Globalization has traditionally been underpinned by a liberalist order, characterized by principles such as multilateral cooperation, cost reduction, and economic rationality. However, the recent geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and China have challenged this institutional logic, giving rise to realist principles that emphasize competition, nationalism, and protectionism (Cui, Vertinsky, Wang, & Zhou, 2023; Luo, 2024; Witt, 2019). This paradigm shift has manifested as U.S.-China decoupling (Cui et al., 2023), techno-nationalism (Luo & van Assche, 2023), Global Value Chain (GVC) disruption (Vertinsky, Kuang, Zhou, & Cui, 2023), politicized fragmentation of the world economy (Beugelsdijk & Luo, 2024; Cui, Tian, & Yu, 2025), and protection sentiments (Yiu, Wan, Chen, & Tian, 2024). The escalated systemic volatility and unpredictability have resulted in global disorder, challenging long-held and fundamental assumptions that shape the decision-making of both domestic and multinational enterprises (MNEs).

Recently, scholars have started to delve into how MNEs respond to such global disorder, from various perspectives. For example, integrating the perspectives of institutional logic and risk management, Cui et al. (2023) has developed a theoretical framework that guides MNEs in addressing the ‘new vulnerabilities’ of globalization. A few researchers have explored MNE post-entry strategies, such as rhetorical and geopolitical jockeying strategies, to address geopolitical conflicts (Lubinski & Wadhwani, 2020; Tian, 2022). Other studies have adopted relational or network perspectives to examine the impacts of country-level conflicts and sentiments exacerbated by national animosity, military conflict, and diplomatic relations, on cross-border investments, including mergers, alliances, and subsidiary establishment (Li, Arikan, Shenkar, & Arikan, 2020; Li, Meyer, Zhang, & Ding, 2018; Tian, Xu, & Yiu, 2024; Xu, Li, Wang, Xin, & Zhao, 2025).

Despite these early insights, the origin, mechanisms, and consequences of the global disorder remains understudied. While prior studies have tackled these issues and developed important theoretical perspectives (Cui et al., 2023; Luo, 2024; Vertinsky et al., 2023; Witt, 2019; Witt, Li, Välikangas & Lewin, 2021), most of the incumbent frameworks remain untested, demanding micro-level empirical evidence. Second, most of the existing studies focus on firm-level decision making, overlooking the role of key decision-makers within firms, such as the board of directors and top management leadership, study of whom would shed more nuanced insights on the global disorder. Third, most existing insights have primarily taken a top-down approach, examining the cascading effect of global disorder on firms, while overlooking the bottom-up effect of micro-level behaviors on the genesis and development of this turbulence. Finally, and probably more importantly, given the disruptive nature of the global disorder on the world economic order, the challenges it poses on the classic theories founded on the economic logic has yet to be fully addressed. A wide range of theories from multiple disciplines (e.g., strategy, international business, and corporate governance) may need to be more fully engaged, where their fundamental assumptions are revisited for novel and updated insights.

Scope of the Special Issue

This special issue aspires to advance our knowledge of these aforementioned critical issues of the global disorder. We focus on China, a key stakeholder shaping this global turbulence. Specifically, we seek studies on Chinese domestic firms, Chinese MNEs, and non-Chinese MNEs operating in China, as they navigate this disorder. We are interested in innovative research that examines, from a top-down approach, the impact of the global disorder on firms, such as their strategic responses and performance consequences. We are also interested in papers that examine, from a bottom-up approach, how firm decision-making may contribute to the evolution of the global disorder.

We welcome a wide range of theoretical perspectives, such as institutional theory, political science, strategy, international business, and corporate governance. We are open to analysis at multiple levels, such as ecosystem, inter-firm, firm, board of directors, and executive teams. Theoretical and empirical studies, quantitative and qualitative approaches are all welcome. Given the transformative nature of the global disorder in redefining the existing global economic order, this special issue particularly welcomes submissions that challenge classic theories and illuminate novel insights. In that spirit, we welcome submissions with empirical findings that may appear unconventional or counterintuitive, and we ensure they will be treated fairly in the review process.

All submissions must directly speak to, measure, and/or investigate the global disorder and its effects. Global disorder must be placed at the center of theorizing and analysis, rather than just serving as a contextual backdrop. Submissions that fail to do so will not be sent out for review.

Example Themes and Topics

Below, we outline several possible topics for exploration. These examples are by no means exhaustive.

Global disorder and firm strategy
- How does the global disorder shape firm risk-taking tendencies and behaviors, and what are the mechanisms?
- How does techno-nationalism influence Chinese companies’ technology-search behaviors, such as digitalization and adopting artificial intelligence (Raisch & Krakowski, 2021), to reduce dependence on foreign resources and technologies?
- How does national security concerns (e.g., data sovereignty, critical infrastructure protection) shape firms’ business models, competition, and cooperation (Cui, Yang, & Vertinsky, 2018)?
- How do geopolitical conflicts and trade protectionism impact the GVCs’ configurations and resilience of domestic firms and MNEs in China?
- How do MNEs employ political behaviors and relations with governments, such as engaging in local political and social initiatives (Sun et al., 2024), to mitigate political risks stemming from the global disorder and how effective are such strategies?
- How do firms utilize strategic behaviors, such as linguistic, rhetorical, political (e.g., guanxi), and philanthropic tactics, to adapt to, take advantage of, or circumvent the potential institutional, behavioral, political, economic, and governance impact of the global disorder? And how effective are such strategies?
- How do Chinese firms work together to circumvent some commonly faced issues of the global disorder? What are the roles of state-owned enterprises in China in such a process?
- What are the differences in the impact of the global disorder on Chinese MNEs, foreign MNEs operating in China, and other firms? And do they react differently to the global disorder and how?
- What is the impact of the global disorder on firm intellectual property rights (IPRs) strategies both domestically and internationally (Brander, Cui, & Vertinsky, 2017; Cui, Narula, Minbaeva, & Vertinsky, 2022)?
Global disorder and board of directors
- How does the global disorder alter the strategic priorities of independent directors, and what governance mechanisms enable them to dynamically adapt their monitoring and resource provision roles (Bonini, Deng, Ferrari, John, & Ross, 2022) in fragmented institutional environments?
- What international experience do directors need to mitigate or exacerbate the negative effects of the global disorder (e.g., supply chain disruptions, regulatory arbitrage) on firm performance and under what conditions?
- How does the global disorder shape board attention to different activities (e.g., proactive strategic planning vs. reactive crisis management)?
- How does the global disorder impact the board’s political capital, and how do firms reconfigure political ties to balance legitimacy risks and resource acquisition?
- How do MNEs strategically balance competing institutional logics in director selection to align with home and host country expectations?
- Which governance innovations (e.g., hybrid boards, decentralized decision rights) help firms reconcile competing institutional logics arising from the global disorder (e.g., conflicting demands between home country governments and global shareholders)?
- How do firms co-evolve with the global disorder through iterative adaptations in governance mechanisms (e.g., shifting from shareholder primacy to stakeholder resilience)?
Global disorder and top management teams
- What leadership capabilities should firm top managers develop to adapt to the evolving global political landscape?
- How do various characteristics (e.g., cognitive flexibility, cosmopolitan identity) of firm top leaders affect their firm’s strategic responses to the global disorder?
- What roles do top managers’ characteristics (e.g., passion, humility, gender, etc.) play in regaining legitimacy for companies under sanctions?
- How does the global disorder amplify public emotional tensions between competing logics (e.g., shareholder primacy vs. national security), and how do top leaders’ emotional ambidexterity (e.g., simultaneous expression of urgency and calmness) enable paradoxical strategies to navigate these tensions?
- What roles do firm leaders’ emotional expressions (e.g., anger as resolve vs. recklessness; Wang, Lin, Jiang, Yang, & Zhao, 2023) play in repairing trust distorted by the global disorder?
The bottom-up effect of firms on global disorder
- How do corporate lobbying efforts shape host/home country policies, thereby exacerbating or mitigating geopolitical tensions (e.g., technology competition, trade wars)?
- Can firm-government ties (e.g., firms’ political embeddedness) escalate or mitigate interstate conflicts by aligning corporate interests with nationalist agendas?
- Under what conditions do MNEs act as informal diplomatic actors to de-escalate geopolitical tensions (e.g., mediating disputes through cross-border investments or joint ventures)?
- How do Chinese private firms leverage ‘business diplomacy’ (e.g., BRI projects, cultural exchanges) to reshape global perceptions of China’s geopolitical intentions?
- Do bottom-up corporate alliances (e.g., industry consortia) create alternative governance structures that reduce the dependency on state-led systems?
- How do localization strategies (e.g., MNEs decoupling R&D from headquarters, Chinese firms building regional hubs) fragment global technological ecosystems and amplify geopolitical rivalry?
- How do firms’ CSR/ESG initiatives (e.g., renewable energy projects in Africa) in conflict-prone regions alter local governance structures, and consequently affect great-power competition?
- Can corporate narratives (e.g., framing trade disputes as ‘win-win’ opportunities) reshape public opinion and soften state-level adversarial postures?
- How do tech firms’ data governance practices (e.g., cross-border data flows, AI ethics) influence interstate disputes over digital sovereignty and cyber norms?
- Can micro-level theories of corporate political activity (e.g., resource dependence, institutional entrepreneurship) explain macro-level geopolitical shifts?
- What is the influence of firm- and country-level IPR policies in China on the global disorder (Brander et al., 2017; Cui, et al, 2022)?

Submission Process and Deadlines

Inquiries regarding the special issue can be addressed to any of the guest editors. Submissions for the special issue should be made electronically via MOR’s ScholarOne Manuscripts platform at https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/mor and specify that they are intended for the ‘Global Disorder’ special issue. Manuscripts must be submitted between Jan 15–31, 2026.

Special Issue Workshop

All authors who are invited to revise and resubmit their manuscripts are expected to present their papers at an MOR Special Issue workshop to be held in May 2026. During the workshop, the special issue editors will provide constructive feedback to help the authors with the revision. Presenting at the workshop does not guarantee acceptance in the special issue. We may also host a pre-submission workshop for those interested in getting early feedback.

Special Issue Guest Editors

Victor Cui, Conrad Research Excellence Chair and Professor of Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Global Strategy at the University of Waterloo. His research focuses on two main areas: geopolitical tensions, particularly between the U.S. and China, and strategies for technological innovation. His work has been published in leading scholarly journals such as Journal of International Business Studies, Strategic Management Journal, and Research Policy, and has been featured by media outlets like Fortune and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). Dr. Cui has co-edited a special issue of JIBS, served on its editorial board, and is currently Senior Editor of Management and Organization Review (MOR). His honors include the Best Senior Editor Award of MOR, JIBS Best Reviewer Award, and best paper awards from the Academy of Management and the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada. His email is: victor.cui@uwaterloo.ca.

Yuehua Xu, Professor at the School of Management, Shandong University. Her main research areas include: corporate governance, corporate social responsibility, and strategic leadership. She has published in top-tier journals, such as Organization Science, Strategic Management Journal, Journal of Management, Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of World Business, and so on. She serves as a board member at Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Management and Organization Review, etc. Her email is: shellyxyh@hotmail.com.

Xiaocong Tian, Associate Professor at the School of Management, Shandong University. Her current research focuses on international political relations, rhetorical strategies, and corporate governance in the context of emerging markets. Her studies have appeared in leading academic journals, including Academy of Management Journal, Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of Management, Journal of World Business, and International Business Review. Her email is: tian.xiaocong@sdu.edu.cn.

Changqi Wu, Professor at the Guanghua School of Management, Peking University. He specializes in corporate strategy and international business. His research appears in leading journals such as Strategic Management Journal, Journal of Management Studies, Journal of World Business, Rand Journal of Economics, and International Journal of Industrial Organization. He serves on the editorial boards of Journal of World Business and Journal of International Policy Studies. His email is: topdog@gsm.pku.edu.cn.

References

Beugelsdijk, S., & Luo, Y. (2024). The politicized nature of international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 55(3), 281-284.

Bonini, S., Deng, J., Ferrari, M., John, K., & Ross, D. G. (2022). Long-tenured independent directors and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 43(8), 1602–1634.

Brander, J. A., Cui, V., & Vertinsky, I. (2017). China and intellectual property rights: A challenge to the rule of law. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(7), 908–921.

Cui, V., Tian, X., & Yu, R. (2025). Fragmentation in international business: A geographical-and-political perspective. International Business Review, forthcoming.

Cui, V., Yang, H., & Vertinsky, I. (2018). Attacking your partners: Strategic alliances and competition between partners in product markets. Strategic Management Journal, 39(12), 3116–3139.

Cui, V., Narula, R., Minbaeva, D., Vertinsky, I. (2022). Towards integrating country- and firm-level perspectives on intellectual property rights. Journal of International Business Studies, 53(9), 1880–1894.

Cui, V., Vertinsky, I., Wang, Y., & Zhou, D. (2023). Decoupling in international business: The ‘new’vulnerability of globalization and MNEs’ response strategies. Journal of International Business Studies, 54(8), 1562–1576.

<[>Li, C., Arikan, I., Shenkar, O., & Arikan, A. (2020). The impact of country-dyadic military conflicts on market reaction to cross-border acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 51, 299–325.

Li, J., Meyer, K. E., Zhang, H., & Ding, Y. (2018). Diplomatic and corporate networks: Bridges to foreign locations. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(6), 659–683.

Lubinski, C., & Wadhwani, R. D. (2020). Geopolitical jockeying: Economic nationalism and multinational strategy in historical perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 41(3), 400–421.

Luo, Y. (2024). Paradigm shift and theoretical implications for the era of global disorder. Journal of International Business Studies, 55(2), 127–135.

Luo, Y., & Van Assche, A. (2023). The rise of techno-geopolitical uncertainty: Implications of the United States CHIPS and Science Act. Journal of International Business Studies, 54(8), 1423–1440.

Raisch, S., & Krakowski, S. (2021). Artificial intelligence and management: The automation–augmentation paradox. Academy of Management Review, 46(1), 192–210.

Sun, P., Doh, J., Rajwani, T., Werner, T., & Luo, X. R. (2024). The management of socio‐political issues and environments: Toward a research agenda for corporate socio‐political engagement. Journal of Management Studies, 61(2), 277–306.

Tian, X. (2022). The art of rhetoric: Host country political hostility and the rhetorical strategies of foreign subsidiaries in developing economies. Journal of World Business, 57(5), 101360.

Tian, X., Xu, Y., & Yiu, D. W. (2024). Foreign Director Exit in the Midst of Deteriorating Bilateral Political Relations. Journal of Management, 01492063241265039.

Vertinsky, I., Kuang, Y., Zhou, D., & Cui, V. (2023). The political economy and dynamics of bifurcated world governance and the decoupling of value chains: An alternative perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 54(7), 1351–1377.

Wang, L., Lin, Y., Jiang, W., Yang, H., & Zhao, H. (2023). Does CEO emotion matter? CEO affectivity and corporate social responsibility. Strategic Management Journal, 44(7), 1820–1835.

Witt, M. A. (2019). De-globalization: Theories, predictions, and opportunities for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 50(7), 1053–1077.

Witt, M. A., Li, P. P., Välikangas, L., & Lewin, A. Y. (2021). De-globalization and decoupling: Game changing consequences?. Management and Organization Review, 17(1), 6-15.

Xu, Y., Li, J., Wang, Y., Xin, L., & Zhao, H. (2025). Exploring corporate philanthropy, home country foreign aid, and country of origin-based stigma for multinational enterprises: An experimental study. Journal of World Business, 60(3), 101623.

Yiu, D. W., Wan, W. P., Chen, K. X., & Tian, X. (2024). A theory of host country sentiments: an illustration in cross-border acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 67(4), 1024–1054.