IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/worbus/v50y2015i1p26-35.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Establishing rigor in mail-survey procedures in international business research

Author

Listed:
  • Chidlow, Agnieszka
  • Ghauri, Pervez N.
  • Yeniyurt, Sengun
  • Cavusgil, S. Tamer

Abstract

How rigorous have our data-collection procedures been in international business research? We report the results of a comprehensive content analysis of scholarly work published in four leading international business journals over the past decade. The focus is data-collection procedures used by researchers in mail surveys. The intent is to be self-critical and formulate strategies for enhancing the rigor and success of data-collection procedures in survey-based research. Our findings confirm that international business scholars could significantly improve surveys’ response rates by following more rigorous and well-established methodological practices already established in the social science literature. We also find that, while some continents tend to be oversampled, a large portion of the world remains underrepresented in international business research. The results point to interesting trends in cross-cultural data-collection procedures. Given that primary research will always drive new knowledge creation, scholars are strongly advised to practice best-available procedures for data collection.

Suggested Citation

  • Chidlow, Agnieszka & Ghauri, Pervez N. & Yeniyurt, Sengun & Cavusgil, S. Tamer, 2015. "Establishing rigor in mail-survey procedures in international business research," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 26-35.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:worbus:v:50:y:2015:i:1:p:26-35
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jwb.2014.01.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090951614000054
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jwb.2014.01.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Jobber & Hafiz Mirza & Kee H Wee, 1991. "Incentives and Response Rates to Cross-National Business Surveys: A Logit Model Analysis," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 22(4), pages 711-721, December.
    2. Yang, Zhilin & Wang, Xuehua & Su, Chenting, 2006. "A review of research methodologies in international business," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 601-617, December.
    3. G Tomas M Hult & David J Ketchen & David A Griffith & Carol A Finnegan & Tracy Gonzalez-Padron & Nukhet Harmancioglu & Ying Huang & M Berk Talay & S Tamer Cavusgil, 2008. "Data equivalence in cross-cultural international business research: assessment and guidelines," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 39(6), pages 1027-1044, September.
    4. B. L. Myers & A. J. Melcher, 1969. "On the Choice of Risk Levels in Managerial Decision-Making," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 31-39, October.
    5. Uma Sekaran, 1983. "Methodological and Theoretical Issues and Advancements in Cross-Cultural Research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 14(2), pages 61-73, June.
    6. Michael R Mullen, 1995. "Diagnosing Measurement Equivalence in Cross-National Research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 26(3), pages 573-596, September.
    7. van Herk, H. & Poortinga, Y.H. & Verhallen, T.M.M., 2005. "Equivalence of survey data : Relevance for international marketing," Other publications TiSEM d808ce41-c3b8-4394-b80d-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. David Jobber & John Saunders, 1988. "An Experimental Investigation into Cross-National Mail Survey Response Rates," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 19(3), pages 483-489, September.
    9. Frank L DuBois & David Reeb, 2000. "Ranking the International Business Journals," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 31(4), pages 689-704, December.
    10. Jagdip Singh, 1995. "Measurement in Cross-National Research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 26(3), pages 597-619, September.
    11. Harzing, Anne-Wil, 1997. "Response rates in international mail surveys: Results of a 22-country study," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 6(6), pages 641-665, December.
    12. N L Reynolds & A C Simintiras & A Diamantopoulos, 2003. "Theoretical justification of sampling choices in international marketing research: key issues and guidelines for researchers," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 34(1), pages 80-89, January.
    13. Knight, Gary A. & Spreng, Richard A. & Yaprak, Attila, 2003. "Cross-national development and validation of an international business measurement scale: the COISCALE," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 12(5), pages 581-599, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Agnieszka Chidlow & Pervez N. Ghauri, 2011. "Establishing Data Collection Procedures Equivalence in International Business Research," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series wp1013, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    2. Bo Bernhard Nielsen & Catherine Welch & Agnieszka Chidlow & Stewart Robert Miller & Roberta Aguzzoli & Emma Gardner & Maria Karafyllia & Diletta Pegoraro, 2020. "Fifty years of methodological trends in JIBS: Why future IB research needs more triangulation," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 51(9), pages 1478-1499, December.
    3. Agnieszka Chidlow & Pervez N. Ghauri, 2014. "What incentives are being used by International Business Researchers in Their Surveys? A Review," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series wp1086, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    4. Harzing, Anne-Wil, 1997. "Response rates in international mail surveys: Results of a 22-country study," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 6(6), pages 641-665, December.
    5. Polsa, Pia, 2013. "The crossover-dialog approach: The importance of multiple methods for international business," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 288-297.
    6. Mary Margaret Rogers & Robert A. Peterson & Gerald Albaum, 2013. "Measuring Business Related Ethicality Globally: Cultural Emic Or Etic?," International Journal of Management and Marketing Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 6(1), pages 1-14.
    7. van Herk, H. & Poortinga, Y.H. & Verhallen, T.M.M., 2005. "Equivalence of survey data : Relevance for international marketing," Other publications TiSEM d808ce41-c3b8-4394-b80d-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Diamantopoulos, A. & Reynolds, N.L. & Simintiras, A.C., 2006. "The impact of response styles on the stability of cross-national comparisons," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(8), pages 925-935, August.
    9. Kothari, Tanvi & Lahiri, Somnath, 2012. "Yesterday, today and tomorrow: An overview of research publications in the Journal of International Management," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 102-110.
    10. Knight, Gary A. & Spreng, Richard A. & Yaprak, Attila, 2003. "Cross-national development and validation of an international business measurement scale: the COISCALE," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 12(5), pages 581-599, October.
    11. Yexin Liu & Weiwei Wu & Yanggi Kim, 2023. "How do latecomer firms achieve catch-up through technology management: a comparative analysis," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    12. Miller, Stewart R. & Moore, Fiona & Eden, Lorraine, 2024. "Ethics and international business research: Considerations and best practices," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(1).
    13. Antoncic, Bostjan & Hisrich, Robert D., 2001. "Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement and cross-cultural validation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 495-527, September.
    14. Tan, Justin, 2001. "Innovation and risk-taking in a transitional economy: A comparative study of chinese managers and entrepreneurs," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 359-376, July.
    15. Hult, G. Tomas M. & Keillor, Bruce D. & Hightower, Roscoe, 2000. "Valued product attributes in an emerging market: a comparison between French and Malaysian consumers," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 206-220, July.
    16. Vishal Gupta & Sandra C. Mortal & Tina Yang, 2018. "Entrepreneurial orientation and firm value: Does managerial discretion play a role?," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, January.
    17. Charles J. Corbett, 2006. "Global Diffusion of ISO 9000 Certification Through Supply Chains," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 330-350, January.
    18. Ellis, Paul D. & Zhan, Ge, 2011. "How international are the international business journals?," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 100-112, February.
    19. Zhan, Ge, 2013. "Statistical power in international business research: Study levels and data types," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 678-686.
    20. Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Douglas Shaw & Shannon R. Ragland & Sally Keefe & John M. (Mac) Callaway, 1996. "Using Distance and Zip Code Census Information For Nonresponse Correction In the Analysis of Mail Survey Data," UCLA Economics Working Papers 751, UCLA Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:worbus:v:50:y:2015:i:1:p:26-35. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/620401/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.