{"title":"中国跨国公司在海外面临的耻辱演变:从后来者耻辱到地缘政治耻辱","authors":"Fengkai Zhou , Dan Prud’homme , Haijian Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.ibusrev.2025.102456","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper conceptualizes the evolution of stigma facing Chinese MNEs<span> in Western markets. From the 1980s-early 2010s, MNEs faced “latecomer stigma” (i.e., stigma from perceived low product quality, copycat behavior, and other latecomer disadvantages) whereas at present they face “geopolitical stigma” (i.e., stigma from threatening Western economic and political leadership). After highlighting the limits of liability of origin theory to explain this shift, we draw on organizational stigma theory and a geopolitical perspective to theorize the causes and consequences of the evolution of these two stigmas. For each type, we contrast their dominant logics, audiences, bases, outcomes, and strategic responses. The shift of institutional logics in Western host markets from neoliberal globalization to neopopulist globalization fundamentally explains the evolution of the stigmas. Among other contributions, we provide a more dynamic perspective of Chinese MNEs’ legitimacy challenges abroad. We also point out that, ironically, Chinese MNEs’ strategies to mitigate latecomer stigma have contributed to geopolitical stigma, and some host government responses to geopolitical stigma replicate practices they often criticized as unfair.</span></div></div>","PeriodicalId":51352,"journal":{"name":"International Business Review","volume":"34 6","pages":"Article 102456"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The evolution of stigmas facing Chinese MNEs abroad: From latecomer stigma to geopolitical stigma\",\"authors\":\"Fengkai Zhou , Dan Prud’homme , Haijian Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ibusrev.2025.102456\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This paper conceptualizes the evolution of stigma facing Chinese MNEs<span> in Western markets. From the 1980s-early 2010s, MNEs faced “latecomer stigma” (i.e., stigma from perceived low product quality, copycat behavior, and other latecomer disadvantages) whereas at present they face “geopolitical stigma” (i.e., stigma from threatening Western economic and political leadership). After highlighting the limits of liability of origin theory to explain this shift, we draw on organizational stigma theory and a geopolitical perspective to theorize the causes and consequences of the evolution of these two stigmas. For each type, we contrast their dominant logics, audiences, bases, outcomes, and strategic responses. The shift of institutional logics in Western host markets from neoliberal globalization to neopopulist globalization fundamentally explains the evolution of the stigmas. Among other contributions, we provide a more dynamic perspective of Chinese MNEs’ legitimacy challenges abroad. We also point out that, ironically, Chinese MNEs’ strategies to mitigate latecomer stigma have contributed to geopolitical stigma, and some host government responses to geopolitical stigma replicate practices they often criticized as unfair.</span></div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51352,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Business Review\",\"volume\":\"34 6\",\"pages\":\"Article 102456\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-03\",\"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/S0969593125000691\",\"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/S0969593125000691","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The evolution of stigmas facing Chinese MNEs abroad: From latecomer stigma to geopolitical stigma
This paper conceptualizes the evolution of stigma facing Chinese MNEs in Western markets. From the 1980s-early 2010s, MNEs faced “latecomer stigma” (i.e., stigma from perceived low product quality, copycat behavior, and other latecomer disadvantages) whereas at present they face “geopolitical stigma” (i.e., stigma from threatening Western economic and political leadership). After highlighting the limits of liability of origin theory to explain this shift, we draw on organizational stigma theory and a geopolitical perspective to theorize the causes and consequences of the evolution of these two stigmas. For each type, we contrast their dominant logics, audiences, bases, outcomes, and strategic responses. The shift of institutional logics in Western host markets from neoliberal globalization to neopopulist globalization fundamentally explains the evolution of the stigmas. Among other contributions, we provide a more dynamic perspective of Chinese MNEs’ legitimacy challenges abroad. We also point out that, ironically, Chinese MNEs’ strategies to mitigate latecomer stigma have contributed to geopolitical stigma, and some host government responses to geopolitical stigma replicate practices they often criticized as unfair.
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.