The business systems approach holds considerable promise for improving our understanding of the relations between societal institutions and technological and economic outcomes. Nonetheless, there have been surprisingly few attempts to validate its proposed typology of business system types. In this paper, I take up this issue and conduct a large-scale empirical assessment of the national business systems typology. I use data on 30 OECD countries from 2000 and 2011 to assess the validity of the typology, and explore its value for comparative institutional analysis through a fuzzy-set analysis of innovation specialization patterns. The findings illustrate that while the national business systems typology needs to be extended, it remains relevant for describing variety in national institutional frameworks. In addition, the detail it adds may provide the nuance needed for exploring more complex relations between institutions and technological and economic outcomes.

Absorptive capacity is frequently highlighted as a key determinant of knowledge transfer within MNEs. But how individual behaviour translates into absorptive capacity at the subsidiary level, and exactly how this is contingent on subsidiaries' social context, remains under-addressed. This not only limits our understanding of the relationship between individual and organizational level absorptive capacity, it also hampers further research on potentially relevant managerial and organizational antecedents, and limits the implications we can draw for practitioners that seek to increase their organization's capacity to put new knowledge to use. To address this shortcoming we conduct an in-depth comparative case study of a headquarters-initiated knowledge transfer initiative at two subsidiaries of the same MNE. The findings demonstrate that social interaction is a prerequisite for subsidiary absorptive capacity as it enables employees to participate in the transformation of new knowledge to the local context and the development of local applications. Second, the findings illustrate how organizational conditions at the subsidiary level can impact subsidiary absorptive capacity by enabling or constraining local interaction patterns. These insights contribute to the absorptive capacity literature by demonstrating the scale and scope of social interaction as a key link between individual-and organizational-level absorptive capacity.

No abstract

Abstract. Despite the interest in issues of knowing and learning in the global strategy field, there has been limited mutual engagement and interaction between the fields of global strategy and organizational learning. The purpose of our article is to reflect on and articulate how the mutual exchange of ideas between both fields can be encouraged. To this end, we first conduct a review of the intersection of the fields of global strategy and organizational learning. We then present two recommendations regarding how the interaction between the two fields can be enhanced. Our first recommendation is for global strategy research to adopt a broader notion of organizational learning. Our second recommendation is for global strategy research to capitalize on its attention to context in order to inform and enhance organizational learning theory. We discuss the use of context in a number of common research designs, and highlight how the scope for theoretical contributions back to organizational learning varies with the research design that is adopted.

Recently, the state and future of organization theory have been widely debated. In this Perspectives issue, we aim to contribute to these debates by suggesting that organizational scholarship may benefit from greater understanding and consideration of societal institutions and their effects on the collective organizing of work. We also illustrate that the literature on comparative institutionalism, a strand of institutional thought with a rich tradition within Organization Studies, provides useful insights into these relations. We highlight several of these insights and briefly introduce the articles collected in the associated Perspectives issue of Organization Studies on comparative institutionalism 1 . We end with a call for greater cross-fertilization between comparative institutionalism and organization theory at large. Keywords comparative institutionalism, organization theory, organization studiesOrganization Studies: An international multidisciplinary journal devoted to the study of organizations, organizing, and the organized in and between societies -The dedication of Organization StudiesIf both research output and critical reflection are necessary requirements for a vibrant academic community, then the field of organization theory is in very good shape. The number of papers submitted to our journals and conferences continues to rise every year, and discussions in a variety of