MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416001690 · doi:10.5465/amproc.2025.357bp

Modeling Optimal FSA Recombination Decisions Using Real Options Theory

2025· article· en· W4416001690 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Peter Iskander, Anthony Goerzen, Christian Geisler Asmussen

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCapital Investment and Risk Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceTransaction costPerspective (graphical)Mode (computer interface)Process (computing)Database transactionValue (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MNEs can create a competitive advantage by ‘melding’ or adapting location-bound and non-location-bound FSAs across international borders. However, this process of melding also entails significant transaction costs which can be abated via internal and external modes of governance, prompting the question: which mode of governance should MNEs choose when engaging in cross-border FSA recombination? Recently, scholars have argued that the ‘optimal’ mode of governance is contingent upon the governance capabilities an MNE possesses: MNEs endowed with high external (Ote) governance capabilities should choose external modes of governance, while MNEs endowed with high internal (Oti) governance capabilities should choose internal or hierarchical modes of governance. However, this perspective has been strongly criticized on the basis of being tautological. In this paper, we seek to demonstrate that the optimal mode of governance is actually contingent upon the type and degree of uncertainty (i.e., endogenous vs. exogenous) in the external environment, rather than the governance capabilities the MNE is endowed with. We adopt a Real Options Theory (ROT) perspective to model the value of internal versus quasi-internal modes of governance under different forms of structural uncertainty, and use option pricing simulations to explore how the optimal choice of governance mode changes in response to changes in the degree of structural uncertainty.

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 score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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