Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-788cddb947-jbkpb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-19T08:51:06.364Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Politics and power in the multinational corporation: an introduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2011

Mike Geppert
Affiliation:
University of Surrey, UK
Christoph Dörrenbächer
Affiliation:
Berlin School of Economics and Law
Christoph Dörrenbächer
Affiliation:
Berlin School of Economics and Law
Mike Geppert
Affiliation:
University of Surrey
Get access

Summary

The current financial and economic crisis has negatively underlined the vital role of multinational corporations (MNCs) in our daily lives. The breakdown and crisis of flagship MNCs, such as Enron, WorldCom, Lehman Brothers, Toyota and General Motors, does not merely reveal the problems of corporate malfeasance and market dysfunction but also raises important questions, both for the public and the academic community, about the use and misuse of power by MNCs in the wider society, as well as the exercise of power by key actors within internationally operating firms. Given these and previous similar developments, it is surprising that questions about organizational power and politics have not had a more central role in the study of the MNC.

Historically, research on the MNC was focused on studying the influence and changing role of headquarters (HQ) management (e.g. Stopford and Wells 1972; Vernon 1966), with, for example, Hymer (1970) actually predicting that more geographical dispersion of MNCs would lead to greater concentration of decision-making power at the center. As long as HQ management was seen in the driving seat, the role of lower level managers, e.g. in local subsidiaries, and of other employees was mainly reduced to adaptation either to centrally set strategies or to external environmental pressures. Later, studies on the “evolution” of the MNC stressed that MNCs can hardly be managed top-down, especially if “diversification” and internationalization are increasing, but they did not “dare” shed more light on power relations and organizational politics.

Type
Chapter
Information
Politics and Power in the Multinational Corporation
The Role of Institutions, Interests and Identities
, pp. 3 - 38
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Almond, P. and Ferner, Α. 2006. American Multinationals in Europe: Managing Employment Relations across National Borders. Oxford University Press
Andersson, U. and Holm, U. 2010. Managing the Contemporary Multinational. Cheltenham: Edward ElgarCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersson, U., Forsgren, M. and Holm, U. 2007. “Balancing subsidiary influence in the federative MNC: a business network view,”Journal of International Business Studies 38: 802–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barner-Rasmussen, W., Piekkari, R., Scott-Kennel, J. and Welch, C. 2010. “Commander-in-chief or absentee landlord?: key perspectives on headquarters in multinational corporations” in Andersson, and Holm, (eds.) Managing the Contemporary Multinational. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 85–105Google Scholar
Bartlett, C. A. and S. Ghoshal 1989. Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School PressGoogle Scholar
Becker-Ritterspach, F. 2006. “The social constitution of knowledge integration in MNEs: a theoretical framework,”Journal of International Management 12: 358–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker-Ritterspach, F. and Dörrenbächer, C. 2009. “Intra-firm competition in multinational corporations: towards a political framework,”Competition and Change 13: 199–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker-Ritterspach, F. and Dörrenbächer, C. 2011. “An organizational politics perspective on intra-firm competition in multinational corporations,” Management International Review (in print)
Bélanger, J. and Edwards, P. 2006. “Towards a political economy framework: TNCs as national and global players” in Quintanilla, and Sánchez-Runde, (eds.) Multinationals, Institutions and the Construction of Transnational Practices: Convergence and Diversity in the Global Economy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 24–52Google Scholar
Bélanger, J., Giles, A. and Grenier, J.-N. 2003. “Patterns of corporate influence in the host country: a study of ABB in Canada,”International Journal of Human Resource Management 14: 469–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkinshaw, J. 1996. “How multinational subsidiary mandates are gained and lost,”Journal of International Business Studies 27: 467–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkinshaw, J. 2000. Entrepreneurship in the Global Firm. London: SageGoogle Scholar
Birkinshaw, J. and Ridderstråle, J. 1999. “Fighting the corporate immune system: a process study of subsidiary initiatives in multinational corporations,”International Business Review 8: 149–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bluhm, K. 2001. “Exporting or abandoning the ‘German Model’?: labour policies of German manufacturing firms in Central Europe,”European Journal of Industrial Relations 7: 153–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouquet, C. and Birkinshaw, J. 2008. “Managing power in the multinational corporation: how low-power actors gain influence,”Journal of Management 34: 477–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Child, J. 1972. “Organizational structure, environment and performance: the role of strategic choice,”Sociology 6: 1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. and Geppert, M. 2006. “Socio-political processes in international management in post-socialist contexts: knowledge, learning and transnational institution building,”Journal of International Management 12: 340–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. and Geppert, M. 2011. “Subsidiary integration as identity construction and institution building: a political sensemaking approach,”Journal of Management Studies (in print)Google Scholar
Clegg, S. R., Courpasson, D. and Phillips, N. 2006. Power and Organizations. London: SageGoogle Scholar
Collinson, S. and Morgan, G. 2009. Images of the Multinational Firm. Chichester: Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar
Crozier, M. 1964. The Bureaucratic Phenomenon. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Crozier, M. and Friedberg, E. 1980. Actors and Systems: The Politics of Collective Action. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. 1992. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Cambridge, MA: BlackwellGoogle Scholar
DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. 1991. “The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields” in Powell, and DiMaggio, (eds.) The new Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. University of Chicago Press, pp. 63–82Google Scholar
Dörrenbächer, C. 2004. “Fleeing or exporting the German model? The internationalization of German multinationals in the 1990s,”Competition and Change 8: 443–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörrenbächer, C. 2007. “Inside the transnational social space: cross-border management and owner relationships at a German subsidiary in Hungary,”Journal of East European Management Studies 4: 318–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörrenbächer, C. and Becker-Ritterspach, F. 2009. “Introducing socio-political perspectives on intra-firm competition, production relocation and outsourcing,”Competition and Change 13: 193–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörrenbächer, C. and Geppert, M. 2006. “Micro-politics and conflicts in multinational corporations: current debates, reframing, and contributions of this Special Issue,”Journal of International Management 12: 251–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörrenbächer, C. and Geppert, M. 2007. “The impact of foreign subsidiary manager's socio-political positioning on career choices and their subsequent strategizing: evidence from German-owned subsidiaries in France” in Ozbilgin, and Malach-Pines, (eds.) Career Choice in Management and Entrepreneurship: A Research Companion. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 240–57Google Scholar
Dörrenbächer, C. and Geppert, M. 2009a. “A micro-political perspective on subsidiary initiative-taking: evidence from German-owned subsidiaries in France,” European Management Journal 27: 100–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörrenbächer, C. and Geppert, M. 2009b. “Micro-political games in the multinational corporation: the case of mandate change,”Management Revue 20: 373–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörrenbächer, C. and Geppert, M. 2010. “Subsidiary staffing and initiative-taking in multinational corporations: a socio-political perspective,”Personnel Review (in print)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doz, Y. L. and Prahalad, C. K. 1991. “Managing DMNCs: a search for a new paradigm,”Strategic Management Journal 12: 145–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunning, J. 2000. “The eclectic paradigm as an envelope for economic and business theories of MNE activity,”International Business Review 9: 163–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunning, J. and Lundan, S. M. 2009. “The multinational firm as a creator, fashioner and respondent to institutional change” in Collinson, and Morgan, (eds.) Images of the Multinational Firm. Chichester: Wiley & Sons, pp. 93–115Google Scholar
Dunning, J. and Rugman, A. 1985. “The Influence of Hymer's dissertation on the theory of foreign direct investment,”American Economic Review 75: 228–33Google Scholar
Edwards, P. and Bélanger, J. 2009. “The multinational firm as a contested terrain” in Collinson, and Morgan, (eds.) Images of the Multinational Firm. Chichester: Wiley & Sons, pp. 193–216Google Scholar
Ferner, A., Quintanilla, J. and Sánchez-Runde, C. 2006. “Introduction: multinationals and the multi-level politics of cross-national diffusion” in Ferner, Quintanilla and Sánchez-Runde, (eds.) Multinationals, Institutions and the Construction of Transnational Practices: Convergence and Diversity in the Global Economy. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fincham, R. 1992. “Perspectives on power: processual, institutional and ‘internal’ forms of organizational power,”Journal of Management Studies 40: 641–759Google Scholar
Fischer, F. 2005. “Revisiting organizational politics: the postempiricist challenge,”Policy and Society June: 1–23Google Scholar
Geppert, M. and Williams, K. 2006. “Global, national and local practices in multinational corporations: towards a sociopolitical framework,”International Journal of Human Resource Management 17: 49–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geppert, M., Williams, K. and Matten, D. 2003. “The social construction of contextual rationalities in MNCs: an Anglo-German comparison of subsidiary choice,”Journal of Management Studies 40: 617–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geppert, M., Matten, D. and Walgenbach, P. 2006. “Transnational institution building and the multinational corporation: an emerging field of research,”Human Relations 59: 1451–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Structuration Theory. Cambridge: Polity PressGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, M. 1985. “Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness,”American Journal of Sociology 91: 481–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, P. A. and D. Soskice 2001. Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardy, C. and Clegg, S. 1996. “Some dare call it power” in Clegg, Hardy and Nord, (eds.) Handbook for Organization Studies. London: Sage, pp. 622–41Google Scholar
Harzing, A.-W. and Sorge, A. 2003. “The relative impact of country of origin and universal contingencies on internationalization strategies and corporate control in multinational enterprises: worldwide and European perspectives,”Organization Studies 24: 187–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haunschild, A., Nienhueser, W. and Weiskopf, R. 2009. “Power in organizations – power of organizations,”Management Revue 20: 320–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedlund, G. 1986. “The hypermodern MNC – a heterarchy?,”Human Resource Management 25: 9–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinings, C. R. and Greenwood, R. 2002. “Disconnects and consequences in organization theory?,”Administrative Science Quarterly 47: 411–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollingsworth, J. R. 1997. “Continuities and changes in social systems of production: the cases of Japan, Germany, and the United States” in Hollingsworth, and Boyer, (eds.) Contemporary Capitalism: The Embeddedness of Institutions. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 265–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hymer, S. H. 1970. “The multinational corporation and the law of uneven development” in Bhagwati, (ed.) Economics and World Order. London: Macmillan, pp. 113–140Google Scholar
Jackson, G. 2010. “Actors and institutions” in Morgan, Campbell, , Crouch, , Pedersen, and Whitley, (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Comparative Institutional Analysis. Oxford University Press, pp. 63–86Google Scholar
Jackson, G. and Deeg, R. 2008. “Comparing capitalisms: understanding institutional diversity and its implications for international business,”Journal of International Business Studies 39: 540–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knights, D. and McCabe, D. 1999. “Are there limits to authority?: TQM and organizational power,”Organization Studies 20: 197–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kostova, T. 1999. “Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: a contextual perspective,”Academy of Management Review 24: 308–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kostova, T. and Zaheer, S. 1999. “Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: the case of the multinational enterprise,”Academy of Management Review 24: 64–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kostova, T. and Roth, K. 2002. “Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: institutional and relational effects,”Academy of Management Journal 45: 215–33Google Scholar
Kostova, T., Roth, K. and Dacin, M. T. 2008. “Institutional theory in the study of multinational corporations: a critique and new directions,”Academy of Management Review 33: 994–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristensen, P. H. and Zeitlin, J. 2001. “The making of a global firm: local pathways to multinational enterprise” in Morgan, Kristensen and Whitley, (eds.) The Multinational Firm: Organizing Across Institutional and National Divides. Oxford University Press, pp. 172–95Google Scholar
Kristensen, P. H. and Zeitlin, J. 2005. Local Players in Global Games. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Lash, S. and Urry, J. 1987. The End of Organized Capitalism. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin PressGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. W. 1994. “Rationalized environments” in Scott, and Meyer, (eds.) Institutional Environments and Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 28–54Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W. 2000. “Globalization – sources and effects on national states and societies,”International Sociology 15: 233–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintzberg, H. 1985. “The organization as political arena,”Journal of Management Studies 22: 133–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, G. 2001a. “The multinational firm: organizing across institutional and national divides” in Morgan, , Kristensen, and Whitley, (eds.) The Multinational Firm: Organizing Across Institutional and National Divides. Oxford University Press, pp. 1–24Google Scholar
Morgan, G. 2001b. “The development of transnational standards and regulations and their impacts on firms” in Morgan, , Kristensen, and Whitley, (eds.) The Multinational Firm: Organizing Across Institutional and National Divides. Oxford University Press, pp. 225–52Google Scholar
Morgan, G. and Kristensen, P. H. 2006. “The contested social space of multinationals: varieties of institutionalism, varieties of capitalism,”Human Relations 59: 1467–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, G. and Kristensen, P. H. 2009. “Multinational firms as societies” in Collinson, and Morgan, (eds.) Images of the Multinational Firm. Chichester: Wiley & Sons, pp. 167–91Google Scholar
Morgan, G. and Whitley, R. 2003. “Introduction to the Special Issue: the changing multinational firm,”Journal of Management Studies 40: 609–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nohria, N. and Ghoshal, S. 1997. The Differentiated Network: Organizing Multinational Corporations for Value Creation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass PublishersGoogle Scholar
Ortmann, G. 1988. “Macht, Spiel, Konsens” in Küpper, and Ortmann, (eds.) Mikropolitik. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, pp. 13–26Google Scholar
Perrow, C. 1986. Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay, 3rd edn. New York: McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar
Pettigrew, A. 1973. The Politics of Organizational Decision Making. London: TavistockGoogle Scholar
Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G. 1978. The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & RowGoogle Scholar
Redding, G. 2005. “The thick description and comparison of societal systems of capitalism,”Journal of International Business Studies 36: 123–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, M. 1996. “Organizational theorizing: a historically contested terrain” in Clegg, , Hardy, and Nord, (eds.) Handbook of Organization Studies. London: Sage, pp. 31–56Google Scholar
Royle, T. 2002. “Resistance is useless! The problem of trade union organization in the European fast-food industry: the case of McDonald's” in Geppert, , Matten, and Williams, (eds.) Challenges for European Management in a Global Context: Experiences from Britain and Germany. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 189–214Google Scholar
Scott, R. W. 2001. Institutions and Organizations, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SageGoogle Scholar
Seo, M.-G. and Creed, W. 2002. “Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: a dialectical perspective,”Academy of Management Review 2: 222–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorge, A. and Streeck, W. 1988. “Industrial relations and technical change: the case for an extended perspective” in Hyman, and Streeck, (eds.) New Technology and Industrial Relations. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 19–47Google Scholar
Stopford, J. M. and Wells, L. T. 1972. Managing the Multinational Enterprise: Organization of the Firm and Ownership of Subsidiaries. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
Tempel, A. 2002. “Multinational companies, institutional environments and the diffusion of industrial relations practices” in Geppert, , Matten, and Williams, (eds.) Challenges for European Management in a Global Context: Experiences from Britain and Germany. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 143–64Google Scholar
Tempel, A. and Walgenbach, P. 2007. “Global standardization of organizational forms and management practices? What new institutionalism and the business-systems approach can learn from each other,”Journal of Management Studies 44: 1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vernon, R. 1966. “International investment and international trade in the product cycle,”Quarterly Journal of Economics 80: 190–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vora, D. A., Kostova, T. and Roth, K. 2007. “Roles of subsidiary managers in multinational corporations: the effect of dual organizational identification,”Management International Review 47: 595–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, M. 1947. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. New York: Free PressGoogle Scholar
Westney, E. D. 1993. “Institutionalization theory and the multinational corporation” in Ghoshal, and Westney, (eds.) Organization Theory and the Multinational Corporation. London: Macmillan, pp. 53–76Google Scholar
Westney, E. D. 2009. “The multinational firm as an evolutionary system” in Collinson, and Morgan, (eds.) Images of the Multinational Firm. Chichester: Wiley & Sons, pp. 117–44Google Scholar
Whitley, R. 1999. Divergent Capitalisms: The Social Structuring and Change of Business Systems. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Whitley, R. 2001. “How and why are international firms different?: the consequences of cross-border managerial coordination for firm characteristics and behavior” in Morgan, , Kristensen, and Whitley, (eds.) The Multinational Firm: Organizing Across Institutional and National Divides. Oxford University Press, pp. 27–68Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. 1985. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free PressGoogle Scholar
Wortmann, M. 2004. “Aldi and the German model: structural change in German grocery retailing and the success of grocery discounters,”Competition and Change 8: 425–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, D. and Shenkar, O. 2002. “Institutional distance and the multinational enterprise,”Academy of Management Review 27: 608–18Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×