Search results

The purpose of this paper is to open up new lines of research into the engagement of corporations during humanitarian crises. The paper provides an introduction to core concepts in the delivery of humanitarian assistance, as well as a comprehensive overview of when, why, how, and to what effect corporations engage in humanitarian action.

Building on extant literature and policy reports, the paper synthesizes concepts and insights to map the interdisciplinary field of research on corporate engagement in humanitarian action.

The paper systematically reviews and describes different dimensions of corporate engagement for delivering humanitarian action and explains key complications that inspire new research questions. In particular, the paper highlights challenges associated with getting corporations to engage in humanitarian action; challenges associated with ensuring effective corporate engagement; and challenges associated with ensuring ethical engagement.

By raising new questions about corporate engagement in humanitarian action, this paper develops an original and positive research agenda for international business, management research, and related fields.

Purpose – The purpose of this contribution is to clarify some of the institutional approaches in international business research and to identify opportunities to extend research on the role of institutions in international business.

Design/methodology/approach – Building on Douglas North's (1990) analogy of institutions as the rules of the game, we illustrate some of the differences between different institutional approaches in international business (IB) through a discussion of the rules and institutions surrounding the world of association football. We then briefly revisit the recent review by Hotho and Pedersen (2012) and compare and contrast three dominant institutional approaches in international business: new institutional economics, new organizational institutionalism and comparative institutionalism.

Findings – Our discussion illustrates that different institutional approaches address and explain different facets of international firm behaviour. The ways in which institutions matter for international business are therefore greatly dependent on how institutions are conceptualized and measured.

Originality/value – We highlight two recent developments in the literature on institutions which we believe offer important implications and opportunities for international business research. The first development is a move towards less deterministic approach to institutions. The second development is the recognition of institutional plurality and complexity, in the sense that organizations are often exposed to multiple logics with potentially contradictory prescriptions. These notions, we believe, offer important opportunities to advance our understanding of the relations between institutions and multinational enterprises (MNEs).

Despite increased interest in headquarters (HQ) and their activities, we still lack a comprehensive understanding of the drivers of HQ relocations and their consequences. We seek to address this gap by examining whether HQ relocations are primarily driven by cost-reduction or value-creation motives, whether these motivations vary by HQ type and how these relocation patterns vary over time. We explore these questions on the basis of a unique hand-collected database of 227 HQ relocations in Europe between 2000 and 2012. Our findings illustrate that different types of HQ units play their orchestrating role in different ways and that their relocations are driven by different motives. Furthermore, our data suggest that although all types of HQ units are increasingly mobile, the implications of relocations for the MNC may differ considerably by HQ type. These findings contribute to a more fine-grained understanding of the drivers of HQ relocations and open up various new avenues for future research on HQ relocation and the role of HQ units in the orchestration of MNCs’ internal networks.

The purpose of this paper is to present a personal reflection on the nature of international business (IB) as a field of both academic study and business practice and, specifically, a domain of political action and societal impact.

The author summarizes what he consider to be his personal contributions to the field of IB over the 15 years of Critical Perspectives on International Business’s existence, to underpin a set of critically reflective questions on the nature of IB, and to inform a brief ‘manifesto’ for how the author envisages a meaningful future for IB research.

The argumentation of this paper is directed at supporting IB research and activity that is underpinned by an Aristotelian phronetic perspective – thinking to inform action for the good of society at large.

This paper presents an original perspective from the author, one that appreciates the multitude of perspectives, values and beliefs of the full range of stakeholders who might impact or be impacted by IB activity.

With a few exceptions, the mainstream literature on learning in multinational enterprises (MNEs) has shown little concern for the transformational nature and the social constitution of learning. This paper aims to address this gap by drawing on Scandinavian institutionalism, social learning perspectives, and comparative institutionalism.

A comparative case study of two subsidiaries of the same MNE was conducted. The subsidiaries received similar practices from headquarters (HQ) but displayed contrasting learning outcomes.

It is shown that learning outcomes differed based on the varying extent to which practices were translated, which depends on the participation of local actors. The difference in participation pattern, in turn, is rooted in differences in the institutional context of the two subsidiaries.

It is recognized that apart from institutional influences, organizational idiosyncrasies may be at work. In addition, the paper briefly considers the extent to which the notion of contrasting forms of capitalism is still useful when comparing the German and British institutional contexts.

The findings highlight the importance of involving employees in the translation of new practices. A challenge for MNEs is that learning of new practices can differ by institutional context. Where enabling institutional conditions are absent, conscious effort may be needed to ensure employee participation.

This paper highlights that MNE practice transfer rests on the translation of the practice content to the local context, and that subsidiary‐level learning processes may be institutionally embedded, thus establishing a link between subsidiary learning and the macro‐level context. As such, this paper both illustrates the value of social learning perspectives and the relevance of the work of institutionalists for understanding MNE learning processes.