Journal of International Business Studies

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 18–27 | Cite as

Distance without direction: Restoring credibility to a much-loved construct

  • Srilata Zaheer
  • Margaret Spring Schomaker
  • Lilach Nachum
Commentary
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

In this commentary we build on Shenkar's (2001) award-winning critique of cultural distance, arguing that most distance constructs, in fact, suffer the same flaws because they oversimplify the relationship between countries, overlook their subjective and context-specific nature, and pay insufficient attention to the mechanisms through which distance operates. The idea of distance, however, has intrinsic value. Moreover, its considerable appeal and undeniable effectiveness have made it a well-entrenched construct. Therefore we see merit in redressing its weaknesses, and offer several suggestions for doing so. These include allowing for the influence of firm-level characteristics that either moderate the effects of distance or render distance – at least in part – subjective with varying consequences for different MNEs; maintaining directionality by distinguishing between distance and the tendency toward a particular characteristic and acknowledging asymmetry; and conceptualizing the effects of distance and the mechanisms through which it operates more carefully by drawing on concepts and measures from a variety of disciplines. By offering ways to strengthen both its theoretical foundations and measurement, we hope to enhance the usefulness of one of international business theory's most central constructs.

Keywords

cultural distance distance mechanisms symmetry 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

References

  1. Bastien, D. T. 2000. Communication and organizational patterns of mergers and acquisitions, Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  2. Baysinger, B. D., & Butler, H. N. 1985. Corporate governance and the board of directors: Performance effects of changes in board composition. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 1 (1): 101–124.Google Scholar
  3. Bergstrand, J. H. 1985. The gravity equation in international trade: Some microeconomic foundations and empirical evidence. Review of Economics and Statistics, 67 (3): 474–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beugelsdijk, S., McCann, P., & Mudambi, R. 2010. Place, space and organization: Economic geography and the multinational enterprise. Journal of Economic Geography, 10 (4): 485–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bresman, H., Birkinshaw, J., & Nobel, R. 1999. Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 30 (3): 439–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cannella, A., Park, J., & Lee, H. 2008. Top management team functional background diversity and firm performance: Examining the roles of team member colocation and environmental uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 51 (4): 768–784.Google Scholar
  7. Cantwell, J. 2009. Location and the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 40 (1): 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chiswick, B. R., & Miller, P. W. 2005. Linguistic distance: A quantitative measure of the distance between English and other languages. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 26 (1): 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crystal, D. 2003. English as a global language (2nd edn). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dastidar, P., & Zaheer, S. 2010. Dealing with information asymmetry in cross-border acquisitions: Distance matters, Best Paper Proceedings, Academy of Management Annual Meeting, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  11. Dunning, J. H. 1998. Location and the multinational enterprise: A neglected factor? Journal of International Business Studies, 29 (1): 45–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ellis, R. 1994. The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Fabrikant, S. I., & Buttenfield, B. P. 2001. Formalizing semantic spaces for information access. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 91 (2): 263–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ghemawat, P. 2001. Distance still matters: The hard reality of global expansion. Harvard Business Review, 79 (8): 137–147.Google Scholar
  15. Ghemawat, P. 2003. The forgotten strategy. Harvard Business Review, 81 (11): 76–87.Google Scholar
  16. Ghemawat, P. 2007. Redefining global strategy: Crossing borders in a world where differences still matter. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  17. Håkanson, L., & Ambos, B. 2010. The antecedents of psychic distance. Journal of International Management, 16 (3): 195–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hart-Gonzales, L., & Lindemann, S. 1993. Expected achievement in speaking proficiency. Washington, DC: Foreign Services Institute, US Department of State.Google Scholar
  19. Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  20. Hofstede, G. 2001. Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Hofstede, G. 2006. What did GLOBE really measure? Researchers’ minds versus respondents’ minds. Journal of International Business Studies, 37 (6): 882–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. 2004. Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Hutzschenreuter, T., & Voll, J. C. 2008. Performance effects of “added cultural distance” in the path of international expansion: The case of German multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (1): 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Javidan, M., House, R. J., Dorfman, P. W., Hanges, P. J., & de Luque, M. S. 2006. Conceptualizing and measuring cultures and their consequences: A comparative review of GLOBE's and Hofstede's approaches. Journal of International Business Studies, 37 (6): 897–914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. -E. 1979. The internationalization process of the firm: A model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8 (1): 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kanagaretnam, K., Lim, C. Y., & Lobo, G. J. 2011. Effects of national culture on earnings quality of banks. Journal of International Business Studies, 42 (6): 853–874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kogut, B., & Singh, H. 1988. The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19 (3): 411–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maznevski, M. L., & Chudoba, K. M. 2000. Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science, 11 (5): 473–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mudambi, R. 2008. Location, control and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries. Journal of Economic Geography, 8 (5): 699–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nachum, L., & Song, S. 2011. The MNE as a portfolio: Interdependencies in MNE growth strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 42 (3): 381–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nachum, L., Zaheer, S., & Gross, S. 2008. Does it matter where countries are? Proximity to knowledge, markets and resources, and MNE location choices. Management Science, 54 (7): 1252–1265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Piscitello, L. 2011. Strategy, location, and the conceptual metamorphosis of the MNE. Global Strategy Journal, 1 (1–2): 127–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schein, E. H. 1985. Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  34. Schomaker, M. S. 2006. Communication and organizational patterns of mergers and acquisitions, Unpublished Doctoral thesis, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  35. Shenkar, O. 2001. Cultural distance revisited: Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences. Journal of International Business Studies, 32 (3): 519–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shenkar, O. 2012. Beyond “cultural distance”: Switching to a friction lens in the study of cultural differences. Journal of International Business Studies, 43 (1): 12–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shenkar, O., Luo, Y., & Yeheskel, O. 2008. From “distance” to “friction”: Substituting metaphors and redirecting intercultural research. Academy of Management Review, 33 (4): 905–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stahl, G. K., Maznevski, M. L., Voigt, A., & Jonsen, K. 2010. Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups. Journal of International Business Studies, 41 (4): 690–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Szulanski, G. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (Winter Special Issue): 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tobler, W. R. 1970. A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region. Economic Geography, 46 (2): 234–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Von Glinow, M. A., Shapiro, D. L., & Brett, J. M. 2004. Can we talk, and should we? Managing emotional conflict in multicultural teams. Academy of Management Review, 29 (4): 578–592.Google Scholar
  42. Weber, Y., & Shenkar, O. 1996. National and corporate cultural fit in mergers/acquisitions: An exploratory study. Management Science, 42 (8): 1215–1227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zaheer, A., & Hernandez, Z. 2011. The geographic scope of the MNC and its alliance portfolio: Resolving the paradox of distance. Global Strategy Journal, 1 (1–2): 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zaheer, S., & Nachum, L. 2011. Sense of place: From location resources to MNE locational capital. Global Strategy Journal, 1 (1–2): 96–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zaheer, S., & Zaheer, A. 2006. Trust across borders. Journal of International Business Studies, 37 (1): 21–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of International Business 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Srilata Zaheer
    • 1
  • Margaret Spring Schomaker
    • 2
  • Lilach Nachum
    • 3
  1. 1.University of Minnesota, Carlson School of ManagementMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.Université LavalQuébecCanada
  3. 3.Baruch College, City University New YorkNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations