Explore the vast range of titles available.

Much of the rising international connectedness of city-regions has developed from MNEs replacing local connections with (superior) international ones. This often creates local disconnectedness that energizes the current populist backlash against MNE activities. We develop approaches to new IB theory, addressing the interdependencies of MNEs and city-regions that we propose as a crucial avenue for future research. We contrast two generic MNE strategies. The first is the traditional one: the ‘global orchestration’ of resources and markets. We argue that it exacerbates local disconnectedness. The second, that we call ‘local spawning,’ involves engaging with the local entrepreneurial ecosystem to create and renew local connectedness, diffusing populist responses. Some MNEs are better able to implement a local spawning strategy, due to industry factors like innovation clock-speed, and firm characteristics like organizational path dependency. Finally, we distinguish between disconnection, which is an outcome of MNE strategy, and global disruptions, like the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, which are primarily stochastic events. Addressing disconnections requires MNEs to re-orient their strategies while dealing with disruptions requires undertaking risk mitigation. We present empirical evidence from city-regions around the world to illustrate our theory.

Current techno-nationalism presents new risks in international business, amplifying volatility, uncertainty, and complexity for multinational enterprises (MNEs). This study explains how today’s techno-nationalism differs from its traditional form, the underlying theoretic logic, the damage it may cause to MNEs, and what MNEs can do to contain the potential harm. We elaborate on several points: (1) new techno-nationalism combines geopolitical, economic, national security, and ideological considerations, and is thus more complex and disruptive to international business than the traditional standpoint; (2) new techno-nationalism is underpinned by the realism doctrine, which portrays the world as zero-sum competition in which states leverage their power of economic coercion, and does not recognize the importance of technological interconnectivity, resource complementarity, open innovation, and positive-sum co-opetition; (3) techno-nationalism obstructs MNEs, especially those dependent on the global technology supply chain and on target country market contribution; and (4) MNEs can respond to techno-nationalism, defensively or offensively, contingent upon their exposure and ability to manage the risks associated with related policies.

Competing in an era of de-globalization presents new challenges for multinationals, particularly for those from large emerging economies. Emerging market MNEs (EMNEs) in the past benefited from an open, globalizing context that facilitates springboard and compositional strategies. De-globalization makes it significantly harder for them to continue this journey. This study tackles the question of what it takes for EMNEs to execute compositional springboard strategies in the new era, making five points. First, de-globalization implies difficulties for EMNEs to acquire global open resources and needed strategic options. Second, uneven de-globalization has a differential impact on the ability of EMNEs from different countries and different sectors to execute springboard strategies. Third, varieties of capitalism represent an underestimated obstacle to compositional springboard strategies, both in general and in interaction with de-globalization. Fourth, EMNEs can consider a double-loop springboard – doubling down on inward internationalization and treating inward internationalization as a series of iterative, continuous, and transformative resource acquisition loops. Finally, springboard MNEs need to reconfigure their global posture strategies and bolster their critical capabilities in pursuit of sustained advantages in a de-globalization world.

A contemporary challenge for the international business (IB) field is to maintain a link between the global activity of firms and the local concerns of regions and communities. In this essay, we reflect on how the IB scholarship of the late Stephen Young, which was embedded in (but not confined to) Scotland, offers valuable insight into how this might be done. With an overarching interest in the role of IB in economic development, the common thread in his work on multinational enterprise (MNE) subsidiaries and internationalizing small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is the significance of locally relevant entrepreneurial behavior in internationalized firms, which we refer to as “the local roots of global entrepreneurship”. We highlight three facets of his work: (1) the scholarly approach, which was sustained, engaged, and broad-based, (2) the conceptual ideas around the purpose, process and people involved in MNEs and SMEs, and (3) the resonance of these ideas with contemporary IB topics. Our analysis indicates that the emergent body of work on cooperation between MNEs and SMEs (especially new ventures) constitutes an extension and integration of Young’s IB scholarship. An overall implication of our essay is that perhaps, counterintuitively, the future interests of IB research may be served well by paying closer attention to one’s own backyard.

What can MNEs learn from the COVID-19 pandemic? IB scholars have provided ample insights into this question with many focusing on risk management. Complementing these insights, we argue that MNEs should also consider the long-lasting effect that COVID-19, inter alia, had on the institutional logic underlying globalization. The U.S. and its allies have redefined their logic from pursuing cost-reduction to building partnerships based on shared value, aiming to substitute China’s role in the world economy. The geopolitical pressure for decoupling from China is the source of ‘new’ vulnerability of globalization. Such pressure is counteracted by economic rationality, creating unsettled priority between the globalization and deglobalization logics at the macro-level institutional space. Combining both risk-management and institutional logic perspectives, we develop a more comprehensive framework on how MNEs should respond to these challenges. This paper contributes to the debate regarding the impact of COVID-19 on globalization, suggesting that neither globalization nor deglobalization logics will prevail in the short run, and IB will likely be more fractured in the long run, based on not only geographic but also ideological and value propinquity. In strategic sectors, the balance will shift toward bifurcation while in others the balance will shift toward the globalization logic.

Multinational enterprises (MNEs) face simultaneous pressures for global integration and local responsiveness. While the extant literature acknowledges that most MNEs are neither entirely geared towards achieving global integration nor local responsiveness, scarce attention is given to how MNEs develop organizational flexibility to address multiple and shifting strategy pressures over time. In this paper, we draw on the dynamic capabilities literature to explore how the MNE develops the capabilities needed to achieve this flexibility. Through a qualitative, longitudinal case study spanning 12 years, we identify three recombination capabilities – legitimizing, leveraging, and launching capabilities – through which the MNE develops organizational flexibility. We find that these recombination capabilities improve the MNEs ability to sense and seize new opportunities and enable the MNE to overcome organizational impediments to achieve flexibility. Our study offers a process perspective that shows how the three capabilities together nourish the MNEs resilience to continuously balance between global integration and local responsiveness. Our findings have managerial implications, illustrating that launching new strategic initiatives may fail if the MNE does not have the capabilities to legitimize the new initiatives and to ensure that existing organizational strengths are properly leveraged to support the new initiatives.

We study how global connectedness can help MNEs become more environmentally sustainable. Based on the idea that environmental sustainability requires dynamic capabilities, we define dynamic green capability as the ability to build complementary green competences and reconfigure organizationally embedded resources to pursue competitive advantage in a rapidly changing stakeholder environment. We argue that MNEs with greater global connectedness in terms of international diversification or international environmental certification possess knowledge advantages in cultivating dynamic green capabilities. We extend the sensing–seizing–reconfiguring framework and propose that global connectedness substitutes for sensing as a driver of seizing by providing direct access to relevant green knowledge pools around the world, and that it complements seizing as a driver of reconfiguring by strengthening the knowledge routines needed to integrate green competences.

We examine how ties with multiple host-country political institutions contribute to MNE subsidiary performance in countries with weak formal institutions. We suggest that forging relationships between subsidiaries and host-country government actors, local chieftains, and religious leaders generates regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive political resources. We integrate institutional and configuration theories to argue that similarity to an ideal configuration of the three political resources contributes to MNE subsidiary performance, and that the more dysfunctional host-country institutions, the greater the impact on performance. We test our hypotheses using primary and archival data from 604 MNE subsidiaries in 23 Anglophone sub-Saharan African countries and find support for our hypotheses. In our conclusion, we discuss the wider theoretical, managerial, and public-policy implications of our findings.

Drawing on institutional theory, this study examines the question of how host country institutions affect corporate social responsibility (CSR) adoption by multinational enterprises (MNEs). I propose that CSR encompasses a set of practices that MNEs draw on to signal legitimacy in different kinds of institutional contexts – contexts that vary in how they shape issue salience and stakeholder power in a given issue field. Building on ideas related to field opacity and the managerial implications of CSR, I study why MNEs adopt two distinct types of CSR policies: standards-based CSR in response to contexts marked by issue salience, and rights-based CSR in response to contexts marked by stakeholder power. To test these hypotheses, I use subsidiary and firm-level data from a sample of 540 Western European MNEs in the issue field of labor rights. Results show that MNEs strategically adopt these CSR policies related to their presence in distinct institutional contexts. The study offers implications for how MNEs manage the legitimacy of their global operations and how CSR, as a form of private governance, can emerge as both a substitute and complement to requlatory institutions.

The international business (IB) literature has emphasised the heterogeneity of firm strategies in shaping MNE–state bargaining, but largely ignored the heterogeneity of states. In contrast, the international political economy (IPE) literature provides a more nuanced consideration of state strategies and their economic and political priorities. We seek to address this oversight by making two related contributions. In the context of MNE–state bargaining, we first discuss how differences in political systems and the political and economic objectives of states may affect their negotiating stance with MNEs. We consider the impact of changes in the balance of state objectives by considering how much importance governments assign to improving the welfare of its broader population, relative to how important they are concerned with the “private benefits” that accrue to the political elites. This enables us to add micro-foundations to the characterisation of the state. Second, we apply a Nash bargaining framework to MNE–state negotiations that vividly captures the relative bargaining powers of the MNE and the state, including how “outside options” available to these two actors can influence the shape of actual bargains. We discuss the implications of these two contributions for future research.