Strategic Responses for a Sustainable Future: New Research in International Management

The main goal of this study is to analyze the influence of social capital and corporate ethics on social progress. A theoretical model is proposed, and the hypotheses were tested on a sample of 32 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and non-OECD countries between 2011 and 2018 that includes data from the Social Progress Imperative non-profit organization as well as from the World Economic Forum database (Global Competitiveness Reports). The results indicate that, although both social capital and corporate ethics have a direct influence on social progress, social capital also influences corporate ethics so that the latter acts as a mediating variable between social capital and social progress.

In the current highly competitive market, most organizations are moving away from reactive and compliance-based to proactive environmental management. This proactive approach to environmental management calls for taking a strategic approach to adoption of green practices beyond an organization’s internal borders. In this respect, incorporating green practices into a firm’s supply chain has attracted interest of operations management scholar and practitioners. The influence of external pressures on the adoption of green supply chain management (GSCM) practices has been established in the literature. This research posits that the adoption of GSCM practices is also driven by a firm’s internal strategic factors including its key resources and competitive strategy. It also suggests that these direct effects are further mediated by the green strategies (GSs) adopted in companies. Theoretically, these relationships are supported by combining the institutional theory with the natural resource-based view. A structural equation modeling is applied to formulate and analyze the relationships and the mediating effect using a survey data collected from 139 ISO14001-certified manufacturers in Malaysia. The results verified the mediating effect of GS adoption on the relationship between internal and external strategic factors, and GSCM practices. This research has made an original contribution to knowledge by bridging the fields of strategic environmental management and GSCM.

The author introduces a strategic responsiveness model that reflects an organization’s ability to sense environmental changes and learn from emergent adaptive responses that attempt to realign organizational activities and gain a better fit with the changing conditions. The author shows in computational simulations how superior strategic adaptation is associated with higher average returns and lower performance risk among firms that compete in the same industry contexts and generate negatively skewed outcome distributions consistent with empirical observations. The model is refined to incorporate an interactive strategy-making process, where experiential insights from decentralized initiatives update forward-looking projections in central planning. The ensuing analysis demonstrates how this adaptive strategy-making approach further enhances the favorable risk-return outcomes. The author discusses these findings and the implications for the study of dynamic adaptive strategy-making processes.

This chapter develops a conceptual understanding on open strategy through a systematic literature review. With a sample of 148 publications, the authors examine the key debates in the field of open strategy and identify a number of limitations such as an excessive definitional focus and a lack of distinct empirical analysis of research in the field. The author’s analysis clarifies open strategy by classifying its main characteristics and harnessing the different aspects together in a comprehensive definition. In doing so, the authors examine how the underpinnings of open strategy can be conceptualized in order to provide a research agenda for how future empirical investigations into open strategy could progress our understanding of an evolving practice.

This study of a market-leader in a turbulent hostile telecommunications market uncovers how the competitive context influences strategy-making and cultivates central control that opposes autonomous initiatives. It shows how a highly competitive industry context reduces organizational slack that inhibits autonomy and drives central actions. Strategic initiatives primarily arise as deliberate actions induced by top management. This creates an information gap between ongoing experiences gained by employees operating in the periphery of the organization and the perceptions of decision-makers at the corporate center. In this organizational setting, the authors observe maverick behavior among entrepreneurial individuals that deliberately circumvent the formal rules to turn autonomous initiatives into viable strategic ventures in the best interest of the firm. Where conventional views presume that power delegation and organizational slack are necessary for autonomous strategic initiatives to emerge, the authors find that central control can provoke autonomous rule-breaking maverick behavior among resource-deprived entrepreneurial individuals inside the organization.

Workplace mavericks are often labeled as non-conformists. They are perceived to be the employees who disregard organizational policies and procedures, and who invite huge risks in the pursuit of goals that sit outside what the organization dictates as the core business or practice. While this may be accurate to a degree, it is not the complete story. Guided by recent conceptualizations of non-conformity and positive deviance, this qualitative study interviewed 27 observers of mavericks (observer-types) in the workplace, and 28 interviews with mavericks (maverick-types). Results highlight that while maverick individuals do challenge organizational norms, they do so for the benefit of others, including the organization. Additionally, they are not wildcard non-conformists as they do in fact conform. However, they are conforming positively to higher level hyper-norms or organizational goals, and therefore operate in what could be termed as bounded non-conformity. Understanding the form that this bounded non-conformity takes is key for organizations to mitigate perceptions of the risk posed by maverick individuals, while maximizing the rewards that maverick employees can offer to organizations, especially for informing ideas and plans around more radical change and innovation. In this way, organizations can benefit from the numerous and unique contributions of mavericks in the workplace, such as innovative, unorthodox, and out-of-the-box thinking, while at the same time still ensuring the effective governance and risk management of the organization.

All firms operating in the global economy are exposed to a multitude of risks including financial crisis, cyberattack, social instability, governance failure, extreme weather events, etc. As a consequence, international organizations assume many (new and evolving) exposures that must be addressed, where some firms are able to adjust and thrive against these adverse odds, whereas many others fail. It appears like some (a few) firms are able to repeatedly outperform the market, where a great many of them struggle, and quite a few register negative returns every year. As a consequence, the authors typically observe leptokurtic negatively skewed distributions of financial returns with extreme negative tails of poor performing firms, where the performance data fall way beyond the requirements of a normal distribution. The authors investigate this phenomenon based on a comprehensive dataset of European firms retrieved from Compustat Global for the 25-year period 1995–2019. The analysis shows that there is indeed a consistent pattern of many underperforming firms across different industry classifications and time intervals and a few outperformers. This provides evidence of a regularly observed phenomenon that often is overlooked in mainstream management studies. The results have implications for academic research that often relies on assumptions of data normality in statistical analysis and for corporate management that has to deal with a risk-prone business environment.

The world in which companies operate today is volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous, thus subjecting contemporary forms to an array of risks that challenge their viability in an increasingly competitive landscape. Organizations that cling to their traditional ways of operating impede their ability to survive while those able to embrace evolving changes and lever their strategic response capabilities (SRCs) will thrive against the odds. The possession of such capabilities has become a prominent explanation for effective adaptation to the impending changes but is rarely analyzed and tested empirically. Strategic adaptation typically assumes innovation as an important component, but we know little about how the innovative processes interact with the firm’s SRCs. Hence, this study investigates these implied relationships to discern their effects on organizational performance and risk outcomes. It explores the effects of SRCs and the role of innovation as intertwined adaptive mechanisms supporting strategic renewal that can attain superior performance and risk effects. The relationships are analyzed based on a large sample of US manufacturing firms over the decade 2010–2019. The study reveals that firms possessing effective SRCs have the ability to exploit opportunities and deflect risky situations to gain favorable performance and risk outcomes. While innovation indeed plays a role, the precise nature and dynamic effect thereof remain inconclusive.