{"title":"全球和国家机构如何相互作用,塑造后发国家企业对创新制度的承诺","authors":"Şükrü Özen , Metehan Feridun Sorkun , Çetin Önder","doi":"10.1016/j.ibusrev.2024.102325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We investigate how the duality of innovation regimes in latecomer countries is institutionally shaped. We first specify the firm-level mechanism of commitment to both knowledge use and knowledge generation regimes with reference to the allocation of government grants across investments in machinery and equipment, and in research and development. Then, we theorize the interactive effects of global and national institutional systems on firms’ commitment to these innovation regimes. Our analysis of firm-level data from 16 latecomer countries classified as either hierarchical or collaborative national institutional systems indicates that, although firms are committed to both innovation regimes, the effect of global cultural rationalization steers firms toward the knowledge generation regime and away from the knowledge use regime. However, this movement away from the knowledge use regime due to rationalization is weaker in hierarchical systems. We contribute to the innovation regime literature by elucidating the firm-level duality in innovation regimes subject to global and national institutional effects.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51352,"journal":{"name":"International Business Review","volume":"33 5","pages":"Article 102325"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How global and national institutions interactively shape firms’ commitment to innovation regimes in latecomer countries\",\"authors\":\"Şükrü Özen , Metehan Feridun Sorkun , Çetin Önder\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ibusrev.2024.102325\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We investigate how the duality of innovation regimes in latecomer countries is institutionally shaped. We first specify the firm-level mechanism of commitment to both knowledge use and knowledge generation regimes with reference to the allocation of government grants across investments in machinery and equipment, and in research and development. Then, we theorize the interactive effects of global and national institutional systems on firms’ commitment to these innovation regimes. Our analysis of firm-level data from 16 latecomer countries classified as either hierarchical or collaborative national institutional systems indicates that, although firms are committed to both innovation regimes, the effect of global cultural rationalization steers firms toward the knowledge generation regime and away from the knowledge use regime. However, this movement away from the knowledge use regime due to rationalization is weaker in hierarchical systems. We contribute to the innovation regime literature by elucidating the firm-level duality in innovation regimes subject to global and national institutional effects.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51352,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Business Review\",\"volume\":\"33 5\",\"pages\":\"Article 102325\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Business Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969593124000726\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"International Business Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969593124000726","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
How global and national institutions interactively shape firms’ commitment to innovation regimes in latecomer countries
We investigate how the duality of innovation regimes in latecomer countries is institutionally shaped. We first specify the firm-level mechanism of commitment to both knowledge use and knowledge generation regimes with reference to the allocation of government grants across investments in machinery and equipment, and in research and development. Then, we theorize the interactive effects of global and national institutional systems on firms’ commitment to these innovation regimes. Our analysis of firm-level data from 16 latecomer countries classified as either hierarchical or collaborative national institutional systems indicates that, although firms are committed to both innovation regimes, the effect of global cultural rationalization steers firms toward the knowledge generation regime and away from the knowledge use regime. However, this movement away from the knowledge use regime due to rationalization is weaker in hierarchical systems. We contribute to the innovation regime literature by elucidating the firm-level duality in innovation regimes subject to global and national institutional effects.
期刊介绍:
The International Business Review (IBR) stands as a premier international journal within the realm of international business and proudly serves as the official publication of the European International Business Academy (EIBA). This esteemed journal publishes original and insightful papers addressing the theory and practice of international business, encompassing a broad spectrum of topics such as firms' internationalization strategies, cross-border management of operations, and comparative studies of business environments across different countries. In essence, IBR is dedicated to disseminating research that informs the international operations of firms, whether they are SMEs or large MNEs, and guides the actions of policymakers in both home and host countries. The journal warmly welcomes conceptual papers, empirical studies, and review articles, fostering contributions from various disciplines including strategy, finance, management, marketing, economics, HRM, and organizational studies. IBR embraces methodological diversity, with equal openness to papers utilizing quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method approaches.