With globalization in business academia expanding and deepening, it is timely to question the validity and utility of the concept of country of origin as a base category for comparative cross‐cultural research and theory development. In their contribution in the British Journal of Management, Burgess and Shaw (2010) rank the most productive institutions and countries contributing to board membership of top ranked journals on the basis of their country of origin. Taking their findings as a starting point for our discourse, we re‐analyse their database, in addition to our own investigations. We contend that while country of origin may be an appropriate category for between‐countries comparison of multinational entities, it is of little use when comparing meta‐national institutions, such as top tier refereed journal boards and the globalized business/management schools from which they are drawn. Our findings point towards the need for finer differentiation of what constitutes the concept country of origin, but also that its relevance should be questioned in, at least, globalized contexts. The question we pose extends to any pertinent ‘globalized’ topic within and without business and management.
Altman, Y., & Laguecir, A. (2012). Leadership in the Academic Field of Business and Management and the Question of Country of Origin: A Commentary on Burgess and Shaw (2010): Leadership in Academic Business and Management. British Journal of Management, 23(4), 589-597. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjom.2012.23.issue-4