The emergence of corporate governance in Russia

By Sheila M. Puffer, Daniel J. McCarthy. 2003

136 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Political Science and International Relations, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/14e7740a5d0aa5649e217678784bae7f41e1d06f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

1. Mike W. Peng
2. Saul Estrin
3. Sheila M. Puffer
4. Daniel J. McCarthy
5. Martha Prevezer
6. Emmanuel Adegbite
7. Max Boisot
8. K. Meyer

In Political Science and International Relations

1. Mike W. Peng
2. Saul Estrin
3. Emmanuel Adegbite
4. Martha Prevezer
5. Sheila M. Puffer
6. Daniel J. McCarthy
7. Garry D. Bruton
8. D. Ahlstrom

In Strategy and Management

1. Saul Estrin
2. Mike W. Peng
3. Sheila M. Puffer
4. Daniel J. McCarthy
5. Martha Prevezer
6. Emmanuel Adegbite
7. Max Boisot
8. K. Meyer

Citations in the corpus

• Entrepreneurship in Russia and China: The Impact of Formal Institutional Voids (2010, background): “While over 20,000 enterprises were privatized by the mid-1990s (Boycko, Shleifer, & Vishny, 1995), many citizens saw little difference between managers and property owners (Puffer & McCarthy, 2003).”
• An institution-based view of international business strategy: a focus on emerging economies (2008, unknown): “Given their inability to produce such models profitably in the United States and Japan, imagine the profit potential these developed-in-China models may have back home, where entry-level cars now sell for $10,000.”
• The role of informal institutions in corporate governance: Brazil, Russia, India, and China compared (2011, background): “What Puffer and McCarthy (2003) call the nomenklatura stage in the late 1990s depicts the control over the economy going to the business-government elite with a number of privileged players enriching themselves and the emergence of a number of leading oligarchs.”
• Good corporate governance in Nigeria: Antecedents, propositions and peculiarities (2015, background): “Alternatively, the study highlights the usefulness of an institutional analysis in understanding firm behaviour in weak institutional contexts (Wood, Dibben, Stride & Webster, 2010; Lau, Fan, Young & Wu, 2007; Aguilera, et. al., 2008; Puffer & McCarthy 2003; Adegbite, et. al.”
• Outside directors and firm performance during institutional transitions (2004, background): “Corporate governance in emerging economies such as China has experienced some of these transitions (Buck et al., 1999; Puffer and McCarthy, 2003; Young et al., 2002).”