<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:creator>Tjemkes, Brian V.</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Furrer, Olivier</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Adolfs, Koen</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Aydinlik, Arzu Ülgen</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2012</dc:date>
  <dc:description xmlns:ns0="xml" ns0:lang="en">International strategic alliances have grown increasingly popular in recent decades,  yet their failure rate is extremely high. Poor management of adverse situations  contributes significantly to such high failure rates. Moreover, the international  environments in which international strategic alliances operate exacerbate the  adverse situations and make their management more critical. However, extant  research does not specify how people from different national cultures respond to  these adverse situations. In order to better understand cross-national differences, this  study investigates future managers’ preferences for specific response strategies in an  international strategic alliance experimental context. Using a scenario-based  experiment with 1,379 business students in five countries—Japan, the Netherlands,  Switzerland, Turkey, and the United Kingdom—the authors assess whether  preferences for seven response strategies—exit, opportunism, aggressive voice,  creative voice, considerate voice, patience, and neglect—vary across countries. The  results indicate that national culture, both directly and interactively through  relationship-level exchange variables that characterize the adversity of the situation,  influences response strategy preference. This study advances literature on response  strategies by explaining that when faced with the same adverse situation, future  managers from different countries likely prefer different response strategies,  depending on which response strategies they believe are most adequate in their  cultural environment.</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>https://folia.unifr.ch/global/documents/303883</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://folia.unifr.ch/documents/303883/files/2012_tjemkes-b_v_furrer-o_journal-of-international-management-1.pdf</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:relation>info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.intman.2011.06.003</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights>
  <dc:rights>License undefined</dc:rights>
  <dc:source>Journal of International Management. - 2012, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 66-84</dc:source>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns1="xml" ns1:lang="en">International strategic alliances</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns2="xml" ns2:lang="en">national culture</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns3="xml" ns3:lang="en">response strategies</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns4="xml" ns4:lang="en">exchange</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>info:eu-repo/classification/udc/3</dc:subject>
  <dc:title xmlns:ns5="xml" ns5:lang="en">Response Strategies in an International Strategic Alliance Experimental Context : cross-country differences</dc:title>
  <dc:type>http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>
