Navigating the hostile maze: A framework for Russian entrepreneurship

By Sheila M. Puffer, Daniel J. McCarthy. 2001

168 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Political Science and International Relations

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/82a5f058535874208f4fb9e022a0c34d9819c656

How researchers see this paper

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

In Political Science and International Relations

Citations in the corpus

A theoretical grounding and test of the GEM model (2008, background): “A particularly important component of control is taxation, and there is evidence that correctly applied tax policies may provide incentives for innovation and growth of firms (Keuschnigg and Nielsen, 2002, 2004; Goldfarb and Henrekson, 2003; Puffer and McCarthy, 2001).”
Guest Editors' Introduction Strategy Research in Emerging Economies: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom* (2005, unknown): “Puffer and McCarthy (2001) argue that entrepreneurs in highly turbulent environments such as Russia may stand out even among their entrepreneurial peers around the world, since it almost requires a special breed of people in order to survive and hopefully prosper there.”
Probing theoretically into Central and Eastern Europe: transactions, resources, and institutions (2005, background): “Only recently have scholars begun to analyse the determinants of new firm establishment (Puffer and McCarthy, 2001; Batjargal, 2003) and their survival (Lyles et al., 2004).”
Entrepreneurial self-efficacy in Central Asian transition economies: quantitative and qualitative analyses (2006, background): “…and Hannan, 2000; Ireland et al., 2001), there is still very little knowledge about entrepreneurial functioning in transition economies in general, and in harsh environments such as those found in Central Asia in particular (Olcott, 1996; Newman, 2000; Peng, 2001; Puffer and McCarthy, 2001).”
Emerging Markets as Learning Laboratories: Learning Behaviors of Local Firms and Foreign Entrants in Different Institutional Contexts (2005, background): “Thus, this situation led to institutional chaos and substantial uncertainty for firms operating there (Puffer and McCarthy, 2001; Stoner-Weiss, 1997).”
Do outside directors and new managers help improve firm performance? An exploratory study in Russian privatization (2003, background): “Much of what has been reported about the resurgence of new entrepreneurship in Russia applies to smaller privatized firms, usually in the retail and service sectors, as well as private start-ups (Barberis et al., 1996; Havrylyshyn & McGettigan, 2000; Peng, 2001; Puffer & McCarthy, 2001).”
Institutions and Entrepreneurship Development in Russia: A Comparative Perspective (2008, background): “Russia of course, was under communist rule for much longer and lacked this tradition (Puffer and McCarthy 2001; Szelenyi, 1988; Webster, 1992). Roberts and Zhou (2000) suggest how entrepreneurial strategy might differ between Central Europe and the former Soviet Union.”
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (2002, background): “For example, Radaev (2005) reports that trust among network participants in Russia is generally developed through repeated business interactions.”
Governance, organizational capabilities, and restructuring in transition economies (2003, background): “These types of governance associated with privatization are widely acknowledged in the economics of transition literature (e.g., Filatotchev et al., 2000; Hoskisson et al., 2000; Puffer & McCarthy, 2001).”
What Drives New Ventures to Internationalize from Emerging to Developed Economies? (2007, background): “As a group, DE, relative to EE, tend to have more entrepreneur-friendly regulations, better protection of intellectual property rights, less corruption, and more transparent and better functioning capital markets (Lee et al., 2007; Peng, 2003; Puffer & McCarthy, 2001).”