Covid 19:

Digesting a Bitter Cherry on an Over Baked Cake

Renewing the Approach to Corporate Strategy in a Global Turmoil'.

Jean Paul Lemaire,

ESCP BS

Abstract :

The Covid 19 health crisis, of unprecedented magnitude, has brutally blocked most economic areas in
the world, as well as international trade and investment flows. It also overlaps with recent challenges
to bilateral and multilateral relations, such as the trade war between China and the United States,
Brexit, economic embargoes or the reconsideration of international trade agreements. Moreover, it is
clearly linked to the major environmental challenges related to the deterioration of the climate and the
biodiversity, as well as to widespread socio-economic challenges, such as unemployment, delocation
and protectionism, while at the same time calling into question the stability of countries and the
survival of companies.

As a reaction to the last decades of continuous economic opening, at regional, continental, multi-
continental or global level, based on a wide diffusion of economic and financial liberalism, these
shocks have severely affected the ongoing international economic integration, starting with the
financial crisis of 2008-2009, and following the political turnarounds of 2014-1017, in the United
States, Brazil and various countries - including in Europe . Their combined impact is exacerbated by
this new and unexpected phenomenon, which is leading to an even more in-depth reconsideration of
companies' internationalisation strategies and managerial practices in this shaken global environment.
This encourages, in such a new and sensitive context, the enrichment of "analysis to decision"
processes and models, which can be applied to companies operating in various geographical areas and
sectors, in order to respond to the specific needs related to their internationalization for their various
functions, in, both, short and long-term perspectives.

Key concepts developed: impact of Covid 19, cyclical and structural shocks, international trade and
investment flows, geographical and sectoral impacts,context international analysis to decision
modelling, adjustments of organizations and business functions.
Introduction :

The health crisis, which dramatically hit almost all countries since the end of 2019, triggered a series
of consequences that has already profoundly affected their growth and, more generally, their
respective socio-economic activities (Nicola et al, 2020), as well as the international trade and
investment flows (Baker et al. 2020).

The first quantitative projections from reference multi-governmental bodies such as the OECD, WTO1
or the World Bank (Fernandes, 2020) point to this ; without prejudice, both immediately and in the
longer term, to the qualitative effects that are still difficult to grasp, at both geopolitical and
environmental levels, as well as for governments, companies, NGOs.., not forgetting populations
(Baldwin & Weder di Mauro, 2020 a & b), in an increasingly "globalised" and, presently, profoundly
shaken political, regulatory, socio-economic and technological context.

Furthermore, it is difficult to consider the pandemic as an isolated phenomenon and to ignore other
major incidents that have occurred over the past five years - Brexit (Tetlow et al., 2018), sanctions and
embargoes (Neuenkirch et al, 2015), the China-U.S. trade war (Bolt, et al., 2019), the widespread rise
of protectionism around the world (Burcifal, 2009), and the growing awareness of environmental
degradation, whose interactions and cumulative effects cannot be ignored (Ghesquiere et al., 2016).

The analyses that apply to Covid 19 -as a "disruptive" and global phenomenon, insofar as almost all
countries are concerned- refer to the financial crisis of 2008-2009 and, beyond that, as many authors
propose, with even more hindsight, to the 1929 crisis (Coibion et al., 2020), giving rise to comparisons
and inspiring evolutionary scenarios (McKibbin et al.,2020), most often of a macro-economic nature,
without always placing them in the current corporate context, marked by this series of upheavals,
without specifying their impact on sectors and organisations (Park et al., 2020).

The first effects of this health crisis already observed among organisations (companies, public actors,
NGOs, etc.) operating across borders (Curran et al., 2018), show significant differences between them,
depending on their size (Bartik et al., 2020) and mode of governance, on their sector of activity - some
sectors being hit hard (del Rio et al, 2020), others being able to take temporary or permanent
advantage of the circumstances (Okyere, 2020). As well, significant differences appear according to
the geographical area in which they operate – some areas appearing more "resilient" than others (Hale
et al., 2020 ; WHO, 2019), at least in terms of the victims of the virus....

In fact, in the face of such a phenomenon, and from a more operational point of view, it is the
internationalisation process developed by each organisation - large or small, private or public, profit-
making or not, operating abroad, in a given sector, in one or more geographical areas - that is at stake
and is called into question.

1 WTO, “Services Trade Barometer”, 19 May 2020 : « The volume of world merchandise trade is likely to fall precipitously
in the first half of 2020 as the COVID-19 pandemic disrupts the global economy, according to the WTO Goods Trade
Barometer released on 20 May. The index currently stands at 87.6, far below the baseline value of 100, suggesting a sharp
contraction in world trade extending into the second quarter. This is the lowest value on record since the indicator was
launched in July 2016 ». https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news20_e/wtoi_19may20_e.htm
In a short term perspective, but just as much in the medium and long term, given the extent of this
questioning triggered by the health crisis, it is a matter for each organisation to integrate this
unforeseen -if not unpredictable- phenomenon and to consider it either as a temporary turbulence or as
a paradigm shift (Gruszczynski, 2020).

Beyond that, each organisation will have, as well, to consider the other events which have, in the
recent period, contributed to questioning the general dynamics of the evolution of trade and
investment flows as well as their impact on its own international sector/activity and corporate
dynamics, in an approach ranging from analysis to decision-making, encompassing its organisational
and functional implementation (Peng, 2004).

It is in this perspective that a "funnel" approach - Macro, Meso and Micro - can be followed at three
successive levels, applying here the PREST model (Lemaire, 1993, 1997, 2000, 2013)2, which is
dynamic, sequential and three-dimensional - political/regulatory, economic/social and technological -:

- starting, in the first instance, from the identification of the various external pressures (Hyatt et al.,
2017) affecting the geographical-sectoral environment -broad or focused- targeted by each
organisation under consideration (its « area of reference »), taking into account the diversity and
renewal of the contextual elements that determine their nature and intensity, and which will have to be
taken into account positively or negatively,

- to, then, assess the impact on its activity, in this « area of reference », it is targeting or in which it is
developing (Bechter et al., 2012), in order to translate them, from external pressures, into terms of
geo-sectoral challenges to face to respond to the pressures, emerging from the previous level of this
contextual analysis,

2 Sketched for the banking sector in the book co-authored by the author and P.B. Ruffini, "Vers l'Europe Bancaire" (Dunod,
Paris, 1993), then in his doctoral thesis, "Stratégies bancaires internationales", Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne, 1995, generalized
to all sectors for the 2000 IMP conference and, improved in successive editions of his textbook Stratégies
d'internationalisation: Nouveaux enjeux d'ouverture des organisations, des activités et des territoires, Management sup,
Paris, Dunod, 3rd ed, 2013.
- in order to better determine the strategic levers, gathering key success factors to be sought and
transformed into competitive advantages (Palmié et al., 2014), that it will be able to operate to satisfy
its priorities and strategic objectives, in the short, medium and long term, as to envisage and develop
their organisational and functional implementation, according to the more or less brutal contextual
changes and issues highlighted upstream, at the two previous levels.

1. First step : identification of new external pressures on the organizations' area(s) of reference:

With the health crisis, in addition to the new constraints applying to international trade and investment
flows which have multiplied over the last five years, it is the situation of most organisations, in their
respective sectors and in their sole or various target countries, that is being impacted, politically and
in terms of regulations (Ozili et al., 2020), as well as economically, socially and technologically

There are major contextual elements each organization has to analyse, which interact widely with each
other and whose effects tend to spread over all geographical areas, but with local specific impacts,:

1.1. At the political-regulatory level, the Anglo-American-inspired liberal policies, initiated by

Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan at the end of the 1970s (Simmons et al., 2006), have
largely displayed among a number of countries, during decades, even if not really converging
(Drezner, 2001), being regularly questionned, especially by the « inclusion » necessity (Porter et
al., 2004) or, more abruptly, as by the 2008-2009 financial crisis. A liberal orientation with which
many actors (governements, private organizations), in many geographical areas (countries,
regions..), seemed to have reconnected, at least temporarily, from 2014-2015, until the successive
geopolitical upheavals, recently terminated by the healthcrisis.

This trend has , during decades, been reflected in the progressive liberalisation of trade through,
notably, Preferential Trade agreements (Dür et al., 2014), both in terms of integration of regional
economic zones (trans-Pacific agreements, for example) and of multiplication of trade agreements
between zones (as between Canada and the European Union), completed by the rapid integration
of economic zones that had, for long, remained dormant, such as ASEAN, not to mention the
reopening - at least briefly - of international trade of "sensitive" zones, such as Iran (Ianchovichina
et al, 2016).

However, this trend has been called into question, in Europe, by the Brexit vote in the United
Kingdom (Sampson, 2017), in the world, by the new embargo policy on Iran (Saleh Albarasneh et
al., 2019), imposed by the United States on all of its economic partners, and by the proliferation of
trade barriers emanating from the American administration as a result –among others- of the
economic war between China and the United States (Allison, 2017), without prejudice to
American retaliatory measures against the European Union in a context of growing protectionism,
often combined with populism in many countries (Inglehart et al., 2016).

The changes in the global geopolitical background can largely explain this turnaround: both the
search for a new world leadership by China, following its spectacular rise in economic power,
uninterrupted for several decades (Pomeranz, 2009 ; Jacques, 2012), and the diplomatic and
military games of Russia's return to the forefront (Larrabee, 2010), the difficulties - or even
regression - of European construction (Milio et al., 2014), as well as the unpredictability of the
decisions taken by the Trump administration (Siniver et al., 2020).
 With the Paris agreements of the COP21 (Hourcade, 2015), despite the fact that they have been
directly challenged by a number of major players, first and foremost, the United States (Zhang et
al., 2017), but, also, Brazil (Diele-Viegas et al., 2019) and, to a lesser extent, by all the countries
which, without reneging on their commitments (Roberts, 2016), have not been able to fulfil them,
it is the environmental constraint that also puts pressure on trade and investment flows. From
global warming to the protection of biodiversity they are gradually imposing on organizations,
volens nolens, new constraints impacting many activities and modes of transport- through, in
particular, CO2 emission standards.

By largely paralysing economic activities, international transport - land, sea and air – as
international supply chains, at an unprecedented level and for an unprecedented period of time
(Ivanov, 2020), the health crisis is intensifying these tensions. Growing steadily, they are
reflected, at a variable level of intensity, from one sector to another and from one country to
another. New directive governement policies would appear, then, necessary, with more constraints
for the players, in order to cope with the likely consequences of the pandemics: prevention of
contamination, adapted working conditions and productivity, new implicit or explicit imperatives
to maintain employment, relocation and reduction of external dependence. . (Fornaro et al., 2020).

1.2. At the economic and social level, external pressures are no less significant, with a level of
uncertainty that the health crisis has suddenly raised, with many major economic implications and
shocks on most economies (Guerrierei et al., 2020), affecting simultaneously the international
trade and investment flows -in contrast to their steep growth, recorded during most of the
previous period, and characterized by a significant transformation of the global economic balance.

Firstly, the rise of emerging economies, constantly progressing, with a significan withdrawal of
poverty, since the early 90s -although nowadays questionned by the pandemics (Summer et al.,
2020). However, some of these have become fast-growing economies, such as some of the BRICS
(O’Neill, 2001) and a growing number of "followers", Middle Income Countries (such as Mexico,
ASEAN countries, Nigeria, etc.), also showing great dynamism, characterized by a high growth
rate, a relatively high level of industrialization and of export of industrial products, a high rate of
openness to the outside world and an expanding domestic market driven by a still vigorous
demography, a rising middle class and a significantly reduced poverty line (Chan, 2018).

Conversely, mature economies, still relying on solid infrastructures, both tangible (transport,
utilities, banking and financial system, etc.) and intangible (education system, legal framework,
etc.) are characterised by much lower growth rates. They begin to perceive the consequences of
the ageing of their populations and of the growing competition from emerging economies, in terms
of relocation, job and skills losses, resulting in an economic downgrading and social tensions, that
are particularly noticeable among the middle and working classes, which had made great progress
in previous periods, encouraging the rise of populism (Inglehart et al., 2016).

For both groups, the convergence of living standards and the development of communications,
which characterize the technological aspect of this contextual evolution, have tended to bring
closer together -to a still relative extent, however (de Mooij & Hofstede, 2002)- the respective
sensitivities and expectations of the emerging and mature countries’ populations, despite cultural
differences that are still very significant, in terms of consumption as well as of environmental
(pollution) or social (child labour, for example) standards, in spite of the support of active NGOs
whose international initiatives are more and more acknoledged (Teegen et al., 2004).
 Finally, the multi-governmental framework, both at the global, regional (particularly European)
and national levels (i.e. Central Banks), has been strongly strengthened for a time, to limit the
effects of the 2008-2009 financial crisis and to guarantee the relative stability of international
relations. It is this framework that is suffering the repercussions of the US administration's policy
of international institutions withdrawal, as well as the effects of the Brexit in the future, but which
proved already its capacity to promptly react (Goodell, 2020).

During the current period, from an health point of view, Covid 19 has not led to a rapid
harmonization of emergency policies, directly supported and coordinated by the WHO (World
Health Organization). These were essentially deployed at the level of the States (Hale and al.,
2020), even if certain convergences and exchanges of experience, as sketched in the past (Walt et
al., 2004), have emerged and the adoption of coordinated rules of prevention and response to new
pandemics may be envisaged in the future.

1.3. Finally, at the technological level, the pressures due to the production upheavals resulting from
the multiplication of "breakthrough innovations" (Miranda-Silva et al ., 2016), to the accelerated
processes of mobility and communication, have been considerably increased in many sectors,
gradually eliciting reactions from various public and private stakeholders, in terms of behaviour
and regulation:

The acceleration and sophistication of transport modes, processes and infrastructures -road, air and
maritime (intermodal, containerization), altogether (Bontekoning et al., 2010)- , have greatly
facilitated the development of trade in volume and efficiency for goods (speed, safety,
traceability). It has encouraged the international redeployment of supply chains and facilitated the
relocation and display at world scale of many industrial sectors. However, environement
protection (i.e. CO2 emission standards already mentionned) as safety concerns (as abruptly
generated by Covid 19) would lead to reconsider at medium term their steep progression
(Rondinellia et al., 2000), both in terms of energy shift (from hydrocarbon to electrical power),
diffusion of new limitations (see political-regulatory pressures) and of new users/consumers
expectations (see economic and social pressures).

Similarly, the integration of communication systems (telephone, television and internet) and the
speed and volume increase in the data flows, thanks to fibre, satellite and improved transmission
framework (3G, then 4G, pending the generalisation of 5G) have greatly contributed to the
dissemination and massive exploitation of data of all kinds -private and public. It has generated, at
the same time, fears and measures to limit or even prohibit such developments -such as the
Huawei ban in the United States, (Schmieg, 2019)- targeting also the dominant players on the
Internet (the GAFAM in Europe), as masters of these transformations (Caglio et al., 2018).

These spectacular advances in both transport and communication modes have considerably
facilitated the spread of innovation through numerous technology transfer agreements (Di
Bendetto et al., 2003) : firstly with the aim of approaching promising markets in fast-growing
economies and, then, with the result to move the bulk of production in many industrial sectors to
low labour cost economies, to serve demand all over the world (Liu, 2008). Meanwhile,
technology transfers have favoured a spectacular progression of new comers, relying on the
extension of their innovation and R&D capacities (Kojima, 2000), allowing a spectacular upturn in
most advanced sectors that were previously the preserve of Western firms (Wang, 2007) and the
emergence of new global leaders - first Japanese, then Korean and, now, Chinese.
 The financial crisis had already shown the importance that these technological changes could have
in transmitting such phenomena and spreading their impact in most economic areas. With the
health crisis, an acute awareness of these transformations has emerged in the governing, political
and economic spheres facing the pandemic, as well as among populations, particularly in the
health sectors (Park, 2020), with the example of equipment (respirators) and consumables (masks,
hydro-alcoholic gel).

This awareness of a growing industrial and technological dependence also seems to have become
somewhat generalized to concern the self-sufficiency. It could, now, in many other sectors than
health, echo the preservation of national jobs and of environmental protection. It could, at least,
lead to some « dislocations » of the global value chains (Rincón-Aznar, 2020), as considered
below.

2. Second step : Review of resulting geo-sectoral challenges for the organisations :

As a result of technological pressures, political and regulatory pressures, as well as economic and
social pressures, the organization and its competitors must consider the geo-sectoral issues they are
confronted which can profoundly transform them: first, in terms of the necessary geo-sectoral
redeployment of their activities, second, in terms of the adaptation of their products and production
processes –if not of their business model-, and, third, in terms of adjustment to the competitive
environment in which they operate from their area of origin towards their area(s) of expansion abroad.

With Covid 19, but also because of the various other types of factors or phenomena that may have
affected trade and investment flows in recent years, these geo-sectoral challenges – in short :
redeployment, adaptation and competition - may have evolved as may have differed significantly from
the previous periods, according to the impact of external pressures applying more particularly to each
target area in the specific field of activity of each organisation in question.

2.1. The challenge of geographic and sectoral redeployment, first of all, in response to external
pressures, is related –for the considered organisation, as for its competitors operating in the same
geographic and sectoral area- to strategic choices concerning the activity or activities it develops there,
either for local selling and/or production, as well as for local display of its international supply chain.

It takes on particular importance when changes in the environment are particularly brutal and the
resulting pressures more intense :

- Geographic redeployment may consist of a pure and simple withdrawal from the area under
consideration (for European companies, for instance, as a consequence of the Iranian embargo under
American pressure). It may also be a reorganization of the geographic deployment of a network of
subsidiaries, related to labour costs considerations (Fish et al., 2012), or anticipating or following a
major political shift -Brexit, for example (Sampson, 2017)- or a change in the status of the
establishments (to comply with new regulatory requirements). More broadly, by enlarging the strategic
perspective, beyond the reference area under consideration, it may involve restructuring the supply and
production chain between different locations and also calling into question relocations previously
decided and implemented (Doh, 2005, Buckley and Ghauri, 2004).

- Sectoral redeployment may call into question, at least in the geo-sectoral area concerned, the nature
of the activities located there, by considering the necessary diversification (Kumar et al., 2012)-, to
balance risks -linked to the uncertainties of the local market, for example (Sali et al., 2011)-, by
envisaging a radical change of activity (to follow a closure of the initial market for economic or
regulatory reasons), by studying the possibility of restructuring through the acquisition of new assets
or the disposal of existing assets which are not priority assets or which have become or are about to
become over-exposed.

In the context of the health crisis, a variety of issues have already been discussed and a number of
scenarios (McKibbin et al., 2020) include the possibility of restructuring internationalized supply and
production chains, precisely in sectors now considered strategic and with a view to limiting or
eliminating external dependence (Doh, 2005). Moreover, the dramatic deterioration of employment in
many countries, as well as the guarantee of the national autonomy, raises questions about the need to
relocate all or part of the supply and production chain. The question of relocating R&D to the country
of origin - in the event that it had previously moved across borders- was also raised (Gersbach et al.
2012; Ivanov, 2020).

2.2. The challenge of adapting the organization’s offer, then, leads to the question of what the
organisation is likely either to standardize or to adapt, on the market and in the specific territorial and
human environment and local context(s) in which it operates across borders (Theodosiou & Leonidou,
2003) ; taking into account, locally, all the pressures that apply, as well as all stakeholders : consumers
or corporate customers, of course, but also local or foreign suppliers, local authorities, NGOs, public
opinion, and the economic and social environment.

Adaptation challenge concerns, also, the range of products and services, as the way it is implemented
and the corporate functions that will be involved in the area of reference under consideration. Beyond
marketing (Ryans et al., 2003), human resources (Dickmann et al., 2006) or finance functions, it is,
therefore, supplies, recruitment and, more generally, corporate social responsibility (He et al., 2020),
which will contribute to expand offer in a reactive manner, particularly when changes in the
environment manifest themselves as abruptly as a health crisis or a natural disaster. The experience of
Covid 19 can also encourage more proactive approaches, according to the special features of the
activity and the specificities of the environment on the territory or set of territories considered.

In fact, two approaches can be distinguished to nurture decisions, based on the analysis of the
evolution of external pressures,

- one, from strong signals indicating more or less sudden and unexpected rupture phenomena
(Hubbard, 2020), calling for greater reactivity -appearance of major health risks (Ezzati et al., 2004),
sudden changes in regulations or economic difficulties, etc.- ; the Covid 19 being an extreme case due
to its brutality and unpredictability ;

- the other based on weaker signals (Kaivo-oja, 2012) , naturally pro-activity encouraging, on the
contrary, by relying on clusters of clues, or on an historical analysis of past incidents, or relying on
punctually updated data, to anticipate recurring but occasional risks or new risks arising, for example,
from the deterioration of the physical or social environment of the organisation in its geo-sectoral area.

The health crisis, but, even more so, the financial crisis and the various challenges to trade and
investment flows, particularly over the last five years, underline the importance of taking into account
anticipatory, as far as possible, and multifunctional factors that do not, however, presuppose
adjustments of any other nature, responding to other challenges caused by external pressures.

2.3. The competition challenge, finally, questions the positioning shifts of the organisation, in the
area of reference under consideration, by determining, in the face of its transformations, how could be
taken into account the new threats and consequent risks that weigh on the sector in this area - just as
the opportunities that could emerge (Rapaccini et al., 2020).

This leads, first of all, to identifying there how each actor or group of actors - including the
organisation considered - sees its position strengthened or deteriorated, as a result of the evolution of
external pressures (Liu, 2013); and to what extent, this would stem, also, from its origin - national or
foreign, and, in this case, its country of origin - as well as its size, or other untangible traits (i.e. type of
management, local record etc..).

This, then, involves identifying the competitive advantages - traditional or renewed - which the
organisation concerned should favour, according to its resources and skills, compared with those of its
competitors, in the context created by the new situation brought about by the various upheavals which
have affected the sector in this particular area (Schlegelmilch, 2020).

Since the health crisis has hit whole sectors particularly hard, those directly exposed to the conditions
of lockdown imposed in a very large number of countries - such as tourism, entertainment, hotels and
restaurants, retailers, but also the automotive industry, aeronautics, etc. -. Many of which are
characterized by their small size and their limited financial resources. Most solid structures seem to
resisted better (Bonadio, et al., 2020). Just as the financial crisis of 2008-2009 had brought to a safe
end those organisations whose activity had not been directly affected - such as the building industry,
even affected for a time – (Kildiené et al, 2011) or those, whatever their sector which had the least
need to resort to banking institutions, temporarily unable to take on new commitments for the benefit
of organisations whose activity had been brutally interrupted.

Conversely, other sectors or industrial streams were able to benefit directly from the pandemics and
from the measures that accompanied it, like the health sector or, to a lesser extent, the agri-food
sector by benefiting from increased but often punctual demand.
However, organisations operating in sectors that have benefited from the health or, previously, from
the financial crisis or that are financially stronger than their competitors have not survived or
prospered solely on their domestic as on international markets. Other assets, other "levers" to be
identified as part of this strategic approach are to be sought in order to overcome the new handicaps
created by such shocks and by the uncertainty that has accompanied or accompanies themin order, as
far as possible, to take advantage of them.

3. Third step : search for appropriate « levers » for new strategic objectives and implementation

Facing these renewed and radicalized challenges due to this succession of crises and rising barriers to
international trade and investment, each organization, beyond the specificities of its economic model
and the unique character on which its domestic and, in this case, cross-border development potential is
based, must, therefore, reconsider all -or part of- its internationalization strategy and its
implementation processes and momentum (Rapaccini et al., 2020).

This leads it to mobilize various "levers" (Palmié, 2014) or converging sets of key success factors
complying with the prospects opened up by the previous phases of the recommended three steps
approach. It would make it possible to overcome (or take advantage of) the dynamics of the new
context, thus clarified. To do this, - if well identified, exploited and combined- the three levers to be
considered - innovation, organization, profitability -can provide each organization with the most
decisive competitive advantages, to cope with emergency –like pandemics (Craven et al., 2020)-, as
well as to face part or all other concerning external issues raised previously –Brexit, embargoes,
financial crises etc..-, affecting its specfic area of reference.

3.1. Innovation lever, in the first place, opens up the widest possible field to explore, as it can concern
products and/or services (Lehrer et al., 2009), as well as their production, distribution and
dissemination processes (Franko, 1989 ; Patel et al, 2013). It can lead to a total or partial renewal of
the offer, as well as to an in-depth revision of the economic model (Morris, 2009), especially if a
radical change in the sector and markets is observed ; which has been demonstrated in the past by
certain major companies confronted to crises and/or to disruptive innovations and/or to major strategic
errors, as in the mobile phone sector (Zaidi et al., 2019).

In this respect, the technological changes in the environment can provide rapid responses to the new
challenges and issues raised by crises, as can be seen, in some activity areas directly affected, for
example by pandemics, by using the Internet and new collective communication solutions (as in
higher management education, for instance, Schlegelmilch, 2020) to offer, respecting health
constraints, traditional services, in an innovative way, which can, in the short term, at least, make
them survive or, even, in a longer term, replace them.

But it is in the area of goods and services production and/or distribution processes that innovation can
also provide answers to the geo-sectoral challenges worsened by crises. For example, by widening the
catchment area for products or services through creation of new distribution methods that go beyond
the geographical domestic or foreign area of distribution previously covered (Knowles et al., 2020).
Innovation could also lead organization to contribute to address urgent global social and
environmental challenges (He et al. 2020).

In this way, innovation can be combined with the other levers -organisation and profitability-, to
improve the organisation’s corporate performance (Miranda-Silva et al., 2016) .

3.2. Organisation lever, indeed, covers a wide range of solutions in response to the challenges (Haas,
1990), generated by crises and the new obstacles to international trade and investment flows:

- Firstly, organisation lever can include major strategic structural moves (mergers and acquisitions,
partnerships, changes in governance arrangements, etc.), in order to increase its critical mass, improve
its financial solidity, optimize its supply chain (Steinle et al., 2008), diversify its portfolio of activities
and/or better balance its geographical exposure;

- it can also focus on the methods for implementing major strategic orientations and adjusting the
organizational architecture (Palmié et al., 2014), by providing the flexibility and agility needed to
adapt to a sudden and/or a more pregressive disruption in the context (Volberda et al., 2003), both by
reconsidering its internal structure (decentralization, for example) and by more effectively calling on
each of its functions ; HR in particular, in order to better mobilize teams, especially if they are
geographically dispersed (Lee et al., 2010), or CSR, to better interact in the environment(s) it operates.

3.3. Profitabilitylever, finally, which includes optimization of, both, costs and revenues, even if, as in
Europe, the support measures of national and supra-national authorities, now, since the financial crisis
of 2008-2009, tend (Pomerleano, (2007) to limit the consequences of crises on employment and
business failures.

On the cost side, the discovery of productivity reserves (Castellani, 2016), as a more judicious
distribution of work between face-to-face and remote work (teleworking), aiming at improving,
employees safety, reduction of costs and travel time, and distribution via the Internet. These could be
responses to the constraints resulting from a crisis such as the Covid, without it being yet possible to
assess its quality over the long term (Belzunegui-Eraso et al., 2020), as well as more permanent
solutions.

On the revenue side, the use of automated and secure payment methods, centralized cash management,
the search for added value linked of the offer, and the volume effects stemming from a geographically
wider distribution (Lu & Beamish, 2017) can all contribute to improving profitability and, thus,
provide the organization with the necessary resources to deal with the uncertainties generated by the
instability of its environment as well as securing its possible future developments.

Conclusion :

Facing the brutal changes in the globalized environment as the specific « area(s) of reference » in
which each organization operate, of which the pandemic is an unprecedented element at a global as at
a local level, but whose repetition in the future is within the realm of probability, it is essential to
reconsider strategic approaches.

Focusing, first and foremost, on the analysis of environmental transformations, its strong signals and
its weak signals herald phenomena of unequalled amplitude, in a world where the time it takes for
their effects to spread is constantly decreasing. The proposed approach, hence, tends to identify the
political, regulatory, economic, social and technological « pressures » that are exerted on the
respective t sectors to which the organisation belong, in the sole or different geographical area(s)
where it operates.

This external pressures identification, then, allow to deduces the major « challenges » - redeployment,
adaptation and competition – to which the organisation is confronted in the foreign geo-sectoral
area(s) it targets, in order to better define the nature and scope of the questions it has to answer, to
more accurately inspire its strategic orientations as their implementation.

This progressive methodological process –beyond the « pressures » and « challenges » successive
steps- leads, at the end, to select and associate the appropriate « levers » - innovation, organisation and
profitability -. The redefinition of the organisation's international strategic orientations as well as their
implementation will logically stem from it, with a view to efficient reactivity and, at the risk of
making mistakes, however, with a concern for anticipation and pro-action that will enable it to better
face the unexpected.
Such an approach is only worthwhile, on the wider scale of globalised trade and investment flows, if it
is regularly and rigorously monitored and seeks to integrate and combine the diversity of signals
previously mentionned, emanating from the environment, in order to transfer them from the analysis
level to the action/decision level.

The lessons of the pandemic, which are still far from being fully understood in all their implications by
political, economic and social actors, call for taking into account the acceleration of change and the
search for ways of assessing - if not covering - the new risks that emerge, exercising vigilance and
developing its intelligence system, as well as identifying response scenarios.

The financial crisis, often mentioned, as well as the new obstacles to trade and investment created by
countries that have long been promoters of an assertive liberalism, are leading to the integration of all
the major factors of instability and uncertainty in such an approach ; without forgetting the
environmental and climatic challenges, which have been so long neglected and whose brutal
manifestations will inevitably be added to the the pandemics and the phenomena taken into account
here as the main ones.

References :

- Allison, G. (2017) Destined for War. Can America and China escape the Thucydides’s Trap ?,
Hougton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston-New York.

Arribas Fernandez I., Perez Garcia F., Tortosa-Ausina E. (2007), Measuring International Integration,
Theory and Evidence of Globalization, fundacion BBVA.

Baker S.R., Bloom N., Davis S.J. Terry, S.J., COVID-Induced Economic Uncertainty, NBER Working
Paper No. 26983, Issued in April 2020, NBER Program(s): Economic Fluctuations and Growth.

- Baldwin R., Weder di Mauro B. (ed.), (2020 a), Economics in the Time of COVID-19, A Vox EU.
Org. Book, CEPR Press, London.

- Baldwin R. Weder di Mauro B. ( ed.), (2020 b), Mitigating the COVID Economic Crisis: Act Fast
and Do Whatever It Takes, A Vox EU. Org. Book, CEPR Press, London.

- Bechter B., Brandl B., Meardi G., (2012), Sectors or countries? Typologies and levels of analysis in
comparative industrial relations, European, Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol 18, Issue 3,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0959680112452691.

- Belzunegui-Eraso, A.; Erro-Garcés A., (2020), Teleworking in the Context of the Covid-19
Crisis. Sustainability, 12, 3662. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093662.

- Bolt W., Mavromatis K. van Wijnbergen, S., The Global Macroeconomics of a Trade War: the Eagle
Model on the Us-China Trade Conflict (January 2019). CEPR Discussion Paper No. DP13495.
Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3328506.

- Bonadio B., Huo Z., Levchenko A.A., , Pandalai-Nayar N., (2020), Global Supply Chains in the
Pandemic, NBER Working Paper No. 27224, Issued in May 2020,
https://www.nber.org/papers/w27224
- Bontekoning Y., Priemus H., (2004), Breakthrough innovations in intermodal freight transport,
Journal, Transportation Planning and Technology, Volume 27, 2004 - Issue 5, pp. 335-345 ,
https://doi.org/10.1080/0308106042000273031

- Bucifal S., (2009), Challenges to the Multilateral Trading System: The Rising Trade Protectionism
Amid the Global Economic Recession (Oct. 26,). Available at SSRN
:https://ssrn.com/abstract=1494805 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1494805.

- Buckley, P. J. and Ghauri, P. (2004) ‘Globalization, economic geography, and the strategy of
multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35, 2, 81– 98.

- Caglio C, Guillou S., (2018), L’Europe numérique. Entre singularités, faiblesses et promesses,
Revue de l’OFCE, 2018/4, pp.11-36.

- Castellani D., Piva M., Schubert T., Vivarelli M., (2016), The Productivity Impact of R&D
Investment: A Comparison between the EU and the US. IZA Discussion Paper No. 9937. Available at
SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2786021.

- Chan S. (2018), East Asian dynamism. Growth, Order and Security in the Pacific Region, 2nd ed.,
Routledge, New York.

- Coibion O., Gorodnichenko Y., Weber M., (2020), Labor Markets During the COVID-19 Crisis: A
Preliminary View, NBER Working Paper No. 27017, Apr.

- Craven M., Liu L., Mysore M., Wilson M., (2020), Risk Practice COVID-19: Implications for
business,. McKinsey, March.

- Curran L., Eckhardt J., (2018), Strategic responses of trade-dependent firms to rising trade
protectionism, in Akcaoglu E.,. Bolsinger H.J. & Wehner R.(ed.), Würzburg International
Business Forum , International Business Conference proceedings, 2018 , Managing
International Political Risk: Arising Challenges for Multinationals in a Changing World

- De Mooij M., Hofstede G., (2002), Convergence and divergence in consumer behavior: implications
for international retailing, Journal of Retailing, Volume 78, Issue 1, Spring, pp. 61-69,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00067-7.

- Del Rio-Chanona R.M., Mealy P., Pichler A., Lafond F., Farmer D., Supply and demand
shocks in the COVID-19 pandemic: An industry and occupation perspective, arXiv Cornell
University 14 April 2020.

- Di Benedetto, C.A., Calantone, R.J. and Zhang, C., (2003), International technology transfer: Model
and exploratory study in the People's Republic of China, International Marketing Review, Vol. 20 No.
4, pp. 446-462. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651330310485171.

- Dickmann M., Müller-Camen M., (2006 -), A typology of international human resource
management strategies and processes, The International Journal of Human Resource Management ,
Vol. 17, Issue 4 , pp. 580-601. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190600581337.
- Diele-Viegas L.M., Rocha C.F.D., (2019), Climate change and Brazil's political
perspectives are threatening the Amazon, Science, Fri, 06-14
.https://science.sciencemag.org/content/climate-change-and-brazil’s-political-
perspectives-are-threatening-amazon

- Doh J.P. (2005), Offshore Outsourcing: Implications for International Business and Strategic
Management Theory and Practice, Journal of Management studies, Vol. 42, Issue 3.

- Drezner D.W., (2001), Globalization and Policy Convergence, International Studies Review, Vol. 3,
Issue1, Spring, pp. 53-78, https://doi.org/10.1111/1521-9488.00225.

- Dür, A., Baccini, L. Elsig, M., (2014), The design of international trade agreements:
Introducing a new dataset. The Review of International Organanizations 9, pp. 353–375
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-013-9179-8.

- Ezzati M., Lopez A.D., Rodgers A., Murray C.J.L. (eds), (2004), Comparative Quantification of
Health Risks. Global and Regional Burden of Disease Attributable to Selected Major Risk Factors,
Vol.1, World Health Organization, Geneva.

- Fernandes, N., (2020), Economic Effects of Coronavirus Outbreak (COVID-19) on the World
Economy, March 22, SSRN: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3557504,.

- Fish J.H., Zschoche M., (2012), The effect of operational flexibility on decisions to withdraw from
foreign production locations, International Business Review, Vol. 21, Issue 5, October, pp. 806-816,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2011.09.006.

- Fornaro L., Wolf M., (2020), Covid-19 Coronavirus and Macroeconomic Policy, CEPR Discussion
Paper No. DP14529, 12 p., Last revised: 6 May.

- Franko L., (1989) Global corporate competition: Who's winning, who's losing, and the R&D factor
as one reason why, Strategic Management Journal,Vol.10, Issue 5, Sept./Oct., pp. 449-474,
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250100505.

- Gersbach H., Schmutzler A. (2011), Foreign direct investment and R&D-offshoring, Oxford
Economic Papers, Vol. 63, Issue 1, Jan., pp. 134–157, https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpq024

- Ghesquiere F., Mahul O., (2016), Financial Protection of the State Against Natural Disasters: A
Primer,World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5429, 20 Apr.

- Goodell J.W., (2020), COVID-19 and finance: Agendas for future research, Finance Research
Letters, 1544-6123/ 2020 Elsevier Inc., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101512.

- Guerrieri V., Lorenzoni G. ; Straub L., Werning I., (2020), Macroeconomic Implications of COVID-
19: Can Negative Supply Shocks Cause Demand Shortages ?, NBER Working Paper No. 26918, April.

- Gruszczynski , L. (2020). The COVID-19 Pandemic and International Trade: Temporary Turbulence
or Paradigm Shift? European Journal of Risk Regulation, 1-6. doi:10.1017/err.2020.29.

- Haas, E.B., (1990), When Knowledge is Power : Three Models of Change in International
Organizations , University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oxford.
- Hale T., Angrist N., Kira B., Petherick A., Phillips T, Webster S.. (2020), Variation in Government
Responses to COVID-19, Blavatnik School of Government Working Paper. May 25,. Available:
www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/covidtracker..

- He H., Harris L., (2020) The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on corporate social responsibility and
marketing philosophy, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 116, Aug., pp.176-182,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.030

- Hourcade, J., Shukla, P., (2015), Cancun’s paradigm shift and COP 21: to go beyond rhetoric. Int
Environ Agreements 15, pp. 343–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-015-9305-6.

- Hubbard D.W. (2020), The Failure of Risk Management. Why it’s Broken and How to Fix It, 2nd ed.,
Wiley.

- Hyatt D.G., Berente N., (2017), Substantive or Symbolic Environmental Strategies? Effects of
External and Internal Normative Stakeholder Pressures, Business, Strategy and the Environment, Vol.
26, Issue8, pp. 1212-1234, https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1979.

- Ianchovichina E., Devarajan S., Lakatos C. (2016), Lifting Economic Sanctions on Iran: Global
Effects and Strategic Responses, World Bank Policy Research Working Papers. Feb.
https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-7549.

- Inglehart R.F., Norris P , (2016), Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots
and Cultural Backlash, HKS Working Paper No. RWP16-026.

- Ivanov D., (2020), Predicting the impacts of epidemic outbreaks on global supply chains: A
simulation-based analysis on the coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2), case
Transportation Research Part E, Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 136, April, 101922,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2020.101922.

- Jacques M., (2012), When China rules the world: The end of the western world and
the birth of a new global order, Penguin Books, NY, London.

- Kaivo-oja J., (2012), Weak signals analysis, knowledge management theory and systemic socio-
cultural transitions, Futures, Volume 44, Issue 3, Apr., pp. 206-217,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2011.10.003.

- Kildienė S. , Kaklauskas A., Kazimieras Zavadskas E., (2011), COPRAS based Comparative
Analysis of the European Country Management Capabilities within the Construction Sector in the
Time of Crisis, Journal of Business Economics and Management , Vol. 12 - Issue 2 , pp. 417-434.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3846/16111699.2011.575190

- Kojima K., (2000) , The “flying geese” model of Asian economic development: origin, theoretical
extensions, and regional policy implications *, Journal of Asian Economics 11, pp. 375–401

- Kumar, V., Gaur, A.S., Pattnaik, C., (2012), Product Diversification and International Expansion of
Business Groups. Evidence from India, Management International Review, Vol. 52, pp.175–192.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-012-0133-4.

- Larrabee, F. S. (2010), Russia, Ukraine and Central Europe : the return of Geopolitics, Journal of
International Affairs, Vol. 63, No. 2, Rethinking Russia, Spring/Summer, pp. 33-52.
- Lee C. Y., Wu F.C., (2010), Factors affecting knowledge transfer and absorptive
capacity in multinational corporations, The Journal of International Management
Studies, 2010; 5(2): pp. 119-126.

- Lehrer M., Behnam M., (2009), Modularity vs programmability in design of international products:
Beyond the standardization–adaptation tradeoff?, European Management Journal, Vol. 27, Issue 4,
Aug., pp. 281-292, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2009.01.003.

- Lemaire J.P., (2000), From an international and sector approach to a corporate decision
formulation : the PREST model, 16th IMP conference, Bath, UK.

- Lemaire J.P., (2013), Stratégies d’internationalisation. Nouveaux enjeux d’ouverture des

organisations, des activités et des territoires, 3rd edition, Dunod, Paris.

- Liu Y., (2013), Sustainable competitive advantage in turbulent business environments, International
Journal of Production Research , Vol. 51, Issue 10, pp. 2821-2841,
https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2012.720392

- Liu Z., (2008), Foreign direct investment and technology spillovers: Theory and evidence, Journal
of Development Economics, Vol. 85, Issues 1–2, Feb., pp.176-193,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2006.07.001.

- Lu J.W., P.W. Beamish (2017), International Diversification and Firm Performance: The S-curve
Hypothesis, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 47, N° 4, Doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/20159604

- McKibbin W.J., Fernando R., (2020), The Global Macroeconomic Impacts of COVID-19: Seven
Scenarios, CAMA Working Paper No. 19/2020.

- Milio S., Durazzi N.,, Garnizova E., Janowski P., Olechnicka A., and Wojtowicz, D., (2014), Impact
of the economic crisis on social, economic and territorial cohesion of the European Union. Regional
Development (Study Vol. 2). European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium.

- Miranda-Silva G., Styles C., Lages L.F., (2016) 1Breakthrough innovation in international business:
The impact of tech-innovation and market-innovation on performance, International Business Review,
Vol. 26, Issue 2, Apr., pp. 391-404, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.10.001

- Nicola M., Alsafi Z.,, Sohrabi C., Kerwan A., Al-Jabir A., Iosifidis C., Agha M., Agha R., (2020),
The socio economic implicationsofthecoronaviruspandemic (COVID-19): A review, International
Journal of Surgery, Vol. 78, Jun., pp. 185-193

- Nuenkirch M., Neumeier F., (2015), The impact of UN and US economic sanctions on GDP growth,
European Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 40, Part A, pp. 110-125.

- Okyere, A.M., Forson R., Essel-Gaisey F. (2020), Positive externalities of an epidemic: The case of
the coronavirus (COVID‐19) in China, Journal of Medical Virology, 03 Apr.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.25830.

- O’Neill, J. (2001), Building Better Global Economic BRICs, in Global Economics Paper No: 66,
goldmansachs.com.

- Ozili P.., Arun T.K., (2020). Spillover of COVID-19: Impact on the Global Economy, SSRN: Mar.
27, https://ssrn.com/abstract=3562570 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3562570.
- Palmié M., Keupp M.M., Gassmann O., (2014), Pull the Right Levers: Creating Internationally
“Useful” Subsidiary Competence by Organizational Architecture, Long Range Planning, Vol. 47,
Issues 1–2, Feb.–Apr., pp. 32-48, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.10.007.

- Patel P.C., Fernhaber S.A., McDouglas-Covin P.P., van der Have R.P., (2013), Beating competitors
to international markets: The value of geographically balanced networks for innovation, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 35, Issue 5. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2114.

- Park C.Y., Kim K., Roth S., Beck S., Kang J.W.,Tayag M.C., Griffin M., (2020), Global Shortage of
Personal Protective Equipment amid COVID-19: Supply Chains, Bottlenecks, and Policy
Implications, ADB Briefs, NO.130 Apr.

- Peng, M. W. (2004) ‘Identifying the big question in international business research. Journal of
International Business Studies, 35, 2, 99–108,.DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400077.

- Pomeranz K., (2009), The great divergence: China, Europe, and the making of the modern world
economy, Princeton University Press, Princeton, Oxford.

- Pomerleano, M., (2007), Corporate Financial Restructuring in Asia: Implications for Financial
Stability BIS Quarterly Review, Sept.: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1599612 or
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1599612

- Porter D., Craig D. (2004) The third way and the third world: poverty reduction and social inclusion
in the rise of ‘inclusive’ liberalism, Review of International Political Economy, 11:2, pp. 387-423,
DOI: 10.1080/09692290420001672881.

- Rapaccini M., Saccani N., Kowalkowskic C., Paiola M., Adrodegari F., (2020), Navigating disruptive
crises through service-led growth: The impact of COVID-19 on Italian manufacturing firms, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 88, July, pp. 225-237, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.05.017.

- Rincón-Aznar A. , Mao X., Tong M., (2020), Global Value Chains and Economic Dislocations :
Introduction, National Institute Economic Review, Vol. 252 , May, pp. R1-R3.

- Roberts D., (2016), A global roadmap for climate change action: From COP17 in Durban to COP21
in Paris, South African Journal of Science, vol.112, pp. 5-6 Pretoria May./Jun.
http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2016/a0158.

- Rondinellia D., Berryb M., (2000), Multimodal transportation, logistics, and the environment:
managing interactions in a global economy, European Management Journal, Vol. 18, Issue 4, Aug.,
pp. 398-410, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-2373(00)00029-3.

- Ryans, J.K., Griffith, D.A., Steven White, D. (2003), "Standardization/adaptation of international

marketing strategy: Necessary conditions for the advancement of knowledge", International
Marketing Review, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 588-603. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651330310505204.

- Saleh Albarasneh A. Koleilat Khatib D., (2019), The US policy of containing Iran – from Obama to
Trump 2009–2018, Global Affairs, 5:4-5, pp. 369-387, DOI: 10.1080/23340460.2019.1701951.

- Sali L., Tallman S., (2011), Research notes and commentaries : MNC Strategies, Exogeneous Shocks
and Performance Outcomes, Strategic Management Journal, 32, pp. 1119–1127.
- Sampson, T., (2017), Brexit: The Economics of International Disintegration, Journal of Economic
Perspectives, 31 (4), pp.163-84. DOI: 10.1257/jep.31.4.163.

- Schlegelmilch B.B. (2020), Why Business Schools Need Radical Innovations: Drivers and
Development Trajectories, Journal of Marketing Education pp. 1 –15,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475320922285.

- Schmieg C. (2019), The US-China Trade War, the Huawei Battle, and its Effects on the World,
Diplomacy, Sustainable Development and Global Economics,. Oct. 14.

Simmons B.A., Dobbin F., Garett G., (2006 ), Introduction: The International Diffusion of
Liberalism, International Organization, Vol. 60, Issue 4, Oct., pp. 781-810, Cambridge University
Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818306060267.

- Siniver A., Featherstone C., (2020), Low-conceptual complexity and Trump’s foreign policy, Global
Affairs , Vol. 6, Issue 1: The Trump presidency: continuity and change in US foreign , pp. 71-85,
https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2020.1734953

- Steinle C., Schiele H., (2008), Limits to global sourcing: Strategic consequences of dependency on
international suppliers: Cluster theory, resource-based view and case studies, Journal of Purchasing
and Supply Management, Vol. 14, Issue 1, Mar., pp. 3-14,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2008.01.001.

- Sumner A., Hoy, C., Ortiz-Juarez E., (2020), Estimates of the impact of COVID-19 on global
poverty , United Nations University UNU-WIDER working paper 2020/43, Apr.

- Teegen, H., Doh, J. P. and Vachani, S. (2004). ‘The importance of nongovernmental organizations
(NGOs) in global governance and value creation: an international business research agenda. Journal of
International Business Studies, 25, 6, pp. 463–83.DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400112.

- Tetlow G., Stojanovic A., (2018), Understanding the economic impact of Brexit, Institute for
government. http:// instituteforgovernment.org.uk.

- Theodosiou M., Leonidou L.C., (2003), Standardization versus adaptation of international marketing
strategy: an integrative assessment of the empirical research, International Business Review, Vol. 12,
Issue 2, Apr., pp. 141-171, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-5931(02)00094-X.

- Volberda, J., Lewin, A. Y. (2003). ‘Co‐evolutionary dynamics within and between firms: from
evolution to co‐evolution, Journal of Management Studies, 40, pp. 2111–36.

- Walt G., Lush L., 0gden J., (2004), International Organizations in Transfer of Infectious Diseases:
Iterative Loops of Adoption, Adaptation, and Marketing, Governance, Vol.17, Issue2, Apr., pp. 189-
210, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2004.00243.x.

- Wang J.H., (2007), From technological catch-up to innovation-based economic growth: South Korea
and Taiwan compared, The Journal of Development Studies, 43:6, pp.1084-1104,
DOI: 10.1080/00220380701466609

- WHO/World Health Organization (2019) , Global-Preparedness-Monitoring-Board,. A world at risk:

annual report on global preparedness for health emergencies, Geneva.
- Zaidi N., Tyagi P., Singh A., (2019), Nokia’s Comeback — Is it Revival of an Iconic Brand?, Asian
Case Research Journal, Vol. 23, No. 02, pp. 415-426.
- Zhang Y.-X., Chao Q.-C., Zheng Q.-H., Huang L.,(2017), The withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris
Agreement and its impact on global climate change governance, Advances in Climate Change
Research, Vol. 8, Issue 4, pp. 213-219.