Emerging Multiplicity pp 15-32 | Cite as
Asia and its Actors, their Logics and the Challenges
Abstract
One of the significant lessons for an executive going into Asia for the first time, and expecting to do business there, is that the region is highly varied, in some ways much more so than most other regions such as Latin America, the Middle East or Europe. It is possible to argue, for example, that Sweden and Italy provide strong contrasts when first observed, but at least they are both products of a shared Christian civilizational heritage, both members of the same political grouping, both operating at a high level of GDP per capita, and both capable of constructing industries and complex firms with a global impact. Much of Europe’s variety is near the surface, and underneath there is much common ground. This is not true of Asia. There the contrasts — on the surface perhaps less obvious than those of Europe — are well below the surface and much more likely to lead to the separating out of different societal formulae. As the famous historian of Chinese science, Joseph Needham, once observed in considering the contrast between China and Japan, the latter is so much closer to Europe and so different from its neighbour that you might just as well tow it away and anchor it off the Isle of Wight.
Keywords
International Business Complex Adaptive System Home Market Business System Institutionalize TrustPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Biggart, N.W. and Delbridge, R. (2004) ‘Systems of Exchange’, Academy of Management Review, 29(1): 28–49.Google Scholar
- Carney, M. and Gedajlovic, E. (2001) ‘Corporate Governance and Firm Capabilities: A Comparison of Managerial, Alliance, and Personal Capitalisms’, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 18(3): 335–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Child, J. (2000) ‘Theorizing about Organization Cross-Nationally’, in J.L.C. Cheng and R.B. Peterson (eds), Advances in International Comparative Management, 13 (Stamford: JAI Press): 27–76.Google Scholar
- DiMaggio, P. (ed.) (2001) The Twenty-First-Century Firm (Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
- DiMaggio, P. and Powell, W.W. (eds) (2001) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
- Eisenstadt, S.N. (1996) Japanese Civilization: A Comparative View (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
- Fligstein, N. (2001) The Architecture of Markets (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
- Friedman, M. (1953) Essays in Positive Economics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
- Granovetter, M. (1985) ‘Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness’, American Journal of Sociology, 91: 481–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hall, P.A. and Soskice, D. (2001) Varieties of Capitalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hamilton, G.G. (1994) ‘Civilizations and the Organization of Economies’, in N.J. Smelser and R. Swedberg (eds), The Handbook of Economic Sociology (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press): 183–205.Google Scholar
- Hofstede, G. (1980) Culture’s Consequences (London: Sage).Google Scholar
- Inglehart, R. (1997) Modernization and Postmodemization (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
- Jacobs, N. (1985) The Korean Road to Modernization and Development (Urbana: University of Illinois Press).Google Scholar
- Landes, D.S. (1998) The Wealth and Poverty of Nations (New York: Norton).Google Scholar
- Lewin, A.Y. and Koza, M.P. (eds) (2001) Organization Studies, special issue: ‘Multi-level Analysis and Co-evolution’, 22(6).Google Scholar
- Lewin, A. and Volberda, H.W. (1999) ‘Prolegomena on Co-evolution: A Framework for Research on Strategy and New Organizational Forms’, Organization Science, 10(5): 519–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Maurice, M. (1989) ‘Methode Comparative et Analyse Societale’, Sociologie du Travail, 17(2): 175–91.Google Scholar
- Nolan, P. (2001) China and the Global Economy (London: Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Porter, M. (1990) The Competitive Advantage of Nations (London: Macmillan, now Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Porter, M. (2000) ‘Attitudes, Values and Beliefs and the Microeconomics of Prosperity’, in L.E. Harrison and S.P. Huntington (ed.), Culture Matters (New York: Basic Books): 14–28.Google Scholar
- Porter, M. and Wayland, R.E. (1995) ‘Global Competition and the Localization of Competitive Advantage’, Advances in Strategic Management, 11(A).Google Scholar
- Ragin, C. (1987) The Comparative Method (Berkeley: University of California Press).Google Scholar
- Redding, G. (1990) The Spirit of Chinese Capitalism (New York: de Gruyter).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Redding, G. (2005) ‘The Thick Description and Comparison of Societal Systems of Capitalism’, Journal of International Business Studies, 36(1): 123–55.Google Scholar
- Weber, M. (1930) The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans (T. Parsons (London: Unwin).Google Scholar
- Whitley, R. (1992) Business Systems in East Asia (London: Sage).Google Scholar
- Whitley, R. (1999) Divergent Capitalisms (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
- Whitley, R. (2003) ‘The Institutional Structuring of Organizational Capabilities: The Role of Authority Sharing and Organizational Careers’, Organization Studies, 24(5): 667–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Zukin, S. and DiMaggio, P. (1990) Structures of Capital: The Social Organization of the Economy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar