MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136495944 · doi:10.5465/ambpp.2012.52

External Threats and MNE Strategy: The Role of Exposure, Resources and Coping Mechanisms

2012· article· en· W2136495944 on OpenAlexaff
Li Dai, Lorraine Eden, Paul W. Beamish

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCapital Investment and Risk Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinational corporationCoping (psychology)SubsidiaryVulnerability (computing)BusinessPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multinational enterprises (MNEs), when threatened by political violence in a host country, make different choices; some stay, others exit. What determines who stays and who leaves? We combine insights from the resource-based view, real options theory, and the climate change and environmental sustainability literatures to predict the likelihood, timing and mode of foreign exit in extreme contexts. Exit is argued to be a function of the MNE subsidiary’s vulnerability, as determined by three factors: exposure to the threat, at-risk resources (i.e., their irreplaceability, which reduces the delayability of exit, and their immobility, which increases the irreversibility of exit), and coping mechanisms. Innovative geographic modeling of 626 Japanese MNE subsidiaries in 23 conflict-afflicted countries over 1986–2006 provides strong support for our arguments. Our findings suggest that valuable resources may become a firm’s “Achilles’ heel” in volatile environments, but that increased resilience is possible through the development of coping mechanisms.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicCapital Investment and Risk AnalysisFrench-language works237,207