Guanxi, a social network tie drawing on connections in business relations, has been identified as a powerful strategic tool helping organizations maintain competitive advantages and achieve superior performance. However, prior empirical studies on the guanxi–performance link provide indefinite conclusions. The purpose of this study is to systematically review and quantify the guanxi–performance link in a meta‐analytic framework by decomposing guanxi into business ties (i.e., guanxi with business partners) and government ties (i.e., guanxi with government authorities) and organizational performance into economic performance and operational performance. Based on effect sizes from fifty‐three studies encompassing 20,212 organizations, we estimate that the overall effect size of the guanxi–performance relationship is positive and significant, thus endorsing the argument that guanxi does enhance organizational performance. Specifically, our meta‐analysis results demonstrate that both business and government ties lead to both economic and operational performance. However, business ties have a bigger impact on operational performance, whereas government ties exert larger effects on economic performance. Further meta‐analytic regression results suggest that ownership (state‐owned vs. non‐state‐owned) and location (Mainland vs. overseas China) explain some of the variations of the guanxi–performance link. Both business and government ties are more important to organizations in Mainland China than to those in overseas China. Government ties are more important to state‐owned than to non‐state‐owned organizations. Lastly, while business ties remain a valuable strategic tool in China, the importance of government ties is time‐variant and has been declining with the development of the institutional environment in China.

a b s t r a c tThis study presents an analysis exploring how four types of justice (distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational) influence dyadic relationship performance in the buyer-supplier context. Underpinned by loose coupling theory, we build a mediating framework in which we propose that a high level of justice (or fairness) as mutually perceived by both parties drives buyer-supplier relationship performance through bolstered coupling links in mutual knowledge sharing, continuous commitment, and relationship investment. Our survey of 216 paired manufacturers (suppliers) and distributors (buyers) in China generally supports this argument, leading to a conclusion that justice is not a direct determinant of buyer-supplier performance but a critical conduit that nourishes mid-range coupling behaviors, which in turn promotes a successful relationship. Based on findings from this study, firms are encouraged to endorse all four kinds of justice in managing supply chain relationships. However, when constrained by resources, the recommendation for managers is to focus on achieving a high level of perceptual convergence on procedural justice and informational justice with the exchange partner, because mutual perceptions of procedural and informational justice have the strongest effects on coupling behaviors and buyer-supplier relationship performance.

Data equivalence refers to the extent to which the elements of a research design have the same meaning, and can be applied in the same way, in different cultural contexts. Failure to establish data equivalence in cross-cultural studies may bias empirical results and theoretical inferences. Although several authors have encouraged researchers to ensure high levels of data equivalence, no study has assessed the status of the field in relation to compliance with data equivalence standards. Accordingly, this study examines three aspects of data equivalence (construct equivalence, measurement equivalence, and data collection equivalence) within 167 studies that involve cross-cultural data published in the Journal of International Business Studies, Management International Review, Journal of World Business, Strategic Management Journal and the Academy of Management Journal from 1995 to 2005. The findings indicate that international business researchers report insufficient information in relation to data equivalence issues, thus limiting confidence in the findings of many cross-cultural studies. To enhance future research, a guideline for procedures for researchers to follow and report in establishing data equivalence is offered.

As of the middle of April 2020, the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic has claimed more than 137,000 lives (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html). Because of its extremely fast spreading, the attention of the global scientific community is now focusing on slowing down, containing and finally stopping the spread of this disease. This requires the concerted action of researchers and practitioners of many related fields, raising, as always in such situations the question, of what kind of research has to be conducted, what are the priorities, how has research to be coordinated and who needs to be involved. In other words, what are the characteristics of the response of the global research community on the challenge? In the present paper, we attempt to characterise, quantify and measure the response of academia to international public health emergencies in a comparative bibliometric study of multiple outbreaks. In addition, we provide a preliminary review of the global research effort regarding the defeat of the COVID-19 pandemic. From our analysis of six infectious disease outbreaks since 2000, including COVID-19, we find that academia always responded quickly to public health emergencies with a sharp increase in the number of publications immediately following the declaration of an outbreak by the WHO. In general, countries/regions place emphasis on epidemics in their own region, but Europe and North America are also concerned with outbreaks in other, developed and less developed areas through conducting intensive collaborative research with the core countries/regions of the outbreak, such as in the case of Ebola in Africa. Researches in the fields of virology, infectious diseases and immunology are the most active, and we identified two characteristic patterns in global science distinguishing research in Europe and America that is more focused on public health from that conducted in China and Japan with more emphasis on biomedical research and clinical pharmacy, respectively. Universities contribute slightly less than half to the global research output, and the vast majority of research funding originates from the public sector. Our findings on how academia responds to emergencies could be beneficial to decision-makers in research and health policy in creating and adjusting anti-epidemic/-pandemic strategies.