International Management IM

Dear Colleagues,

Happy New Year!

I just wanted to inform you that a new issue of MOR has just published!

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/management-and-organization-review/issue/0B1B331492C82834A8EA3E8F945C42BF

Two main themes emerge from the collection of articles published in this issue of MOR. One is related to innovation, and the other is about China and Indian's distinct approaches to global business. 

While innovation has been studied extensively in management research, scant attention has been paid to how subsidiary TMT (top management team) attention to group network versus to external network influences subsidiary innovation, or how different patterns of local knowledge spillover can be leveraged to increase service innovation for international firms. The authors of this issue not only theorize the embedded agency of TMT in state-owned enterprises (Butzbch, Fuller, Schnyder, & Svystunova, 2022) across multilevel institutional contexts, but also identify the role of subsidiary autonomy in enhancing the effect of TMT attention to different networks on subsidiary innovation (Wang, Zhang, & Shang, 2022). In addition, Ngo and Thornton (2022) find that different configurations of local knowledge spillover channels in conjunction with absorptive capacity can increase international firms' service innovation.  

Since China became the largest economy in the world in 2015, India has made great strides in recent years to globalize its business. In comparing firm internationalization of these two countries, Huang, Conde, Cui, and Fu (2022) examined the extent to which India firms' strategic asset-seeking, opportunity-seeking, and market-seeking motives apply to Chinese firms, and found several key differences in absorptive capacity, international expansion scales and patterns, ownership type, and the home institutional contexts. In comparing how FDI in Africa from China and India, Xie, Chen, and Wang (2022) propose that the two emerging giants compete on different bases: China relying on government-to-government relationship building whereas India having the advantage of institutional proximity and large diaspora communities in Africa. Meyer (2022) further illustrates their different approaches by focusing on the historical roots, the government role, and the nature of projects in the business globalization of these two countries. He even states that "the 'rivalry' between India and China on the global stage is much ado about nothing."

I truly hope you enjoy reading the articles in this issue!

Xiao-Ping

Xiao-Ping Chen
Editor-in-Chief
Management and Organization Review

Regular Articles

· State-Owned Enterprises as Institutional Actors: A Hybrid Historical Institutionalist and Institutional Work Framework
Olivier Butzbach, Douglas B. Fuller, Gerhard Schnyder, Liudmyla Svystunova 

· Impact of Subsidiary TMT Network Attention on Innovation: The Moderating Role of Subsidiary Autonomy
Shi-quan Wang, Shuang Zhang, and Guo-yin Shang 

· How Knowledge Services Clustered Firms Leverage Different Channels of Local Knowledge Spillovers for Service Innovation
Thi (Alice) N. B. Ngo and Sabrina Thornton 

· What Motivates Emerging Economy Firms to Internationalize? A Replication and Extension of Ahsan et al. (2020) in the Context of China
Can Huang, Felix Conde, Lin Cui, and Yao Fu 

· Enabling the Creative Performance of Indian IT Employees Through Their Voice: The Mediating Role of Psychosocial Prosperity
R. Prince and M. Kameshwar Rao 

· Navigating Cultural Divides via Identity Work: Bulgarian Migrant Entrepreneurs' Tactics in the UK
Stoyan Stoyanov and Veselina Stoyanova 

Dialogue, Debate, and Discussion

· When Dragon Meets Elephant in Africa: The Rivalry on Distinctive Competitiveness
Zhenzhen Xie, Xuanjin Chen, and Hao Wang 

· India and China: Distinct Paths to Global Businesses
 Klaus E. Meyer 

------------------------------
Xiao-Ping Chen
University of Washington
Seattle WA
(206) 543-2265
------------------------------