Search results

“First principles” of international business (IB) thinking should be applied systematically when assessing the functioning of internationally operating firms. The most important first principle is that entrepreneurially oriented firms seek to create, deliver and capture economic value through cross-border linkages. Such linkages invariably require complementary resources from a variety of parties with idiosyncratic vulnerabilities to be meshed. Starting from first principles allows bringing to light evidence-based insight. For instance, most companies are not global and even the world’s largest firms rarely change the location of key strategic functions. International new ventures (INVs), emerging economy multinational enterprises (MNEs) and family firms face unique vulnerabilities but also command resources that can be used to create value across borders. The quest for “optimal” international diversification appears to be a futile academic exercise, and in emerging economies with institutional voids, relational networks – and more broadly, informal institutions – are unlikely to function as scalable substitutes for formal institutions. In global value chains (GVCs), many lead firms and their partners have been able to craft governance mechanisms that reduce bounded rationality and bounded reliability challenges, and it is also critical for them to use governance as a tool to create entrepreneurial space. Finally, many of the world’s largest companies have been on successful trajectories toward reducing their climate change footprint for a few decades. But these firm-specific trajectories are fraught with challenges and cannot just be imposed via unilateral, macro-level targets decided upon by individuals and institutions lacking a clear understanding of innovation and capital expenditure processes in business.

Global value chains (GVCs) have been challenged by several emerging macro-trends during the last years. Among them, sustainability of production and consumption patterns is becoming a central theme given the necessity to mitigate the degradation of the environment and the over-exploitation of scarce natural resources. In this respect, scholars and practitioners increasingly propose the circular economy (CE) approach as a systemic solution to overcome the conventional linear “take–make–use–dispose” model underlying the structure of contemporary global economy. However, the international business (IB) community has introduced the topic of CE only marginally in its debate. The aim of the present study is to fill this research gap identifying the opportunities for integrating IB and CE principles. Thus, the main objective is to investigate whether and how the adoption of the CE paradigm by multinational enterprises (MNEs) may affect activities, geographical configuration, and governance of their relevant GVCs.

The authors address the issue from a conceptual point of view, identifying direct and indirect impacts of CE adoption on GVC, relative enablers, and possible broader implications. Lastly, the authors propose some reflections for future investigations.

This study investigates how firms’ awareness of sustainability affects the revision of their internationalization strategy. Adopting a resource-based view (RBV) approach, the authors argue that sustainable-oriented firms have a higher propensity to de-internationalize (i.e., to go back to their home country) when confronted with the need to relocate foreign manufacturing subsidiaries, as the shortening of value chains would allow the reduction of transportation emissions and enhanced corporate image as green-oriented entities. Furthermore, the authors explore the role exerted by a stringent regulatory setting in the home country on the likelihood of de-internationalization. The empirical test conducted on a sample of relocations performed across European nations in 2002–2014 reveals that multinational enterprises (MNEs) – regardless of their sustainability orientation – have a higher probability to de-internationalize when their home countries have strict institutional contexts in place.

In Morocco, as in many developing countries, environmental responsibility is not well integrated into corporate management at the operational, tactical, and strategic levels. While the management literature offers a rich body of knowledge on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) strategies and practices, less attention has been paid to exploring the complexity of environmental responsibility through the lens of corporate culture. This research aims to address this gap by examining the influence of cultural factors on the deployment of environmental responsibility using Johnson's (2000) model of corporate culture. This model identifies seven components of corporate culture: stories or myths, symbols, power structures, organizational structures, control systems, rituals and routines, and paradigms. Through a Moroccan industrial group case study, this chapter presents the successful deployment of environmental responsibility and describes how managing cultural factors facilitated this transition. This chapter also identifies the unique aspects of the group's culture that allowed redesigning the company's management systems. These insights offer valuable implications for managers and policymakers seeking to improve the environmental performance of large enterprises in developing countries.

This chapter analyzes the efficiency levels of a circular economy (CE) with an emphasis on transaction costs. It examines the governance aspect of CE activities in comparison to the predominant linear value creation. Extant CE research in business studies tends to be descriptive and lacks a theoretical foundation, particularly in understanding CE management. Transaction cost theory explains efficiency in economic organizing, lending itself to the study of arrangements that maximize resource efficiency at continued economic virtue. The conceptualization proposes that CE transaction costs are greater than those within the linear economy (LE), primarily due to the uncertainties about reciprocal dependencies, looping material complexities, exchanging novel information, and increased contracting efforts. Geographically bounded and institutionally homogeneous CE initiatives may curb these rising costs. By bringing efficiency concerns into CE analysis, the chapter demonstrates the applicability of transaction cost theory and highlights CE relevance to international business by pointing out spatial choice implications.

This study aims at investigating the effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate social irresponsibility (CSI) on corporate financial performance (CFP) in firms headquartered in developed versus emerging countries. Drawing upon stakeholder and legitimacy perspectives, the authors argue that the CSR/CSI–CFP relationship differs depending on the home-countries’ level of economic development as this reflects their different sensitivity to sustainability. Indeed, as emerging economies are normally characterized by weaker regulations, they are likely to place lower pressures on companies for superior CSR practices. Therefore, the authors expect the effect of CSR on CFP to be more positive for firms headquartered in advanced than in emerging countries. At the same time, the authors propose a more negative relationship between CSI and CFP for firms headquartered in developed countries due to the higher overall sustainability expectations required to gain legitimacy. The empirical analyses, run on a sample of 1,971 publicly listed firms between 2010 and 2020 from developed and emerging economies, support the expectations, thus confirming that country-specific contextual factors do play a role in shaping both the positive and the negative impact of CSR and CSI on CFP, and that the reactions of stakeholders to responsible and irresponsible behavior are stronger when their sensitivity to sustainability is higher.

Alain Verbeke is one of the world’s leading thinkers on international business (IB) and globalization, a renowned scholar and educator who contributes to creating a better global business environment by addressing some of today’s most critical challenges. He was one of the first scholars to advance a theoretically rigorous and practically significant perspective on international corporate social responsibility (CSR). Verbeke’s work on international CSR is particularly impactful because it is rooted in IB theory and based on a realistic set of assumptions about the behavior of managers, policymakers, and other market and nonmarket stakeholders. In this chapter, the authors apply theoretical principles central to Verbeke’s research – most notably behavioral assumptions of bounded rationality and bounded reliability – to analyze businesses’ and societies’ pace of progress in relation to stated environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals. The authors argue that bounded rationality and reliability challenges create misalignment between stated/imposed commitments toward ESG performance, and economic actors’ ability to deliver on these commitments. The authors discuss examples of such misalignment, focusing on tensions among stakeholders, between stakeholder organizations and firms, and within firms. The authors propose that to be relevant for policy and practice, the sustainability research should be based on realistic microfoundational assumptions.

The UK government has taken the lead in accelerating the capacity of higher education to engage with sustainability accounting and adopting a novel systematic approach toward a collective implementation of and contribution to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The UN SDG 16 “Peace, Justice & Strong Institutions” promotes the (re)building of effective and accountable institutions. In line with the institutional logics metatheory, we provide empirical evidence on how the alignment between social mechanisms alongside the reputation of higher education institutions (HEIs) and SDGs on transparent and responsible service (SDG 16) affect the students' overall experience. Using a sample of 142 UK HEIs, interpretative content analysis and ordinary least squares, the results show that integrating HEIs' responsible-oriented research agenda proactively with high sustainability reputation adds significantly to greater student satisfaction.

In this chapter, we discuss talent development in the context of higher education. After discussing the advantages and disadvantages of inclusive and exclusive approaches to talent development, we present empirical data that detail how the participants of a focus group study perceive talent development in higher education. Our data show the importance of a contextualized reading of talent development as the competitive context in academia hinders an inclusive focus on talent development. This context results in a performance-centred, instead of a development-centred approach to talent management, where outperforming others in narrowly defined areas (e.g. publication record) is the main goal. We show that in such a context the development of competitive talent is rewarded, and the development of communal talent is not. The focus on performance instead of (inclusive) development becomes more pronounced when employees move through their career and is believed to have several negative consequences. Mostly women perceived that such a non-inclusive approach to talent development hinders the development and deployment of their talents and obstructs their career progression.

Worldwide academia is going through a major transformation because of Open Science and Recognition and Rewards movements that are linked to big societal challenges such as climate change, digitalization, growing inequality, migration, political instability, democracies under threat and combinations of these challenges. The transformations affect the human resource management (HRM) and talent management of universities. The main focus of this chapter is on collaborative innovation and the way universities participate in coalitions and strategic alliances on national and international levels. These platforms not only discuss the transformations and support the academic changes but also act as talent pools and talent exchange. This chapter provides an overview of the current state of affairs with respect to Open Science and Recognition and Rewards in academia. Next, a theoretical foundation is presented on the concepts of collaborative innovation, coopetition and HRM innovation in general. The leaders or leading organizations in the HRM innovation models often can’t make it happen on their own, in particular in highly institutionalized contexts such as academia. The legitimacy of transformations requires coalitions of the willing and therefore strategic alliances on different levels. The coalitions in academia can also contribute to academic talent management through sectoral transformations (see Recognition and Rewards) and through the way these coalitions operate.