俄罗斯会在不断变化的全球经济中发挥作用吗?西方和俄罗斯文化视角的对比

IF 1.9 4区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT Cross Cultural & Strategic Management Pub Date : 2019-07-01 DOI:10.1108/CCSM-10-2018-0164
D. J. McCarthy, Sheila M. Puffer, Daniel M. Satinsky
{"title":"俄罗斯会在不断变化的全球经济中发挥作用吗?西方和俄罗斯文化视角的对比","authors":"D. J. McCarthy, Sheila M. Puffer, Daniel M. Satinsky","doi":"10.1108/CCSM-10-2018-0164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this paper is to examine the dramatically changed role of Russia in the global economy since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, as the Soviet institutions collapsed and were either reformed or replaced in a new Russian institutional landscape. The paper presents a fact-based and balanced view of Russia’s evolving role in the global economy, as distinguished from the sometimes one-sided view presented by some Western commentators. The authors establish that the two countervailing views are fundamentally based on different cultural perspectives about institutions, primarily the roles of business and government.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis paper is developed as a perspectives article drawing upon the decades of academic and business experience of all three authors with Russian business, management and the economy. The paper focuses on the structure of Russian institutional change and places it within the historical context of the challenges of various periods of time from the late 1980s to the present. The authors posit that cultural foundations complicate that institutional evolution.\n\n\nFindings\nRussia will remain a major player in world markets for energy, raw materials and armaments for the near future at least. Principal institutional questions facing Russia have to do with how to reduce the country’s overall dependence on raw material exports, with its vulnerability to world market fluctuations, and how to modernize Russian economic and political institutions. The degree of success in addressing these questions will depend largely upon the ability of the new and reformed economic institutions to show the flexibility to respond to changes in the global order, on whether political considerations will continue to supersede economic issues, and how markedly cultural traditions will continue to impede positive changes.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe entire system of international trade is under question, disrupted by the growing nationalism that is threatening the globalization that became institutionalized over decades in the wake of the Second World War. Russia’s future role is partially dependent upon how new patterns of international trade develop in response to the current disruption of established trade regimes, and by how political conflicts are expressed economically. The authors observe that Russia’s historical and cultural traditions, especially acquiescence to a highly centralized government with a strong autocratic leader, limit the country’s options. The authors explore how Russia’s reactions to Western sanctions have led to a new strategic approach, moving away from full engagement in the global economy to selective economic, and sometimes political, alliances with primarily non-Western countries, most notably China. The authors contrast Russia’s situation with that of China, which has been able to make substantial economic progress while still embracing a strong, centralized political institutional structure.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nMany Western analysts have viewed Russian institutional evolution very critically through the lens of Western politics and sanctions, while Russia has continued along its own path of economic and institutional development. Each view, the authors argue, is based upon differing cultural perspectives of the roles of business and government. As a result, a distinct difference exists between the Western and Russian perspectives on Russia’s role in the world. This paper presents both points of view and explores the future of Russia’s position in the world economy based upon its evolving strategy for national economic policy. The authors contrast the situations of Russia and China, highlighting how Western-centric cultural views have affected perceptions of each country, sometimes similarly and at times with decided differences.\n","PeriodicalId":51820,"journal":{"name":"Cross Cultural & Strategic Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/CCSM-10-2018-0164","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Will Russia have a role in the changing global economy? Contrasting Western and Russian cultural lenses\",\"authors\":\"D. J. McCarthy, Sheila M. Puffer, Daniel M. Satinsky\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/CCSM-10-2018-0164\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe purpose of this paper is to examine the dramatically changed role of Russia in the global economy since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, as the Soviet institutions collapsed and were either reformed or replaced in a new Russian institutional landscape. The paper presents a fact-based and balanced view of Russia’s evolving role in the global economy, as distinguished from the sometimes one-sided view presented by some Western commentators. The authors establish that the two countervailing views are fundamentally based on different cultural perspectives about institutions, primarily the roles of business and government.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThis paper is developed as a perspectives article drawing upon the decades of academic and business experience of all three authors with Russian business, management and the economy. The paper focuses on the structure of Russian institutional change and places it within the historical context of the challenges of various periods of time from the late 1980s to the present. The authors posit that cultural foundations complicate that institutional evolution.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nRussia will remain a major player in world markets for energy, raw materials and armaments for the near future at least. Principal institutional questions facing Russia have to do with how to reduce the country’s overall dependence on raw material exports, with its vulnerability to world market fluctuations, and how to modernize Russian economic and political institutions. The degree of success in addressing these questions will depend largely upon the ability of the new and reformed economic institutions to show the flexibility to respond to changes in the global order, on whether political considerations will continue to supersede economic issues, and how markedly cultural traditions will continue to impede positive changes.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThe entire system of international trade is under question, disrupted by the growing nationalism that is threatening the globalization that became institutionalized over decades in the wake of the Second World War. Russia’s future role is partially dependent upon how new patterns of international trade develop in response to the current disruption of established trade regimes, and by how political conflicts are expressed economically. The authors observe that Russia’s historical and cultural traditions, especially acquiescence to a highly centralized government with a strong autocratic leader, limit the country’s options. The authors explore how Russia’s reactions to Western sanctions have led to a new strategic approach, moving away from full engagement in the global economy to selective economic, and sometimes political, alliances with primarily non-Western countries, most notably China. The authors contrast Russia’s situation with that of China, which has been able to make substantial economic progress while still embracing a strong, centralized political institutional structure.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nMany Western analysts have viewed Russian institutional evolution very critically through the lens of Western politics and sanctions, while Russia has continued along its own path of economic and institutional development. Each view, the authors argue, is based upon differing cultural perspectives of the roles of business and government. As a result, a distinct difference exists between the Western and Russian perspectives on Russia’s role in the world. This paper presents both points of view and explores the future of Russia’s position in the world economy based upon its evolving strategy for national economic policy. The authors contrast the situations of Russia and China, highlighting how Western-centric cultural views have affected perceptions of each country, sometimes similarly and at times with decided differences.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":51820,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cross Cultural & Strategic Management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/CCSM-10-2018-0164\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cross Cultural & Strategic Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-10-2018-0164\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cross Cultural & Strategic Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-10-2018-0164","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

目的本文的目的是考察自1991年苏联解体以来,俄罗斯在全球经济中的角色发生了巨大变化,当时苏联的制度崩溃了,在新的俄罗斯制度格局中进行了改革或取代。这篇论文对俄罗斯在全球经济中不断演变的角色提出了一种基于事实的平衡观点,与一些西方评论家有时提出的片面观点不同。作者认为,这两种相反的观点从根本上是基于对制度的不同文化视角,主要是企业和政府的角色。设计/方法论/方法本文是一篇前瞻性文章,借鉴了三位作者在俄罗斯商业、管理和经济领域数十年的学术和商业经验。本文关注俄罗斯制度变革的结构,并将其置于从20世纪80年代末到现在各个时期的挑战的历史背景下。作者认为,文化基础使制度演变复杂化。FindingsRussia至少在不久的将来仍将是世界能源、原材料和军备市场的主要参与者。俄罗斯面临的主要体制问题与如何减少该国对原材料出口的总体依赖、其对世界市场波动的脆弱性以及如何使俄罗斯经济和政治体制现代化有关。解决这些问题的成功程度将在很大程度上取决于新的和改革后的经济机构是否有能力表现出应对全球秩序变化的灵活性,取决于政治考虑是否将继续取代经济问题,以及文化传统将在多大程度上继续阻碍积极变化。研究局限性/影响整个国际贸易体系受到质疑,因为日益增长的民族主义正在威胁第二次世界大战后几十年来制度化的全球化。俄罗斯未来的作用部分取决于新的国际贸易模式如何发展,以应对当前既定贸易制度的破坏,以及政治冲突如何在经济上表达。作者观察到,俄罗斯的历史和文化传统,特别是默许一个拥有强大独裁领导人的高度集权政府,限制了该国的选择。作者探讨了俄罗斯对西方制裁的反应如何导致一种新的战略方法,从全面参与全球经济转向与主要非西方国家(尤其是中国)的选择性经济联盟,有时是政治联盟。作者将俄罗斯的情况与中国的情况进行了对比,中国在经济上取得了实质性进展,同时仍然拥有强大的中央集权政治体制结构。原创性/价值许多西方分析人士从西方政治和制裁的角度非常批判性地看待俄罗斯的制度演变,而俄罗斯则继续走自己的经济和制度发展道路。作者认为,每一种观点都是基于对企业和政府角色的不同文化视角。因此,西方和俄罗斯对俄罗斯在世界上的角色的看法存在明显差异。本文提出了这两种观点,并根据俄罗斯不断发展的国家经济政策战略,探讨了俄罗斯在世界经济中的未来地位。作者对比了俄罗斯和中国的情况,强调了以西方为中心的文化观如何影响对每个国家的看法,有时相似,有时有明显的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Will Russia have a role in the changing global economy? Contrasting Western and Russian cultural lenses
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the dramatically changed role of Russia in the global economy since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, as the Soviet institutions collapsed and were either reformed or replaced in a new Russian institutional landscape. The paper presents a fact-based and balanced view of Russia’s evolving role in the global economy, as distinguished from the sometimes one-sided view presented by some Western commentators. The authors establish that the two countervailing views are fundamentally based on different cultural perspectives about institutions, primarily the roles of business and government. Design/methodology/approach This paper is developed as a perspectives article drawing upon the decades of academic and business experience of all three authors with Russian business, management and the economy. The paper focuses on the structure of Russian institutional change and places it within the historical context of the challenges of various periods of time from the late 1980s to the present. The authors posit that cultural foundations complicate that institutional evolution. Findings Russia will remain a major player in world markets for energy, raw materials and armaments for the near future at least. Principal institutional questions facing Russia have to do with how to reduce the country’s overall dependence on raw material exports, with its vulnerability to world market fluctuations, and how to modernize Russian economic and political institutions. The degree of success in addressing these questions will depend largely upon the ability of the new and reformed economic institutions to show the flexibility to respond to changes in the global order, on whether political considerations will continue to supersede economic issues, and how markedly cultural traditions will continue to impede positive changes. Research limitations/implications The entire system of international trade is under question, disrupted by the growing nationalism that is threatening the globalization that became institutionalized over decades in the wake of the Second World War. Russia’s future role is partially dependent upon how new patterns of international trade develop in response to the current disruption of established trade regimes, and by how political conflicts are expressed economically. The authors observe that Russia’s historical and cultural traditions, especially acquiescence to a highly centralized government with a strong autocratic leader, limit the country’s options. The authors explore how Russia’s reactions to Western sanctions have led to a new strategic approach, moving away from full engagement in the global economy to selective economic, and sometimes political, alliances with primarily non-Western countries, most notably China. The authors contrast Russia’s situation with that of China, which has been able to make substantial economic progress while still embracing a strong, centralized political institutional structure. Originality/value Many Western analysts have viewed Russian institutional evolution very critically through the lens of Western politics and sanctions, while Russia has continued along its own path of economic and institutional development. Each view, the authors argue, is based upon differing cultural perspectives of the roles of business and government. As a result, a distinct difference exists between the Western and Russian perspectives on Russia’s role in the world. This paper presents both points of view and explores the future of Russia’s position in the world economy based upon its evolving strategy for national economic policy. The authors contrast the situations of Russia and China, highlighting how Western-centric cultural views have affected perceptions of each country, sometimes similarly and at times with decided differences.
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
4.70
自引率
12.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Cross Cultural & Strategic Management (CCSM), is dedicated to providing a forum for the publication of high quality cross-cultural and strategic management research in the global context. CCSM is interdisciplinary in nature and welcomes submissions from scholars from international business, management and other disciplines, such as anthropology, economics, political science, psychology and sociology. The goal of CCSM is to publish discerning, theoretically grounded, evidence-based and cutting edge research on issues relevant to all aspects of global management. CCSM is especially interested in theoretical and empirical papers that investigate new and unique ideas and/or are multilevel (micro-meso-macro) and/or are multidisciplinary in nature. Research papers submitted to CCSM are expected to include an answer to the question: What is the contribution of this paper to the literature and the field of international business and managing in the global context? CCSM accepts theoretical/conceptual and empirical papers based on quantitative and qualitative research endeavors that advance our overall knowledge of international business. This includes research that yields positive, neutral or negative findings as long as these studies are based on sound research methodology, and have a good command of the theory/literature that pertains to the phenomena under investigation. These studies should also provide a more in-depth interpretation of the reason(s) for the findings and include more detailed recommendations for future research directions.
期刊最新文献
The roles of entrepreneurial orientation and government support in the open innovation of manufacturing firms: empirical evidence from South Korea “Without trust, we can’t really do any work”: workplace trust and communication among expatriates and host nationals The effect of intellectual property rights on firm performance in service firms: the role of process and organizational innovation When the well is full, it will run over: the double-edged sword effect of corporate lobbying activities on firm performance Consumer emotions and behaviors: double moderation of sign value and source market
×
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