THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS
SPRING 2009
Office
Phone
Email
Chiung-Hui Tseng
61411A
(06)2757575 ext.53512
ctseng@mail.ncku.edu.tw
Course Objectives
This course is designed to familiarize students with an array of business theories that
are often used to explain firms’ international business behavior. At the completion of
this course, students should have knowledge about the theoretical grounding of
international business (IB) literature and the skills to critically read IB research.
Requirements and Grading
Participation
Term paper
Practice comprehensive exam
40%
30%
30%
Required Readings:
The readings have been pre-selected by the instructor (see below). The selected
readings include reviews of research, classics, and exemplar conceptual or empirical
studies on specific topics. The reading load for each week is typically three articles,
but may vary contingent upon the density of articles.
This course will be run as a seminar. All students are expected to PREPARE for and
PARTICIPATE in every seminar meeting. Through in-class discussion, we can all
learn from each other’s viewpoints and experience and, more importantly, we can
learn more by debating issues than by listening passively.
Grading on participation is based on the following scale:
Participation Quantity and Quality
Points
Contributions ranked top 10%
100
Contributions ranked next 20%
90
Contributions ranked next 20%
80
Contributions ranked next 20%
70
1
Contributions ranked next 20%
60
Contributions ranked bottom 10%
50
Term Paper:
Each student will need to select a research topic, identify an appropriate submission
outlet, and prepare the manuscript over the course of the semester. The purpose of this
research project is to develop a manuscript for submission to an appropriate journal or
conference. Specific deadlines are provided below:
Scheduled Item
Paper proposal
Date Due
Week 6
Paper draft and presentation
Revised manuscript
Weeks 16&17
Week 18 (06/21)
The paper proposal (maximum two pages) should include a description of the topic
scope, rationale for selection (theoretical and managerial importance), and expected
contributions, along with a copy of the target editorial policy or author instructions
and a list of key references. The final paper should be in the format required by
“author instructions” for your selected outlet. **Late paper will not be accepted for
grading**
Practice Comprehensive Exam:
The purpose of this exercise is to simulate the actual comprehensive exam condition.
During the finals week, students will be given three exam questions (approximately
one hour for each question). Students will be expected to demonstrate a skill in using
relevant citations from the IB literature to develop a thoughtful and critical response
to the questions. No aids are permitted.
Policy on Cheating
Cheating on exams, plagiarism of published authors or classmates, or any other form
of academic dishonesty will result in an automatic fail in the class and the incident
will be reported for further action.
2
The Readings
Week 1 (02/18/09): Course Overview
Week 2 (02/25/09): Research Epistemologies and Theory Development
Lee, A.S. (1991) ‘Integrating Positivist and Interpretive Approaches to Organizational
Research,’ Organization Science 2(4): 342-365.
Sutton, R.I. and Staw, B.M. (1995) ‘What Theory Is Not,’ Administrative Science
Quarterly 40(3): 371-384.
Weick, K.E. (1995) ‘What Theory Is Not, Theorizing Is,’ Administrative Science
Quarterly 40(3): 385-390.
Whetten, D.A. (1989) ‘What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution?’ Academy of
Management Review 14(4): 490-495.
Bacharach, S.B. (1989) ‘Organizational Theories: Some Criteria for Evaluation,’
Academy of Management Review 14(4): 496-515.
Week 3 (03/04/09): Transaction Cost Economics / Internalization Theory (I)
Williamson, O.E. (1971) ‘The Vertical Integration of Production: Market Failure
Considerations,’ The American Economic Review 61(2): 112-123.
McKean, R.N. and Weston, J.F. 1971 ‘Discussion,’ The American Economic Review
61(2): 124-127.
Williamson, O.E. (1991) ‘Comparative Economic Organization: The Analysis of
Discrete Structural Alternatives,’ Administrative Science Quarterly 36(2):
269-296.
Williamson, O.E. (1998) ‘Transaction Cost Economics: How It Works; Where It Is
Headed,’ De Economist 146(1): 23-58.
Week 4 (03/11/09): Transaction Cost Economics / Internalization Theory (II)
Geyskens, I., Steenkamp, J.E.M. and Kumar, N. (2006) ‘Make, Buy, or Ally: A
Transaction Cost Theory Meta-Analysis,’ Academy of Management Journal
49(3): 519-543.
Chen, S.-F. (2005) ‘Extending Internalization Theory: A New Perspective on
International Technology Transfer and Its Generalization,’ Journal of
International Business Studies 36(2): 231-245.
Jacobides, M.G. (2005) ‘Industry Change through Vertical Disintegration: How and
Why Markets Emerged in Mortgage Banking,’ Academy of Management Journal
48(3): 465-498.
3
Week 5 (03/18/09): Transaction Cost Economics / Internalization Theory (III)
Chen, S.-F. (2009) ‘A Transaction Cost Rationale for Private Branding and Its
Implications for the Choice of Domestic vs. Offshore Outsourcing,’ Journal of
International Business Studies 40(1): 156-175.
Shrader, R.C. (2001) ‘Collaboration and Performance in Foreign Markets: The Case
of Young High-Technology Manufacturing Firms,’ Academy of Management
Journal 44(1): 45-60.
Masters, J.K. and Miles, G. (2002) ‘Predicting the Use of External Labor
Arrangements: A Test of the Transaction Costs Perspective,’ Academy of
Management Journal 45(2): 431-442.
Week 6 (03/25/09): Proposal Presentation
Week 7 (04/01/09): No Class
Week 8 (04/08/09): The Resource-Based View of the Firm (I)
Barney, J. (1991) ‘Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage,’ Journal of
Management 17(1): 99-120.
Priem, R.L. and Butler, J.E. (2001) ‘Is the Resource-Based “View” A Useful
Perspective for Strategic Management Research?’ Academy of Management
Review 26(1): 22-40.
Barney, J.B. (2001) ‘Is the Resource-Based “View” A Useful Perspective For
Strategic Management Research? Yes,’ Academy of Management Review 26(1):
41-56.
Priem, R.L. and Butler, J.E. (2001) ‘Tautology in the Resource-Based View and the
Implications of Externally Determined Resource Value: Further Comments,’
Academy of Management Review 26(1): 57-66.
Week 9 (04/15/09): The Resource-Based View of the Firm (II)
Lado, A.A., Boyd, N.G., Wright, P. and Kroll, M. (2006) ‘Paradox and Theorizing
within the Resource-Based View,’ Academy of Management Review 31(1):
115-131.
Newbert, S.L. (2008) ‘Value, Rareness, Competitive Advantage, and Performance: A
Conceptual-Level Empirical Investigation of the Resource-Based View of the
Firm,’ Strategic Management Journal 29(7): 745-768.
Tseng, C.-H., Tansuhaj, P., Hallagan, W. and McCullough, M. (2007) ‘Effects of Firm
Resources on Growth in Multinationality,’ Journal of International Business
Studies 38(6): 961-974
4
Week 10 (4/22/09): The Internationalization Process Model
Johanson, J. and Wiedersheim-Paul, F. (1975) ‘The Internationalization of the Firm:
Four Swedish Cases,’ Journal of Management Studies 12(3): 305-322.
Johanson, J. and Vahlne, J. (1977) ‘The Internationalization Process of the Firm: A
Model of Knowledge Development and Increasing Foreign Market
Commitment,’ Journal of International Business Studies 8(1): 23-32.
Shrader, R.C., Oviatt, B.M. and McDougall, P.P. (2000) ‘How New Ventures Exploit
Trade-Offs among International Risk Factors: Lessons for the Accelerated
Internationalization of the 21st Century,’ Academy of Management Journal 43(6):
1227-1247.
Week 11 (04/29/09): Institutional Theory (I)
Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1977) ‘Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure
as Myth and Ceremony,’ American Journal of Sociology 83(2): 340-363.
Dimaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983) ‘The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional
Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields,’ American
Sociological Review 48(2): 147-160.
Scott, W.R. (1987) ‘The Adolescence of Institutional Theory,’ Administrative Science
Quarterly 32(4): 493-511.
Week 12 (05/06/09): Institutional Theory (II)
Heugens, P.P.M.A.R. and Lander, M.W. (2009) ‘Structure! Agency! (And Other
Quarrels): A Meta-Analysis of Institutional Theories of Organization,’ Academy
of Management Journal 52(1): 61-85.
Dacin, M.T., Oliver, C. and Roy, J. (2007) ‘The Legitimacy of Strategic Alliances: An
Institutional Perspective,’ Strategic Management Journal 28(2): 169-187.
Maguire, S. and Hardy, C. (2009) ‘Discourse and Deinstitutionalization: The Decline
of DDT,’ Academy of Management Journal 52(1): 148-178.
Week 13 (05/13/09): Agency Theory (I)
Fama, E.F. (1980) ‘Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm’, Journal of
Political Economy 88(2): 288-307.
Fama, E.F. and Jensen, M. (1983) ‘Separation of Ownership and Control’, Journal of
Law and Economics 26(2): 301-326.
Fama, E.F. and Jensen, M. (1983) ‘Agency Problems and Residual Claims’, Journal
of Law and Economics 26(2): 327-349.
5
Week 14 (05/20/09): Agency Theory (II)
Williamson, O.E. (1983) ‘Organization Form, Residual Claimants, and Corporate
Control,’ Journal of Law and Economics 26(2): 351-366.
Klein, B. (1983) ‘Contracting Costs and Residual Claims: The Separation of
Ownership and Control,’ Journal of Law and Economics 26(2): 367-374.
Reuer, J.J. and Ragozzino, R. (2006) ‘Agency Hazards and Alliance Portfolios,’
Strategic Management Journal 27(1): 27-43.
Week 15 (05/27/09): Theories Integration
Brouthers, L.E., Brouthers, K.D. and Werner, S. (1999) ‘Is Dunning’s Eclectic
Framework Descriptive or Normative?’ Journal of International Business
Studies 30(4): 831-844.
Mesquita, L.F. and Lazzarini, S.G. (2008) ‘Horizontal and Vertical Relationships in
Developing Economies: Implications for SMEs’ Access to Global Markets,’
Academy of Management Journal 51(2): 359-380.
Berrone, P. and Gomez-Mejia, L.R. (2009) ‘Environmental Performance and
Executive Compensation: An Integrated Agency-Institutional Perspective,’
Academy of Management Journal 52(1): 103-126.
Week 16 (06/03/09): Paper Presentation (I)
Week 17 (06/10/09): Paper Presentation (II)
Week 18 (06/17/09): Practice Comprehensive Exam
6