Beyond Hofstede and GLOBE: Improving the quality of cross-cultural research

By Rosalie L. Tung, Alain Verbeke. 2010

678 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Anthropology, Communication, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e0813327e9f230d4207fa7cf6724052042f89103

How researchers see this paper

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

In Anthropology

In Communication

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Societal-Level Versus Individual-Level Predictions of Ethical Behavior: A 48-Society Study of Collectivism and Individualism (2013, background): “…this question as a continuation of previous discussions on the appropriate level of analysis (e.g., Au and Cheung 2004; Bond et al. 2004; Lenartowicz and Roth 2001; Tung and Verbeke 2010) and the relevance of multi-level analyses (e.g., Peterson et al. 2012; Ralston et al. 2009; Tsui et al. 2007).”
Multinationals and corporate social responsibility in host countries: Does distance matter? (2011, neutral): “While the Kogut and Singh index has been criticized as problematic (Håkanson & Ambos, 2010; Shenkar, 2001; Tung & Verbeke, 2010), it remains the most widely used index for cultural distance.”
The Concept of Distance in International Business Research: A Review and Research Agenda (2016, neutral): “dominant headquarters, centralized decision-making and early stages of firm internationalization), this may indeed be the appropriate reference point, but in others the neglect of idiosyncratic firm characteristics that goes along with the home reference point may seem to be an oversimplification (T”
Widening the lens: Rethinking distance, diversity, and foreignness in international business research through positive organizational scholarship (2016, background): “…measures can be useful in gauging the differences across countries, a growing number of scholars (Berry, Guillén, & Zhou, 2010; Håkanson & Ambos, 2010; Tung & Verbeke, 2010; Zaheer et al., 2012) raise concerns about the frequent – and sometimes inappropriate – use of these concepts in IB research.”
National Culture and Corporate Cash Holdings around the World (2015, background): “Tung and Verbeke (2010) state that despite the criticisms that have been voiced against Hofstede’s work, his influence in the fields of international business and management is undeniable.”
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).”
Situational job characteristics and job satisfaction: The moderating role of national culture (2015, background): “…House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004; Peltokorpi & Froese, 2014; Trompenaars, 1993), these four dimensions remain the most prominent in intercultural research (Taras, Rowney, & Steel, 2009; Tung & Verbeke, 2010; for a critique of Hofstede, see e.g. Brewer & Venaik, 2011; McSweeney, 2002).”
Values, schemas, and norms in the culture–behavior nexus: A situated dynamics framework (2015, background): “Value theorists using country-level scores to predict the behavior of individuals from the same country assume that the average values are broadly representative, an assumption that Tung and Verbeke (2010) have critiqued.”