Rethinking Ethnocentrism in International Business Research

Snejina Michailova*, Rebecca Piekkari, Marianne Storgaard, Janne Tienari

*Kontaktforfatter for dette arbejde

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

Research summary: For nearly five decades, international business (IB) research in general and the literature on organizational design and staffing of multinationals in particular have treated ethnocentrism mainly as an adverse attribute. Limited attention has been paid to the disciplines that originally established the concept—anthropology, sociology, and psychology. These disciplines have examined ethnocentrism as a positive, neutral, or negative phenomenon with a complex hierarchical structure. IB literature, in turn, has almost exclusively adopted a negative view, suggesting that ethnocentrism hinders adoption of a global strategy. This article borrows insights from the three base disciplines to rethink the concept of ethnocentrism in IB research and to draw implications for global strategy research. The article also calls for a more careful borrowing of concepts from other disciplines. Managerial summary: This article is about ethnocentrism. Ethnocentric people tend to believe that their group, organization, culture, or ethnicity is superior to others. Ethnocentrism can exist in international business, for instance, where home country staff consider themselves superior to foreign staff in other countries. In international business research, ethnocentrism is usually considered undesirable, something that should be eliminated. However, sociology, anthropology, and psychology, where the concept was originally established, have adopted a wider, far more nuanced and intellectually richer view that also acknowledges the neutrality and benefits of ethnocentrism. We draw on this more refined view to rethink ethnocentrism in international business and show implications for global strategy research.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftGlobal Strategy Journal
Vol/bind7
Udgave nummer4
Sider (fra-til)335-353
ISSN2042-5791
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 1. nov. 2017

Fingeraftryk

International business research
Ethnocentrism
Global strategy
International business
Strategy research
Sociology
Psychology
Staff
Organizational design
Ethnic groups
Limited attention
Organization culture
Neutrality
Staffing
Borrowing
Hierarchical structure
Home country
Anthropology
Multinationals

Citer dette

Michailova, Snejina ; Piekkari, Rebecca ; Storgaard, Marianne ; Tienari, Janne. / Rethinking Ethnocentrism in International Business Research. I: Global Strategy Journal. 2017 ; Bind 7, Nr. 4. s. 335-353.
@article{4d3d7ded36be4a9eaa8695d5d81716fa,
title = "Rethinking Ethnocentrism in International Business Research",
abstract = "Research summary: For nearly five decades, international business (IB) research in general and the literature on organizational design and staffing of multinationals in particular have treated ethnocentrism mainly as an adverse attribute. Limited attention has been paid to the disciplines that originally established the concept—anthropology, sociology, and psychology. These disciplines have examined ethnocentrism as a positive, neutral, or negative phenomenon with a complex hierarchical structure. IB literature, in turn, has almost exclusively adopted a negative view, suggesting that ethnocentrism hinders adoption of a global strategy. This article borrows insights from the three base disciplines to rethink the concept of ethnocentrism in IB research and to draw implications for global strategy research. The article also calls for a more careful borrowing of concepts from other disciplines. Managerial summary: This article is about ethnocentrism. Ethnocentric people tend to believe that their group, organization, culture, or ethnicity is superior to others. Ethnocentrism can exist in international business, for instance, where home country staff consider themselves superior to foreign staff in other countries. In international business research, ethnocentrism is usually considered undesirable, something that should be eliminated. However, sociology, anthropology, and psychology, where the concept was originally established, have adopted a wider, far more nuanced and intellectually richer view that also acknowledges the neutrality and benefits of ethnocentrism. We draw on this more refined view to rethink ethnocentrism in international business and show implications for global strategy research.",
keywords = "base disciplines, concept borrowing, ethnocentrism, international business research, multinational corporation",
author = "Snejina Michailova and Rebecca Piekkari and Marianne Storgaard and Janne Tienari",
year = "2017",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/gsj.1159",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "335--353",
journal = "Global Strategy Journal",
issn = "2042-5791",
publisher = "Strategic Management Society",
number = "4",

}

Rethinking Ethnocentrism in International Business Research. / Michailova, Snejina; Piekkari, Rebecca; Storgaard, Marianne; Tienari, Janne.

I: Global Strategy Journal, Bind 7, Nr. 4, 01.11.2017, s. 335-353.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rethinking Ethnocentrism in International Business Research

AU - Michailova, Snejina

AU - Piekkari, Rebecca

AU - Storgaard, Marianne

AU - Tienari, Janne

PY - 2017/11/1

Y1 - 2017/11/1

N2 - Research summary: For nearly five decades, international business (IB) research in general and the literature on organizational design and staffing of multinationals in particular have treated ethnocentrism mainly as an adverse attribute. Limited attention has been paid to the disciplines that originally established the concept—anthropology, sociology, and psychology. These disciplines have examined ethnocentrism as a positive, neutral, or negative phenomenon with a complex hierarchical structure. IB literature, in turn, has almost exclusively adopted a negative view, suggesting that ethnocentrism hinders adoption of a global strategy. This article borrows insights from the three base disciplines to rethink the concept of ethnocentrism in IB research and to draw implications for global strategy research. The article also calls for a more careful borrowing of concepts from other disciplines. Managerial summary: This article is about ethnocentrism. Ethnocentric people tend to believe that their group, organization, culture, or ethnicity is superior to others. Ethnocentrism can exist in international business, for instance, where home country staff consider themselves superior to foreign staff in other countries. In international business research, ethnocentrism is usually considered undesirable, something that should be eliminated. However, sociology, anthropology, and psychology, where the concept was originally established, have adopted a wider, far more nuanced and intellectually richer view that also acknowledges the neutrality and benefits of ethnocentrism. We draw on this more refined view to rethink ethnocentrism in international business and show implications for global strategy research.

AB - Research summary: For nearly five decades, international business (IB) research in general and the literature on organizational design and staffing of multinationals in particular have treated ethnocentrism mainly as an adverse attribute. Limited attention has been paid to the disciplines that originally established the concept—anthropology, sociology, and psychology. These disciplines have examined ethnocentrism as a positive, neutral, or negative phenomenon with a complex hierarchical structure. IB literature, in turn, has almost exclusively adopted a negative view, suggesting that ethnocentrism hinders adoption of a global strategy. This article borrows insights from the three base disciplines to rethink the concept of ethnocentrism in IB research and to draw implications for global strategy research. The article also calls for a more careful borrowing of concepts from other disciplines. Managerial summary: This article is about ethnocentrism. Ethnocentric people tend to believe that their group, organization, culture, or ethnicity is superior to others. Ethnocentrism can exist in international business, for instance, where home country staff consider themselves superior to foreign staff in other countries. In international business research, ethnocentrism is usually considered undesirable, something that should be eliminated. However, sociology, anthropology, and psychology, where the concept was originally established, have adopted a wider, far more nuanced and intellectually richer view that also acknowledges the neutrality and benefits of ethnocentrism. We draw on this more refined view to rethink ethnocentrism in international business and show implications for global strategy research.

KW - base disciplines

KW - concept borrowing

KW - ethnocentrism

KW - international business research

KW - multinational corporation

U2 - 10.1002/gsj.1159

DO - 10.1002/gsj.1159

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85018731619

VL - 7

SP - 335

EP - 353

JO - Global Strategy Journal

JF - Global Strategy Journal

SN - 2042-5791

IS - 4

ER -