Developing successful trust-based international exchange relationships

373 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

A Process-Based Explanation of the Psychic Distance Paradox: Evidence from Global Virtual Teams (2014, background): “…transfer performance within multinational companies (Pedersen et al. 2003), the development of trust and performance in international exchange relationships (Katsikeas et al. 2009), and an increased uncertainty related to subsidiary performance judgments by headquarters (Grewal et al. 2008).”
At What Level (and in Whom) We Trust (2012, background): “, 2008), the interorganizational relationship is young, the external market is stable, risk is shared equally among parties (Luo, 2008), parties have high interdependence (Katsikeas et al., 2009), and parties engage in few, if any, opportunistic behaviors (Jap & Anderson, 2003).”
The PD scale: a measure of psychic distance and its impact on international marketing strategy (2011, neutral): “Similarly to recent research on psychic distance (e.g. Bello et al., 2003; Katsikeas et al., 2009), we also use reflective indicators and assume that a modification in the latent variable will change the items.”
Relationship Capabilities, Quality, and Innovation as Determinants of Export Performance (2009, background): “Although a range of theoretical perspectives has been used, including most recently the real-options perspective (Lee et al. 2009), the three theoretical paradigms used most often are the structure–conduct–performance framework from industrial organization (e.”