Journals of international business studies (2021)

Herman Aguinis1 and Kelly P. Gabriel1

INTRODUCTION
Articles published in Journal of International Business Studies (JIBS) and elsewhere have argued
that international business (IB) is a very complex field (e.g., Bello & Kostova, 2012;
Cheng et al., 2014; Peterson, 2004). Consequently, the reasoning is that this high
degree of complexity makes IB particularly unique and different from other fields both
theoretically and methodologically (Aguinis et al., 2020; Bello & Kostova, 2012;
Cuervo-Cazurra et al., 2013, 2016; Doz, 2011; Norder et al., 2021; Sullivan &
Daniels, 2008).
Short summary of the article
Articles in Journal of International Business Studies (JIBS) and elsewhere have argued that international
business (IB) is a uniquely complex field. We offer an alternative perspective and evidence that IB is not so
uniquely complex compared to organizational behavior, strategic management studies, and entrepreneurship.
We argue that viewing IB as uniquely complex is likely a result of what a vast body of social psychology
research has uncovered and labeled false uniqueness bias: the tendency for people to believe that they are
unique compared to others. We discuss selective accessibility and focalism as underlying psychological mechanisms
of this bias. We acknowledge advantages of claiming uniqueness, but argue that it is now more beneficial and
realistic to highlight similarities. Doing so will allow IB to import and export theories and methods and thereby make
IB borders even more permeable. In turn, increased permeability is likely to lead to further theoretical progress that
will benefit IB research, practice, and its positive impact on organizations and society even further. To illustrate
advantages of not exaggerating IB’s uniqueness, we use JIBS Decade Award winners as exemplars of studies that
are admired and impactful precisely because of their focus on similarities rather than unique complexity.

METHODOLOGY
Many IB researchers refer to the field as being uniquely complex regarding its theoretical founda- tions
(e.g., Cuervo-Cazurra et al., 2016). Specifically, it has been argued that IB is unique because no single
theoretical lens or discipline can provide a complete explanation (Cantwell & Brannen, 2011; Cheng et
This study source was downloaded by 100000857242907 from CourseHero.com on 11-29-2022 08:51:09 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/127168267/article-review-of-international-business-by-Tamanudocx/
 al., 2009). Bello and Kostova (2012: 541) explained that this ‘‘layering’’ of theories wherein one
draws from another is both a ‘‘blessing and a curse.’’ While in the past this diversity of theoretical
approaches was seen as a threat to IB’s standing as a legitimate field, IB has proven over time that it has
its own theories, constructs, and bases of knowl- edge and that multi-theory approaches can be an added
benefit.
Many have also argued that IB is uniquely complex regarding the phenomena of interest. Specif-
ically, multiple and cross-border locations of the firm create inherent complexity (Cuervo-Cazurra
The most recent example arguing for IB’s unique complexity is a JIBS article by Eden and Nielsen
(2020: 1610), which stated that ‘‘complex- ity is the underlying cause of the unique method- ological
problems facing international business research.’’
We offer the alternative view that IB is not so uniquely complex theoretically or methodologi- cally. Our
perspective is based on evidence that other fields are similarly complex. To do so, we draw upon Eden
and Nielsen’s (2020) complexity framework including three dimensions: multiplic- ity, multiplexity, and
dynamism. Specifically, we show that organizational behavior, strategic man- agement studies, and
entrepreneurship are simi- larly complex because, just like in IB, theories need to consider a variety of
agents and actors (i.e., multiplicity), a variety of relationships and inter- dependencies among these
agents and actors (i.e., multiplexity), and processes as they unfold over time (i.e., dynamism in
environments). We also provide evidence that IB’s interdisciplinary nature is similarly not unique
compared to these other fields.
In an effort to understand its origin, we use psychological theory to explain a likely reason why IB is
often described as being so unique. Specifi- cally, we argue that this conclusion is likely a result of what
a vast body of social psychology research has uncovered and labeled false uniqueness bias (e.g., Suls,
2007; Suls & Wan, 1987). False unique- ness bias is the tendency for people to incorrectly believe that
they are different from others. Building upon psychological theory, we describe two under- lying
mechanisms for why false uniqueness bias has likely emerged among IB researchers: (i) selective
accessibility (i.e., information about our own field is much more easily accessible compared to informa-
tion on other fields), and (ii) focalism (i.e., giving more weight to information that is readily available).
We would like to emphasize that our article is most certainly not intended to be a criticism of the IB
field. On the contrary, there are advantages associated with claiming uniqueness – particularly when a
scientific field is in its nascent stage. However, IB has now reached maturity and legiti- macy (Cantwell
& Brannen, 2016). For example, as an indication of IB’s stature in the global academic community,
Clarivate’s June 2021 Web of Science edition ranked JIBS as the #6 most impactful journal in the
Business category (out of 153 jour- nals), and also as the #7 most impactful journal in the Management
category (out of 226 journals). We believe that by considering not only differences from other
This study source was downloaded by 100000857242907 from CourseHero.com on 11-29-2022 08:51:09 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/127168267/article-review-of-international-business-by-Tamanudocx/
 disciplines, but also similarities, IB can harness its interdisciplinary nature (Cheng et al., 2009; Dunning,
1989) and more easily import and export theories and methods (Buckley et al., 2017). Clearly, importing
and exporting theories requires selectivity (e.g., consistency in concepts, explana- tory power;
Kenworthy & Verbeke, 2015). Similarly, importing and exporting methods also requires selectivity (e.g.,
consistency in units of analysis, data availability; Peterson et al., 2012). Reassur- ingly, IB has moved
from being predominantly a net importer (Sullivan et al., 2011; Yeheskel & Shenkar, 2009) to net
exporter (Cantwell et al., 2014). Accordingly, we believe that an overempha- sis on uniqueness is not
only detrimental to IB but also to other disciplines that have much to gain from IB’s theories and
applications (Cantwell & Brannen, 2011). Overall, as noted eloquently by Cheng et al., (2009: 1072),
‘‘Whereas it is the rare disciplinary scholar who reaches outward across boundaries, IB cannot similarly
sustain itself as a field of inquiry if we mimic this insularity.’’ Our perspective is that increased
permeability is likely to lead to further theoretical progress that will in turn benefit IB research, IB
practice, and enhance IB’s positive impact on organizations and society even further.

CONCLUSION
Is the field of international business studies unique based on the three complexity
dimensions of multiplicity, multiplexity, and dynamism, and its interdisciplinary
nature? We provided the alterna- tive perspective that IB is not so uniquely complex
compared to the adjacent fields of organizational behavior, strategic management,
and entrepreneur- ship. Clearly, there have been advantages associ- ated with
claiming uniqueness when IB was in its nascent stage. But, our perspective is that IB
is now a mature, established, and legitimate field, and therefore it has more to gain
by highlighting theoretical and methodological similarities rather than uniqueness—
which may lead to self-imposed isolation. We see a bright future and impact for IB
based on the fact that JIBS Decade Award winners have precisely focused on
similarities rather than uniqueness, which has resulted in bridges with OB, SMS, and
entrepreneurship that are beneficial for all fields involved. Continuing to build
bridges, rather than walls, will allow IB to selectively import and export theories and
methods and thereby make IB borders even more permeable. In turn, these synergies
are likely to result in further theoretical progress that will benefit IB research, IB
practice, and enhance IB’s positive impact on society even further.
This study source was downloaded by 100000857242907 from CourseHero.com on 11-29-2022 08:51:09 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/127168267/article-review-of-international-business-by-Tamanudocx/
 OVER ALL MY COMMENT
The researches shall be pay attention for the criteria for publications in research area in which things are
supported by evidence to be judged to some conclusions. The stricture of the researches is not considered
as requirement and some part of normal research organ has been omitted from the writing. For instance,
topic. objective , statement of the problems , research questions, finding and recommendations for
researchers are not included in to the research’s content .
STRENGTH
In the current global market in with the world becoming one village and marketing are possibly
throughout the world within the day , the research and development of international business are an area
of concern and very important to make decision in the global market.
WEAKNESS
The omission of topic which is very critical for researcher to identify to what are generally we are going
to do and general area of our concern is very important. The paper has no unique topic. The content
itself is the mix of different subject area. Shall to be steak to one selected topic as so as to allow give
focus for the study and study Itself to be attainable. The absence of clear objective of the paper,
statement of the problems to be solved, the research question to be answered , data collection methods,
findings of the research to be concluded and the recommendations for other researchers brief the
assignment to do are all the weak side of the given article.

This study source was downloaded by 100000857242907 from CourseHero.com on 11-29-2022 08:51:09 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/127168267/article-review-of-international-business-by-Tamanudocx/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)