Global connectedness and dynamic green capabilities in MNEs

Abstract

We study how global connectedness can help MNEs become more environmentally sustainable. Based on the idea that environmental sustainability requires dynamic capabilities, we define dynamic green capability as the ability to build complementary green competences and reconfigure organizationally embedded resources to pursue competitive advantage in a rapidly changing stakeholder environment. We argue that MNEs with greater global connectedness in terms of international diversification or international environmental certification possess knowledge advantages in cultivating dynamic green capabilities. We extend the sensing–seizing–reconfiguring framework and propose that global connectedness substitutes for sensing as a driver of seizing by providing direct access to relevant green knowledge pools around the world, and that it complements seizing as a driver of reconfiguring by strengthening the knowledge routines needed to integrate green competences.

Resume

Nous étudions comment la connectivité mondiale peut aider les EMN à devenir plus respectueuses de l’environnement. Partant de l’idée que la durabilité environnementale exige des capacités dynamiques, nous définissons la capacité dynamique écologique comme la capacité d’acquérir des compétences vertes complémentaires et de reconfigurer les ressources intégrées à l’organisation pour obtenir un avantage concurrentiel dans un environnement de parties prenantes en constante évolution. Nous soutenons que les EMN ayant une plus grande connectivité mondiale en termes de diversification internationale ou de certification environnementale internationale possèdent des avantages au niveau des connaissances pour développer des capacités dynamiques écologiques. Nous élargissons le cadre de la détection, de la saisie et de la reconfiguration et proposons que la connectivité mondiale remplace la détection en tant que moteur de saisie en fournissant un accès direct aux pools de connaissances écologiques pertinents dans le monde, et qu’elle complète la saisie en tant que moteur de reconfiguration en renforçant les routines de connaissances requises pour intégrer les compétences écologiques.

Resumen

Estudiamos como la conectividad global puede ayudar a las empresas multinacionales a ser más ambientalmente sostenibles. Con base en la idea que la sostenibilidad ambiental requiere capacidades dinámicas, definimos la capacidad verde dinámica como la habilidad para construir competencias verdes complementarias y reconfigurar los recursos organizacionalmente arraigados para buscar una ventaja competitiva en un entorno de grupos de interés rápidamente cambiante. Discutimos que las empresas multinacionales con mayor conectividad global en términos de diversificación internacional o certificación ambiental internacional poseen ventajas de conocimiento para cultivar capacidades verdes dinámicas. Extendemos el marco de detección-apoderamiento-reconfiguración y proponemos que la conectividad global substituye a la detención como habilitador para el apoderamiento al proporcionar acceso directo a fondos comunes de conocimiento verde relevantes alrededor del mundo, y que esto complementa el apoderamiento como habilitador al fortalecer las rutinas de conocimiento necesitadas para integrar las competencias verdes.

Resumo

Estudamos como a conectividade global pode ajudar MNEs a se tornarem mais ambientalmente sustentáveis. Com base na ideia de que a sustentabilidade ambiental requer capacidades dinâmicas, definimos a capacidade dinâmica verde como a abilidade de criar competências verdes complementares e reconfigurar recursos incorporados na organização para buscar vantagens competitivas em um ambiente de stakeholders que muda rapidamente. Argumentamos que MNEs com maior conectividade global em termos de diversificação internacional ou certificação ambiental internacional possuem vantagens de conhecimento no desenvolvimento de recursos verdes dinâmicos. Estendemos o modelo de detecção-apreensão-reconfiguração e propomos que a conectividade global substitui a detecção como um fator de apreensão, fornecendo acesso direto a conjuntos de conhecimentos verdes relevantes em todo o mundo, e que ela complementa a apreensão como um fator de reconfiguração fortalecendo as rotinas de conhecimento necessárias para integrar competências verdes.

摘要

我们研究全球关联性如何帮助跨国公司变得在环境上更可持续发展。 基于环境可持续性需要动态能力的理念, 我们将动态绿色能力定义为构建互补的绿色竞争力以及重新组织嵌入式资源以在快速变化的利益相关者的环境中追求竞争优势的能力。我们认为, 在国际多样化或国际环境认证方面具有更大全球关联性的跨国公司在培育动态绿色能力方面具有知识优势。我们扩展了感应-捕捉-重新配置的理论框架, 并建议全球关联性通过提供对世界各地相关的绿色知识库的直接访问来取代感应作为捕捉的驱动力, 并通过加强需要用于整合绿色竞争力的知识程序来补充捕捉作为重新配置的驱动力.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Figure 1

REFERENCES

  1. Aragón-Correa, J. A., & Sharma, S. (2003). A contingent resource-based view of proactive corporate environmental strategy. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 71–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Arora, S., & Cason, T. N. (1996). Why do firms volunteer to exceed environmental regulations? Understanding participation in EPA’s 33/50 Program. Land Economics, 72(4), 413–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Attig, N., Boubakri, N., El Ghoul, S., & Guedhami, O. (2016). Firm internationalization and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 134(2), 171–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Banerjee, S. B. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly. Critical Sociology, 34(1), 51–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bansal, P. (2019). Sustainable development in an age of disruption. Academy of Management Discoveries, 5(1), 8–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bansal, P., & Bogner, W. C. (2002). Deciding on ISO 14001: Economics, institutions, and context. Long Range Planning, 35(3), 269–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000). Why companies go green: A model of ecological responsiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 717–736.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Benson, C. (1996). The ISO 14000 international standards: Moving beyond environmental compliance. North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation, 22(1), 307–364.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Berry, C. H. (1971). Corporate growth and diversification. The Journal of Law and Economics, 14(2), 371–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Berry, H. (2014). Global integration and innovation: Multicountry knowledge generation within MNCs. Strategic Management Journal, 35(6), 869–890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Botta, E., & Koźluk, T. 2014. Measuring environmental policy stringency in OECD countries. OECD Economics Department Working Papers (1177).

  12. Brammer, S. J., Pavelin, S., & Porter, L. A. (2009). Corporate charitable giving, multinational companies and countries of concern. Journal of Management Studies, 46(4), 575–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Burchell, J., & Cook, J. (2013). Sleeping with the enemy? Strategic transformations in business-NGO relationships through stakeholder dialogue. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(3), 505–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Buysse, K., & Verbeke, A. (2003). Proactive environmental strategies: A stakeholder management perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 24(5), 453–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Campbell, J. T., Eden, L., & Miller, S. R. (2012). Multinationals and corporate social responsibility in host countries: Does distance matter? Journal of International Business Studies, 43(1), 84–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cano-Kollmann, M., Cantwell, J., Hannigan, T. J., Mudambi, R., & Song, J. (2016). Knowledge connectivity: An agenda for innovation research in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(3), 255–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cantwell, J., & Santangelo, G. (1999). The frontier of international technology networks: Sourcing abroad the most highly tacit capabilities. Information Economics and Policy, 11(1), 101–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Christmann, P. (2000). Effects of “best practices” of environmental management on cost advantage: The role of complementary assets. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 663–680.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Christmann, P., & Taylor, G. (2001). Globalization and environment: Determinants of firm self-regulation in China. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(3), 439–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Dimaggio, P. J., & 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 

  21. Doh, J. P., Teegen, H., & Mudambi, R. (2004). Balancing private and state ownership in emerging markets’ telecommunications infrastructure: Country, industry, and firm influences. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(3), 233–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., & Kim, Y. (2017). Country-level institutions, firm value, and the role of corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(3), 360–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Florida, R. (1996). The move to environmentally conscious manufacturing. California Management Review, 39(1), 80–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gonzalez-Benito, J., & Gonzalez-Benito, O. (2006). A review of determinant factors of environmental proactivity. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(2), 87–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Grinstein, A., & Riefler, P. (2015). Citizens of the (green) world? Cosmopolitan orientation and sustainability. Journal of International Business Studies, 46(6), 694–714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Guillén, M. F., & Capron, L. (2016). State capacity, minority shareholder protections, and stock market development. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(1), 125–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hart, S. L., & Dowell, G. (2011). A natural-resource-based view of the firm: Fifteen years after. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1464–1479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hausman, J. A. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica, 46(6), 1251–1271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hawn, O., & Ioannou, I. (2015). Mind the gap: The interplay between external and internal actions in the case of corporate social responsibility. Strategic Management Journal, 37(13), 2569–2588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2015). Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 831–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Helfat, C. E., & Raubitschek, R. S. (2000). Product sequencing: Co-evolution of knowledge, capabilities and products. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 961–979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Henderson, R., & Cockburn, I. (1994). Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management Journal, 15(S1), 63–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Kim, H. (1997). International diversification: Effects on innovation and firm performance in product-diversified firms. Academy of Management Journal, 40(4), 767–798.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hoffman, A. J. (2001). The diffusion of corporate environmental practice. Organization and Environment, 14(2), 133–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Huang, H. H., Kerstein, J., & Wang, C. (2018). The impact of climate risk on firm performance and financing choices: An international comparison. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(5), 633–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Husted, B. W., Montiel, I., & Christmann, P. (2016). Effects of local legitimacy on certification decisions to global and national CSR standards by multinational subsidiaries and domestic firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(3), 382–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. ISO. 2015. Introduction to ISO 14001. Retrieved March 20, 2019 from https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/introduction_to_iso_14001.pdf.

  38. Jones, J., York, J. G., Vedula, S., Conger, M., & Lenox, M. 2019. The collective construction of green building: Industry transition toward environmentally beneficial practices. Academy of Management Perspectives. Advance online publication February 21. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2017.0031.

  39. Jourdan, J., & Kivleniece, I. (2017). Too much of a good thing? The dual effect of public sponsorship on organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 60(1), 55–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kang, J. (2013). The relationship between corporate diversification and corporate social performance. Strategic Management Journal, 34(1), 94–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kassinis, G., & Vafeas, N. (2006). Stakeholder pressures and environmental performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 145–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. King, A. A., Lenox, M. J., & Terlaak, A. (2005). The strategic use of decentralized institutions: Exploring certification with the ISO 14001. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 1091–1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kolk, A. (2010). Trajectories of sustainability reporting by MNCs. Journal of World Business, 45(4), 367–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Kolk, A., & Fortanier, F. (2013). Internationalization and environmental disclosure: The role of home and host institutions. Multinational Business Review, 21(1), 87–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Kolk, A., & Pinkse, J. (2008). A perspective on multinational enterprises and climate change: Learning from “An Inconvenient Truth”? Journal of International Business Studies, 39(8), 1359–1378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Kostova, T., & Zaheer, S. (1999). Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 64–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Lessard, D., Teece, D. J., & Leih, S. (2016). The dynamic capabilities of meta-multinationals. Global Strategy Journal, 6(3), 211–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Li, X., & Zhou, Y. M. (2017). Offshoring production while offshoring pollution? Strategic Management Journal, 38(11), 2310–2329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Luo, Y. (2000). Dynamic capabilities in international expansion. Journal of World Business, 35(4), 355–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Mithani, M. A. (2017). Liability of foreignness, natural disasters, and corporate philanthropy. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(8), 941–963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1995). Green and competitive: Ending the stalemate. Harvard Business Review, 28(6), 128–129.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Ramus, C. A., & Steger, U. (2000). The roles of supervisory support behaviors and environmental policy in employee “ecoinitiatives” at leading-edge European companies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 605–626.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Rao, H., & Greve, H. R. (2018). Disasters and community resilience: Spanish flu and the formation of retail cooperatives in Norway. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 5–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Rasche, A., Waddock, S., & McIntosh, M. (2013). The United Nations Global Compact: Retrospect and Prospect. Business and Society, 52(1), 6–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (1998a). Corporate strategies and environmental regulations: An organizing framework. Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 363–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (1998b). Corporate strategy and international environmental policy. Journal of International Business Studies, 29(4), 819–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2001). Environmental policy and international business. In A. Rugman & T. Brewer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of international business. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2003). Extending the theory of the multinational enterprise: Internalization and strategic management perspectives. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(2), 125–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Scalera, V. G., Perri, A., & Hannigan, T. J. (2018). Knowledge connectedness within and across home-country borders: Spatial heterogeneity and the technological scope of firm innovations. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(8), 990–1009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Shrivastava, P. (1995). The role of corporations in achieving ecological sustainability. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 936–960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Simmonds, P. G. (1990). The combined diversification breadth and mode dimensions and the performance of large diversified firms. Strategic Management Journal, 11(5), 399–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Strike, V. M., Gao, J., & Bansal, P. (2006). Being good while being bad: Social responsibility and the international diversification of US firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), 850–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Svirydzenka, K. 2016. Introducing a new broad-based index of financial development. IMF Working Paper.

  66. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Teece, D. J. (2014). A dynamic capabilities-based entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(1), 8–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. The Economist. 2017. The retreat of the global company. Retrieved on January 28, 2017 from https://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21715653-biggest-business-idea-past-three-decades-deep-trouble-retreat-global.

  70. Turkina, E., & Van Assche, A. (2018). Global connectedness and local innovation in industrial clusters. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(6), 706–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Van Beurden, P., & Gössling, T. (2008). The worth of values – A literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(2), 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Van Zanten, J. A., & Van Tulder, R. (2018). Multinational enterprises and the sustainable development goals: An institutional approach to corporate engagement. Journal of International Business Policy, 1(3–4), 208–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Verona, G., & Ravasi, D. (2003). Unbundling dynamic capabilities: An exploratory study of continuous product innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(3), 577–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Wang, S. L., & Li, D. (2019). Responding to public disclosure of corporate social irresponsibility in host countries: Information control and ownership control. Journal of International Business Studies, 50(8), 1283–1309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3), 339–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vladislav Maksimov.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information accompanies this article on the Journal of International Business Studies website (www.palgrave.com/journals).

Accepted by Shaker Zahra, Guest Editor, 27 August 2019. This article has been with the authors for three revisions.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 37 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maksimov, V., Wang, S.L. & Yan, S. Global connectedness and dynamic green capabilities in MNEs. J Int Bus Stud (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-019-00275-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • environmental sustainability
  • MNEs
  • dynamic capabilities
  • global connectedness
  • knowledge-based view