International diversification is a growth strategy that has a major potential impact on firm performance. The relationship between international diversification and firm performance has been extensively studied in the international strategy literature. A major gap in the literature has been the non-existence of studies that have examined the effect of international diversification on performance in service firms. Previous studies that have tested the international diversification–performance relationship were based on samples of manufacturing firms. We argue that the form of the relationship between multinationality and performance is different in service firms. We provide a theoretical argument for this claim and hypothesize that there is a U-shaped curvilinear relationship between multinationality and performance in service firms. Our sample consists of 81 major German service firms, spanning across four industries. Results show that there is support for a U-shaped curvilinear relationship. Based on the findings, implications and directions for future research are provided. Journal of International Business Studies (2003) 34, 345–355. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400036
Purpose-China, one of the fastest growing economies in the world, has become a major trading partner with the USA. However, trading with Chinese involves major cultural barriers. The Chinese and US cultures differ widely in their values, which produces different attitudes and behaviors. This study purports to add to the existent knowledge on the managerial values in the USA and China by empirically comparing and contrasting these values along several dimensions. Design/methodology/approach-This empirical investigation examines the differences in managerial values between US and Chinese managers through independent sample t-tests based on survey responses from 1,741 US and 982 Chinese managers. Findings-The findings indicate that significant cultural differences exist between the two samples. Results show that US managers are more individualistic than their Chinese counterparts. The managerial values of the US sample are also characterized by lower power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and work ethics than the Chinese sample. Practical implications-The findings provide support for the conventional wisdom regarding the differences between the US and Chinese cultures. Originality/value-The large sample sizes in the research study provide strong empirical support to existent theory.
There have been numerous studies that have examined the relationships between international diversification, product diversification, firm resources, and performance. However, these studies have largely ignored the interrelationships and the causal linkages among the variables in consideration It was the purpose of this study, to overcome these limitations and to provide a better understanding.
The present study examined the relationship between cognitive emotion regulation, social support and job stress. First, we investigated the relationship between cognitive emotion regulation and job stress. Second, we also have investigated that social support from work (peers or supervisors) and non-work (family or social networks) have a moderatoring effect on the relationship between cognitive emotion regulation and job stress. Based on a survey of 127 employees, we found support for our hypotheses that there is a negative relationship between cognitive emotion regulation and job stress. The results also show that work-related and non-work related social support positively moderates the relationship between cognitive emotion regulation and job stress. Results and implications are discussed and suggestions for future research are provided.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.