of 
context in IB. Submissions are welcome and encouraged from all 
methodological traditions and especially those that may be particularly 
suited to this overall topic.

*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 
<https://webaccess.villanova.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=S1njiC6cqtnbwj3UG9U5Q9Pw5wItKvzl6CZJtEy_3Mq3MExom1DSCGgAdAB0AHAAOgAvAC8AZQBlAHMALgBlAGwAcwBlAHYAaQBlAHIALgBjAG8AbQAvAGoAdwBiAA..&URL=http%3a%2f%2fees.elsevier.com%2fjwb>. 


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 ([log in to unmask])

Mary Ann Von Glinow, Florida International University, 
USA ([log in to unmask])

Kamel Mellahi, Warwick Business School, UK ([log in to unmask])

**

*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', J/ournal 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, K.B. Lowe & 
E. Drost (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), pp. 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 Managemen/*t*, 27(2), Summer: 
201-229.

Von Glinow, M.A, Drost, E. & Teagarden, M.B. (2002a).*'*Converging on 
IHRM Best Practices: Lessons Learned from a Globally-Distributed 
Consortium on Theory and Practice',**/Human Resource Management, Special 
Issue,/**41(1), pp. 123-140.**

Von Glinow, M.A, Drost, E. & Teagarden, M.B. (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), pp. 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.


____
AIB-L is brought to you by the Academy of International Business.
For information: http://aib.msu.edu/community/aib-l.asp
To post message: [log in to unmask]
For assistance:  [log in to unmask]
AIB-L is a moderated list.