While the construct of moqi (默契, pronounced ‘mò-chee’) is ubiquitously understood and finds itself in everyday conversations around the home and workplace in China, the theoretical development of moqi has been scarce. In this article, we expand on prior work on moqi and conceptualize moqi as a dyadic level construct that describes a situated state of shared contextualized understanding without saying a word between two counterparties. We further articulate a broader view of moqi as a dyadic communication construct that is both target-specific and situation-specific. We propose a nomological network of moqi that shows how shared contextualized understandings between counterparties are informed by several different layers, including ‘capability’ (a) a generalized proclivity to be able to form such understandings with others, and ‘contributing factors’, (b) how those understandings are formed either (i) through interactions or (ii) without them through overlaps in background characteristics or experiences, and (c) how other factors accentuate the capability and inclination to ultimately achieve moqi. We then discuss several potential consequences of moqi in organizational settings. Finally, we discuss why moqi is a powerful form of effective communication that is meaningful beyond the Chinese cultural context.

Building on recent developments in optimal distinctiveness (OD) research, we identify two dimensions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices – CSR scope conformity and CSR emphasis differentiation – and examine the antecedents of both. We theorize that private ownership and enhanced media coverage may increase scope conformity and emphasis differentiation, while such effects may be contingent on industrial context. In socially contested industries, the impact of private ownership on scope conformity will be mitigated, and the impact of media coverage on scope conformity will be amplified. Meanwhile, in highly competitive industries, the impact of private ownership and media coverage on emphasis differentiation will be mitigated. We test our predictions using a database of 942 Chinese publicly listed firms between 2008 and 2016. Our findings imply that the choice of optimal CSR strategy has to be made in accordance with the embedding context. The multidimensionality view of OD enables firms to better orchestrate firms’ strategic positioning along different dimensions of complex practices, which leads to better customization of societal expectations and the industrial competitive landscape.

Research on corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure recognizes the importance of the government and examines how firms respond to government CSR regulations. However, little attention is given to how government regulations affect firms’ disclosure strategy in multiple fields of CSR. Based on institutional theory, this study proposes that mandatory CSR disclosure increases the legitimacy management cost for firms, and thus firms disclose more CSR scope to gain legitimacy and less CSR emphasis to reduce costs. Using data from Chinese A-share listed firms in 2008–2018, this study finds that mandatory CSR disclosure is positively related to CSR scope but negatively related to CSR emphasis. In addition, firm visibility strengthens the aforementioned positive and negative relations, whereas market competition weakens the relation between mandatory CSR disclosure and CSR emphasis. This study contributes to the literature on CSR disclosure and studies on organizational responses to the government mandate.

This study examines Chinese corporations’ responses to a sudden natural disaster in terms of their philanthropic donations. We apply Polanyi's double movement perspective to argue that rapid market expansion in an emerging economy causes social problems such as large-income disparities and environmental degradation. This calls forth counterforces advocating social responsibility and sustainability. Such countermovements can be strengthened by a major disaster, especially in the domain of corporate philanthropy. The resulting increase in corporate philanthropy persists long after the disaster, especially for those firms with large intra-firm pay disparities, operating in socially contested industries and located in regions with more social foundations. Using the context of China's 2008 Wenchuan earthquake, we find support for these arguments in a sample of Chinese public firms.

In 2018, in the Dialogue, Debate, and Discussion section of MOR 14.3, an interesting series of articles was published in the ‘Forum on Tesla and the Global Automotive Industry’, where researchers discussed the future dynamics of the global automotive sector. In their work, Perkins and Murmann (2018) contended that, based on Tesla's success, a well-funded company could develop a new electric vehicle (EV) from scratch and move it into production within three to five years if it would invest one to two billion USD in design, development, and manufacturing. Expressing a contrasting view, MacDuffie (2018) questioned this possibility, arguing that EV product architecture is unlikely to become substantially more modular and any new entrant would therefore have to develop the ordinary capabilities that current automotive original equipment manufacturers possess, and there is no guarantee that a firm can develop such capabilities. Teece (2018) joined the debate by proposing a capability-based framework within which to analyze four paradigm shifts that have marked progress in the global automotive industry: EVs, autonomous vehicles, connected cars, and personal mobility services. He argues that these paradigm shifts have created opportunities for new entrants while posing challenges to incumbent firms. To navigate through the uncertainty associated with these paradigm shifts, incumbent firms need to enhance and refine their dynamic capabilities and leverage their integration skills. Jiang and Lu (2018) based their contribution to this debate on the development of the Chinese EV market. In MOR 15.1, published in 2019, Teece (2019) further elaborated his framework to facilitate analysis of the prospects for Chinese firms seeking a stronger foothold in the global automobile market. All these articles have been well received by MOR readers and were ranked among the top 20 articles in full-text view times between June 2021 and June 2022.

This essay argues that to assess the likelihood that incumbent firms will successfully make the required transformations to their strategy and operations in the face of technological transformations, it is not sufficient to investigate their dynamic capabilities. Whether an incumbent is likely to succeed in its effort to change itself via dynamic capabilities depends also on how quickly start-ups or diversifying entrants can build ordinary capabilities to offer the new technology at scale. We offer a framework to assess dynamic competition that integrates both ordinary and dynamic capabilities into the analysis by systematically comparing incumbents, start-ups, and diversifying entrants. We illustrate the framework with a case study of electric vehicles and aim to show how crucial such comparative analyses are for making well-founded predictions about the likelihood that incumbents will be able to maintain their leadership positions in the future.

This is a follow-up discussion about the Chinese electric vehicle (EV) sector, in particular the relative prospects of traditional automotive manufacturers and new ‘species’, four years after our last conversation on this topic (Jiang & Lu, 2018). It is also a response to Murmann and Vogt's (2022) latest article, which goes beyond Teece's (2019) focus on dynamic capabilities and constructs a systematic framework of firm capabilities to understand the competitive dynamics during a transformational shift of products.

Murmann and Vogt's (2022) analysis of the automobile industry using a capabilities framework that integrates both dynamic and ordinary capabilities supports an informative table which sets out the major relevant capabilities that incumbents, start-ups, and diversifying entrants would need to develop or access via contract or other arrangement (see Murmann and Vogt, 2022, Table 3). Jiang and Lu (2022) have further discussed new industry paradigms which they suggest will greatly challenge – and perhaps overwhelm – automotive industry incumbents. We believe that their insights can be taken a step further by focusing on two areas: first, the greatly increased availability of outsourced manufacturing driven by the shift to electric vehicle (‘EV’) powertrains; and second, the ongoing transformation of the driver and passenger experience that is driven by software–user experience software integrated with networked consumer service ecosystems.

The measurement and communication of the effect size of an independent variable on a dependent variable is critical to effective statistical analysis in the Social Sciences. We develop ideas about how to extend traditional methods of evaluating relationships in multivariate models to explain and illustrate the statistical power of a focal independent variable. Even with a growing acceptance of the need to report effect sizes, scholars in the management community have few well-established protocols or guidelines for reporting effect sizes. In this editorial essay, we: (1) review the necessity of reporting effect sizes; (2) discuss commonly used measures of effect size and accepted cut-offs for large, medium, and small effect sizes; (3) recommend standards for reporting effect sizes via verbal descriptions and graphical presentations; and (4) present best practice examples of reporting and discussing effect size. In summary, we provide guidance for authors on how to report and interpret effect sizes, advocating for rigor and completeness in statistical analysis.