Search results

This chapter analyses the moves global brewery companies undertake towards the distribution of decision-making authority in their multinational organization and the likelihood of newly acquired subsidiaries to influence these moves. In this consumer goods industry, brands are suggested to be the primary subsidiary-specific resource to influence these distribution processes. Empirically, this chapter explores three European acquisitions of the Dutch brewery corporation Heineken in Switzerland, Slovakia, and France. We explore whether differing brand value (regional/international, standard/premium) has had an impact on the subsidiaries’ ability to maintain a certain degree of decision-making authority after the take-over. The results of our case studies show, however, that the ownership of valuable brands may not be considered as a critical resource for subsidiaries here.

The authors extend the existing research on acquisition programs by identifying four types of acquisition programs that we call: cautious approach, political approach, investment-intensive approach, and hybrid approach. The authors also provide a finer-grained distinction between various characteristics of these acquisition programs. Furthermore, when examining the performance of different types of acquisition programs, the authors found that an acquisition program has to be designed in a way that not only fits to the current environmental conditions in the host country, but also takes into account an acquirer’s acquisition capabilities and resources.

After three years of decline, the size and number of international acquisitions is picking up again. We show that there is every reason to believe that some of the mistakes of earlier acquisition waves will be made again. This paper presents five lessons from recent research that will help to avoid costly mistakes and instead build a successful multinational corporation. These lessons are illustrated with a case that has attracted much attention recently: the Ahold case.

In this chapter, we assess the ownership characteristics for the companies in our sample. For this, we do not only use ownership concentration measures such as the Herfindahl–Hirschman index but also voting power measures since ownership and voting power are not necessarily equivalent. We find that, in line with previous studies, ownership concentration and voting power of large shareholders is generally higher in continental European countries, which has important implications for corporate governance.

Business sustainability urges firms to simultaneously address economic, ecological, and social concerns. It innately combines different potentially competing organizational elements. Therefore, sustainability represents a suitable context for the study and practice of hybridity. Based on an understanding of hybridity as a continuum, in this chapter, the author distinguish between four different forms of hybridity for business sustainability, depending on the degree of integration and autonomy of sustainability initiatives in business organizations. With ceremonial hybridity, businesses only leave the impression to pursue business and sustainability goals but focus their practices on conventional business priorities. Contingent hybridity denotes an approach where ecological and social concerns are only pursued to the extent that they align with business goals. With peripheral hybridity, firms pursue sustainability initiatives in their own right but do not integrate them with core business activities. Full hybridity puts both business as well as sustainability at the core of the organization without emphasizing one over the other. These different forms of hybridity in business sustainability are illustrated with examples from various business organizations. By characterizing different degrees of hybridity in business sustainability, the argument and the examples highlight how organizational hybridity and business sustainability can fruitfully inform one another. The author develop research opportunities for using business sustainability as a context for studying different degrees as well as the dynamics of hybrid organizing and for using different degrees of hybridity for achieving a better understanding of different pathways toward substantive business contributions to sustainable development.

This study was aimed at examining the motivations, elements and channels of sustainability reporting of a multinational mining company that operates a subsidiary in Ghana. Semi-structured interviews were conducted among the company’s key stakeholders. These informants were drawn from the case company, a public regulatory agency, members and the opinion leaders of the company’s host community. In addition to the primary data, secondary documents were relied upon to corroborate the views shared by the interviewees. We discovered that while the sustainability reporting mechanism was necessary for gaining internal legitimacy with the parent company, to a large extent, the host community did not appreciate the importance of that report. In place of that the management of the mining subsidiary employed less-formal channels of communication to engage the community representatives on matters relating to sustainability. Our findings suggest that the sustainability reporting process must be adaptable and not always communicated formally. Therefore, the process needs to be re-organised to meet the expectations of all key stakeholders within the subsidiary companies’ jurisdictions. To meet the expectation of stakeholders and gain legitimacy, those charged with the governance of subsidiary companies need to contextualise their sustainability reporting strategies.

Although more than 71 per cent of the Earth is covered by water, 97 per cent of that volume is saltwater held in the oceans. Of the remaining water, 2 per cent is freshwater locked away in snow and ice, leaving less than 1 per cent available for human requirements (Williams, 2016). Yet, water is crucial for human survival. Therefore, access to water must be recognised as a fundamental human right. In 2010, the United Nations adopted Resolution 64/292 which explicitly recognises the human right to water and sanitation, acknowledges that clean drinking water and sanitation are essential for the realisation of all human rights, and seeks to protect water as a national resource and the people that need it the most. Despite the adoption of the aforementioned Resolution, water remains a hugely pertinent issue across the world, particularly in areas where water is considered predominantly as a tradeable commodity. Hence, Water and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the 2015 UN-Water Annual International Zaragoza Conference are extremely important in terms of water protection, preservation and sustainable development. This chapter discusses access to water as a fundamental precondition of life, noting that the Republic of Slovenia became one of the first countries in the world to include the human right to water in its Constitution in 2017. The authors believe that this is an excellent example for other countries to change their legislation in favour of protecting the fundamental human right to access to water. It also presents further possibilities for achieving SDG 6.1 (and other SDGs related to water) in practice.

In the previous chapters of this part, we considered voter turnout, ownership concentration and voting behaviour of shareholders. In this chapter, we take a closer look at the types of shareholders that are present in our data set. We define five different types of shareholders and evaluate their stakes. Afterwards, we consider outsider shareholder voting behaviour and find that, when only considering these shareholders, dissent rates are significantly higher. These findings imply that it may be desirable for continental European countries to consider a rule like UK Listing Rules 9.2.2AR to ER.