Search results

This chapter highlights a study showing that knowledge sharing and envisioning processes can have positive effects on human and social capital growth within a network. The chapter begins by arguing that a responsible development perspective can be more proactive approach than a sustainability perspective. Some actors (non-profit, public, and private) have achieved responsible development goals by integrating values, purposes, and visions. More specifically, we conducted a study testing a methodology that can guide a process of building a strategic vision within a network with the goal of improving their responsible development orientation. The chosen methodology is “Participatory Action Research.” The implementation of the envisioning process was studied via quantitative/qualitative research tools. The methodology was tested in an official cross-country project funded by the European Commission. The project was selected as a best practice by the same European Union Commission. The study highlights the importance of envisioning processes in building social and human capital at the inter-organizational level and, in particular, in highly complex sectors such as those oriented toward improving social responsibility. In fact, work on the envisioning process itself represents an essential instrument for developing strategic objectives to be shared among actors within networks that intend to promote responsible development and improve their human and social capital. This bottom-up process of envisioning can also facilitate cultural interaction among community members, even in a cross-country context. This relevant “learning-by-interacting” experience can create a growth process for the human and social capital of entire communities. The creation of social capital also promotes the development of shared knowledge and advances, leading to the general understanding of common core objectives and appropriate ways of acting within the social system. The chapter ends with recommendations for future research.

Globalization has created an intense competitive environment. As a result, achieving competitive advantage has become the core argument in international management. Some scholars have argued that the development of global leaders is critical (Osland, Bird, & Mendenhall, 2006; Yukl, 2009), while others believe that the global mindset is the key to strategic advantage (Black, Morison, & Gregerson, 1999; Jeannet, 2000; Javidan, 2008). In this paper, we present a review of both literatures (i.e., global leadership and global mindset) to highlight that today's dynamic marketplace requires a shift in thinking. We conclude by drawing attention to existing gaps in these literatures, and shed light on an emerging integrative model of global leadership and mindset.

This paper ranks university faculties, accounting doctoral programs, individual behavioral accounting researchers, and the most influential articles based on Google Scholar citations to publications in Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research (AABR). All articles published in AABR in its first 15 volumes are included and four citation metrics are used. The paper identifies the articles, authors, faculties, and doctoral programs that made the greatest contribution to the development of AABR. Such an analysis provides a useful basis for understanding the direction the journal has taken and how it has contributed to the literature (Meyer & Rigsby, 2001). The h-index and m-index for AABR indicates it compares favorably among its peers. Potential doctoral students with an interest in behavioral accounting research, “new” accounting faculty with an interest in behavioral accounting research, current behavioral accounting research faculty, department chairs, deans, and other administrators will find these results informative.

The purpose of this qualitative research study was to explore the requirements of leading in a global environment as perceived by the leaders participating in this study as well as the way these leaders learn and develop their global mindset.

The research methodology informed by social constructivism included in‐depth interviews with 24 global leaders that were analyzed using constant comparative and content analysis. The findings presented in this paper are part of a larger study on the meaning of global leadership and mindset. The framework for this research was guided by the Global Leadership Mindset (GLM) model developed by the authors and their colleagues.

Transcendence, plasticity of the mind (flexibility, thinking differently, rebalancing, openness, having multiple frames of reference), mindfulness, curiosity, and humility emerged as requirements of leading in the global environment. The global leaders' learning journeys were characterized by informal learning during everyday work and life experiences including learning from mistakes, and from and with others. Self‐reflection leading to the “self‐awareness of otherness” as well as reflection with others were at the core of learning and developing the global mindset of these leaders.

The findings of this study highlight the role of human resource development (HRD) professionals in facilitating self‐reflection and reflection with others – core processes for the learning and development of global mindset. HRD professionals are called to address both the “you don't know what you don't know” phenomenon by offering cross‐cultural training programs and experiential learning opportunities and the “you know what you don't know” daily challenges of global leaders and their team members. Initiatives that will incorporate self‐reflective and reflective processes will allow the participants to make meaning of their learning.

This is an initial attempt to explore the development of a global leadership mindset as informed by the GLM model with a focus on its learning component. The findings of this study could inform leaders preparing to work in global environments and HRD professionals called to develop learning environments and a learning culture in global workplaces.

The following is an annotated bibliography of materials published in 1977 on orienting users to the library and on instructing them in the use of reference and other resources. A few entries have a 1976 publication date and are included because information about them was not available in time for the 1976 review. Also some entries are not annotated because the compiler was unable to secure a copy of the information.

This paper aims to study largely recent aspects of entrepreneurship and innovation in China. It synthesizes the research in the current special issue (SI) of Multinational Business Review (MBR) on this topic. In addition, this paper differs from other work on this topic in examining entrepreneurship and innovation from a more global standpoint with relevant international effects.

The paper provides an overview of the literature on entrepreneurship, innovation and key related topics such as firm and economic growth, as well as linking this research to related international works. It also summarizes the papers of the SI.

The authors’ analysis suggests that the study of entrepreneurship and innovation should be placed in the context of a country’s economic development and institutional environment as well as the firm internationalization trajectories and business models. In addition, the authors believe that a good understanding of economic growth in a transition economy like China (which is a key goal of China’s recent emphasis on innovation) is facilitated by understanding the comparative advantages and disadvantages of an economy with respect to the global innovation system.

The authors’ study explores the local-global and parent-subsidiary connectivity and co-evolution of firm strategies and the institutional environment in entrepreneurship and innovation in emerging and transition economies. The authors summarize and synthesize the papers in this SI to provide the results as well as some directions for future research in the domain of entrepreneurship, innovation and new venture creation, which is believed to be a key engine of economic growth in the coming years.