Distance without direction: Restoring credibility to a much-loved construct

By Srilata Zaheer, Margaret Schomaker, Lilach Nachum. 2012

506 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/50e1da731cc66dc6cf9ceed746d9dcee85c6ba7e

How researchers see this paper

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

In Communication

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Global cities and multinational enterprise location strategy (2013, background): “This means that global cities may be bending the fabric of geographic space as it applies to MNEs, warranting new theorizing about the concept of distance itself, as also called for by Zaheer, Schomaker, and Nachum (2012).”
The Concept of Distance in International Business Research: A Review and Research Agenda (2016, unknown): “Given that this essential question remains unanswered, it is understandable that some scholars claim that the concept of distance is without direction (Shenkar 2012; Zaheer et al. 2012).”
A Process-Based Explanation of the Psychic Distance Paradox: Evidence from Global Virtual Teams (2014, background): “Zaheer et al. (2012) reach a similar conclusion and call for more fine-grained distance research that includes the examination of the underlying processes linking distance with performance.”
Widening the lens: Rethinking distance, diversity, and foreignness in international business research through positive organizational scholarship (2016, background): “In fact, Zaheer et al. (2012) found that the Kogut and Singh measure has actually gained usage since Shenkar’s critique, probably because it provides an extremely user-friendly measure “that scholars who are not primarily interested in institutions or cultures can throw into a regression equation…”
Towards a more balanced treatment of culture in international business studies: The need for positive cross-cultural scholarship (2014, background): “As Shenkar (2001) and others (Tung & Verbeke, 2010; Zaheer et al., 2012) have noted, the concept of cultural distance is based on the assumption of discordance.”
Do We Need to Distance Ourselves from the Distance Concept? Why Home and Host Country Context Might Matter More Than (Cultural) Distance (2015, background): “Previous contributions have already espoused many limitations of the (cultural) distance concept (see, for example, Shenkar 2001; Harzing 2003; Tung and Verbeke 2010; Zaheer et al. 2012).”
Addressing the cross-country applicability of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB): A structured review of multi-country TPB studies (2016, background): “In line with Rabl et al. (2014) and Zaheer et al. (2012) we decided to focus on a small number of the most relevant dimensions to ascertain whether these dimensions moderate the relationship between intention and its antecedents.”
MNEs as border-crossing multi-location enterprises: The role of discontinuities in geographic space (2013, methodology): “…the internal distance into account when assessing the role of international distances, distance can be contextualized, an approach which is in line with some recent suggestions in IB (Zaheer et al., 2012) that follow on earlier work in EG (Scott, 1996; for a survey see Iammarino & McCann, 2013).”