Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Corporate social responsibility in the multinational enterprise: strategic and institutional approaches

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of International Business Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

What is the relationship of global and local (country-specific) corporate social responsibility (CSR) to international organizational strategy? Applying the strategic logic of the Bartlett and Ghoshal typology to the realm of CSR, multinational firms should respond to pressures for integration and responsiveness from salient stakeholders. However, an institutional logic would suggest that multinational firms will simply replicate the existing product-market organizational strategy (multidomestic, transnational, global) in their management of CSR. These alternative approaches are tested with a survey instrument sent to MNEs operating in Mexico. The results of this study are consistent with the proposition that institutional pressures, rather than strategic analysis of social issues and stakeholders, are guiding decision-making with respect to CSR. We develop implications for MNE management and research, as well as public policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abascal, C. (2003) ‘La generación de empleos es responsabilidad de todos los mexicanos’, USEM: La Revista Social del Empresario 34 (Noviembre/Diciembre): 10–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acutt, N.J., Medina-Ross, V. and O'Riordan, T. (2004) ‘Perspectives on corporate social responsibility in the chemical sector: a comparative analysis of the Mexican and South African cases’, Natural Resources Forum 28 (4): 302–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, K.R. (1987) The Concept of Corporate Strategy, Irwin: Homewood, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansoff, H.I. (1980) ‘Strategic issues management’, Strategic Management Journal 1 (2): 131–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, J.S. and Overton, T.S. (1977) ‘Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys’, Journal of Marketing Research 18 (3): 396–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arthaud-Day, M. (2005) ‘Transnational corporate responsibility: a tri-dimensional approach to international CSR research’, Business Ethics Quarterly 15 (1): 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J.E., Reficco, E., Berger, G., Fischer, R.M., Gutierrez, R., Koljatic, M., Lozano, G. and Ogliastri, E. (2004) Social Partnering in Latin America: Lessons Drawn from Collaborations of Businesses and Civil Society Organizations, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, D.P. (2001) ‘Private politics, corporate social responsibility and integrated strategy’, Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 10 (1): 7–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, D.P. (2005) Business and Its Environment, Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, C.A. and Ghoshal, S. (1989) Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution, Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J. (2002) ‘Multinational corporations, social responsibility and conflict’, Journal of International Affairs 55 (2): 393–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • BSR (2005) ‘Business for social responsibility’, [website] http://www.bsr.org. (accessed 26 December 2005).

  • Christmann, P. (2004) ‘Multinational companies and the natural environment: determinants of global environmental policy standardization’, Academy of Management Journal 47 (5): 747–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, I. (2005) ‘The biggest contract’, The Economist 26 May, p.87.

  • De George, R.T. (1993) Competing with Integrity in International Business, Oxford University Press: New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Jongh, D. (2004) ‘A stakeholder perspective on managing social risk in South Africa: responsibility or accountability?’ Journal of Corporate Citizenship 15 (Autumn): 27–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983) ‘The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields’, American Sociological Review 48 (2): 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. and Dunfee, T.W. (1994) ‘Toward a unified conception of business ethics: integrative social contracts theory’, Academy of Management Review 19 (2): 252–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, J.E., Fahey, L. and Narayanan, V.K. (1983) ‘Toward understanding strategic issue diagnosis’, Strategic Management Journal 4 (4): 307–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fligstein, N. (1991) ‘The structural transformation of American industry: an institutional account of the causes of diversification in the largest firms, 1919–1979’, in W.W. Powell and P. J. DiMaggio (eds.) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, pp: 311–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, W.C. (1991) ‘The moral authority of transnational corporate codes’, Journal of Business Ethics 10 (3): 165–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E. and Mele, D. (2004) ‘Corporate social responsibility theories: mapping the territory’, Journal of Business Ethics 53 (1–2): 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gnyawali, D.R. (1996) ‘Corporate social performance: an international perspective’, in S.B. Prasad and B.K. Boyd (eds.) Advances in International Comparative Management, vol. 11. JAI Press: Greenwich, CT, pp: 251–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair Jr, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1992) Multivariate Data Analysis, (3rd edn), Macmillan: New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, T.H. (1994) ‘Structure, strategy, and the agenda of the firm’, in R.P. Rumelt, D.E. Schendel and D. J. Teece (eds.) Fundamental Issues in Strategy: A Research Agenda, Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA, pp: 97–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S.L. and Sharma, S. (2004) ‘Engaging fringe stakeholders for competitive imagination’, Academy of Management Executive 18 (1): 7–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A. (2000) ‘An empirical analysis and extension of the Bartlett and Ghoshal typology of multinational companies’, Journal of International Business Studies 31 (1): 101–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. and Keim, G.D. (2001) ‘Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: what's the bottom line?’, Strategic Management Journal 22 (2): 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B.W. (2005) ‘Risk management, real options, and corporate social responsibility’, Journal of Business Ethics 60 (2): 175–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Infosel News (2004) ‘Crean empresarios Fundemex; Enfrentaran problemas sociales’, Infosel News 17 June.

  • Kanter, R.M. (1999) ‘From spare change to real change’, Harvard Business Review 77 (3): 122–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keim, G.D. (1978) ‘Corporate social responsibility: an assessment of the enlightened self-interest model’, Academy of Management Review 3 (1): 32–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klecka, W.R. (1980) Discriminant Analysis, Sage: Newbury Park, CA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Logsdon, J.M. and Husted, B.W. (2000) ‘Mexico's environmental performance under NAFTA: the first five years’, Journal of Environment and Development 9 (4): 370–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logsdon, J.M and Wood, D.J. (2005) ‘Global business citizenship and voluntary codes of ethical conduct’, Journal of Business Ethics 59 (1–2): 55–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahon, J.F. and Waddock, S.A. (1992) ‘Strategic issues management: an integration of issue life cycle perspectives’, Business and Society 31 (1): 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D. (2000) ‘Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification?’ Strategic Management Journal 21 (5): 603–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D. (2001) ‘Corporate social responsibility: a theory of the firm perspective’, Academy of Management Review 26 (1): 117–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K.E. (2004) ‘Perspectives on multinational enterprises in emerging economies’, Journal of International Business Studies 35 (4): 259–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R.R. and Winter, S.G. (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2002) ‘The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy’, Harvard Business Review 80 (12): 56–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C.K. and Doz, Y.L. (1987) The Multinational Mission: Balancing Local Demands and Global Vision,, The Free Press: New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Press, S.J. and Wilson, S. (1978) ‘Choosing between logistic regression and discriminant analysis’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 73 (364): 699–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, D. (2002) ‘Employing normative stakeholder theory in developing countries: a critical theory perspective’, Business and Society 41 (2): 166–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera, J. (2002) ‘Assessing a voluntary environmental initiative in the developing world: the Costa Rican certification for sustainable tourism’, Policy Sciences 35 (4): 333–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robins, J.A., Tallman, S. and Fladmoe-Lindquist, K. (2002) ‘Autonomy and dependence of international cooperative ventures: an exploration of the strategic performance of US ventures in Mexico’, Strategic Management Journal 23 (10): 881–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salazar, J. (2006) ‘La responsabilidad social de la empresa: Teoría y evidencia para México’, PhD thesis, Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon.

  • Servitje, L. (2004) ‘Responsabilidad social de la empresa: Grupos marginados’, Negocios y Bancos, 30 January' accessed through Infolatina on 23 April 2004.

  • Sethi, S.P. (1990) ‘An analytical framework for making cross-cultural comparisons of business responses to social pressures: The case of the United States and Japan’, in L.E. Preston (ed.) International and Comparative Corporation and Society Research, JAI Press: Greenwich, CT, pp 29–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S. (2000) ‘Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy’, Academy of Management Journal 43 (4): 681–697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S. and Vredenburg, H. (1998) ‘Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities’, Strategic Management Journal 19 (8): 729–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spicer, A., Dunfee, T.W. and Bailey, W.J. (2004) ‘Does national context matter in ethical decision making? an empirical test of integrative social contracts theory’, Academy of Management Journal 47 (4): 610–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, A. (1965) ‘Social structure and organizations’, in J.G. March (ed.) Handbook of Organizations, Rand McNally: Chicago, IL, pp: 142–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strike, V., Gao, J. and Bansal, P. (2006) ‘Being good while being bad: social responsibility and the international diversification of US firms’, Journal of International Business Studies, doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400226.

  • Walzer, M. (1992) ‘Moral minimalism’, in W.R. Shea and G.A. Spadafora (eds.) The Twilight of Probability: Ethics and Politics, Science History Publications: Canton, MA, cited in Donaldson, T. and Dunfee, T.W. (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yip, G. (1992) Total Global Strategy: Managing for Worldwide Competitive Advantage, Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, L.G. (1987) ‘Institutional theories of organization’, Annual Review of Sociology 13: 443–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was made possible by a grant from the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (Mexico). The authors thank Rodrigo García and Cesar Villegas for their research assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Monterrey, Mexico

    Bryan W Husted

  2. Instituto de Empresa, Madrid, Spain

    Bryan W Husted & David B Allen

Authors
  1. Bryan W Husted
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David B Allen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bryan W Husted.

Additional information

Accepted by Lorraine Eden, Amy Hillman, Peter Rodriquez and Donald Siegel, Guest Editors, 28 February 2006. This paper has been with the author for two revisions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Husted, B., Allen, D. Corporate social responsibility in the multinational enterprise: strategic and institutional approaches. J Int Bus Stud 37, 838–849 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400227

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400227

Keywords

Search

Navigation