全球战略中的战略和节约

IF 5.7 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Global Strategy Journal Pub Date : 2022-05-16 DOI:10.1002/gsj.1443
Christian Geisler Asmussen, Nicolai J. Foss
{"title":"全球战略中的战略和节约","authors":"Christian Geisler Asmussen,&nbsp;Nicolai J. Foss","doi":"10.1002/gsj.1443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Research summary</h3>\n \n <p>The strategic management and international business fields have followed, in some respects, quite similar intellectual trajectories, as reflected in the push for a field of “global strategy.” However, a key distinction in the strategy literature—namely, Williamson's distinction between “strategizing” and “economizing”—has not been explicitly recognized in the international business/global strategy fields. We argue that progress can be made in global strategy by recognizing this distinction and exploring the interaction between “strategizing” and “economizing.” To lend credence to this claim, we offer a simple model of the entry decision which highlights both economizing and strategizing aspects of this decision. We also offer recommendations on economizing-strategizing research in global strategy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Managerial summary</h3>\n \n <p>Multinational enterprises gain competitive advantage either by improving the efficiency with which they operate (by having unique resources, lowering costs, or improving managerial practices) or by exercising their market and bargaining power. Most research has emphasized the former source of competitive advantage. However, in actuality, the two sources are intertwined. We detail how they are intertwined by means of a simple numerical example of the entry decision facing a company that can choose between competing or collaborating with the local firm. We show that strategizing plays into the entry decision in this case.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47563,"journal":{"name":"Global Strategy Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1443","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Strategizing and economizing in global strategy\",\"authors\":\"Christian Geisler Asmussen,&nbsp;Nicolai J. Foss\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/gsj.1443\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Research summary</h3>\\n \\n <p>The strategic management and international business fields have followed, in some respects, quite similar intellectual trajectories, as reflected in the push for a field of “global strategy.” However, a key distinction in the strategy literature—namely, Williamson's distinction between “strategizing” and “economizing”—has not been explicitly recognized in the international business/global strategy fields. We argue that progress can be made in global strategy by recognizing this distinction and exploring the interaction between “strategizing” and “economizing.” To lend credence to this claim, we offer a simple model of the entry decision which highlights both economizing and strategizing aspects of this decision. We also offer recommendations on economizing-strategizing research in global strategy.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Managerial summary</h3>\\n \\n <p>Multinational enterprises gain competitive advantage either by improving the efficiency with which they operate (by having unique resources, lowering costs, or improving managerial practices) or by exercising their market and bargaining power. Most research has emphasized the former source of competitive advantage. However, in actuality, the two sources are intertwined. We detail how they are intertwined by means of a simple numerical example of the entry decision facing a company that can choose between competing or collaborating with the local firm. We show that strategizing plays into the entry decision in this case.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47563,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Strategy Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gsj.1443\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Strategy Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gsj.1443\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Strategy Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gsj.1443","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

战略管理和国际商务领域在某些方面遵循着非常相似的智力轨迹,正如对“全球战略”领域的推动所反映的那样。然而,战略文献中的一个关键区别——即威廉姆森对“战略化”和“经济化”的区分——并未在国际商业/全球战略领域得到明确认可。我们认为,认识到这一区别,并探索“战略化”和“经济化”之间的相互作用,可以在全球战略方面取得进展。为了证明这一观点,我们提供了一个简单的进入决策模型,该模型突出了该决策的经济性和战略性两个方面。并对全球战略中的节约型战略研究提出了建议。跨国企业通过提高其经营效率(通过拥有独特的资源、降低成本或改进管理实践)或通过行使其市场和议价能力获得竞争优势。大多数研究都强调竞争优势的前一种来源。然而,实际上,这两个来源是交织在一起的。我们通过一个简单的数值例子来详细说明它们是如何交织在一起的,这个例子是一家公司面临的进入决策,它可以选择与当地公司竞争或合作。我们表明,在这种情况下,策略在进入决策中起作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Strategizing and economizing in global strategy

Research summary

The strategic management and international business fields have followed, in some respects, quite similar intellectual trajectories, as reflected in the push for a field of “global strategy.” However, a key distinction in the strategy literature—namely, Williamson's distinction between “strategizing” and “economizing”—has not been explicitly recognized in the international business/global strategy fields. We argue that progress can be made in global strategy by recognizing this distinction and exploring the interaction between “strategizing” and “economizing.” To lend credence to this claim, we offer a simple model of the entry decision which highlights both economizing and strategizing aspects of this decision. We also offer recommendations on economizing-strategizing research in global strategy.

Managerial summary

Multinational enterprises gain competitive advantage either by improving the efficiency with which they operate (by having unique resources, lowering costs, or improving managerial practices) or by exercising their market and bargaining power. Most research has emphasized the former source of competitive advantage. However, in actuality, the two sources are intertwined. We detail how they are intertwined by means of a simple numerical example of the entry decision facing a company that can choose between competing or collaborating with the local firm. We show that strategizing plays into the entry decision in this case.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
11.80%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: The Global Strategy Journal is a premier platform dedicated to publishing highly influential managerially-oriented global strategy research worldwide. Covering themes such as international and global strategy, assembling the global enterprise, and strategic management, GSJ plays a vital role in advancing our understanding of global business dynamics.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information - TOC A perspective on three trade-offs of blockchain technology for the global strategy of the MNC Foreign institutional investors and equity share decisions in cross‐border mergers and acquisitions Do financial crises moderate the influence of stakeholder rights protection on M&A activity: The influence of institutional logics and power? Issue Information - TOC
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1