On the basis of a rich panel data set of large- and medium-sized Chinese manufacturing enterprises, we observe that different types of firms (i.e., state-owned enterprises [SOEs], foreign-funded ownership [FFO] of firms, Hong Kong-Macau-Taiwanese [HMT] companies and privately-owned firms) exploit different stages of the innovation – productivity chain depending on the extent of market concentration. By applying a modified CDM model, this study reveals that SOEs tend to be more active in making innovative decisions and pursuing innovative investments but are less efficient in terms of innovation output and labour productivity, whereas FFO firms have relatively high labour productivity but are less active in the first three stages of the innovation – productivity chain. Market competition favours SOEs in the production of additional innovation products. Foreign firms are efficient in labour productivity if they are operating in a concentrated market. By using the metaphor of DNA, this study explains the heterogeneity among these different forms of ownership and generates several managerial implications.

Drawing on the job-demand resource theory, the article examines the relative importance and the complementarity of three widely practiced leadership styles – transformational, paternalistic, and authoritarian. It investigates how the three styles relate to followers’ work engagement amongst employees in Russian domestic organizations. It also theorizes and tests the mediating effects of three psychological mechanisms, namely self-efficacy, self-esteem, and job control, on the examined relationships. The findings show that all three leadership styles relate to followers’ work engagement positively. The relationship of transformational leadership is dominant and mediated by all three psychological mechanisms. The remaining two styles also make their unique contributions to followers’ work engagement. Whereas authoritarian leadership influences followers by enhancing their self-efficacy and self-esteem, paternalistic leadership operates more extrinsically by increasing followers’ job control. Surprisingly, our analyses found that the role of control variables such as gender, age, and hierarchical position were insignificant in predicting how the three leadership styles influence employee work engagement. The study is among the first to shed light on the relative importance of the three focal leadership styles, their differential influences and interrelations, and the different mechanisms through which they relate to followers’ work engagement.

Extant literature focuses on within-dyad opportunism (i.e., transgression of the norms of a specific business relationship) while neglecting pro-relational opportunism (i.e., transgression of societal norms to benefit the relationship), resulting in limited understanding of their different effects. We argue that opportunism is a significant threat to the identity of business partners and boundary spanners which results in different relational dynamics at different levels, that is, Type-I (i.e., interorganizational identification squeezing out interpersonal identification) and Type-II identification asymmetry (i.e., interpersonal identification dominating interorganizational identification). Identification asymmetry further mediates the effects of opportunism on exchange performance. Based on a matched manufacturer–supplier sample, we find strong support to the hypotheses. Moreover, distributive fairness aggravates the effect of pro-relational opportunism on identification asymmetry, while interactive fairness mitigates it. Our research provides more nuanced between-level findings on identification in interorganizational settings, and cautions against firms’ tendency toward Machiavellian reasoning when they face the temptation of complicit behavior for organizational gains.

We study firm level antecedents that drive different motives of internationalization of emerging economy firms. Based on firm's resource based considerations of asset exploitation versus asset augmentation and locational advantages of host countries, we provide a framework to classify the motives of internationalization of emerging economy firms belonging to knowledge intensive industries. Motives of internationalization have been classified into three broad categories – market-seeking, opportunity-seeking, and strategic asset-seeking. We determine motives behind different modes of internationalization – alliances, acquisitions, and greenfield ventures. Drawing upon the adaptability, amalgamation, and ambidexterity (AAA) advantages from the springboard perspective, we find that firm characteristics like R&D investments, availability of financial slack, firm's ownership structure, and family control shape up its motive of internationalization.

Universities in China have increased their entrepreneurship significantly, yet a good understanding of the specific characteristics of university-based technology transfers remains missing. This study focuses on a special type of university spinoffs in China, University-Run Enterprises (UREs), and examines how URE eminence contributes to a university's technology transfer performance, using panel data covering 195 universities over the five years from 2002 to 2006. The findings reveal that URE eminence not only signifies a university's strong entrepreneurial culture, but also signals commercial values and quality of the university research. It moderates the contribution of university scientists from the supply side and that of sourcing firms from the demand side.

The uncertainty and information asymmetry that surround initial public offering firms (IPOs) often introduce difficulties for potential investors to discern organizational value, thereby leading to ‘underpricing’. Using the signaling theory, we investigate the role of organizational reputation in the underpricing of IPOs. We analyze 463 initial public offerings in China from the period of 2010 to 2016 and find that being known for quality and generalized favorability dimensions of reputation are negatively related with underpricing on the first day of trading. In addition, we find that the negative effects of organizational reputation on underpricing are mediated by investor attention.