CALL FOR PAPERS: SPECIAL RESEARCH FORUM
WEST MEETS EAST: NEW CONCEPTS AND THEORIES
GUEST EDITORS:
Harry Barkema, Xiao-Ping Chen, Gerard George, Yadong Luo, Anne Tsui
Management scholarship has grown tremendously over the past 60 years. Most of our
paradigms originated, in terms of concepts, assumptions, and insights, from North America in
the 1940s-1980s (resource dependence theory, institutional theory, transaction cost theory,
agency theory, equity theory, justice theory, social exchange theory, social network theory,
social learning theory, etc.), inspired by the empirical phenomena and cultural, philosophical,
and research traditions of the time. They have also been applied to and tested in Europe, Asia,
South America and Africa, leading to increasing numbers of publications in top journals such as
AMJ (Kirkman & Law, 2005).
After centuries of Western leadership in most economic matters, China, India, and the rest of
the East, with their emerging economies, are asserting themselves with new vigor on the world
stage. The 21st century has commonly been referred to as the Pacific Century (Wilkins, 2010).
The world appears to be in a transition from “West leads East” to “West meets East” (Chen &
Miller, 2010). It’s time to go beyond Western settings to tap into the empirical phenomena of the
East and its cultural, philosophical and broader intellectual tradition to create a richer, more
robust and “powerful” field of Management, in terms of understanding and managing
organizations and behavior globally (Barkema, 2001; Barkema, Baum, & Mannix, 2002; Tsui,
2007, 2009; Chen & Miller, 2011).
Of course “the East” is not a monolithic entity; there are vast differences between the
Confucian-based East Asian countries and the Buddhism and Islam-based South Asian
cultures, each accounting for over 1.6 billion people. This region comprises countries with
varying stages of economic development and a rich variety of cultures. This Special Research
Forum (SRF) encourages research and solicits submissions that offer insights (cf. Whetten,
1
1989) into the “what” (i.e., concepts), “how” (new relationships between concepts), and “why”
(new theoretical logic regarding these relationships) of more traditional, as well as in the 21st
century, emerging phenomena in Management in the East. We encourage authors to tap into
the Eastern intellectual tradition to develop new concepts and theories, tested on data from the
East or elsewhere. Contributions would need to offer distinct, new, and powerful theories.
We would consider concepts and theories constructed “from the ground up” by observing
Eastern phenomena. The new concepts and theories could also be constructed deductively,
inspired by the Eastern intellectual tradition. In either case, the concepts, relationships between
concepts, and theoretical logic supporting these relationships should be substantiated by
empirical data, in concert with the mission of AMJ. The data do not have to be limited to the
East. Inclusion of data from elsewhere providing a comparative perspective, enriching the
understanding of Eastern management phenomena, or enabling tests of new theories emerging
from the Eastern intellectual tradition, are also suitable for submissions to the SRF.
What this SRF is not: we are not inviting papers that simply apply existing theories to (new)
Asian phenomena, or develop and test contingencies in terms of “who,” “where,” and “when”
(Whetten, 1989). For instance, papers testing hypotheses about interactions between existing
concepts and culture, or (other) environmental variables (Whetten, 2009) extending or
identifying a boundary condition of existing theories, are outside the bounds of this SRF. We will
welcome such contextualized studies if they lead to new, distinct, and powerful insights that are
missed by the received theories.
Below are some examples of topics that fall under the domain of this SRF:

Western paradigms have offered many contrasting conceptualizations such as
competition vs. cooperation; exploitation vs. exploration; imitation vs. innovation;
shareholder value vs. stakeholder well-being; trust-based vs. legal relationships. While
“either-or” thinking seems to dominate the Western mindset, “both-and” seems to
describe the Eastern ones, and an emphasis on the co-existence of seemingly
contrasting practices, ideas, and concepts (Chen, 2008; Chen & Miller, 2010, 2011;
Chen, Xie, & Chang, 2011; Peng & Nesbitt, 1999). Of course, management researchers
already use concepts such as paradoxical thinking and dialectical cognition to make
sense of contrasting perspectives. Do “both-and” conceptualizations in the East, or other
conceptualizations inspired by the Eastern intellectual tradition, inspire new, distinct,
powerful explanations of team work, leadership, social relationships, competition,
innovation, internationalization and growth, in Asia or elsewhere?

As often noted, “guanxi” are key in Chinese work environments (Chen & Chen, 2004;
Luo, 2007). Western theory and evidence have inspired social exchange theory
(Homans, 1958), social network theory and social capital theory (Burt, 1992; Lin, 2001).
However, assumptions about the structure and functions of networks, how they emerge,
and who is seen as part of the network and occupies central positions, may vary across
cultural contexts (Xiao & Tsui, 2007). How does studying “guanxi” or other types of
2
social relationships in the East enable new, distinct theories or major modifications of
theories in Management?

Technology is transcending traditional geographical barriers in Asia at an unprecedented
rate, vastly reducing the cost of information transfer, creating new opportunities for
offshoring, outsourcing and distribution (e.g., reaching low-income, high Internet use
consumers beyond major cities), and new organizational forms and industries, in some
cases leapfrogging the West (e.g., mobile banking). Which new concepts and theories
do these emerging management practices and behaviors inspire?Entrepreneurship is a
major engine of growth, Asia included, both in small and medium-sized enterprises and
in large firms competing in a global context. Do Asian entrepreneurs and their business
logic, leadership style, social and business relationships (e.g., business family vs. family
businesses), strategies, and ways of organizing inspire new concepts and theories for
entrepreneurship, corporate and social venturing, global competition and business
strategy, social networks, leadership or employee motivation?

Management scholars have almost exclusively studied companies serving upper- and
middle-class consumers in Asia. However, increasing numbers of companies, social
entrepreneurs, and NGOs are developing new business models serving the four billion
people living on less than a few dollars a day, mainly living in Asia but also elsewhere.
These business models are often very different in terms of value propositions, price
points, business processes, distribution channels, partner use, and objectives. Which
new concepts and theories are needed to understand how to effectively form and
manage these organizations serving the 70% of mankind living below the poverty line?
Is there a difference between enterprises in “failing states’ (countries with around one
billion people with very low incomes and zero average growth of incomes since 1970)
vs. those with a low baseline but higher growth rates who may join the global middle
classes by 2050? Which new theories might explain work and management in these
contrasting contexts?

Do Asian multinational firms inspire new, distinct concepts and theories in terms of how
they handle coordination, control, and cooperation between units, and global expansion
and tactical implementation, beyond current conceptualizations such as agency and
transaction cost theories, liability of foreignness and internationalization process
theories, and other learning perspectives?

The “creativity problem” is a salient theme in the last decade in several East Asian
societies (Morris and Leung, 2011). Singapore has introduced educational reforms to
encourage creativity and economic policies aimed at developing creative industries.
China has designated certain cities as creativity centers and constructed creative
neighborhoods by converting disused manufacturing areas into studios, galleries, and
café spaces (Keane, 2007). Which new distinct concepts and theories inspired by the
Eastern intellectual tradition or by observing Eastern management practices and
behavior add to our current understanding of creativity, innovation, and growth?
3

Many countries in Asia, regardless of their political system variation, have a strong State
that manages the economic development of the nation (Lin, 2011), which now inspires
governments in other parts of the world as well (e.g., in Africa). Which new, distinct,
powerful concepts and theories help to explain the role of “government” in managerial
decisions of investment, innovation, social responsibility, labor relations, conflict
resolution, employee arrangements, etc.?
TIMELINE AND SUBMISSION
Submissions are due between September 15 and October 31, 2012. Contributors should
follow the directions for manuscript submission described in “Information for Contributors” in the
front of each issue of AMJ and on AMJ's Contributor Information Page. For queries about
submission, contact AMJ's managing editor, Michael Malgrande at mmalgrande@pace.edu For
questions regarding the content of this Special Research Forum, write to one of the guest
editors: Harry Barkema (h.g.barkema@lse.ac.uk ), Xiao-Ping Chen (xpchen@u.washington.edu ),
Gerard George (g.george@imperial.ac.uk Yadong Luo (yluo@bus.miami.edu ), or Anne Tsui
(anne.tsui@asu.edu ).
REFERENCES
Barkema, H.G, 2001. From the Editors, Academy of Management Journal, 44 (4): 615-617.
Barkema, H.G, J. Baum, and E. Mannix, 2002. Management challenges in a new time,
Academy of Management Journal, 45 (5): 916-930.
Burt, R. 1992. Structural Holes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Chen, M-J. 2008. Reconceptualizing the Competition-Cooperation Relationship: A transparadox
Perspective. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17 (4): 276-281.
Chen, X. P., & Chen, C. C. 2004. On the intricacies of Chinese guanxi: A process model of
guanxi development. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21 (3): 305-324.
Chen, X. P., Xie, X. F., & Chang, S. Q. 2011. Cooperative and competitive orientations in China:
Scale development and validation. Management and Organization Review, 7 (2): forthcoming
Chen, M-J., & Miller, D. 2010. West meets East: Toward an ambicultural approach to
management. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24 (4): 17-24.
Chen, M-J, & Miller, D. 2011. The relational perspective as a business mindset, Academy of
Management Perspectives, forthcoming.
Homans, G.C., 1958. Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63(6):
597-606.
Keane, M. 2007. Created in China: The great new leap forward. New York: Routledge.
Kirkman, B. L., & Law, K. S. 2005. International management research in AMJ: Our past,
present, and future. Academy of Management Journal, 48: 377–386.
Luo, Y. 2007. Guanxi and business. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing, 2nd Edition.
Lin, N. 2001. Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. NY: Cambridge
4
University Press.
Lin, N. 2011. Capitalism in China: A centrally managed capitalism (CMC) and its future.
Management and Organization Review, 7(1): 63-96.
Morris, M.W., & Leung, K. 2011. Creativity East and West: Perspectives and parallels.
Management and Organization Review, 6(3): 313-327.
Peng, K.P. & Nesbitt, R.E., 1999. Culture, dialectics, and reasoning beyond contradiction.
American Psychologist, 54(9): 741-754.
Tsui, A.S. 2007. From homogenization to pluralism: International management research in the
Academy and beyond. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6): 1353-1364.
Tsui, A.S. 2009. Editor's introduction – Autonomy of inquiry: Shaping the future of emerging
scientific communities. Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 1-14.
Whetten, D.A. 1989. What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management
Review, (4): 490-495.
Whetten, D. A. 2009. An examination of the interface between context and theory applied to the
study of Chinese organizations. Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 29–55.
Wilkins, T. 2010. The new 'Pacific Century' and the rise of China: An international relations
perspective. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 64(4): 381–405.
Xiao, Z.X. & Tsui, A. S. 2007. Where brokers may not work: The culture contingency of social
capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52: 1-31.
5