This article proposes a theoretical re-conceptualization of power dynamics and their legitimation in contemporary business–society relations using the prism and metaphor of parentalism. The paper develops a typology of forms of parentalism along two structuring dimensions: care and control. Specifically, four ideal-types of parentalism are introduced with their associated practices and power-legitimation mechanisms. As we consider current private governance and authority through this analytical framework, we are able to provide a new perspective on the nature of the moral legitimation of power dynamics in contemporary business–society relations. And we weave the threads between this conceptual frame and historical antecedents, suggesting that business ethicists need to revive old debates on paternalism in light of the current pervasive trend of modernized and subtler forms of parentalism. Implications for business ethics and political CSR are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
There are many definitions of power but we settle here on a relational definition (Dahl 1957). Power is the capacity to impose one’s will upon others and to secure one’s own ends even against resistance and opposition (Dahl 1957; Parsons 1967). Lukes identified four facets of power: coercion, authority, manipulation, and domination (Lukes 1974; see also Gond et al. 2016; Fleming and Spicer 2014). A relational view on power is insightful for the elaboration of the parentalism lens as it facilitates analysis of the interdependencies and varying practices within business–society relationships. But power has also been defined in structural terms by Foucault (1980), in that power resides in the distribution of knowledge among agents. A Marxist reading attributes power to those who control the means of production which has informed cultural hegemony critiques (e.g., Gramsci et al. 2005), suggesting that power resides in the naturalization of cultural norms that benefit the ruling class.
Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2010). International regulation without international government: Improving IO performance through orchestration. The Review of International Organizations, 5(3), 315–344.
Ackers, P. (1998). On paternalism: Seven observations on the uses and abuses on the concept in industrial relations, past and present. Historical Studies in Industrial Relations, 5, 173–193.
Andranovich, C. (1995). Achieving consensus in public decision making: Applying interest-based problem solving to the challenges of intergovernmental collaboration. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 31(4), 429–442.
André, K. (2013). The ethics of care as a determinant for stakeholder inclusion and CSR perception in business education. Society and Business Review, 8(1), 32–44.
Arneson, R. J. (1980). Mill versus paternalism. Ethics, 90, 470–489.
Bäckstrand, K. (2006). Democratizing global environmental governance? Stakeholder democracy after the world summit on sustainable development. European Journal of International Relations, 12, 467–498.
Banerjee, S. B. (2010). Governing the Global Corporation: A critical perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(2), 265–274.
Banerjee, S. B. (2011a). Embedding sustainability across the organization: A critical perspective. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10, 719–731.
Banerjee, S. B. (2011b). Voices of the governed: Towards a theory of the translocal. Organization, 18, 323–344.
Barrientos, S., & Smith, S. (2007). Do workers benefit from ethical trade? Assessing codes of labour practice in global production systems. Third World Quarterly, 28(4), 713–729.
Bartley, T. (2014). Transnational governance and the re-centered state: Sustainability or legality? Regulation and Governance, 8(1), 93–109.
Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology, 4(1), 1–103.
Bendix, R. (1956). Work and authority in industry; ideologies of management in the course of industrialization. New York: Wiley.
Bennett, J. W., & Ishino, I. (1972). Paternalism in the Japanese economy: Anthropological studies of oyabun-kobun patterns. London: Greenwood Pub Group.
Bexell, M., Tallberg, J., & Uhlin, A. (2010). Democracy in global governance: The promises and pitfalls of transnational actors. Global Governance, 16, 81–101.
Bitzer, V., & Glasbergen, P. (2015). Business–NGO partnerships in global value chains: Part of the solution or part of the problem of sustainable change? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 12, 35–40.
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
Bloomfield, J. (2012). Is forest certification a hegemonic force? The FSC and its challengers. Journal of Environment & Development, 21(4), 391–413.
Brown, P. (2012). A nudge in the right direction? Towards a sociological engagement with libertarian paternalism. Social Policy & Society, 11, 305–317.
Buchholz, R. A., & Rosenthal, S. B. (2004). Stakeholder theory and public policy: How governments matter. Journal of Business Ethics, 51, 143–153.
Cadman, T. (2011). Quality and legitimacy of global governance: Case lessons from forestry. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Carnegie, A. (1889). Wealth. The North American Review, 148(391), 653–664.
Carroll, A. (2009). A history of corporate social responsibility. In: A. Crane, D. Matten, A. McWilliams, J. Moon & D. S. Siegel (Eds.), Oxford handbook of CSR (pp. 19–46). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cashore, B. (2003). Legitimacy and the privatization of environmental governance: How non–state market–driven (NSMD) governance systems gain rule–making authority. Governance, 15, 503–529.
Chan, S. C., Huang, X., Snape, E., & Lam, C. K. (2013). The Janus face of paternalistic leaders: Authoritarianism, benevolence, subordinates’ organization-based self-esteem, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 108–128.
Chirico, F., Nordqvist, M., Colombo, G., & Mollona, E. (2012). Simulating dynamic capabilities and value creation in family firms: Is paternalism an “asset” or a “liability”? Family Business Review, 25(3), 318–338.
Clegg, S. R., Courpasson, D., & Phillips, N. X. (2006). Power and organizations. London: Sage.
Coffey, J. (2003). Léon Harmel: Entrepreneur as Catholic social reformer. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Colli, A. (2003). The history of family business, 1850–2000 (Vol. 47). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cornell, N. 2015. A third theory of paternalism. Michigan Law Review, 113, 1295–1336.
Crane, A., Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2004). Stakeholders as citizens? Rethinking Rights, participation, and democracy. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1/2), 107–122.
Crilly, D., Zollo, M., & Hansen, M. T. (2012). Faking it or muddling through? Understanding decoupling in response to stakeholder pressures. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1429–1448.
Crossley, D. (1999). Paternalism and corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 21, 291–302.
Cutler, A. C., & Dietz, T. (2017). The politics of private governance. London: Routledge.
Dahl, R. A. (1957). The concept of power. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 2(3), 201–215.
Dallmayr, F. (2003). Cosmopolitanism moral and political. Political Theory, 31(3), 421–442.
Devinney, T. M. (2009). Is the socially responsible corporation a myth? The good, the bad, and the ugly of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23, 44–56.
Djelic, M. L. (2016). History of management. What is the future for research on the past? In B. Czarniawska (Ed.), A research agenda for management and organization studies (pp. 1–10). Northampton: Edward Elgar.
Djelic, M.-L. (2011). From the rule of law to the law of rules. International Studies of Management and Organization, 41, 35–61.
Djelic, M.-L., & Etchanchu, H. (2017). Contextualizing corporate political responsibilities: Neoliberal CSR in historical perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 142(4), 641–661.
Djelic, M.-L., & Quack, S. (Eds.). (2010). Transnational communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Djelic, M.-L., & Sahlin, K. (2009). Governance and its transnational dynamics. Towards a reordering of our world? In C. Chapman, D. Cooper & P. Miller (Eds.), Accounting, organizations and institutions (pp. 175–204). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Djelic, M.-L., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (Eds.). (2006). Transnational governance: Institutional dynamics of regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Driver, C., & Thompson, G. (2002). Corporate governance and democracy: The stakeholder debate revisited. Journal of Management and Governance, 6(2), 111–130.
Drucker, P. F. (1984). The new meaning of corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 26, 53–63.
Drummond, D. K. (1995). Crewe: Railway town, company and people 1840–1914. Aldershot: Scholar Press.
Dworkin, G. (1971). Paternalism. In R. A., Wasserstrom (Ed.), Morality and the law. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Co.
Dworkin, G. (1988). The theory and practice of autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Edward, P., & Willmott, H. (2008). Corporate citizenship: Rise or demise of a myth? Academy of Management Review, 33(3), 771–773.
Edward, P., & Willmott, H. (2013). Discourse and normative business ethics. In C. Luetge (Ed.), Handbook of the philosophical foundations of business ethics (pp. 549–580). Dordrecht: Springer.
Eisenach, E. J. (2011). Tough choice: Structured paternalism and the landscape of choice. Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries, 48, 1168–1168.
Everett, J., & Jamal, T. B. (2004). Multistakeholder collaboration as symbolic marketplace and pedagogic practice. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13(1), 57–78.
Feldman, S., & Stenner, K. (1997). Perceived threat and authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 18(4), 741–770.
Fleming, P. (2005). ‘Kindergarten Cop’: Paternalism and Resistance in a high-commitment workplace. Journal of Management Studies, 42(7), 1469–1489.
Fleming, P., & Banerjee, S. B. (2016). When performativity fails: Implications for critical management studies. Human Relations, 69(2), 257–276.
Fleming, P., Roberts, J., & Garsten, C. (2013). In search of corporate social responsibility: Introduction to special issue. Organization, 20(3), 337–348.
Fleming, P., & Spicer, A. (2014). Power in management and organization science. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 237–298.
Fotion, N. (1979). Paternalism. Ethics, 89, 191–198.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon.
Fox, A. (1985). History and heritage. London: Allen and Unwin.
Frederick, W. C. (1994). From CSR1 to CSR2: The maturing of business-and-society thought. Business & Society, 33(2), 150–164.
Fuchs, D. (2006). Business power in global governance. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Garrau, M., & Le Goff, A. (2015). Care, justice et dépendance: Introduction aux théories du care. Paris: PUF.
Gert, B., & Culver, C. M. (1979). The justification of paternalism. Ethics, 89, 199–210.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gond, J.-P., Barin Cruz, L., Raufflet, E., & Charron, M. (2016). To frack or not to frack? The interaction of justification and power in a sustainability controversy. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12166.
Gond, J.-P., Kang, N., & Moon, J. (2011). The government of self-regulation: On the comparative dynamics of corporate social responsibility. Economy & Society, 40, 640–671.
Gramsci, A., Hoare, Q., & Nowell-Smith, G. (2005 ). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. London: Lawrence & Wishart.
Graz, & Nölke (Eds.). (2008). Transnational private governance and its limits. London: Routledge.
Greene, A., Ackers, P., & Black, J. (2001). Lost narratives? From paternalism to team-working in a lock manufacturing firm. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 22, 211–237.
Grosser, K. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and multi-stakeholder governance: Pluralism, feminist perspectives and women’s NGOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(1), 65–81.
Grüne-Yanoff, T. (2012). Old wine in new casks: Libertarian paternalism still violates liberal principles. Social Choice & Welfare, 38(4), 635–645.
Gueslin, A. (1992). Le paternalisme Revisité en Europe occidentale. Genèses, 7(1), 201–211.
Haack, P., & Scherer, A. G. (2014). Why sparing the rod does not spoil the child: A critique of the ‘‘strict father’’ model in transnational governance. Journal of Business Ethics, 122, 225–240.
Habermas, J. (1973). Legitimationsprobleme im Spätkapitalismus (Vol. 623). Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Hanlon, G., & Fleming, P. (2009). Updating the critical perspective on corporate social responsibility. Sociology Compass, 3, 937–948.
Hausman, D. M., & Welch, B. (2010). Debate: To nudge or not to nudge. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(1), 123–136.
Höllerer, M. A. (2013). From taken-for-granted to explicit commitment: The rise of CSR in a corporatist country. Journal of Management Studies, 50(4), 573–606.
Humphreys, J. H., Randolph-Seng, B., Haden, P., S.S., & Noviceviz, M. M. (2015). Integration libertarian paternalism into paternalistic leadership: The choice architecture of H.J. Heinz. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 22(2), 187–201.
Iankova, E. A. (2008). From corporate paternalism to corporate social responsibility in post-communist Europe. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 29, 75–81.
Ite, U. E. (2004). Multinationals and corporate social responsibility in developing countries: A case study of Nigeria. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 11, 1–11.
Jargon (2011). Under pressure, McDonald’s adds apples to kids meals. (Eastern edn). New York, 27 July 2011, B.1.
Kerfoot, D., & Knights, D. (1993). Management, masculinity and manipulation: From paternalism to corporate strategy in financial services in Britain. Journal of Management Studies, 30(4), 659–677.
Kinderman, D. (2012). Free us up so we can be responsible! The co-evolution of corporate social responsibility and neo-liberalism in the UK, 1977–2010. Socio-Economic Review, 10, 29–57.
Knights, D., & McCabe, D. (2001). A different world: Shifting masculinities in the transition to call centres. Organization, 8(4), 619–645.
Koven, S., & Michel, S. (1990). Womanly duties: Maternalist politics and the origins of welfare states in France, Germany, Great Britain, and the United States. The American Historical Review, 95, 1880–1920. 1076–1108.
Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2001). Hegemony and socialist strategy (Second edn.). London: Verso.
Lawrence, T. B., & Maitlis, S. (2012). Care and possibility: Enacting an ethic of care through narrative practice. Academy of Management Review, 37(4), 641–663.
Lee, C. W., McQuarrie, M., & Walker, E. T. (2015). Democratizing inequalities. New York: New York University Press.
Lee, C. W., & Romano, Z. (2013). Democracy’s new discipline: Public deliberation as organizational strategy. Organization Studies, 34, 733–753.
Levy, D. L., Brown, H. S., & de Jong, M. (2010). The contested politics of corporate governance: The case of the global reporting initiative. Business & Society, 49(1), 88–115.
Levy, D. L., & Kaplan, R. (2007). CSR and theories of global governance: strategic contestation in global issue arenas. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon & D. Siegel (Eds.), The oxford handbook of CSR. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Litrico, J. B. (2007). Beyond paternalism: Cross-cultural perspectives on the functioning of a Mexican production plant. Journal of Business Ethics, 73(1), 53–63.
Lukes, S. (1974). Power: A radical view. London: Basingstoke.
Marens, R. (2008). The hollowing out of corporate social responsibility: Abandoning a tradition in an age of declining hegemony. McGeorge Law Review, 39, 851–876.
Marneffe, P. (2006). Avoiding paternalism. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 34, 68–94.
Martin, R., & Fryer, R. (1975). The deferential worker?. In M. Bulmer (Ed.), Working class images of society. London: Routledge.
Matten, D., & Crane, A. (2005). What is stakeholder democracy? Perspectives and issues. Business Ethics: A European Review, 14, 6–13.
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33, 404–424.
Melè, D., & Paladino, M. (2008). Corporate services in poor areas: A case study with participative multistakeholder involvement. Business & Society Review, 113(2), 253–275.
Mena, S., & Palazzo, G. (2012). Input and output legitimacy of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(3), 527–556.
Mill, J. S. (1859). On liberty. London: J.W: Parker and Son.
Moog, S., Böhm, S., & Spicer, A. (2015). The limits of multi-stakeholder governance forums: The crisis of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). Journal of Business Ethics, 128, 469–493.
Moon, J., Kang, N., & Gond, J. P. (2010). Corporate social responsibility and government. In: D. Coen, W. Grant & G. Wilson, Oxford handbook of business and government (pp. 512–544). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Morice, A. (2004). Travail atypique, travail salarié et paternalisme: Retour sur 25 ans de recherche. TRAVAIL, 37.
Muller, C., Vermeulen, W. J. V., & Glasbergen, P. (2012). Pushing or sharing as value-driven strategies for societal change in global supply chains: Two case studies in the British-south African fresh fruit supply chain. Business Strategy and the Environment, 21, 127–140.
Newby, H. (1977). Paternalism and capitalism. In R. Scase (Ed.), Industrial society: Class, cleavage and control. London: Allen and Unwin.
Newby, H. (1978). The deferential worker: A study of farm workers in East Anglia. London: Allen Lane.
Newby, H., Bell, C., Rose, D., & Saunders, P. (1978). Property, paternalism and power: Class and control in rural England. London: Hutchinson of London.
Nielsen, N. J. (1994). Lifelong care and control: Paternalism in nineteenth-century factory communities. Ethnologia Scandinavica, 24, 70–89.
Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral development. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Ötken, A., & Cenkci, T. (2012). The impact of paternalistic leadership on ethical climate: The moderating role of trust in leader. Journal of Business Ethics, 108, 525–536.
Ouchi, W. G., & Jaeger, A. M. (1978). Type Z organization: Stability in the midst of mobility. The Academy of Management Review, 3(2), 305. https://doi.org/10.2307/257670.
Padavic, I., & Earnest, W.-R. (1994). Paternalism as a component of managerial strategy. The Social Science Journal, 31(4), 389–405.
Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. G. (2006). Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 71–88.
Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility, democracy, and the politicization of the corporation. Academy of Management Review, 33, 773–775.
Parsons, T. (1967). On the concept of political power. In T. Parsons (Ed.), Sociologica theory and modern society. New York: Free Press.
Pattberg, P. (2005). The institutionalization of private governance: How business and nonprofit organizations agree on transnational rules. Governance, 18(4), 589–610.
PEFC. Retrieved August 28, 2017, from http://www.pefc.org.
Pellegrini, E. K., Scandura, T. A., & Jayaraman, V. (2010). Cross-cultural generalizability of paternalistic leadership: An expansion of leader-member exchange theory. Group & Organization Management, 35, 391–420.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
Phillips, N., Lawrence, T. B., & Hardy, C. (2000). Inter-organizational collaboration and the dynamics of institutional fields. Journal of Management Studies, 37, 23–43.
Pilaj, H. (2015). The choice architecture of sustainable and responsible investment: Nudging investors toward ethical decision-making. Journal of Business Ethics, 1–11.
Prasad, A., & Mills, A. J. (2011). Critical management studies and business ethics: A synthesis and three research trajectories for the coming decade. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(2), 227–237.
Provan, K. G., Beyer, J. M., & Kruytbosch, C. (1980). Environmental linkages and power in resource-dependence relations between organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(2), 200–225.
Quack, S. (2010). Law, expertise and legitimacy in transnational economic governance: An introduction. Socio-Economic Review, 8(1), 3–16.
Reid, D. (1985). Industrial paternalism: Discourse and practice in nineteenth-century french mining and metallurgy. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 27, 579–607.
Richter, U. H. (2010). Liberal thought in reasoning on CSR. Journal of business ethics, 97(4), 625–649.
Rostbøll, C. F. (2005). Preferences and paternalism: On freedom and deliberative democracy. Political Theory, 33, 370–396.
Ruggie, J.-G. (2017). Multinationals as global institution: Power, authority and relative autonomy. Regulation & Governance. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12154.
Rynes, S. L., Bartunek, J. M., Dutton, J. E., & Margolis, J. D. (2012). Care and compassion through an organizational lens: Opening up new possibilities. Academy of Management Review, 37, 503–523.
Sabadoz, C., & Singer, A. (2017). Talk ain’t cheap: Political CSR and the challenges of corporate Deliberation. Business Ethics Quarterly, 27(2), 183–211.
Sandman, L., & Munthe, C. (2010). Shared decision making, paternalism and patient choice. Health Care Analysis, 18(1), 60–84.
Scherer, A. (2017). Theory assessment and agenda setting in political CSR: A critical theory perspective. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20, 387–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12137.
Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2007). Toward a political conception of corporate social responsibility: Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1096–1120.
Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 899–931.
Scherer, A. G., Rasche, A., Palazzo, G., & Spicer, A. (2016). Managing for political corporate social responsibility: New challenges and directions for PCSR 2.0. Journal of Management Studies, 53(3), 273–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12203.
Schnellenbach, J., Seele, P., & Lock, I. (2012). Nudges and norms: On the political economy of soft paternalism. European Journal of Political Economy, 28(2), 266–277. Journal of Business Ethics, 131, 401–414.
Schrempf-Stirling, J., & Palazzo, G. (2016). Upstream corporate social responsibility: The evolution from contract responsibility to full producer responsibility. Business & Society, 55(4), 491–527.
Seele, P., & Lock, I. (2015). Instrumental and/or deliberative? A typology of CSR communication Tools. Journal of Business Ethics, 131, 401–414.
Stone, D. (2013). Knowledge actors and transnational governance: The private public policy. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
Sunstein, C. R. (2014). Choosing not to choose. Duke Law Journal, 64(1), 1–52.
Sunstein, C. R., & Thaler, R. H. (2003). Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron. University of Chicago Law Review, 70, 1159–1202.
Szerletics, A. (2011). Paternalism. The essex autonomy project green paper technical report. Colchester: Essex University, Department of Philosophy.
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. The American Economic Review, 93, 175–179.
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Todd, E. (2011). L’origine des systèmes familiaux. Paris: Gallimard.
Tone, A. (1997). The business of benevolence. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Topal, C. (2009). The construction of general public interest: Risk, legitimacy, and power in a public hearing. Organization Studies, 30, 277–300.
Tronto, J. C. (1993). Moral boundaries. New York: Routledge.
Tronto, J. C., Maury, H., & Mozère, L. (2009). Un monde vulnérable. Paris: Éd. la Découverte.
Turcotte, M. F., & Pasquero, J. (2001). The paradox of multistakeholder collaborative roundtables. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 37(4), 447–464.
Vallgårda, S. (2012). Nudge—A new and better way to improve health? Health Policy, 104, 200–203.
Van Breugel, G., Van Olffen, W., & Olie, W. (2005). Temporary liaisons: the commitment of “temps” towards their agencies. Journal of Management Studies, 42(3), 539–566.
Vogel, D. (2008). Private global business regulation. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 261–282.
Vogel, D. (2010). The private regulation of global corporate conduct. Achievements and limitations. Business and Society, 49(1), 68–87.
Walker, E. T. (2015). Legitimating the corporation through public participation. In C. W. Lee, M. McQuarrie & E. T. Walker (Eds.), Democratizing inequalities: Dilemmas of the new public participation: (pp. 66–80). New York: NYU Press.
Weber, M. .(1949 ). ‘Objectivity’ in social science and social policy. In E. Shils & H. Finch (Eds.), Max Weber: The methodology of the social sciences. Glencoe: The Free Press.
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Whelan, G. (2012). The political perspective of corporate social responsibility: A critical research agenda. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(4), 709–737.
Wood, S., Abbott, K., Black, J., Eberlein, B., & Meidinger, E. (2015). The interactive dynamics of transnational business governance: A challenge for transnational legal theory. Transnational Legal Theory, 6(2), 333–369.
Wray, D. (1996). Paternalism and its discontents: A case study. Work, Employment and Society, 10(4), 701–715.
We would like to thank the editor, Antonino Vaccaro, and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments during the revision process. We would also like to acknowledge Professors Jan Lepoutre and Jeremy Moon, as well as participants in workshops at Cass and ESSEC Business School, the Society for Business Ethics and the GRONEN reading Group for their input on previous versions of this manuscript. Helen Etchanchu is member of the Entrepreneurship and Innovation Chair, which is part of LabEx Entrepreneurship (University of Montpellier, France) and funded by the French government (Labex Entreprendre, ANR-10-Labex-11-01).
This study was partially funded by Institut Francilien de Recherche sur l’Innovation en Société (IFRIS), Domaine d’Intérêt Majeur Innovation, Sciences, Technique, Société (DIM-IS²IT).
About this article
Cite this article
Etchanchu, H., Djelic, ML. Old Wine in New Bottles? Parentalism, Power, and Its Legitimacy in Business–Society Relations. J Bus Ethics 160, 893–911 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3928-9
- Private governance
- Political CSR