Open for business in a closed world? Managing MNE nonmarket strategy in times of populism and geopolitical uncertainty
本文探讨民粹主义和地缘政治不确定性如何威胁自由贸易的全球经济，并分析跨国公司如何通过非市场战略（如增强韧性、多元化、市场与非市场战略整合、制度套利）来应对这些挑战，对研究国际商务和非市场战略的学者有参考价值。
Purpose The international strategies of multinational enterprises are increasingly augmented by insights on, and approaches to, external stakeholders and nonmarket dynamics. The rise of populism and increased geopolitical uncertainty have accelerated these efforts, particularly for business leaders anticipating and engaging external agents, events, and issues that challenge the strategic objectives of their enterprises. Design/methodology/approach In this paper we explain why the increased preponderance of populism and geopolitical uncertainty are concurrently posing an existential threat to the post-Cold War global economy predicated on free trade and (relatively) open borders and, consequently, challenging the structures and strategies of international business. Findings We provide an overview of the four papers in our special issue and consider how each advances insights on how multinational enterprises effectively navigate the nonmarket uncertainties of the contemporary global economy. We then advance four important areas for international business research on multinational nonmarket strategies: (i) resilience and legitimacy; (ii), diversification; (iii), market and nonmarket strategy integration; and (iv), institutional arbitrage. Research limitations/implications We anticipate that nonmarket strategy scholars can build on these themes to assess how nonmarket strategies can better enable multinational enterprises to survive and thrive in an age of heightened global risk and uncertainty. Originality/value This paper and the related special issue provides novel theoretical insights by drawing attention to the relatively under-researched realm of multinational enterprise nonmarket strategy, particularly in populist contexts and during periods of geopolitical uncertainty. Importantly, we identify four promising domains – resilience and legitimacy, diversification, the integration of market and nonmarket strategy, and institutional arbitrage – for international business scholars investigating nonmarket strategy to consider. We anticipate that our paper, as well as other papers in this special issue, contribute further momentum to this burgeoning area of research.