MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283826994 · doi:10.1002/gsj.1455

Formal institutional context in global strategy research: A layer cake perspective

2022· article· en· W4283826994 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Strategy Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinational corporationNexus (standard)Context (archaeology)Leverage (statistics)PoliticsEconomic systemPolitical scienceEconomic geographyInstitutional theoryPolitical economyEconomicsSociologySocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Research summary We offer a novel view of formal institutions as a layer cake, suggesting a structural relationship between higher‐level and lower‐level institutions. In this context, inter‐layer conflict imposes complex pressures on multinational corporations (MNCs). These tensions have become more rife amid the growth in global connectedness and the commensurate increase in the importance of within‐country differences. Drawing on political science and economic geography research, we introduce regime type and the distribution of economic resources as conditions under which inter‐layer conflict is most likely to arise. We leverage two caselets to illustrate the inter‐layer conflict and the novel response options MNCs can deploy. Our perspective advances the theoretical understanding of intra‐national institutional diversity, laying the groundwork for future research at the nexus of institutional theory and global strategy. Managerial summary Firms often encounter opposing pressures in their operating environments because institutions within the nation‐state impose misaligned policies. Despite acknowledging that such interactions exist, firms traditionally did not make it an integral part of their strategy. We demarcate how formal institutions cascade, forming a layer cake of relevant influences whereby the structural relationship between higher‐level and lower‐level institutions may impose complex pressures when in conflict. We turn to political science and economic geography literatures for explanations of when such conflict is most likely and offer a window into the responses by multinational firms using caselets within the COVID‐19 pandemic context. We offer new avenues for research on the ways in which institutions function to affect multinational firms in a global economy increasingly characterized by institutional complexity.

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.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.251 · 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