The Boundary Spanning Effects of the Muslim Diaspora on the Internationalization Processes of Firms from Organization of Islamic Conference Countries

Schotter, Andreas; Abdelzaher, Dina

doi:10.1016/j.intman.2012.09.002

Cited by 40 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our work also questions the use of ‘cosmopolitan’ in relation to managers with diverse cultural experiences as specific cultural identities became more or less salient in the context in which they were asked to play boundary‐spanning roles (Doz and Wilson, ). Whereas we examined identity threats arising from the home country identities becoming salient, it is important to acknowledge the complexity of not only dual but also triple and sometimes quadruple identity (Schotter and Abdelzaher, ; Schotter and Bontis, ). It would be profitable for future research to examine such situations paying special attention to the relative status of multiple cultural groups in the specific context of work.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Am I Still One of Them?’: Bicultural Immigrant Managers Navigating Social Identity Threats When Spanning Global Boundaries

Kane

Levina

2017

J Management Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the practice of nominating bicultural immigrants to manage knowledge‐intensive projects sourced from their host to their home countries. We focus on their actions vis‐à‐vis global collaborators and unpack psychological processes involved. Managers in these positions have to navigate the workplace social identity threat that arises from being associated with the home country group – a lower status group in this context. How they navigate this threat shapes the way they use their bicultural competencies and authority as managers. When they embrace their home country identity, immigrant managers tend to enable knowledge‐based boundary spanning through actions empowering home country collaborators, such as teaching missing competencies, connecting to important stakeholders, and soliciting input. Instead, when distancing from their home country identity, they tend to hinder collaborators by micromanaging, narrowing communication channels, and suppressing input. We develop theoretical implications for the study of global boundary spanning, bicultural managers, and workplace social identity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Am I Still One of Them?’: Bicultural Immigrant Managers Navigating Social Identity Threats When Spanning Global Boundaries

Kane

Levina

2017

J Management Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We argue that demand for cross‐border interaction between platform users will be greater among country‐dyads that experience greater bilateral flows of commerce and people. Migrants, guest workers, business travelers, foreign subsidiaries of multinational enterprises, international students, and similar groups can generate demand for cross‐border interactions because their social networks tend to span multiple countries (Brouthers et al, 2016; Schotter & Abdelzaher, 2013). Platforms can tap into this latent demand by providing cross‐border connectivity, for example, by enabling Chinese expatriates in Paris to communicate with relatives in Shanghai (WeChat) or Korean students in Toronto to stay in touch with friends in Seoul (KakaoTalk).…”

Section: Implications For the International Strategies Of Platform Firmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Platforms without borders? The international strategies of digital platform firms

Stallkamp

Schotter

2019

Global Strategy Journal

245

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Summary: Digitalization has enabled firms with so‐called platform business models to emerge in many sectors of the economy. By facilitating transactions between different groups of users (e.g., buyers and sellers), platform firms are disrupting industries around the world. However, little is known about the international strategies of platform firms, as research has mostly examined platforms in single‐country contexts. We address this gap by integrating insights from platform research in strategy and economics—specifically the notion of network externalities—with internalization theory. We extend the existing typology of network externalities by distinguishing between within‐country and cross‐country network externalities. We derive testable propositions regarding the foreign entry modes of platform firms, their international strategic posture (multidomestic vs. globally integrated), as well as foreign market selection criteria and market exit. Managerial Summary: Many companies in the digital economy operate platform business models, which create value by connecting different groups of users, such as buyers and sellers. We examine how network externalities—the notion that a platform becomes more valuable to each user as more users join—influence the international expansion of these firms. We show that it is important to consider the geographic scope of network externalities, that is, whether network externalities operate across national borders or whether platform firms have to create separate user networks in each country. The distinction between within‐country and cross‐country network externalities affects key internationalization decisions, such as how to enter foreign markets, whether to pursue multidomestic or global strategies, how to select foreign markets, and when to exit from a foreign market.

show abstract

“…The boundary spanner role in global organizations is often subliminally attached to certain functions in organizations (Mudambi and Swift, 2009), such as to regional managers in MNEs (Vora et al, 2007), but the actual performance of the task is dependent on individuals' actions. In other cross-boundary scenarios, certain individuals (e.g., managers with multicultural experience) have been observed to act as boundary spanners without such a role attached to their functions (Schotter and Beamish, 2011;Schotter and Abdelzaher, 2013).…”

Section: What Is Boundary Spanning?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Boundary Spanning in Global Organizations

Schotter

Mudambi

Doz

et al. 2017

J Management Studies

265

220

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global organizations are inherently complex. The spatial dispersion of activities results in organizational subunits becoming embedded in local host‐country contexts that differ from their parents’ home country contexts. These subunits are also embedded in their parents’ corporate networks, causing them to differ from their locally embedded peers. The dual embeddedness and associated complexities create complex and often implicit boundaries. In addition, the contextual and operational diversity that affects the boundaries in global organizations are continually changing. Hence managing and coordinating across different inter‐ and intra‐organizational boundaries has emerged as an important capability for the success of global organizations. So far, we have a limited understanding of the factors that affect the complexity and effectiveness of the boundary spanning function. In this article, we focus on clarifying these key issues and propose a model for effective boundary spanning in global organizations.

show abstract

The Boundary Spanning Effects of the Muslim Diaspora on the Internationalization Processes of Firms from Organization of Islamic Conference Countries

Cited by 40 publications

References 71 publications

‘Am I Still One of Them?’: Bicultural Immigrant Managers Navigating Social Identity Threats When Spanning Global Boundaries

‘Am I Still One of Them?’: Bicultural Immigrant Managers Navigating Social Identity Threats When Spanning Global Boundaries

Platforms without borders? The international strategies of digital platform firms

Boundary Spanning in Global Organizations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About