TY - JOUR
T1 - The tortuous evolution of the role of culture in IB research: what we know, what we don’t know, and where we are headed
AU - Tung, Rosalie
AU - Stahl, Günter
PY - 2018
Y1 - 2018
N2 - This paper takes stock of the literature on culture in International Business by looking back in terms of evaluating what we know and what we do not know; and looking forward by identifying emerging trends and outlining avenues for future research. Unresolved issues, gaps and limitations include: (1) narrow conceptualization of culture and fragmented approach to the study of culture; (2) failure to adopt a multilevel approach and insufficient attention to level of analysis; (3) insufficient attention to context and process; (4) failure to adopt a more dynamic view of culture; (5) tendency to equate country with culture and failure to explore other national differentiators; and (6) Western-centric approach to the study of culture. Suggestions on redressing the unresolved issues include: (1) broadening the definition of culture and transcending the values-based approach to include schemas, norms, and “memes”; (2) paying more attention to process/context by exploring the situation-dependent and dynamic nature of culture; and (3) entertaining alternative research designs/methods, such as emic approaches, qualitative methods, experimental designs, neuroscience-based methods, and replication studies. While these may represent a major departure from methodologies popular in our field, their use can hopefully help us overcome the fragmented, discipline-based approach which has contributed to the persistent problems that have plagued the study of culture in IB in the past.
AB - This paper takes stock of the literature on culture in International Business by looking back in terms of evaluating what we know and what we do not know; and looking forward by identifying emerging trends and outlining avenues for future research. Unresolved issues, gaps and limitations include: (1) narrow conceptualization of culture and fragmented approach to the study of culture; (2) failure to adopt a multilevel approach and insufficient attention to level of analysis; (3) insufficient attention to context and process; (4) failure to adopt a more dynamic view of culture; (5) tendency to equate country with culture and failure to explore other national differentiators; and (6) Western-centric approach to the study of culture. Suggestions on redressing the unresolved issues include: (1) broadening the definition of culture and transcending the values-based approach to include schemas, norms, and “memes”; (2) paying more attention to process/context by exploring the situation-dependent and dynamic nature of culture; and (3) entertaining alternative research designs/methods, such as emic approaches, qualitative methods, experimental designs, neuroscience-based methods, and replication studies. While these may represent a major departure from methodologies popular in our field, their use can hopefully help us overcome the fragmented, discipline-based approach which has contributed to the persistent problems that have plagued the study of culture in IB in the past.
U2 - 10.1057/s41267-018-0184-2
DO - 10.1057/s41267-018-0184-2
M3 - Journal article
SN - 0047-2506
VL - 49
SP - 1167
EP - 1189
JO - Journal of International Business Studies JIBS
JF - Journal of International Business Studies JIBS
ER -