524 P.Deng Recommendation 1:Cross-fertilization among the Four Research Streams One area that may directly benefit from incorporating research from another area is the research on catch-up strategies and liabilities of foreignness.At the core of the two research themes is the question of whether or how Chinese firms with limitec or constrained capabilities build their firm-specific assets in reducing the costs of doing business abroad and catching up with established MNCs (Luo Tung, 2007;Rugman,2010).Recent latecomer work that differentiates between the exploitation and exploration of Chinese internationalization might profit from the liability of foreignness research that distinguishes the types of resource deficit, multiplicity of disadvantages,and the dynamic nature of these relationships Although these two areas are examined using similar theoretical approaches,they may benefit from synergy.Specifically,work on the liability of foreignness may benefit from the latecomer perspective by examining specific resources and capa- bilities that cross-border M&As bring to Chinese mNCs as well as an effective mechanism to deploy them.For in are the resources and capabilities tha contribute to catch-up strategies similar to those that might overcome the liability of foreignness?Will Chinese firms need different network capital or relational assets when they acquire different tangible or intangible assets in their international expansion? Similarly,research on the liability of foreignness may benefit from dynamie considerations of the role of government regarding dual yet disparate institu- tional forces-institutional escapism and governmental promotion (Luo et al. 2010)Although Chinese firms are engaged in multiple resource-seeking strat- egies (Kolstad Wiig,2012),scholars have rarely considered such strategies in enhancing their competitive edge simultaneously.Because of this research void,we know little about how different strategies complement each other to reduce social or institutional liabilities and compensate for competitive weak ness.Do these strategies work independently or as substitutes with little or no change in (dis)advantages?Do Chinese MNCs progress through a sequence ncentives before inc their international engagements?How does the decision to engage in asset-driver M&As affect the decision to reduce the liability of foreignness or to comply with government regulations or priorities?Future research can delineate the differ nces or similarities among these strategies to understand their tradeoff and complementarities. With the rise of Chinese SOEs as a powerful force in global investment,the role of the Chinese state as a cross-border investor is of immediate relevance.In terms of promoting international endeavours and engaging its economies in the globa landscape,the Chinese state can act as both a strategic entrepreneur,recognizing opportunities in its environment,and an institutional entrepreneur,crafting the institutions required to capitalize on these opportunities.Since Chinese SOEs sit at C 2013 The International Association for Chinese Management ResearchRecommendation 1: Cross-fertilization among the Four Research Streams One area that may directly benefit from incorporating research from another area is the research on catch-up strategies and liabilities of foreignness. At the core of the two research themes is the question of whether or how Chinese firms with limited or constrained capabilities build their firm-specific assets in reducing the costs of doing business abroad and catching up with established MNCs (Luo & Tung, 2007; Rugman, 2010). Recent latecomer work that differentiates between the exploitation and exploration of Chinese internationalization might profit from the liability of foreignness research that distinguishes the types of resource deficit, multiplicity of disadvantages, and the dynamic nature of these relationships. Although these two areas are examined using similar theoretical approaches, they may benefit from synergy. Specifically, work on the liability of foreignness may benefit from the latecomer perspective by examining specific resources and capa￾bilities that cross-border M&As bring to Chinese MNCs as well as an effective mechanism to deploy them. For instance, are the resources and capabilities that contribute to catch-up strategies similar to those that might overcome the liability of foreignness? Will Chinese firms need different network capital or relational assets when they acquire different tangible or intangible assets in their international expansion? Similarly, research on the liability of foreignness may benefit from dynamic considerations of the role of government regarding dual yet disparate institu￾tional forces – institutional escapism and governmental promotion (Luo et al., 2010). Although Chinese firms are engaged in multiple resource-seeking strat￾egies (Kolstad & Wiig, 2012), scholars have rarely considered such strategies in enhancing their competitive edge simultaneously. Because of this research void, we know little about how different strategies complement each other to reduce social or institutional liabilities and compensate for competitive weak￾ness. Do these strategies work independently or as substitutes with little or no change in (dis)advantages? Do Chinese MNCs progress through a sequence of activities or do they first look to government incentives before increasing their international engagements? How does the decision to engage in asset-driven M&As affect the decision to reduce the liability of foreignness or to comply with government regulations or priorities? Future research can delineate the differ￾ences or similarities among these strategies to understand their tradeoff and complementarities. With the rise of Chinese SOEs as a powerful force in global investment, the role of the Chinese state as a cross-border investor is of immediate relevance. In terms of promoting international endeavours and engaging its economies in the global landscape, the Chinese state can act as both a strategic entrepreneur, recognizing opportunities in its environment, and an institutional entrepreneur, crafting the institutions required to capitalize on these opportunities. Since Chinese SOEs sit at 524 P. Deng © 2013 The International Association for Chinese Management Research