衡量公司层面多国性的模糊性与局限性:理论与实证探索

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Patrik Vaněk
{"title":"衡量公司层面多国性的模糊性与局限性:理论与实证探索","authors":"Patrik Vaněk","doi":"10.1108/mbr-09-2022-0137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to explore the ambiguity and limitations of measuring firm-level multinationality (FLM) using theoretical and empirical comparisons of existing methods. The paper puts forward a list of five key aspects that collectively serve as a tool for researchers to select the most appropriate method for future research and as a basis for the future development of methods.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nFirstly, the author reviews existing methods of measuring FLM and consolidates findings into five key aspects. Secondly, the author uses the aspects to compare existing methods theoretically, and subsequently, the author groups them into three distinct streams. Thirdly, the author compares existing methods across a sample of the 35 largest European MNEs by sales in 2020 to identify and demonstrate the ambiguity and limitations of these methods.\n\n\nFindings\nThe author identifies the five key aspects of measuring FLM: framework, aggregation, segmentation, metrics and indicators. Using empirical comparison, the author empirically confirms the limitations highlighted in the literature and shows the differences and inconsistencies among methods, which cause confusion rather than clarity in the extant literature. Additionally, the author emphasises that three distinct streams further drive the debate on the regional/global nature and present further limitations of methods not mentioned in the literature to date.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis paper provides the most comprehensive review of the existing literature on FLM, resulting in five novel aspects of measuring FLM. The analysis of a sample of 35 European firms demonstrates and identifies the ambiguity and limitations of FLM-measuring methods.\n","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The ambiguity and limitations of measuring firm-level multinationality: a theoretical and empirical exploration\",\"authors\":\"Patrik Vaněk\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/mbr-09-2022-0137\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis paper aims to explore the ambiguity and limitations of measuring firm-level multinationality (FLM) using theoretical and empirical comparisons of existing methods. The paper puts forward a list of five key aspects that collectively serve as a tool for researchers to select the most appropriate method for future research and as a basis for the future development of methods.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nFirstly, the author reviews existing methods of measuring FLM and consolidates findings into five key aspects. Secondly, the author uses the aspects to compare existing methods theoretically, and subsequently, the author groups them into three distinct streams. Thirdly, the author compares existing methods across a sample of the 35 largest European MNEs by sales in 2020 to identify and demonstrate the ambiguity and limitations of these methods.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe author identifies the five key aspects of measuring FLM: framework, aggregation, segmentation, metrics and indicators. Using empirical comparison, the author empirically confirms the limitations highlighted in the literature and shows the differences and inconsistencies among methods, which cause confusion rather than clarity in the extant literature. Additionally, the author emphasises that three distinct streams further drive the debate on the regional/global nature and present further limitations of methods not mentioned in the literature to date.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThis paper provides the most comprehensive review of the existing literature on FLM, resulting in five novel aspects of measuring FLM. The analysis of a sample of 35 European firms demonstrates and identifies the ambiguity and limitations of FLM-measuring methods.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/mbr-09-2022-0137\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/mbr-09-2022-0137","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的通过对现有方法的理论和实证比较,探讨衡量企业层面跨国性的模糊性和局限性。本文列出了五个关键方面,这些方面共同作为研究人员选择未来研究最合适方法的工具,并作为方法未来发展的基础。设计/方法论/方法首先,作者回顾了现有的FLM测量方法,并将研究结果整合为五个关键方面。其次,作者利用这些方面对现有的方法进行了理论比较,并将其分为三个不同的流。第三,作者比较了2020年欧洲销售额最大的35家跨国公司的现有方法,以确定和证明这些方法的模糊性和局限性。发现作者确定了衡量FLM的五个关键方面:框架、聚合、细分、度量和指标。通过实证比较,作者实证地证实了文献中强调的局限性,并显示了方法之间的差异和不一致,这导致了现存文献的混乱而非清晰。此外,作者强调,三个不同的流进一步推动了关于区域/全球性质的辩论,并对迄今为止文献中未提及的方法提出了进一步的限制。原创性/价值本文对现有的FLM文献进行了最全面的综述,得出了衡量FLM的五个新颖方面。对35家欧洲公司样本的分析表明并确定了FLM测量方法的模糊性和局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The ambiguity and limitations of measuring firm-level multinationality: a theoretical and empirical exploration
Purpose This paper aims to explore the ambiguity and limitations of measuring firm-level multinationality (FLM) using theoretical and empirical comparisons of existing methods. The paper puts forward a list of five key aspects that collectively serve as a tool for researchers to select the most appropriate method for future research and as a basis for the future development of methods. Design/methodology/approach Firstly, the author reviews existing methods of measuring FLM and consolidates findings into five key aspects. Secondly, the author uses the aspects to compare existing methods theoretically, and subsequently, the author groups them into three distinct streams. Thirdly, the author compares existing methods across a sample of the 35 largest European MNEs by sales in 2020 to identify and demonstrate the ambiguity and limitations of these methods. Findings The author identifies the five key aspects of measuring FLM: framework, aggregation, segmentation, metrics and indicators. Using empirical comparison, the author empirically confirms the limitations highlighted in the literature and shows the differences and inconsistencies among methods, which cause confusion rather than clarity in the extant literature. Additionally, the author emphasises that three distinct streams further drive the debate on the regional/global nature and present further limitations of methods not mentioned in the literature to date. Originality/value This paper provides the most comprehensive review of the existing literature on FLM, resulting in five novel aspects of measuring FLM. The analysis of a sample of 35 European firms demonstrates and identifies the ambiguity and limitations of FLM-measuring methods.
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
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信