International Journal of Management Reviews最新文献

Managerial heuristics – simple methods for solving problems – are critical for key functions, such as deciding, strategizing, and organizing. Yet, research on managerial heuristics has been siloed into divergent streams, creating polarization among empirical findings and sparking numerous calls for integration. The goal of this review is to integrate different understandings of the construct, different processes examined by extant research, and divergent perspectives on heuristics’ performance into a coherent conceptual framework. We systematically reviewed 54 articles focusing on two complementary processes: the creation and the use of managerial heuristics. We discovered that research which describes the performance of heuristics as suboptimal focuses on the study of innate heuristics which are used reflexively; meanwhile, research which frames heuristics positively focuses on the study of learned heuristics which are used deliberately. We, thus, propose that the two perspectives on managerial heuristics are not contradictory but complementary. Based on this novel differentiation, we, first, aggregate the inputs and outcomes of creating and of using managerial heuristics into an integrative framework built around the manager's cognitive effort; second, we propose managerial heuristics as storage devices for managerial experience, time, cognitive effort and information about the environment; and third, we discuss implications for future research.

The level of scholarly and practitioner interest in negative leadership behaviour has been increasing, but research in this field remains fragmented, and we lack a common understanding of what constitutes negative leadership behaviour and its antecedents, consequences and contexts. To address these research gaps, we systematically review 352 papers and identify 25 different negative leadership behaviours with large overlaps in their conceptualization and operationalization. Our analysis of conceptualizations reveals common attributes that constitute the behavioural intensity and the behavioural valence of negative leadership behaviour. Behavioural intensity attributes constitute negative leadership behaviour as active, reoccurring and intentional behaviour that targets subordinates’ psychological states. Behavioural valence attributes constitute negative leadership behaviour as being unethical, lack of empathy, leader self-worthiness and self-orientation, verbal hostility, use of power asymmetry and harming and belittling of others. The vast majority of operationalizations for negative leadership behaviour reflect the perceptions of subordinates or colleagues, whereas only a few operationalizations reflect supervisors’ self-assessments. Our findings further reveal that the antecedents of negative leadership behaviour focus mainly on supervisors, whereas the consequences of negative leadership behaviour focus mainly on subordinates. We develop a unified conceptualization of negative leadership behaviour and discuss our findings in the light of an impactful future research agenda that revolves around the unified conceptualization and empirical representation of negative leadership behaviour on the basis of behavioural attributes, the role of subordinates and dyad-related factors leading to negative leadership behaviour and the integration of the negative and positive psychological and economic consequences of negative leadership behaviour.

Should we still use the concept of political corporate social responsibility (PCSR) in management research? In response to recent and significant challenges in the management literature regarding the relevance of PCSR as a concept, we conduct a review of the literature in the field. We combine a bibliometric analysis and a qualitative content analysis to assess the use of the concept of PCSR between 2005 and 2022. We contribute to the PCSR literature in four ways: First, we map the field of PCSR in order to develop an objective understanding of the concept. Second, we demonstrate that PCSR exhibits the features of a concept, and that current research has begun to address some of the significant challenges that question its relevance. Third, we identify the four pillars at the base of the concept and uncover a fifth pillar: the dynamic perspective of PCSR. Last, we propose research directions to strengthen the PCSR concept and enrich its contributions to theory and practice.

The steady increase in academic production has been paralleled by a surge in the number of bibliometric and systematic literature reviews (SLRs) published. Over the years, scholars began to combine bibliometric analyses with SLRs. However, such combined approaches relied on fragmented methodological suggestions without clear guiding frameworks. This article introduces integrated guidelines for undertaking multi-method literature reviews, combining bibliometric analyses with SLRs and theory development, which we call ‘Bibliometric-Systematic Literature Review’ (B-SLR). In doing so, we develop a 10-step process on how to apply the B-SLR. In each of the proposed steps, we discuss critical decisions and best practices to support researchers while crafting meaningful and theoretically relevant literature reviews. The B-SLR is intended as a flexible toolbox designed to accommodate diverse research objectives in the miner–prospector continuum, spanning from reviewing, theorising, tracing future roadmaps or creating bridges among different topics. The B-SLR incorporates the pillars of critical analysis, timeliness, coverage, rigour, coherence and originality of contribution, also emphasising the need for a novel and relevant theoretical contribution. The B-SLR is supported by a companion website, providing additional resources to assist researchers in this 10-step process: https://www.b-slr.org.

Born global firms (BGs) in emerging markets differ in significant ways from those in developed countries and this study aims to comprehensively examine those differences. To do this, we conduct a systematic literature review that analyses 148 empirical research articles published during 2010–2023, highlighting how BGs from developed and emerging economies differ in terms of their firm and entrepreneurial characteristics, as well as their operating environments. We find that these differences shape the BG's disposition to distance, liabilities and risks, with BGs from emerging economies facing additional liabilities and demonstrating a greater tolerance for risk and distance compared with BGs from developed economies. This leads to particular outcomes with regard to the BG's strategic choice of host country and internationalization mode, as well as its performance. The paper concludes by suggesting pathways for future research.

This review proposes a new concept, the ‘Paternal body’, to illuminate the corporeal impact, on employed men, of new fatherhood. It explores literatures on fatherhood, employment and health to reveal how fathers experience pregnancy, birth and infant-care (infancy defined, here, as up to age two). In contrast to well-established notions regarding Maternal (pregnant and post-birth) bodies, there exists within management studies no similar concept to facilitate understanding of recent fatherhood, the body and employment. The proposed concept ‘Paternal body’ addresses this lack, offering a strategic platform for theorizing how fatherhood impacts men's lived, bodily experience of balancing paternity with paid work. Drawing upon interdisciplinary perspectives from sociology and health literatures, the paper reviews research on paternal corporeality in the context of employment in neo-liberal (market-oriented) economies (typified by the USA and UK). It identifies related and important health symptoms (such as sleep deprivation) that pose risks to paternal health and employment. Yet the review shows how expectant/recent fathers are pressured, at work, to live up to a mythical image of hegemonic masculinity that requires them to display strong work-orientation, denying ill-health and working long hours away from home. The paper coins the term: ‘Absent warrior’ to represent this illusion of a ‘manly’ father (warrior) who is absent from infant-care and from his home, but bodily present at work: a father who is supposed to deny the materiality of inhabiting a Paternal body. Recommendations are made for further exploration of fathers’ embodied health needs through the concept of the lived ‘Paternal body’.

How can grand challenge-related issues be studied while comprehensively addressing contemporary needs? The literature on grand challenges has been growing, with an abundance of phenomena on which research is undertaken in a piecemeal fashion, without sufficiently offering integrated insights. In this debate essay, we challenge the proposal offered in Seelos, C., Mair, J. & Traeger, C. (2023) The future of grand challenges research: retiring a hopeful concept and endorsing research principles, International Journal of Management Reviews, 25(2), 251–269 on retiring the grand challenge concept. Instead, we advocate for revitalizing, not retiring, so that grand challenges research can be adapted with the ultimate human purpose of achieving wellbeing. We propose that the solution lies in taking a telo-centric approach to navigate the intersections between various grand challenge issues, offering a novel lens to delve into the ultimate end of human endeavours and to ensure the continued relevance of the grant challenge concept. We exemplify the application of this telo-centric approach through the prism of digital wellbeing, demonstrating how it can pave the way for innovative theoretical frameworks, rigorous empirical investigations and practical developments. We conclude by forwarding future directions for research, practice and policy.

Tsai, T.-Y. & Urmetzer, F. (2024). A decisional framework for manufacturing relocation: Consolidating and expanding the reshoring debate. International Journal of Management Reviews, 26(2), pp. 254–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12352

In the caption of Figure 1, the text “Chronological distribution of relocation research.” was incorrect. This should have read: “The systematic reviewing process.”

We apologize for this error.