Managerial agency, risk, and strategic posture: Nonmarket strategies in the transitional core and periphery

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract (may include machine translation)

    Why do nonmarket strategies of businesses in peripheral economies of Eastern Europe and Central Asian (EECA) differ from those in post-socialist member states of the European Union? This paper suggests an explanation, by offering three advances in our theoretical understanding of the problem. First, we develop a focus on managerial agency in a nonmarket strategic process. Second, we disentangle two distinct features of nonmarket strategies: the firm's strategic posture vis-á-vis the external environment and the level of nonmarket risk associated with a particular strategy. Third, we draw upon a broader array of business actors, paying attention to both multinational and local firms. The resulting enriched framework is applied in an exploratory study of the differences in nonmarket strategies between peripheral and core EECA economies. Using original qualitative data, we develop theoretical propositions linking heterogeneity of nonmarket strategies to the levels of political-economic institutionalization of various EECA markets.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)984-996
    Number of pages13
    JournalInternational Business Review
    Volume24
    Issue number6
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Dec 2015

    Keywords

    • Central Asia
    • Eastern Europe
    • Emerging economies
    • Managerial agency
    • Nonmarket risk
    • Nonmarket strategy
    • Strategic posture
    • Transitional economies

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Managerial agency, risk, and strategic posture: Nonmarket strategies in the transitional core and periphery'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this