Through extending the psychological approach to threats, we advance a threat–contingency model to understand how two domains of host-country threats–symbolic and realistic–drive multinational enterprises (MNEs) to deploy parent-country nationals to manage their foreign subsidiaries. When faced with symbolic threats related to ethics and morals in a host country, MNEs act rigidly and conservatively, increasing the likelihood of deploying parent-country nationals as executives in foreign subsidiaries. When dealing with realistic threats associated with potential economic losses in a host country, however, MNEs are adaptive, decreasing the tendency to transfer parent-country nationals abroad and increasing the use of host-country nationals in foreign subsidiaries. The two threats interact in affecting staffing decisions. Moreover, industry globalization moderates asymmetrically the influences of the two threats: globalization strengthens the effect of symbolic threats but weakens the effect of realistic threats. We used a primary archival study and supplementary laboratory studies to test our hypotheses. Overall, our study provides an additional theoretical account to explain MNEs’ divergent responses toward two domains of threats in a host country. We conclude the study with implications for international business and global mobility research.

通过扩展对威胁的心理学方法，我们提出了威胁应急模型，以了解东道国威胁的两个领域（象征性威胁和现实威胁）如何推动跨国企业（MNE）部署母国国民来管理其外国子公司。当在东道国面临与道德和道德相关的象征性威胁时，跨国企业会采取严格而保守的行动，从而增加了将母国国民部署到外国子公司担任高管的可能性。然而，在应对与东道国潜在经济损失相关的现实威胁时，跨国企业具有适应性，减少了将母国国民转移到国外的趋势，并增加了外国子公司中东道国国民的使用。这两种威胁相互作用，影响人员配置决策。此外，产业全球化不对称地缓和了两种威胁的影响：全球化增强了象征性威胁的影响，但削弱了现实威胁的影响。我们使用主要档案研究和补充实验室研究来检验我们的假设。总体而言，我们的研究提供了额外的理论解释来解释跨国企业对东道国两个威胁领域的不同反应。我们总结了这项研究对国际商业和全球流动性研究的影响。