 |
 |
CALL FOR PAPERS Special Issue of the Journal of International Business Studies INFORMAL INSTITUTIONS AND INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS Special Issue Editors: * Luis Alfonso Dau (Northeastern University, USA, <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]) * Aya Chacar (Florida International University, USA, <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]) * Marjorie Lyles (Indiana University, USA, <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]) * Jiatao Li (Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]) Deadline for submission: August 31, 2018 Tentative publication date: Spring 2020 Introduction This call invites papers focusing on the relationship between informal institutions and international business. In this special issue, we understand institutions to be ※humanly devised constraints§ or ※the rules of the game in a society§ (North, 1990: 3). Much attention has been paid to formal institutions, or the written (or codified) rules or constraints, such as laws, regulations, constitutions, contracts, property rights, and formal agreements. On the other hand, much less attention has been given to informal institutions or the typically unwritten but socially shared rules and constraints (Pejovich, 1999; Sartor & Beamish, 2014; Sauerwald & Peng, 2013). These informal institutions include common values, cognitions, beliefs, traditions, customs, sanctions, and norms of behavior that are often expected or taken for granted (North, 1990, 2005). In common parlance, the term ＆institutions＊ is often used to refer to ＆organizations＊ (e.g., governments, international organizations, non-governmental organizations, etc.), but it is important to distinguish between institutions and organizations for academic purposes in order to examine the relationship between them (Chacar, Celo, & Hesterly, 2017; North, 1990, 2005; Scott, 2013). For instance, the WTO is an organization that provides a formal institutional framework of written rules to which its member countries agree to adhere. Simultaneously, membership in the WTO creates informal (or unwritten) institutional structures between member nations, such as reciprocity and interdependency expectations. Papers examining the interaction of formal and informal institutions on international business are also welcome. In the advent of globalization, the international business literature has increasingly emphasized the importance of considering the institutional environment, instead of studying firm behavior in a vacuum (Dau, 2012, 2013, 2017; Eden, 2010; Kostova, 1997, Kostova et al., 2008; Li, 2013; Li & Qian, 2013). Still, a gap exists in our understanding of informal institutions, as formal institutions only provide part of the picture (North, 1990). This gap is particularly problematic in developing and emerging markets, where informal institutions may have a more prominent role, enabling and facilitating business transactions (Khanna & Palepu, 1997, 2000; Verbeke & Kano, 2013). Note that this special issue invites papers on informal institutions and not culture, although submissions may examine their relationship and tease out the differences between the two constructs as they relate to international business. Some prior work has treated culture and informal institutions as synonymous. However, these two terms are distinct albeit they can overlap at times. Definitions of culture vary in the literature, but it is typically defined as ※the collective programming of the human mind that distinguishes the members of one human group from those of another. Culture in this sense is a system of collectively held values§ (Hofstede, 1984: 51). It ※is the deeper level of basic assumptions and beliefs§ (Schein, 1985: 6-7; see also, Hofstede, 1980, 1994; House et al., 2004; Schein, 2004; Tung & Verbeke, 2010). Informal institutions, on the other hand, are the actual unwritten rules and norms of behavior (North, 1990, 2005), which likely arise as a result of and in conjunction with the cultural framework, but also of formal structures in place in a given location. For instance, whereas culture is often captured with broad dimensions such as the degree of uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede, 1980), embeddedness (Schwartz, 1992), or assertiveness (House, et al., 2004), informal institutions specifically refer to the shared unwritten rules or norms in a society, organization, or other social grouping. Interdisciplinary Work and Work from Different Perspectives Interdisciplinary work and research from different institutional perspectives is particularly welcome. Campbell (2004) has identified three main ※institutional theories§: rational choice institutionalism (or institutional economics/comparative institutional analyses) (North, 1990; Williamson, 1975, 1985, 2000), organizational institutionalism (or neo-institutional theory) (DiMaggio & Powell, 1991; Scott, 1987, 2013), and historical institutionalism (or institutional sociology) (Granovetter, 1985, 1992, 2017). These theoretical strands are associated primarily with economics, political science, and sociology, respectively, but have been used across disciplines using other names as well (Campbell, 2004). Submissions should make a clear and novel theoretical contribution, but may build on any theoretical lens (e.g., internalization theory, resource based view, transaction cost economics, evolutionary theory, learning theory, agency theory, etc.) in addition to the institutional theories (Cantwell et al., 2010; Dunning & Lundan, 2008, 2010). What is critical is to use the institutional framework to help develop new theoretical insights. Furthermore, we encourage work that provides novel ways of measuring informal institutions. Sample Topics Given the limited attention on the effects of informal institutions on firms, as well as on the joint effects of formal and informal institutions on firms, this call for papers is purposefully broad. The following is not an exhaustive list, but provides some examples of potential topics: 1. How do informal institutions, and their interactions with formal institutions, affect firms? * What is their impact on firm strategy across borders (e.g., internationalization decisions, location choices, mode of entry decisions, entrepreneurship, global corporate social responsibility, global innovation, etc.) (Dau & Cuervo-Cazurra, 2014; Pejovich, 1999)? * Are some of these institutions or combinations of institutions in different markets more conducive to firm success (Chacar, Newburry, & Vissa, 2010)? * How do firms organize internally to improve their institutional fit across countries? What structures and organizational models do they choose under different institutional conditions? * How do organizations learn the informal rules and develop international capabilities to manage them (Easterby-Smith & Lyles, 2011; Lyles, 2014)? How do resources and capabilities vary in these differing institutional contexts? * How does informal knowledge sharing or know-how sharing take place? How do inter- and intra-organizational learning systems and knowledge transfer relate to informal vis-角-vis formal institutional information and knowledge? * Do informal rules and governance choices allow unethical choices that are covered up? What happens if they are exposed? * What is the relationship between governance choices and the use of informal institutional structures, such as relational contracting based on favors, trust, reciprocity, interdependency, family ties, social capital networks, mutually beneficial relationships, interpersonal connections, and business group networks (Vissa, Greve, & Chen, 2010)? What is the specific role of informal structures such as Guanxi/Guanxiwang in China, Blats/Svyazy in Russia, Wasta in the Arab World, Immak in Korea, Kankei in Japan, Jeito/Jeitinho in Brazil, and ＆grease＊ payments (Batjargal, 2007; Chen et al., 2004; Chua et al., 2009; Ledeneva, 1998; Millington et al., 2005; Opper et al., 2017; Park & Luo, 2001; Smith et al., 2012; Zhou et al., 2007)? * How do informal institutions alter the value distributions among stakeholders (Chacar & Hesterly, 2008; Coff, 1999; Lieberman & Chacar, 1997)? * How does the nature of competition and industry structure change with the informal institutional structure? Are foreign and local firms affected differently (Chacar & Vissa, 2005)? 2. How do these institutions change and how do actors and organizations affect them (Vaccaro & Palazzo, 2015)? * How do firms engage in non-market strategies to affect informal and formal institutions and institutional structures/frameworks? * How do firms influence formal and informal institutions in different ways? * What is the impact of informal institutions on international organizations (e.g., international non-governmental organizations [INGOs], inter-governmental organizations [IGOs], international non-profit organizations [INPOs], etc.) and how do these organizations affect informal institutions? Research Across Levels of Analysis Although institutions are typically conceptualized at the national level of analysis, they may also be conceptualized at other levels, such as the supranational, regional, corporate, subsidiary, functional area, or workgroup/team levels of analysis. Papers focusing on informal institutions at different levels are also welcome. In particular, papers that study informal institutions across levels of analysis are particularly welcome. Some examples follow: * How are informal supranational institutions (i.e., hyper norms that cross borders) and formal supranational institutions (i.e., international laws, rules, regulations, and agreements) shaped by globalization and how does this affect international business? * How are supranational informal and formal institutions impacted by the diversity in informal and formal national environments and how does this complicate international business? Similarly, how can firms cope with or even benefit from such differences? * When do the informal and formal institutional frameworks of a firm clash and when are they compatible with the informal and formal institutional environments of their home and host countries of operation? * How can firms align informal and formal institutions across their international subsidiaries or across their areas of operation to enhance their international efficiency, growth, and performance? * How do business group informal institutional structures and networks operate and what are the implications for international business? * How do firms manage informal institutional differences across their international units (headquarters/subsidiaries), functional areas, or work groups? * Do MNEs provide a means of reducing informal and formal institutional differences across nations? Conference and Symposium With the aim of helping the authors further develop their papers, we will organize a paper development workshop conference during the spring of 2019. We will invite the authors of papers that receive the option to revise and resubmit their manuscripts. Together with the review process, the opportunity to present and receive comments from discussants and conference participants, will aid authors in strengthening and refining their papers. Furthermore, we plan to have a symposium at a major academic conference in 2020 for the final selected papers that will appear in the special issue, in order to increase their visibility and impact. Submission Process and Deadlines Submissions need to meet JIBS guidelines, including in terms of what is considered international business. Typically, single country studies are only considered international if they focus on international firms or firm internationalization. Furthermore, submission should have implications for international business, although they may also have secondary implications for other fields. All manuscripts will be reviewed as a cohort for this Special Issue. Manuscripts must be submitted between August 17-31, at <http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jibs> 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 ( <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]). References Batjargal, B. 2007. Network triads: transitivity, referral and venture capital decisions in China and Russia. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(6): 998-1012. Campbell, J.L. 2004. Institutional Change and Globalization. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Cantwell, J.L., Dunning, J.H. and Lundan, S.M. 2010. An evolutionary approach to understanding international business activity: The co-evolution of MNEs and the institutional environment. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(4): 567-586. Chacar, A.S., & Hesterly, W. 2008. Institutional settings and rent appropriation by knowledge坼based employees: the case of Major League Baseball. Managerial and Decision Economics, 29(2坼3), 117-136. Chacar, A.S., Newburry, W., & Vissa, B. 2010. Bringing institutions into performance persistence research: Exploring the impact of product, financial, and labor market institutions. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(7), 1119-1140. Chacar, A.S., & Vissa, B. 2005. Are emerging economies less efficient? Performance persistence and the impact of business group affiliation. Strategic Management Journal, 26(10), 933-946. Chacar, A.S., Celo, S. & Hesterly 2017. The Rules of the Game in MLB: Do Formal or Informal Institutions Change First? Business History, in press: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00076791.2017.1342811. Chen, C.C., Chen, Y.R., and Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practices and trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. Organization Science, 15(2): 200-209. Chua, R.Y., Morris, M.W., and Ingram, P. 2009. Guanxi vs. networking: Distinctive configurations of affect-and cognition-based trust in the networks of Chinese vs. American managers. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(3): 490-508. Coff, R.W. 1999. When competitive advantage doesn't lead to performance: The resource-based view and stakeholder bargaining power. Organization science, 10(2), 119-133. Dau, L.A. 2012. Pro-market reforms and developing country multinational corporations. Global Strategy Journal, 2(3): 262-276. Dau, L.A. 2013. Learning across geographic space: Pro-market reforms, multinationalization strategy, and profitability. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(3): 235-262. Dau, L.A. 2017. Contextualizing international learning: The moderating effects of mode of entry and subsidiary networks on the relationship between reforms and profitability. Journal of World Business, in press: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jwb.2016.10.005. Dau, L.A. and Cuervo-Cazurra, A. 2014. To Formalize or Not to Formalize: Entrepreneurship and pro-Market Institutions. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(5): 668-686. DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (eds.) 1991. The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (Vol. 17). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Dunning, J.H. and Lundan, S.M. 2008. Institutions and the OLI paradigm of the multinational enterprise. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(4): 573 每593. Dunning, J. H. and Lundan, S.M. 2010. The institutional origins of dynamic capabilities in multinational enterprises. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(4): 1225-1246. Easterby-Smith, M., and Lyles, M.A. (Eds.) 2011. Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management. New York: John Willey and Sons. Eden, L. 2010. Letter from the Editor-in-Chief: Lifting the veil on how institutions matter in IB research. Journal of International Business Studies, 41.2: 175-177. Granovetter, M. 1985. Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91: 481每510. Granovetter, M. 1992. Economic institutions as social constructions: A framework for analysis. Acta Sociologica, 35(1): 3-11. Granovetter, M. 2017. Society and economy: Framework and principles. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture＊s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Hofstede, G. 1984. National cultures and corporate cultures. In L.A. Samovar, R.E. Porter (Eds.), Communication between cultures. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Hofstede, G. 1994. The business of international business is culture. International Business Review, 3(1): 1每14. House, R.J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P.W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). 2004. Culture, leadership and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Khanna, T. and Palepu, K.G. 1997. Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 75(4): 41-51. Khanna, T. and Palepu, K.G. 2000. The future of business groups in emerging markets: Long-run evidence from Chile. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 268-285. Kostova, T. 1997. Country institutional profiles: Concept and measurement. Academy of Management Proceedings, 180-183. Kostova, T., Roth, K. and Dacin, M.T. 2008. Institutional theory in the study of multinational corporations: A critique and new directions. Academy of Management Review, 33(4): 994-1006. Ledeneva, A.V. 1998. Russia＊s economy of favors: Blat, networking, and informal exchange. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Li, J.T. 2013. The Internationalization of Entrepreneurial Firms from Emerging Economies: The Roles of Institutional Transitions and Market Opportunities. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 11(2): 158-171. Li, J.T and Qian, C. 2013. Principal-Principal Conflicts under Weak Institutions: A Study of Corporate Takeovers in China. Strategic Management Journal, 34: 498-508. Lieberman, M. & Chacar, A.S. 1997. Distribution of Returns among Stakeholders: Method and Application to U.S. and Japanese Companies . In Thomas, Howard and O＊Neal, Don (Eds.) 1997, Strategic Discovery: Competing in New Arenas. John Wiley & Sons Ltd: London, UK. Lyles, M.A. 2014. Organizational Learning, knowledge creation, problem formulation and innovation in messy problems. European Management Journal, 32(1): 132-136. Millington, A., Eberhardt, M., and Wilkinson, B. 2005. Gift giving, guanxi and illicit payments in buyer每supplier relations in China: Analysing the experience of UK companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 57(3): 255-268. North, D.C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press. North, D.C. 2005. Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Opper, S., Nee, V. and Holm, H. 2017. Risk Aversion and Guanxi Activities: A Behavioral Analysis of CEOs in China. Academy of Management Journal, 60(4): 1504-1530. Park, S. and Luo, Y. 2001 Guanxi and organizational dynamics: Organizational networking in Chinese firms, Strategic Management Journal, 22: 455-477. Pejovich, S. 1999. The effects of the interaction of formal and informal institutions on social stability and economic development. Journal of Markets and Morality, 2(2). Sartor, M.A. and Beamish, P.W. 2014. Offshoring innovation to emerging markets: Organizational control and informal institutional distance. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(9): 1072-1095. Sauerwald, S., & Peng, M.W. 2013. Informal institutions, shareholder coalitions, and principal每principal conflicts. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(3), 853-870. Schein, E.H. 1985. Organizational Culture and Leadership (1st edition), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Schein, E.H. 2004. Organizational Culture and Leadership (3rd edition), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Schwartz, S.H. 1992. Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. San Diego: Academic Press. Scott, W.R. 1987. The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative science quarterly: 32(4): 493-511. Scott, W.R. 2013. Institutions and organizations (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Smith, P.B., Torres, C., Leong, C.H., Budhwar, P., Achoui, M., Lebedeva, N. 2012. Are indigenous approaches to achieving influence in business organizations distinctive? A comparative study of guanxi, wasta, jeitinho, svyazi and pulling strings. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(2): 333-348. Tung, R.L., and Verbeke, A. 2010. Beyond Hofstede and GLOBE: Improving the quality of cross-cultural research. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(8), 1259-1274. Vaccaro, A., & Palazzo, G. 2015. Values against violence: institutional change in societies dominated by organized crime. Academy of Management Journal, 58(4), 1075-1101. Verbeke, A., & Kano, L. 2013. The transaction cost economics (TCE) theory of trading favors. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(2), 409-431. Vissa, B., Greve, H.R., & Chen, W.R. 2010. Business group affiliation and firm search behavior in India: Responsiveness and focus of attention. Organization Science, 21(3), 696-712. Williamson, O.E. 1975. Markets and Hierarchies, Analysis and Antitrust Implications: A Study in the Economics of Internal Organization. New York: Free Press. Williamson, O.E. 1985. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. New York: Free Press. Williamson, O.E. 2000. The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead. Journal of Economic Literature, 38(3): 595-613. Zhou, L, Wu, W.P., Luo, X. 2007. Internationalization and the performance of born-global SMEs: the mediating role of social networks." Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4): 673-690. About the Guest Editors Luis Alfonso Dau is an associate professor of International Business and Strategy at the D＊Amore-McKim School of Business at Northeastern University. His research focuses on the strategic responses of emerging market firms to institutional processes and changes. He is particularly interested in the impact of regulatory reforms on the international strategy and performance of such firms. Aya Chacar is an Professor in Management and International Business and Ingersoll-Rand Chaired Professor at Florida International University. She holds a PhD in Strategy and Organization from University of California, Los Angeles. Her research interests are on the interaction of institutions and globalization on firm organization and leadership, strategy and performance, strategic human assets and value appropriation. Marjorie Lyles is Professor of International Strategic Management at Indiana University Kelley School of Business and the Kimball Faculty Fellow. She was founding Director of the Indiana University Center on Southeast Asia. She is a member of the American Management Association's International Council and has been an Invited Scholar and consultant for the U.S. Department of Commerce in the Peoples' Republic of China. Marjorie's writings center on organizational learning, international strategies and cooperative alliances, and technology development particularly in emerging economies. She is a Fellow of the Academy of International Business and a JIBS Area Editor. Jiatao (JT) Li is Lee Quo Wei Professor of Business, Head and Chair Professor of Management, and the Senior Associate Dean of the HKUST Business School, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. His current research interests are in the areas of organizational learning, strategic alliances, corporate governance, innovation, and entrepreneurship, with a focus on issues related to global firms and those from emerging economies. His work has appeared in top academic journals such as Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Journal of International Business Studies, Organization Science, and Strategic Management Journal. He is a Fellow of the Academy of International Business and a JIBS Area Editor. ____ 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] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> For assistance: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> AIB-L is a moderated list. ____ 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.