MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964953479 · doi:10.5465/amr.2008.34422026

Institutional Theory in the Study of Multinational Corporations: A Critique and New Directions

2008· article· en· W1964953479 on OpenAlexaff
Tatiana Kostova, Kendall Roth, M. Tina Dacin

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinational corporationInstitutional theoryManagementSociologyBusinessPolitical scienceEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper was motivated by the growing interest of scholars of multinational corporations (MNCs) in the institutional perspective. Our review of the literature suggests that international management applications of this perspective have been dominated by a narrow set of neoinstitutional ideas. We develop a set of provocations that challenge the validity of traditional neoinstitutionalism in the context of MNCs. We then offer ideas for more novel theory building in the study of MNCs, based on integrating “old” and “new” institutionalism.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.064
Scholarly communication0.0110.019
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1,523
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ReviewSame topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207