Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of International Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/intman

Journal of International Management: A 25-year review using

bibliometric analysis
Satish Kumar a, b, d, *, Meena Chavan c, Nitesh Pandey a
a
Department of Management Studies, Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
b
Faculty of Business, Design and Arts, Swinburne University of Technology, Sarawak, Malaysia
c
Macquarie Business School, Macquarie University, Australia
d
Adnan Kassar School of Business, Lebanese American University Beirut, Lebanon

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The Journal of International Management (JIM) is a leading international academic journal in the
Journal of International Management field of international business. This study presents a retrospect of the publications in JIM for the
25-year retrospective last 25 years (as JIM was founded in 1995) through a bibliometric methodology using the Scopus
Bibliometric methodology
database and Web of Science. The study graphically maps the bibliographic material using VOS
Theme — past, present and future
viewer software and applies co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and co-occurrence of
Future research agenda
author keywords. We identify that the journal has expanded consistently and steadily in terms of
both number of publications and citations. The collaboration network has expanded over the
years, and the geographical focus is more global, encompassing Asia and Oceania. Bibliographic
coupling of JIM publications reveals several distinct, major themes in the international man­
agement/business domain. Conventional international management themes that have emerged
include market entry modes, globalization, international human resource management, cross-
cultural management/leadership, and expatriate management. New emerging themes include
emerging markets, global sourcing, innovation performance, digital firms, diversity of global
teams, internationalization in uncertain environments, and virtual teams. A summary of the
shifting research trends and themes in the discipline and their development is presented in this
review, culminating in future directions for prospective publishers of JIM.

1. Introduction

The Journal of International Management (JIM) was founded in 1995 is one of the leading journals in the field of international
business research. The journal is devoted to advancing an understanding of issues in the management of global enterprises, global
management theory, and practice, as well as providing theoretical and managerial implications useful for the further development of
research in international management. For more than 25 years (as JIM was founded in 1995), JIM has been a leading quality source for
research in the field of international business and international management, as portrayed through a range of citations-based and peer
review–based measures.
According to Scopus, the journal has a Cite Score of 7.0,1 indicating that articles published between 2018 and 2021 have received

* Corresponding author at: Department of Management Studies, Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur, India.
E-mail addresses: skumar.dms@mnit.ac.in (S. Kumar), meena.chavan@mq.edu.au (M. Chavan), 2018RBM9016@mnit.ac.in (N. Pandey).
1
The data regarding the journal’s CiteScore and source normalized impact per paper can be found at https://www.scopus.com/sourceid/20633.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2022.100988
Received 17 February 2022; Received in revised form 1 September 2022; Accepted 15 September 2022
Available online 25 September 2022
1075-4253/© 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

an average of 7.0 citations. Further, JIM has a source normalized impact per paper of 1.722, indicating that its articles have received,
on average, 1.722 times more citations than the citation potential of its subject areas. The social science citation index impact for JIM
was 5.526 in 2021,2 indicating that articles published in 2019 and 2020 received an average of 5.526 citations in 2021 alone, and its
five-year impact factor is 6.459, meaning that articles published between 2017 and 2021 have received an average of 6.459 citations.
Peer review–based rankings also rank JIM highly, with the Australian Business Deans Council3 ranking the journal “A” and the
Chartered Association of Business Schools rating the journal “3” in its Academic Journal Guide.4
In this study, we present a retrospect of JIM using bibliometric methodology and systematic approach (Donthu et al., 2021a; Kraus
et al., 2022) to analyze the content of this large body of work (Ramos-Rodrígue and Ruíz-Navarro, 2004). This methodology is widely
accepted in academic circles; many past studies have used it to present the retrospect of journals, including the Journal of International
Marketing (Donthu et al., 2021b), Management International review (Mukherjee et al., 2021), Journal of International Business Studies
(García-Lillo et al., 2019), International Business Review (Rialp et al., 2019), and International Marketing Review (Donthu et al., 2021c).
To present a comprehensive review of this journal, we ask several research questions (RQs).
First, we explore the development of the journal’s productivity and impact, along with its collaboration patterns. This can be
helpful for the editorial board, and also help readers appreciate the journal’s growth over time. To fulfill this objective, we ask the
following question:
RQ1. What are the publication and citation patterns and trends in JIM over 25 years?
Second, we investigate the methodological choices of JIM authors due to the significance of the knowledge and practice of
dominant methodologies for a scholar’s success in academia (Hanson and Grimmer, 2007). Such trends can be helpful in uncovering
‘how’ the research has been conducted by authors contributing to JIM, and they can help identify potential blind spots for the research
published in the journal, which paves the way for the future. To fulfill this objective, we ask the following questions:
RQ2. What do the collaboration patterns look like within JIM?
RQ3. What have been the geographical focus methodological choices for JIM authors?
Third, we explore the major themes discussed by JIM authors, and discuss and debate the development and growth trends of
publications in JIM. We suggest a future research agenda that will be particularly valuable for new scholars in the field of international
business research. The large amount of literature present in the journal requires the use of bibliometric analysis, which, because of its
quantitative nature, can handle large quantities of data. Further, the industrial and thematic focus of the journal can be classified
quantitatively. Thus, we use bibliometric analysis to summarize the research and answer the following research questions:
RQ4. What are the major themes explored by JIM authors over time?
RQ5. What major theories have been applied by JIM authors?
RQ6. What types of firms are explored by JIM authors?
The remainder of the study is organized as follows. Section 2 provides an overview of the bibliometric method used in this study.
Section 3 examines the publications, citations, and collaboration patterns. Section 4 analyzes the methodological choices of JIM au­
thors, theories, and firm types. Section 5 examines the major themes explored by JIM authors, along with their development and
potential future directions. Finally, Section 6 concludes the study.

2. Bibliometric method

Bibliometric analysis is defined as the application of quantitative techniques on bibliographic data (Donthu et al., 2021a;
Mukherjee et al., 2022a). One major advantage of this methodology is its ability to handle large bibliographic data (Ramos-Rodrígue
and Ruíz-Navarro, 2004). This method of analysis has gained popularity with the development of large bibliographic databases
(Donthu et al., 2021a). The methodology has been used to explore various fields, including marketing (Calma et al., 2019; Kumar et al.,
2019; Mulet-Forteza et al., 2018), finance and accounting (Merigó and Yang, 2017; Zhang et al., 2019; Goodell et al., 2021, 2022;
Sureka et al., 2021), entrepreneurship (Aparicio et al., 2019; Vallaster et al., 2019), and international business (Mukherjee et al., 2021,
2022b; Rialp et al., 2019). We base our bibliometric study’s contributions drawing from the work of Mukherjee et al. (2022b) who
offered specific guidelines in this regard.
To address the first and second RQs, we analyzed the publication and citation patterns, as well as the collaboration patterns, of JIM.
For the former, we conducted analysis of publications and citations per year for the journal. For the latter, we prepared a country-level
collaboration network for JIM and presented their period wise analysis.
To answer the third research question, we classified each paper according to its geographical focus (single- or multi-country) and
methodology employed. Two of the authors independently read the full articles and coded and classified the research methods

2
The data regarding the journal’s impact factor and five-year impact factor can be found at https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-
international-management/.
3
The ABDC rankings can be found at https://abdc.edu.au/research/abdc-journal-quality-list/.
4
AJG ratings can be found at https://charteredabs.org/academic-journal-guide-2021-view/.

2
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

(empirical, conceptual, literature review, modelling, and analytical),5 research design (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed), type of
analysis (cross-section or longitudinal), and data collection (case study, interview, archival, survey, or experiment). These were
summarized to present a period wise table. The data are presented in the appendices.
We used bibliographic coupling to identify the major themes in the JIM corpus. In bibliographic coupling, it is assumed that the
similarity between two publications is dependent upon the number of shared literature references (Kessler, 1963), with a greater
number of common references indicating greater similarity (Wallin, 2005). Using shared literature references as a measure of simi­
larity, the documents were divided into clusters using a variation of algorithms by Newman (2004) and Newman and Girvan (2004).
Each major cluster represented a major theme in the journal.
The search was conducted using the source (journal) search by the title “Journal of International Management” on Scopus. Scopus is
used in past studies using similar approach (Varma et al., 2022; Bamel et al., 2022). The initial search resulted in 615 documents
published between 1998 and 2020.6 After further cleaning the data by removing duplicates, notes and other erroneous entries, 589
documents remained and were used for further analysis. The data were then used as input for VOSviewer (van Eck and Waltman, 2010)
for bibliometric analysis, while Gephi (Bastian et al., 2009) was used for network visualization.

3. Publication, citation, and collaboration patterns

Table 1 presents a summary of the most prominent theoretical perspectives and the share of different industries. As shown, diverse
standard international management and international business theories have been applied by authors publishing in JIM globally,
including the upper echelons theory, resource-based theory, Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, social identity theory, and the CAGE
framework.
Unfortunately, little theory building has been undertaken in international management; therefore, there is a need for authors
submitting to JIM to develop links with adjacent disciplines such as strategy, entrepreneurship, psychology, and marketing.
The reason for this lack of theory building is the lower number of qualitative research studies in international management
compared with quantitative studies. Qualitative research provides rich data and a strong foundation on which to build theory. Thus,
many scholars state that, for theory development, qualitative research must precede quantitative research (Cassell and Symon, 2006;
Eisenhardt, 1989; Miles and Huberman, 1994; Strauss and Corbin, 1990).
The analysis in Table 3 shows the diverse methodologies used in research in JIM, where quantitative research is 50.42 % and
qualitative research is less than half of that at 21.22 %. Dennis and Garfield (2003) state that “quantitative research is theory in search
of data while qualitative research is data in search of theory.”
There is a close relationship between the methodology used in international management research and the development of new
theories in international management. Thus, in addition to increasing qualitative, case study, and mixed method studies to develop a
new theory, we recommend adopting and applying theories from other disciplines, as supported by Aguinis and Gabriel (2021).
International management was established as an academic field under the broader umbrella of international business with the aim
of developing a theoretical understanding of doing business in an international context (Shenkar, 2004). Aguinis and Gabriel (2021)
argue that international business management research is similar to organizational behavior, strategic management studies, and
entrepreneurship research, and that there are benefits to importing and exporting theories and methods from these disciplines and lead
theoretical progress that will benefit IB research and practice, and will have a positive impact on organizations and society. In their
research, they explain the similarity between international business and the disciplines of organizational behavior, strategic man­
agement, and entrepreneurship based on the complexity dimensions of multiplicity, multiplexity, and dynamism. They recommend
many theories from these disciplines that can be applied to the international management discipline.
Theories that future authors should consider when submitting their research to JIM include the exploration and exploitation theory,
and theories on diversification strategies, organizational capabilities, competition, networks, business ecosystems, gender, social class,
income, and occupation disparity in various contexts and countries.
Organizational, cognitive, and social–psychological theories on motivation, decision-making, self-efficacy (Vroom, 1964), and goal
setting theory (Locke and Latham, 2020) can also be applied within international management research, where there is a large number
and variety of relationships and interdependencies among entities.
Geographical diversification strategies (Kor and Leblebici, 2005), dimensions of environmental dynamism (Kim and Rhee, 2009)
and their effects on the evolution of organizational knowledge and the literature on entrepreneurial orientation (EO) (Lumpkin and
Dess, 1996) can also be applied in international management, because the discipline of entrepreneurship is interdisciplinary. It ex­
plores entrepreneurial cognition and entrepreneurs’ individual attributes and cognitive processes that lead them to identify oppor­
tunities similar to the dynamic environment in international management (Aguinis and Gabriel, 2021).
The majority of the publications focus on service firms, while a few relate to manufacturing and other types.
Fig. 1 presents the pattern of publications and citations of JIM between 1998 and 2020. As shown, the journal has grown in terms of
both measures. The number of publications of the journal has increased from just 17 in 1998 to 47 per year in 2020. Similarly, citations

5
The data collection techniques are defined as literature review (if the article was a review of the discipline, research topic(s), or methodology),
empirical (if it contained any form of “real” data), modelling and analytical (if the article was based only on mathematical derivations and/or
simulated/created datasets), conceptual (if the article did not include any data and was primarily based on logic and discussion of theoretical
frameworks), and mixed (if the article had any combination of these methods).
6
Coverage of the journal in Scopus began in 1998. The search covered full years between 1998 and 2020.

3
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

Table 1
Research focus of JIM in terms of industry and theoretical perspectives.
1998–2003 2004–2009 2010–2015 2016–2020 1998–2020

Panel A: Share of industries

Service 13.89 % 17.39 % 9.49 % 8.02 % 12.05 %
Manufacturing 17.59 % 21.12 % 15.19 % 18.52 % 18.17 %
Both 10.19 % 9.94 % 6.96 % 8.64 % 8.83 %
Other 58.33 % 29.81 % 45.57 % 46.30 % 43.80 %
Not mentioned 0.00 % 21.74 % 22.78 % 18.52 % 17.15 %

Panel E: Most prominent theoretical perspectives in each period

Transaction cost
Institutional theory Resource-based view Institutional theory Institutional theory
theory
Globalization theory Resource-based view Institutional theory Resource-based view Resource-based view
Foreign direct Transaction cost Organizational learning Transaction cost Transaction cost
Most prominent theoretical
investment economics theory economics economics
perspectives
Hofstede’s cultural Social identity
Institutional theory Transaction cost theory Agency theory
dimensions theory
Transaction cost Organizational learning
Agency theory Eclectic paradigm Agency theory
economics theory

Note: The summary of industry shares and theoretical perspectives is based on explicit mentions in the papers.

have increased from two in 1998 to 2521 in 2020. The growth across both measures indicates that the journal has grown consistently in
terms of productivity (as indicated by publications) and impact (as indicated by citations).
Fig. 2 presents the analysis of the collaboration network of JIM across four periods, and Fig. 3 shows the consolidated collaboration
network for the entire period. Fig. 2 shows that the United States (US) has been at the center of collaboration networks across all
periods. Another striking feature is the relationship between the US and Canada. Throughout the periods, both nations have shared a
strong collaboration relationship (as suggested by the thickness of the link between the two), indicating strong working relationships
among scholars from both nations. The networks also show that the US, United Kingdom, Canada and Germany have remained
prominent across all periods, with the prominence of China and other emerging economies growing in recent years. There has also
been growth in the network, indicating that the journal has seen more collaborative efforts at the country level.

4. Analysis of geographical focus and methodologies employed

Table 2 presents a summary of the research focus of studies published in JIM over the last 25 years. As shown, most of the research
published in JIM has focused on single-countries, with multi-country studies not far behind. Both types of studies have seen an increase
in different periods. Panel B of the table shows a breakdown of the share of different countries in single-country studies. In terms of
focus, no country has dominated the research. Recently, the share of publications set in China and India has been rising, whereas
research set in the US has declined over time. Overall, there is diversity in terms of the geographical focus of research, with the US, East

50 3000
45
2500
40
35
2000
30
25 1500
20
1000
15
10
500
5
0 0
2013
2014
2015
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012

2016
2017
2018
2019
2020

Total Publication Total Citation

Fig. 1. Publication and citation patterns for JIM

This figure presents the publication and citation patters in JIM between 1998 and 2020.

4
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

1998–2003 2004–2009

2010–2015 2016–2020

Fig. 2. Period wise country-level collaboration network

This figure illustrates the collaboration network in each of the four sub-periods.

Asia and South Asia receiving much attention. The list also includes countries from Africa, Europe and Latin America, which dem­
onstrates that the research published in JIM is truly international in nature.
Table 3 presents a summary of the methodologies used in JIM studies. It can be observed that the most preferred method is the
empirical research method at 65.87 %, with quantitative being the most favored research design at 50.42 %. The share of conceptual
studies and systematic literature reviews has declined over time from 34.26 % and 9.26 % to 9.26 % and 7.41 % respectively. In
addition, most studies published in the journal are cross-sectional, and studies using longitudinal/panel data also have a substantial
share. Data sources are diverse, with archival, survey, case studies, and interviews all having a share of more than 10 %. It should be
noted that many studies use more than one data collection method. Most research published in the journal is empirical in nature and
uses a quantitative research design using a cross-sectional dataset, with data sourced from archival sources.

5. Major themes in the Journal of International Management

We used bibliographic coupling to find the major themes in the JIM corpus. The application of bibliographic coupling to the JIM
corpus led to the creation of 12 clusters. However, only six clusters had more than two publications. These major clusters covered 582
of the 589 publications. These clusters were analyzed along with their publication patterns (Fig. 4). It was found that the first three of
the six major clusters were rising clusters, while the other three were declining. While analysis of all clusters is required to obtain an
understanding of the journal, only the first three pave the way to the future. Therefore, future directions were presented only for the
first three clusters. Some of the conventional international management themes that emerged were market entry modes, interna­
tionalization in emerging economies, export management, globalization, international HRM, small business internationalization,
global offshoring and outsourcing, cross-cultural management/leadership, cultural assimilation, expatriate management, knowledge

5
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

Fig. 3. Country-level collaboration network for all years

This figure illustrates the country-level collaboration network for JIM between 1998 and 2020.

management and innovation, internationalization pathways, and institutional factors relating to international business. The new
emerging themes were identified as global sourcing, innovation performance, social responsibility in multinational corporations
(MNCs), knowledge management, internationalization of digital firms, platforms, websites, diversity of global teams, international­
ization in uncertain environments, global virtual teams, international digital competition, diaspora entrepreneurship, transnational
enterprises, liability of foreignness, and global institutional structures. A summary of the shifting research trends and themes in the
discipline and their development is presented in this review, culminating in future directions for prospective publishers of JIM.

5.1. Cluster 1: culture

This major cluster represents themes related to culture. Most articles are positivist and revolve around business culture, cultural
distance, HRM, and cultural dimensions. There are more quantitative than qualitative articles.
More specifically, authors have explored topics related to the measurement of cultural and physical distance and its implications for
international business strategy. The temporal trends indicate that this theme has been consistently published by the journal. It was the
second largest cluster in the periods 1998–2003 and 2004–2009, became the largest cluster in the next period (2010–2015), and was
the second largest cluster between 2016 and 2020. This indicates that the cluster is a core theme for the journal. Table 4 presents the
summary and future directions for cluster 1. Overall, the focus of themes in this cluster has shifted from the perspective of

6
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

Table 2
Geographical focus of studies published in JIM.
1998–2003 2004–2009 2010–2015 2016–2020 Total

Panel A: Share of single- and multi-country studies

Single-country 30.56 % 31.68 % 40.51 % 45.06 % 37.69 %
Multi-country 28.70 % 31.68 % 35.44 % 38.27 % 33.96 %
Other 40.74 % 36.65 % 24.05 % 16.67 % 28.35 %

Panel B: Share of countries/territories (in single-country studies)

China 6.48 % 5.59 % 8.23 % 11.73 % 8.15 %
United States 9.26 % 4.35 % 5.70 % 3.70 % 5.43 %
India 0.93 % 4.35 % 2.53 % 6.79 % 3.90 %
Japan 3.70 % 1.86 % 2.53 % 1.23 % 2.21 %
Brazil 0.00 % 0.62 % 2.53 % 1.23 % 1.19 %
Germany 0.00 % 1.86 % 2.53 % 0.00 % 1.19 %
South Korea 0.93 % 0.62 % 1.90 % 1.23 % 1.19 %
Mexico 2.78 % 1.24 % 1.27 % 0.00 % 1.19 %
Taiwan 0.00 % 0.00 % 1.90 % 1.85 % 1.02 %
Russia 0.00 % 1.86 % 1.27 % 0.00 % 0.85 %
Spain 0.93 % 0.00 % 1.27 % 1.23 % 0.85 %
Sweden 0.00 % 1.86 % 0.00 % 1.23 % 0.85 %
United Kingdom 0.93 % 0.62 % 0.63 % 0.62 % 0.68 %
Ghana 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.00 % 1.23 % 0.51 %
Hungary 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.63 % 0.62 % 0.51 %
Italy 0.00 % 0.00 % 1.27 % 0.62 % 0.51 %
South Africa 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.63 % 0.62 % 0.51 %
Bangladesh 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 1.23 % 0.34 %
Belgium 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.63 % 0.62 % 0.34 %
Canada 1.85 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.34 %
Denmark 0.93 % 0.62 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.34 %
Finland 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.34 %
France 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.63 % 0.62 % 0.34 %
Israel 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.34 %
Netherlands 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.63 % 0.00 % 0.34 %
Philippines 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 1.23 % 0.34 %
Thailand 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.63 % 0.00 % 0.34 %
Turkey 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.34 %
Australia 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.17 %
Austria 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.17 %
Chile 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.17 %
Greece 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.63 % 0.00 % 0.17 %
Hong Kong 0.93 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.17 %
Indonesia 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.17 %
Ireland 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.63 % 0.00 % 0.17 %
Lebanon 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.63 % 0.00 % 0.17 %
Malaysia 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.17 %
Norway 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.63 % 0.00 % 0.17 %
Peru 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.17 %
Portugal 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.17 %
Singapore 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.17 %
Sri Lanka 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.63 % 0.00 % 0.17 %
United Arab Emirates 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.17 %
Uganda 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.17 %
Vietnam 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.62 % 0.17 %

Note: The data presented in Panel B adds up to the share of single-country studies.

organizations to that of individuals and teams. This could be extended further with an exploration of the cognitive biases and per­
ceptions of individuals regarding their behavior in a cross-cultural setting. The articles adopt ontological, epistemological, and
methodological assumptions to analyze culture and its effects on organizations and management.

5.2. Cluster 2: internationalization in developing economies

The second cluster represents themes related to internationalization in developing economies. This cluster has received much
attention in recent times, moving from the second smallest cluster (along with cluster 3) in 1998–2003 to the largest in 2014–2020.
The development of this cluster in the last two periods (2010–2015 and 2016–2020) has been intense, with publications more than
doubling between these periods. Interestingly, this is the only cluster that has seen growth in the last period. All other clusters have
seen a decline, which may be attributed to the smaller size of the last period (five years). This makes the sharp increase in publications
even more impressive and indicates increased interest by authors in exploring topics related to the central theme of this cluster. This

7
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

Table 3
Share of different methodologies in JIM research.
1998–2003 2004–2009 2010–2015 2016–2020 Total

Panel A: Share of different research methods in JIM research

Empirical 46.30 % 55.90 % 72.78 % 82.10 % 65.87 %
Conceptual 34.26 % 29.81 % 16.46 % 9.26 % 21.39 %
Literature review 9.26 % 6.21 % 8.86 % 7.41 % 7.81 %
Modelling and analytical 0.00 % 0.00 % 1.90 % 1.23 % 0.85 %
Other 10.19 % 8.07 % 0.00 % 0.00 % 4.07 %

Panel B: Share of different research designs in JIM research

Quantitative 44.44 % 37.89 % 60.13 % 57.41 % 50.42 %
Qualitative 21.30 % 29.81 % 12.03 % 21.60 % 21.22 %
Mixed 4.63 % 3.11 % 0.63 % 2.47 % 2.55 %
Not mentioned 29.63 % 29.19 % 27.22 % 18.52 % 25.81 %

Panel C: Share of cross-sectional/longitudinal data in JIM research

Cross-sectional 38.89 % 35.40 % 37.97 % 48.15 % 40.24 %
Longitudinal 1.85 % 22.36 % 43.04 % 39.51 % 28.86 %
Other/no design 59.26 % 42.24 % 18.99 % 12.35 % 30.90 %

Panel D: Share of data sources in JIM research

Archival 32.41 % 41.61 % 50.63 % 52.47 % 45.33 %
Survey 29.63 % 24.22 % 31.01 % 23.46 % 26.83 %
Case study 8.33 % 21.74 % 11.39 % 20.37 % 16.13 %
Interview 10.19 % 21.74 % 13.92 % 19.75 % 16.98 %
Experiment 0.93 % 1.86 % 1.90 % 2.47 % 1.87 %
No data reported/collected 34.26 % 28.57 % 16.46 % 10.49 % 21.39 %

Note: Some of percentages in Panel D might not add up to zero because of the use of multiple data collection methods in a single study.

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1998-2003 2004-2009 2010-2015 2016-2020

Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4 Cluster 5 Cluster 6

Fig. 4. Period wise publications in each cluster in JIM corpus

This figure presents the publication patterns in each of the six major clusters.

cluster is unique because it focuses on developing rather than developed economies. Continued exploration of this theme could lead to
further investigation of the institutional effects of developing countries and their effect on the internationalization of developing
market firms. Table 5 presents a summary and future directions for cluster 2.

5.3. Cluster 3: knowledge management and innovation

The third major cluster represents the themes of knowledge management and innovation. Apart from the slight dip in the latest
period (2016–2020), the publication patterns of this cluster are similar to those of cluster 2. This cluster, along with cluster 2, was the
second smallest cluster in terms of the number of publications in 1998–2003. It became the second largest cluster in 2010–2015. The
trends show that interest in the themes represented in this cluster has been more continuous and sustained (similar to cluster 1). Along

8
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

Table 4
Summary of major clusters 1.
Author Title Year TC

Cluster 1: Culture (TP: 151, TC: 5061)

Most cited Beechler S., Woodward I. The global “war for talent” 2009 318
articles C.
Taras V., Rowney J., Steel Half a century of measuring culture: Review of approaches, challenges, and limitations based on 2009 254
P. the analysis of 121 instruments for quantifying culture
Håkanson L., Ambos B. The antecedents of psychic distance 2010 242
Brady M.K., Robertson C. Managing behavioral intentions in diverse cultural environments: An investigation of service 2001 126
J., Cronin J.J. quality, service value, and satisfaction for American and Ecuadorian fast-food customers
Ambos B., Håkanson L. The concept of distance in international management research 2014 114

1998–2003 2004–2009 2010–2015 2016–2020

Major themes • Management of • Acquisition of talent • Cultural distance • Virtual teams

services • Managerial mindsets • Institutional legitimacy • HRM across cultural
• Work stress and • Management of partnership • Cultural friction contexts
culture across cultures • Effect of cultural shifts on • Language barriers
• Virtual teams • National cultures expatriates • Cultural intelligence
• Country of origin • Cultural distance
• Expatriates
• Globalization
Potential future • What is effect of cognitive biases of managers on strategy across cultural contexts?
directions • How do cross-cultural contexts affect expatriate/employee behavior?
Note: TP: total publications; TC: total citations.

Table 5
Summary of major clusters 2.
Author Title Year TC

Cluster 2: Internationalization in developing economies (TP: 128, TC: 5023)

Most cited Bell J., McNaughton R., Young S. “Born-again global” firms: An extension to the “born global” phenomenon 2001 340
articles Cuervo-Cazurra A. The multinationalization of developing country MNEs: The case of multilatinas 2008 200
Blomstermo A., Eriksson K., Lindstrand The perceived usefulness of network experiential knowledge in the 2004 193
A., Sharma D.D. internationalizing firm
Li P.P. Toward an integrated theory of multinational evolution: The evidence of Chinese 2007 165
multinational enterprises as latecomers
Zaheer S. The liability of foreignness, redux: A commentary 2002 156

1998–2003 2004–2009 2010–2015 2016–2020

Major themes • Liabilities of • Internationalization in • Exporting • Sharing economy

foreignness developing countries • Foreign direct investment • Human capital
• Export • Foreign direct investments • Leaning based view of • Competitive and institutional
management • Role of experience in internationalization environment in developing
• Born-global internationalization • Liabilities of foreignness countries
phenomenon • Offshoring • Psychic distance and
• Joint ventures internationalization strategy
Potential • How does institutional environment affect the internationalization of firms in developing countries?
future • How does the institutional environment of developing countries affect the internationalization of firms belonging to them?
directions

Note: TP: total publications; TC: total citations.

with clusters 1 and 2, this cluster has presented the most prominent topics in JIM in recent times. Table 6 presents the summary and
future directions for cluster 3.

5.4. Cluster 4: internationalization paths

This is one of the clusters that has seen a decline in recent times. The publication trends show that it was the largest cluster in the
two periods between 1998 and 2009. Publications in this cluster saw a sharp decline in the next period (2011–2015) and a further
decline (only five publications) in the most recent period (2016–2020). This decline can be attributed to the themes of this cluster
being subsumed into cluster 2. It appears that, more recently, authors have studied topics related to internationalization paths such as

9
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

Table 6
Summary of major clusters 3.
Author Title Year TC

Cluster 3: Knowledge management and innovation (TP: 111, TC: 4.528)

Most cited Foss N.J., Pedersen Transferring knowledge in MNCs: The role of sources of subsidiary knowledge and organizational 2002 426
articles T. context
Ambos T.C., Ambos The impact of distance on knowledge transfer effectiveness in multinational corporations 2009 248
B.
Mudambi R. Knowledge management in multinational firms 2002 142
Singh D.A., Gaur A.S. Governance structure, innovation and internationalization: Evidence from India 2013 124
Schotter A., Beamish Performance effects of MNC headquarters-subsidiary conflict and the role of boundary spanners: The 2011 111
P.W. case of headquarter initiative rejection

1998–2003 2004–2009 2010–2015 2016–2020

Major themes • Knowledge • Knowledge • Organizational structures and • Headquarter subsidiary

management management innovation relationship
• Innovation • Organizational • Value chain • Innovation networks and
• Organizational learning • Subsidiary to headquarter value creation
structures • Research and knowledge transfer • Sustainable innovation
• Organizational development
competencies
Potential future • How do organizational structures affect sustainable innovations?
directions • What is the effect of the HQ–subsidiary relationship on innovation?
Note: TP: total publications; TC: total citations.

offshoring and cross-border mergers within the context of internationalization in developing countries. The topics, while apparently
similar to those of cluster 2, differed in the context in which they were studied. The focus in cluster 4 was more general, whereas studies
in cluster 2 focused more on developing countries. Table 7 presents the summary and future directions for cluster 4.

5.5. Cluster 5: market entry modes

This cluster has always been a minor one in which market entry modes were discussed from the perspective of culture and
internationalization, although the discussion regarding market entry specifically has not received much attention. In the first period
(1998–2003), this cluster was among the three most explored clusters. However, attention has consistently declined, leading to this
cluster becoming the weakest in the most recent period (2016–2020). The reason for the decline in this cluster becomes apparent when
delving into the themes explored in the cluster. First the fall in the interest on joint ventures and alliances. The fall in the interest in the

Table 7
Summary of major clusters 4.
Author Title Year TC

Cluster 4: Internationalization paths (TP: 93, TC: 4143)

Most cited Shimizu K., Hitt M.A., Vaidyanath Theoretical foundations of cross-border mergers and acquisitions: A review of current 2004 402
articles D., Pisano V. research and recommendations for the future
Knight G.A. Entrepreneurship and strategy in the international SME 2001 278
Hätönen J., Eriksson T. 30+ years of research and practice of outsourcing — Exploring the past and anticipating 2009 213
the future
Graf M., Mudambi S.M. The outsourcing of IT-enabled business processes: A conceptual model of the location 2005 153
decision
Slangen A., Hennart J.-F. Greenfield or acquisition entry: A review of the empirical foreign establishment mode 2007 137
literature

1998–2003 2004–2009 2010–2015 2016–2020

Major themes • Internationalization in new firms • Cross-border • Foreign direct investment • Mergers and
and SMEs mergers • International joint ventures acquisitions
• Cross-border mergers • Outsourcing • Internationalization and • Diversification
• Effect of host country Institution • International supply performance
chains
Potential future • Declining cluster
directions

Note: TP: total publications; TC: total citations.

10
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

joint ventures and alliances from a managerial and developed country perspective can be attributed to rise in their study in developing
country context (covered under cluster 2). Further, it is safe to assume that this cluster will decline in significance in JIM as new
domains emerge where market entry modes can be explored together with current scenarios and the emergence of more sophisticated
modes in the digital economy, such as artificial intelligence and machine learning, blockchain and the share economy. An important
area to chart would be the internationalization of digital global businesses like Facebook, Uber, and Airbnb. Table 8 presents the
summary and future directions for cluster 5.

5.6. Cluster 6: institutional factors relating to international business

This is another minor theme that focused on the institutional aspects of international business. This cluster has had a small number
of publications in each period and is the only one with less than 10 publications in two periods (1998–2003 and 2016–2020). As seen in
the development of cluster 1, the institutional aspects of international business have usually been studied from the perspective of
culture in recent times. This may explain the decline in this cluster. As was the case with the previous two clusters, the themes have
been subsumed by the clusters that have been growing in recent times. Table 9 presents the summary and future directions for cluster
6.

6. Future research

The scope for future publications in JIM is wide-ranging and extensive. The themes identified over the last 25 years should be
extended as a result of changing times, the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, technological developments and innovations in
machine learning, artificial intelligence, and increased mobility of people. Further, in an increasingly polarized world, international
businesses have found it difficult to adapt to changing environments. One example is the readiness of many international businesses to
close their business in Russia following its invasion of Ukraine. While these decisions are morally sound, they come with a risk of
revenue loss. However, in a hypothetical scenario where China invades Taiwan or any of its democratic neighbors, will the response be
the same? Would businesses be willing to lose revenue from China for a moral position? These are decisions that need to be made by
businesses in the real world. They will need action plans in such scenarios, and the scholarly community can provide its expertise to
help the industry in this regard. In this section, we delineate some novel ideas aligned with the themes that emerged in this retro­
spective for scholars of international management.

6.1. Culture

Publications on “culture” form one of the strongest clusters in JIM. Future research should seek to develop a new cultural dimension
measurement scale to measure the cultural characteristics of people from various countries and cultures, because major publications
have adopted the Hofstede (1980) dimensions for analysis, which has been criticized by many scholars.
Some researchers (Bhimani, 1999; Harrison and McKinnon, 1999; McSweeney, 2002; Signorini et al., 2009) have cautioned
scholars who use Hofstede’s model of national culture. The main dispute over Hofstede’s work is that cultures and nations are not the
same. Hence, it is wrong to generalize the culture of a country; it is reasonable only if human societies are separated from one another.
Moreover, Hofstede’s research work was based on data from one company. The criticism again was that the findings did not provide
valid information regarding the culture of an entire country (Graves, 1986; Olie, 1995). The findings of one corporation cannot be
applied to the overall culture to determine cultural dimensions.
The GLOBE dimensions were developed next and are a step further ahead from Hofstede’s approach because they aim to develop
theoretically sound and provable cross-cultural dimensions. However, the GLOBE dimensions have been criticized by many authors
(McCrae et al., 2008), who state that GLOBE’s scales are unfounded national stereotypes. Further, GLOBE has overlooked the dif­
ference between personal values and prescribed norms for others. Many scholars argue that instead of measuring culture as it is and as
it should be, the study measured stereotypes and ideologies (Minkov and Blagoev, 2012).
The latest measurement tool is the World Values Survey (WVS), which covers 60 countries and 90,000 individuals. Using multi­
dimensional item response theory (MIRT), the WVS has identified five new national social dimensions representing 198 questions and
56 countries: (1) religiosity, (2) neutrality, (3) fairness, (4) skepticism, and (5) societal tranquility. These more accurately measure
underlying differences across countries in the WVS and can be used to demonstrate national differences (MacIntosh, 1998). The WVS
has also been critiqued against the usage of nations as units for intercultural analysis (Minkov and Hofstede, 2012), as studies on
individuals show significant variations inside a country, and culture is not static. Hence, there is scope for authors to continue research
to identify new cultural dimension measurement tools.
Within the cultural theme, research should be extended to cognitive biases and individuals’ perceptions of their behavior in a cross-
cultural setting, along with organizational and national culture. There is an opportunity to explore the interrelationship between
organizational culture and national culture, along with individual culture and the effect of various facets of international management,
such as the adoption of technology, on conflict management, market entry, expatriate assignments, and working remotely. Within the
culture domain, there is further scope to chart the future of remote work across cultures and gender, as well as cross-cultural conflict
and management of cross-cultural virtual teams during crisis situations like the pandemic, when remote work and virtual teams were a
necessity.
Novel future research suggestions from a cultural perspective include the incongruence of opportunities and pay for highly skilled
migrants, indigenous communities, refugees, and women; discrimination and racism in various parts of the world; Brexit and its effect

11
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

Table 8
Summary of major clusters 5.
Author Title Year TC

Cluster 5: Market entry modes (TP: 54, TC: 2398)

Most cited Morschett D., Schramm-Klein H., Decades of research on market entry modes: What do we really know about external 2010 182
articles Swoboda B. antecedents of entry mode choice?
Das T.K., Teng B.-S. A risk perception model of alliance structuring 2001 171
Kedia B.L., Lahiri S. International outsourcing of services: A partnership model 2007 170
Luo Y., Shenkar O., Nyaw M.-K. Mitigating liabilities of foreignness: Defensive versus offensive approaches 2002 134
Contractor F.J., Ra W. How knowledge attributes influence alliance governance choices: A theory development 2002 103
note

1998–2003 2004–2009 2010–2015 2016–2020

Major themes • International alliances • R&D alliances • Cultural distance • Knowledge transfer in strategic
• Joint ventures • Strategic • Institutions and market alliances
• Interorganizational alliances entry
collaborations • Foreign
subsidiaries
Potential future • Declining cluster
directions

Note: TP: total publications; TC: total citations.

Table 9
Summary of major clusters 6.
Author Title Year TC

Cluster 6: Institutional factors relating to international business (TP: 45, TC: 1971)
Most cited Darnall N., Henriques I., Do environmental management systems improve business performance in an 2008 294
articles Sadorsky P. international setting?
Riddle L., Hrivnak G.A., Nielsen Transnational diaspora entrepreneurship in emerging markets: Bridging institutional 2010 128
T.M. divides
Lynes J.K., Andrachuk M. Motivations for corporate social and environmental responsibility: A case study of 2008 120
Scandinavian Airlines
Luo Y. A coopetition perspective of MNC-host government relations 2004 101
Kshetri N. Institutional factors affecting offshore business process and information technology 2007 97
outsourcing

1998–2003 2004–2009 2010–2015 2016–2020

Major themes • Government policy and • Sustainability and environmental • Diaspora • Environmental
international business management • Fundraising responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
Potential future • Declining cluster
directions

Note: TP: total publications; TC: total citations.

on the status of expatriates in the UK; the pandemic and its after-effects, including an increase in discrimination and inequity and the
persecution of ethnic migrants; and the Black Lives Matter movement. In addition to business challenges, it is important to open the
Pandora’s box of social issues in international management.
Linking entrepreneurship research to cross-cultural management research could also open up many options for future authors in
JIM. Topics that could be explored further include the super diversity of culture, immigrant and refugee entrepreneurs, and circular
economy entrepreneurs and their internationalization strategies while trying to combat cultural challenges and liability of foreignness.
A new research stream that needs much attention is that of indigenous entrepreneurs in Australia, NZ, the US, Canada, and developing
countries, as well as the internationalization of their business.
Most research papers in JIM have adopted the theory testing approach, whereby different streams of research have developed
largely independently of each other. In our analysis, most of the research in JIM is quantitative (50.42 %) rather than qualitative
(21.22 %). Quantitative analysis is better for confirming or testing a theory or hypothesis, while qualitative research is better for
understanding concepts, thoughts, and experiences (Cassell and Symon, 2006; Eisenhardt, 1989; Miles and Huberman, 1994; Strauss
and Corbin, 1990); hence, most people use a testing theory approach.
This has hindered theory extension or development and practical advancement in the field. These context-specific articles test a
theory in a different country or a trait like intercultural competence in another context to achieve a novel outcome, but this does not

12
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

create or extend the existing theoretical base. Thus, there is an opportunity to extend the existing theoretical base in international
management by incorporating different theories from other disciplines. The methodological choice can be more diverse, and new
research using longitudinal data and mixed methods and growing qualitative studies will enhance theory building. There is scope for
future cross-country research on social media and cultural identity and its influence on international management. We found limited
research on learning and teaching in JIM; thus, there is an opportunity to explore the effect of culture on learning, culturally
appropriate evaluations of learning (Henze and Zhu, 2012), and culturally contextualized teaching, assessments, and activities with
diversity and intercultural education.

6.2. Knowledge management and innovation

Knowledge and innovation are the core of international management. Many studies have explored how multinational firms are
engaged in the creation, transformation, and leveraging of knowledge and innovation. There is scope to explore the dark side of
knowledge management and innovation and the ethics factor in knowledge transfer, transformation, and harvesting during strategic
alliances. It would be of interest to explore different modes through which firms engage in knowledge sharing and innovation. Studies
analyzing the adoption of innovation in cross-country settings are also needed in order to investigate the speed of adoption by indi­
vidualistic and collectivist cultures in various institutional, economic, and political environments.
Additionally, there is scope to focus on innovation from the emerging economies of China and India, as well as developed, tech­
nologically adept countries, such as South Korea, Japan, Israel, South Africa, Taiwan, Israel, Japan, Germany, and Russia, to explore
their effect on the world economy. There is a need to chart future research on human and social factors and capabilities and skill
development in knowledge management across countries to meet the societal challenges of the pandemic and climate change. Cross-
country studies on knowledge management and innovations in relation to combating carbon emissions, promoting sustainability, and
protecting the environment, as well as benchmarking the progress toward the implementation of the 17 sustainability goals of the UN
across countries, would be ambitious and novel additions to the huge collection of scholarly articles in international management.
Other significant studies in JIM would include publications on knowledge management processes across borders, technology and
knowledge development, and collaborations in knowledge management globally.

6.3. Internationalization paths and market entry modes

Many publications in JIM have explored entry modes and internationalization paths, but few have explored subsequent entry and
re-entry strategies (Sousa et al., 2021; Younis and Elbanna, 2022), and interest in these themes in international management is
increasing.
Research on how and why firms re-enter foreign markets is still in its infancy; thus, scholars should study the path of subsequent
entry and re-entry after a firm’s first internationalization attempt in both developed and developing countries to enlighten practi­
tioners to the nuances. Few studies have explored exiting from a market; therefore, it would be insightful for authors to explore the
causes, countries, moderators/mediators, and outcomes of exit — for example, the exit of the West from Russia, exit from Africa, and
the UK after Brexit. It would be insightful to explore this aspect of internationalization pathways and entry modes in current times of
the pandemic and the Russia–Ukraine war. Last within this stream would be the exploration of deglobalization (Kim et al., 2020)
resulting from Brexit, trade wars and the pandemic, which has led to an increase in nationalism. It would be interesting to explore the
balance between globalization and deglobalization given the need to collaborate globally on significant matters of climate change,
vaccines, and international crime.
Reverse internationalization (Gnizy and Shoham, 2018) and de-internationalization (Turcan, 2013) are other under-researched
areas. Existing studies have explored divestments, cutbacks in certain countries, and changes in operating modes, but little has
been explored regarding the process of de-internationalization, the causes and antecedents, and the consequences.

6.4. Institutional factors

Institutions — political, legal, and societal — are used as sources of international competitiveness (Guerrieri and Meliciani, 2005;
Peng et al., 2008; Rodriguez et al., 2005). Although some studies have observed the effect of home- and host-country-specific formal
and informal institutions in the context of international competitiveness, few studies have combined all of them. This finding suggests
that a firm’s success in international markets depends on formal and informal institutional environments and the difference between
home and host countries. A small number of studies have focused on exploring how institutional conditions vary between industries,
regions, and nations, or how they influence firms differently (Beckmann and Padmanabhan, 2009; Grabova et al., 2018; Momaya and
Selby, 1998; Tesfatsion, 2007; Von Jacobi, 2018). Further, few studies have focused on understanding the incidence of other formal
institutional approaches or including additional measures of informal institutional distance such as language, religion, and law.
Longitudinal analysis would further enhance the knowledge of how institutional conditions change over time and their effect on
international competitiveness. This analysis could be used in different contexts (i.e., countries, regions). For example, in the context of
methods, a multilevel analysis could help investigate institutions on a national, regional, industrial, or individual level to identify
effects on international competitiveness. In the same way, another promising approach would be to study dynamic processes to capture
the constructs’ multidimensionality and the variability of different institutional conditions. Finally, comparative case study analysis
could develop other theoretical frameworks while also opening the door to mixed methodologies (qualitative and quantitative).
An important topic for prospective international management publishers is institutional logics: “Institutional logics scholars strive

13
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

to understand institutional logics (a) as more abstract social structures than institutions; at a ‘meta-level’ of values, norms and symbols,
which make the institutions what they are (Thornton et al., 2012), and (b) as coexisting in practical organizational life even though
they are contradictory, where the friction between logics creates agency and potentially change” (Gümüsay et al., 2020). The logic
perspective offers specific strengths in addressing key societal concerns; it is particularly significant in addressing current ecological
and social concerns (e.g., Amis et al., 2017; Lee and Lounsbury, 2015). Research in institutional logics can offer solutions to these
societal concerns and have significant implications for policy and practice. It can provide scholars in international management and
institutional theory with an opportunity to contribute to matters that are significant to everyone in society.
In addition to the above themes, it is important to further study transfer pricing, which is an important issue for multinationals.
There is a need for transfer pricing research to go beyond compliance and tax management to use transfer pricing as a strategic tool in
business (Kumar et al., 2021).
Other areas of research that need further attention are artificial intelligence and gamification in international management, the gig
economy, crowd-sourcing platforms, the internationalization of ibusiness (platforms for customers to interact with each other and
generating value through content creation through said interactions), and the cycles and waves of internationalization.

7. Conclusion

In this study, we presented a retrospect of JIM between 1998 and 2020 using the bibliometric method. We adopted co-authorship
analysis, network analysis, and bibliographic coupling to achieve our objectives. To analyze the journal in a structured manner, we
organized our study into several RQs. The responses to these RQs are summarized below.
For RQ1, which deals with the publication and citation patterns of the journal, we found that the journal has grown significantly in
terms of both publications and citations, indicating a rise in both productivity and impact. For RQ2, which deals with the collaboration
patterns of JIM authors, we found that the journal’s collaboration network has become more global and complex over time, with the US
emerging as its most important component, and Asia and emerging and developing economies gaining significance over the last few
years. For RQ3, which deals with the methodological choices of JIM authors, we found that the journal has a similar share of single- and
multi-country studies. We also found that research published in the journal has been more empirical and quantitative in nature, with
archival being the preferred source of data. Finally, for RQ4, which deals with the major themes in JIM publications, we found that the
journal has focused more on social–psychological aspects of business, with a focus on internationalization in developing countries.
Further, the journal’s focus has moved away from purely managerial aspects of international business. The major themes in the journal
are culture, internationalization in developing economies, knowledge management and innovation, internationalization paths, market
entry modes, and institutional factors relating to international business. The first three themes have been increasing, and thereby
paving the way for future research, while the last three themes are in decline.
The findings indicate that while JIM has grown in terms of both publications and citations, several improvements can be made.
First, the journal has focused very little on countries outside North America, Western Europe, East Asia and South Asia. Although the
Middle East and North Africa have received some attention, much more is required. Economies in Eastern Europe and South America
are also less explored. Similarly, the collaboration network shows that authorship in the journals has been determined by the region
with North America and Western Europe. JIM can promote research in these regions by publishing special issues that focus on them.
This will not only be helpful for authors to expand research in these countries, but it will also encourage authors to collaborate with
authors from less represented regions. Second, there has been a decreasing focus on theoretical and qualitative studies. While
methodologies are largely the prerogative of authors, reviewers and editors can only judge the robustness of the applications, the
journals can promote the use of qualitative and conceptual studies in IB/IM fields. This can be achieved through special issues that
invite papers using qualitative methods and conceptual studies. In doing so, JIM can contribute to theory building in the field, thereby
helping the field mature and find future directions.

References

Aguinis, H., Gabriel, K.P., 2021. International business studies: are we really so uniquely complex? J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2021 https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-021-
00462-x.
Amis, J.M., Mair, J., Munir, K.A., 2017. The organizational reproduction of inequality. Acad. Manag. Ann. 14, 195–230. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2017.0033.
Aparicio, G., Iturralde, T., Maseda, A., 2019. Conceptual structure and perspectives on entrepreneurship education research: a bibliometric review. Eur. Res. Manag.
Bus. Econ. 25, 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2019.04.003.
Bamel, U., Pereira, V., Del Giudice, M., Temouri, Y., 2022. The extent and impact of intellectual capital research: a two decade analysis. J. Intellect. Cap. 23, 375–400.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-05-2020-0142.
Bastian, M., Heymann, S., Jacomy, M., 2009. Gephi: an open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. In: Proceedings of the Third International
ICWSM Conference (2009), pp. 361–362. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2004.010033.
Beckmann, V., Padmanabhan, M., 2009. Institutions and Sustainability. Springer, Berlin.
Bhimani, A., 1999. Mapping methodological frontiers in cross-national management control research. Account. Org. Soc. 24, 413–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0361-3682(98)00068-3.
Calma, A., Martí-Parreño, J., Davies, M., 2019. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1973–2018: an analytical retrospective. Scientometrics 119, 879–908.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03080-5.
Cassell, C., Symon, G., 2006. Qualitative methods in industrial and organizational psychology. In: Hodgkinson, G.P., Ford, J.K. (Eds.), International Review of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Wiley Publishing, pp. 339–380. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470696378.ch8.
Dennis, A.R., Garfield, M., 2003. The adoption and use of GSS in project teams: towards more participative processes and outcomes. MIS Q. 27, 289–317. https://doi.
org/10.2307/30036532.
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., Lim, W.M., 2021a. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: an overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 133, 285–296.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070.

14
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Pandey, N., Lim, W.M., 2021b. Research constituents, intellectual structure, and collaboration patterns in Journal of International Marketing:
an analytical retrospective. J. Int. Mark. 29, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069031X211004234.
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Pattnaik, D., Pandey, N., 2021. A bibliometric review of International Marketing Review (IMR): past, present, and future. Int. Mark. Rev.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-11-2020-0244 ahead-of-p.
van Eck, N.J., Waltman, L., 2010. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84, 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11192-009-0146-3.
Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 14, 532–550. https://doi.org/10.2307/258557.
García-Lillo, F., Claver-Cortés, E., Marco-Lajara, B., Úbeda-García, M., 2019. Identifying the ‘knowledge base’ or ‘intellectual structure’ of research on international
business, 2000–2015: a citation/co-citation analysis of JIBS. Int. Bus. Rev. 28, 713–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2019.02.001.
Gnizy, I., Shoham, A., 2018. Reverse internationalization: a review and suggestions for future research. In: Leonidou, L., Katsikeas, C., Samiee, S., Aykol, B. (Eds.),
Advances in Global Marketing. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61385-7_3.
Goodell, J.W., Kumar, S., Lim, W.M., Pattnaik, D., 2021. Artificial intelligence and machine learning in finance: identifying foundations, themes, and research clusters
from bibliometric analysis. J. Behav. Exp. Financ. 32, 100577 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2021.100577.
Goodell, J.W., Kumar, S., Li, X., Pattnaik, D., Sharma, A., 2022. Foundations and research clusters in investor attention: evidence from bibliometric and topic
modelling analysis. Int.Rev.Econ.Financ. 82, 511–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2022.06.020.
Grabova, O.N., Suglobov, A.E., Karpovich, O.G., 2018. Evolutionary institutional analysis and prospects of developing tax systems, 39, 1–40. https://www.
revistaespacios.com/a18v39n16/18391640.html.
Graves, D., 1986. Corporate Culture — Diagnosis and Change: Auditing and Changing the Culture of Organizations. Frances Printer, London.
Guerrieri, P., Meliciani, V., 2005. Technology and international competitiveness: the interdependence between manufacturing and producer services. Struct. Chang.
Econ. Dyn. 16, 489–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2005.02.002.
Gümüsay, A.A., Claus, L., Amis, J., 2020. Engaging with grand challenges: an institutional logics perspective. Organ. Theory 1, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/
2631787720960487.
Hanson, D., Grimmer, M., 2007. The mix of qualitative and quantitative research in major marketing journals, 1993-2002. Eur. J. Mark. 41, 58–70. https://doi.org/
10.1108/03090560710718111.
Harrison, G., McKinnon, J., 1999. Cross-cultural research in management control systems design: a review of the current state. Account. Org. Soc. 24, 483–506.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(97)00048-2.
Henze, J., Zhu, J., 2012. Current research on Chinese students studying abroad. Res. Comp. Int. Educ. 7, 90–104.
Hofstede, G., 1980. Culture and organizations. Int. Stud. Manag. Organ. 10, 15–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.1980.11656300.
Kessler, M.M., 1963. Bibliographic coupling between scientific articles. Am. Doc. 14, 123–131.
Kim, H.-M., Li, P., Lee, Y.R., 2020. Observations of deglobalization against globalization and impacts on global business. Int. Trad. Pol. Dev. 4, 83–103. https://doi.
org/10.1108/ITPD-05-2020-0067.
Kim, T., Rhee, M., 2009. Exploration and exploitation: internal variety and environmental dynamism. Strateg. Organ. 7, 11–41.
Kor, Y.Y., Leblebici, H., 2005. How do interdependencies among human-capital deployment, development, and diversification strategies affect firms’ financial
performance? Strateg. Manag. J. 26, 967–985.
Kraus, S., Breier, M., Lim, W.M., Dabić, M., Kumar, S., Kanbach, D., Mukherjee, D., Corvello, V., Piñeiro-Chouse, J., Liguori, E.W., Marqués, D.P., Schiavone, F.,
Ferraris, A., Fernandes, C., Ferreira, J.J., 2022. Literature reviews as independent studies: Guidelines for academic practice. Rev. Manag. Sci. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11846-022-00588-8 (in press).
Kumar, S., Pandey, N., Lim, W.M., Chatterjee, Akash N., Pandey, N., 2021. What do we know about transfer pricing? Insights from bibliometric analysis. J. Bus. Res.
134, 275–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.05.041.
Kumar, P., Sharma, A., Salo, J., 2019. A bibliometric analysis of extended key account management literature. Ind. Mark. Manag. 82, 276–292. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.01.006.
Lee, M.-D.P., Lounsbury, M., 2015. Filtering institutional logics: community logic variation and differential responses to the institutional complexity of toxic waste.
Organ. Sci. 26, 847–866. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0959.
Locke, E.A., Latham, G.P., 2020. Building a theory by induction: the example of goal setting theory. Organ. Psychol. Rev. 10, 223–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/
2041386620921931.
Lumpkin, G.T., Dess, G.G., 1996. Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Acad. Manag. Rev. 21, 135–172. https://doi.org/
10.5465/amr.1996.9602161568.
McCrae, R.R., Terracciano, A., Realo, A., Allik, J., 2008. Interpreting GLOBE societal practices scales. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 39, 805–810. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0022022108323806.
MacIntosh, R., 1998. Global attitude measurement: an assessment of the World Values Survey postmaterialism scale. Am. Sociol. Rev. 63, 452–464. https://doi.org/
10.2307/2657558.
McSweeney, B., 2002. The essentials of scholarship: a reply to Geert Hofstede. Hum. Relat. 55, 1363–1372. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267025511005.
Merigó, J.M., Yang, J.B., 2017. Accounting research: a bibliometric analysis. Aust. Account. Rev. 27, 71–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12109.
Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
Minkov, M., Hofstede, G., 2012. Hofstede’s fifth dimension: new evidence from the World Values Survey. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 43, 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0022022110388567.
Momaya, K., Selby, K., 1998. International competitiveness of the Canadian construction industry: a comparison with Japan and the United States. Can. J. Civ. Eng.
25, 640–652. https://doi.org/10.1139/l98-004.
Mukherjee, D., Kumar, S., Donthu, N., Pandey, N., 2021. Research published in management international review from 2006 to 2020: a bibliometric analysis and
future directions. Manag. Int. Rev. 61 (5), 99–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-021-00454-x.
Mukherjee, D., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Goyal, K., 2022a. Mapping five decades of international business and management research on India: a bibliometric analysis
and future directions. J. Bus. Res. 145, 864–891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.011.
Mukherjee, D., Lim, W.M., Kumar, S., Donthu, N., 2022b. Guidelines for advancing theory and practice through bibliometric research. J. Bus. Res. 148, 101–115.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.04.042.
Mulet-Forteza, C., Martorell-Cunill, O., Merigó, J.M., Genovart-Balaguer, J., Mauleon-Mendez, E., 2018. Twenty five years of the Journal of Travel & Tourism
Marketing: a bibliometric ranking. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 35, 1201–1221. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2018.1487368.
Newman, M.E.J., 2004. Fast algorithm for detecting community structure in networks. Phys. Rev. E 69, 66133. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.69.066133.
Newman, M.E.J., Girvan, M., 2004. Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Phys. Rev. E 69, 26113. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.69.026113.
Olie, R., 1995. The culture factor in personnel and organization policies. In: Harzing, A.W., Ruysseveldt, J.V. (Eds.), International Human Resource Management: An
Integrated Approach. Sage Publications, London, pp. 124–143.
Peng, M., Wang, D., Jiang, Y., 2008. An institution-based view of international business strategy: a focus on emerging economies. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 39, 920–936.
https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400377.
Ramos-Rodrígue, A.R., Ruíz-Navarro, J., 2004. Changes in the intellectual structure of strategic management research: a bibliometric study of the Strategic
Management Journal, 1980–2000. Strateg. Manag. J. 25, 981–1004. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.397.
Rialp, A., Merigó, J.M., Cancino, C.A., Urbano, D., 2019. Twenty-five years (1992–2016) of the International Business Review: a bibliometric overview. Int. Bus. Rev.
28, 101587 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2019.101587.
Rodriguez, P., Uhlenbruck, K., Eden, L., 2005. Government corruption and the entry strategies of multinationals. Acad. Manag. Rev. 30, 383–396. https://doi.org/
10.5465/amr.2005.16387894.
Shenkar, O., 2004. One more time: international business in a global economy. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 35, 161–171.

15
S. Kumar et al. Journal of International Management 29 (2023) 100988

Signorini, P., Wiesemes, R., Murphy, R., 2009. Developing alternative frameworks for exploring intercultural learning: a critique of Hofstede’s cultural difference
model. Teach. High. Educ. 14, 253–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510902898825.
Sousa, C.M.P., He, X., Lengler, J., Tang, L., 2021. Foreign market re-entry: a review and future research directions. J. Int. Manag. 27, 100848 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.intman.2021.100848.
Strauss, A.L., Corbin, J., 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
Sureka, R., Kumar, S., Colombage, S., Abedin, M.Z., 2021. Five decades of research on capital budgeting–a systematic review and future research agenda. Res. Int. Bus.
Financ. 60, 101609 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2021.101609.
Tesfatsion, L., 2007. Agents come to bits: towards a constructive comprehensive taxonomy of economic entities. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 63, 333–346. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jebo.2005.12.016.
Thornton, P.H., Ocasio, W., Lounsbury, M., 2012. The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure, and Process. Oxford University Press,
Oxford.
Turcan, R.V., 2013. The philosophy of turning points: a case of de internationalization. Adv. Int. Manag. 26, 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1571-5027(2013)
0000026014.
Vallaster, C., Kraus, S., Merigó Lindahl, J.M., Nielsen, A., 2019. Ethics and entrepreneurship: a bibliometric study and literature review. J. Bus. Res. 99, 226–237.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.02.050.
Varma, M.M., Chen, D., Lin, X., Aknin, L.B., Hu, X., 2022. Prosocial behavior promotes positive emotion during the COVID-19 pandemic. Emotion. Adv. Online Publ.
https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001077.
Von Jacobi, N., 2018. Institutional interconnections: understanding symbiotic relationships. J. Inst. Econ. 14, 853–876. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S1744137417000558.
Vroom, V.H., 1964. Work and Motivation. Wiley, New York.
Wallin, J.A., 2005. Bibliometric methods: pitfalls and possibilities. Basic Clin. Pharmacol. Toxicol. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-7843.2005.pto_139.x.
Younis, H., Elbanna, S., 2021. How do SMEs decide on international market entry? An empirical examination in the Middle East. J. Int. Manag. 28, 100902 https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2021.100902.
Zhang, D., Zhang, Z., Managi, S., 2019. A bibliometric analysis on green finance: current status, development, and future directions. Financ. Res. Lett. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.frl.2019.02.003.

16