Sunil Venaik
University of Queensland
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Sunil Venaik.
Management International Review | 2004
Sunil Venaik; David F. Midgley; Timothy M. Devinney
The Integration-Responsiveness framework of Prahalad and Doz (1987) has been used extensively in the international business literature to typify the diverse and often-conflicting environmental pressures confronting firms as they expand worldwide. Although the IR framework has been successfully applied for over a decade, many theoretical and empirical studies have focused on the consequences of these pressures rather than the pressures themselves. Prahalad and Doz identified the economic, technological, political, customer and competitive factors that create the global integration and local responsiveness pressures on the diverse businesses and functions in MNEs. This article explains the methodology, including the procedure for data collection and analysis. The researchers conclude with a discussion of their findings and directions for future research, speculating as to the appropriate definition of the domain of IR pressures and the criteria they might use to validate measures of these.
International Marketing Review | 2012
Paul Brewer; Sunil Venaik
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to highlight the ongoing misapplication of the Hofstede and GLOBE national culture dimensions at the individual level of analysis in both research and teaching. It provides suggestions as to how these national level constructs might be used in analysis and the challenges such use presents to researchers.Design/methodology/approach – The methodology used by Hofstede and GLOBE in their calculation of national culture dimensions is discussed together with the implications.Findings – The consequences of the national nature of the Hofstede and GLOBE national culture dimensions are that the dimensions do not exist at the individual level. The paper explains why, in spite of this, the dimensions continue to be misapplied to individuals.Practical implications – There are important implications for practitioners. The cultural assumptions often made about individuals in different countries based on the Hofstede and GLOBE dimension scores are invalid. Practitioners should not u...
International Marketing Review | 2013
Sunil Venaik; Paul Brewer
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to clarify critical issues underlying the national culture dimensions of Hofstede and GLOBE, demonstrating their irrelevance to international marketing decision‐making.Design/methodology/approach – In‐depth discussion of the theoretical and empirical logic underlying the national culture dimension scales and scores.Findings – Hofstede and GLOBE national culture scores are averages of items that are unrelated and which do not form a valid and reliable scale for the culture dimensions at the level of individuals or organizations. Hence these scores cannot be used to characterize individuals or sub‐groups within countries. The national culture dimension scores are therefore of doubtful use for marketing management that is concerned with individual‐and segment‐level consumer behavior.Research limitations/implications – Researchers should be cautious in using the Hofstede and GLOBE national culture dimension scores for analysis at the level of individuals and organization...
Organization Studies | 2014
Paul Brewer; Sunil Venaik
This article challenges the understanding and use of the Hofstede and GLOBE national culture models in much extant culture-related theory development. Both the Hofstede and GLOBE culture dimensions are derived from individual-level survey data aggregated to, and analysed at, the national level. But their culture scales that are correlated at the national (ecological) level are not correlated in the same manner at the individual or organizational level. To presume they are is a form of ‘ecological fallacy’ that, despite warnings, has often been overlooked by culture researchers. We analyse five research articles in top journals in organizational behaviour, general management, international business, marketing and accounting and show how the articles commit an ecological fallacy by projecting national-level culture characteristics onto individuals or organizations. The implications of this ecological fallacy include the development of invalid culture-related theory and the persistence of erroneous practitioner stereotyping. We provide the first comprehensive explanation of the origins, effects and implications of the ecological fallacy in national culture research and practice. A way forward for culture-related research is also suggested.
Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal | 2013
Sunil Venaik; Yunxia Zhu; Paul Brewer
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to critically examine, theoretically and empirically, the two time orientation dimensions – long‐term orientation (LTO) and future orientation (FO) – in the national culture models of Hofstede and GLOBE, respectively.Design/methodology/approach – Following Kluckhohn and Strodtbecks past‐present‐future theoretical lens, the Hofstede LTO and GLOBE FO measures are analysed to understand the conceptual domain covered by these two dimensions. Next, the authors empirically examine the relationship of Hofstede LTO and GLOBE FO with secondary data from Hofstede, GLOBE, and the World Values Survey.Findings – This paper shows that Hofstede LTO and GLOBE FO dimensions capture different aspects of time orientation of societies. In particular, Hofstede LTO focuses on past (tradition) versus future (thrift) aspect of societies, GLOBE FO practices capture the present versus future (planning) practices of societies, and GLOBE FO values reflect societal aspirations and preferences f...
Management Learning | 2016
Sunil Venaik; Paul Brewer
The Hofstede and GLOBE national culture dimensions are commonly used by business and management educators, researchers and practitioners to understand cultural differences between countries. However, there are fundamental problems in using these dimensions to learn about cross-cultural differences. First, there is a lack of face validity in many of the items used to determine the culture scores. Second, national culture scores for similar dimensions across the two models for common countries are either unrelated or negatively related, and for dissimilar dimensions are often more strongly related than for the similar dimensions. A lack of face, convergent and discriminant validity seriously undermines the credibility of the dimension scores in representing the culture phenomena that they claim to represent. Hence, using these scores to infer the broader characteristics of societies, individuals and organizations is invalid and the managerial prescriptions based on such research are misleading. As cross-cultural learning in management is largely shaped by national culture models, the blind faith in these models is perpetuating cultural ignorance.
Archive | 2004
Sunil Venaik; David F. Midgley; Timothy M. Devinney
Both directly and indirectly, the process of globalization is a dramatic determinant of the strategic posture, organizational structure, processes and performance of firms, both multinational and domestic. World Trade Organization (WTO) liberalization, the pervasiveness of communications technology and the advent of regional trading blocs are just a few of the reasons why the global imperative has become relevant for an increasing number of firms whose integration into the global economy requires expanded subsidiary operations and a deeper under-standing of the complexities of managing a global organization.
Asian business review | 2016
Sunil Venaik; Emily M. Nason; Joyce Linghua Wang; Kannika Leelapanyalert; Bryan Hong
Main purpose of this article is to make a dynamic interaction between Award winning scholars and audience (or readers), particularly those who would like to focus on case writing on Asian consumers and businesses for journals like Harvard Business Review (HBR) and Academy of Asian Business (AABR) or competitions like WACC (World Asian Case Competition). The authors provided important guidelines to write a powerful case study. First, several key decisions before writing a case are presented with some issues in case pedagogy, writing and analysis. Then discussed are three key elements such as themes, protagonists, and challenges in case study. Some tips for writing a powerful case study are also provided. The importance of highlighting turning points and “Asian ways” also presented. Several important emerging issues and tips are presented to help readers write an influential case study for their research and career.
Journal of Business Research | 2008
Tim Coltman; Timothy M. Devinney; David F. Midgley; Sunil Venaik
Journal of International Business Studies | 2005
Sunil Venaik; David F. Midgley; Timothy M. Devinney