Skip to main content

How to Approach Nonmarket Strategy and Corporate Political Activity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Nonmarket Strategy in Japan

Abstract

This chapter presents an overview of the theoretical approaches through which the corporate political activity (CPA) phenomenon can be analyzed. The number of related fields and disciplines, such as economics, political science, sociology, management, as well as the volume of literature is so extensive that the choice was made to only briefly review the fundamentals and focus for this book’s analysis on a combination of political science and strategic management.

A discussion of the concept of power leads to the adoption of the broader and better-suited notion of influence as an elemental analytic dimension that can be understood as ranging from pressure to persuasion. This dimension is substantiated in a tool, the Balance of Influence matrix.

A second central dimension underlying any CPA situation consists of the conceptual pair Representativeness/Credibility. These notions encompass the more traditional ideas of Collective/Individual actions but are meant to describe better and comprehensively a nuanced reality. They give birth to the second essential tool, the Balance of Coalition. These two dimensions could be seen as the conceptual infrastructure on which the practical CPA tactics are built in the framework, that is the subject of this chapter.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Criticizing the elusiveness of the concept of power due, inter alia, to the different lens adopted by each school (political scientists/pluralism and sociologists/elitism), Bachrach and Baratz propose a new approach based on the analysis of dominant values, myths and, above all, existing bias to understand the dynamic of non-decision-making.

  2. 2.

    After having defined power in a generic manner, stating that people exert power over others when they affect them in a manner contrary to their interests, Lukes points out that people sometimes act willingly in ways contrary to their interests. To him, this constitutes the third dimension of power that can be seen in ideology where no coercion or constraints are at play.

  3. 3.

    This fourth dimension questions the production of the subject as well as the norms governing our self-understandings and political practices.

  4. 4.

    A central criticism to the concept of soft power consists of considering that soft power is only secondary to hard power and cannot exist without its backing.

  5. 5.

    CME : Coordinated Market Economy, LME: Liberal Market Economy.

  6. 6.

    Gyôkai: industry

  7. 7.

    Interviewees, especially the Japanese companies, report that the first thing officials ask them when they come to explain their case is why they do not use the channel of their trade association (the “normal” way), and that they cannot do anything for a single company.

  8. 8.

    Nemawashi: prior consultation and behind-the-scenes consensus-building process.

References

  • Astley, W. G., & Sachdeva, P. S. (1984). Structural Sources of Intraorganizational Power: A Theoretical Synthesis. Academy of Management Review, 9(1), 104–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M. S. (1962). Two Faces of Power. The American Political Science Review, 56(4), 947–952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M., & Duvall, R. (2005). Power in International Politics. International Organization, 59(1), 39–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, D. P. (1993). Business and Its Environment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, D. P. (1995a). The Nonmarket Strategy System. Sloan Management Review, 37(1), 73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, D. P. (1995b). Integrated Strategy: Market and Nonmarket Components. California Management Review, 37(2), 47–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, D. P. (2013). Business and Its Environment (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. London: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boddewyn, J., & Brewer, T. L. (1994). International Business Political Behavior: New Theoretical Directions. Academy of Management Review, 19(1), 119–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonardi, J. P., Holburn, G. L. F., & Vanden Bergh, R. G. (2006). Nonmarket Strategy Performance: Evidence from U.S. Electric Utilities. Academy of Management Journal, 49(6), 1209–1228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. M., March, G. J., & Olsen, P. J. (1972). A Garbage can Model of Organizational Choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. A. (1957). The Concept of Power. Behavioral Science, 2(3), 201–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. A. (1963). Modern Political Analysis. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. A., & Stinebrickner, B. (2003). Modern Political Analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Digeser, P. (1992). The Fourth Face of Power. The Journal of Politics, 54(4), 977–1007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-Dependence Relations. American Sociological Review, 27(1), 31–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, E. (1969). The Corporation in American Politics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Funkhouser, G. R., & Parker, R. (1999). An Action-based Theory of Persuasion in Marketing. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 7(3), 27–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Getz, K. A. (1997). Research in Corporate Political Action: Integration and Assessment. Business and Society, 36(1), 32–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guegen, D. (2007). European Lobbying. Brussels: Europolitics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., & Hitt, M. (1999). Corporate Political Strategy Formulation: A Model of Approach, Participation, and Strategy Decisions. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 825–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homans, G. C. (1961). Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms (Rev. ed. 1974). New York: Harcourt Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kindleberger, C. P. (1970). Power and Money. New York: Basic Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lassalle-De Salins, M. (2006). Le meta-lobbying ou comment les entreprises influencent les décisions des organisations intergouvernementales: Le cas des stratégies politiques de l’industrie française au Codex Alimentarius. (Doctoral dissertation, Humanities and Social Sciences, HEC PARIS). Retrieved April 3, 2014, from https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/pastel-00004621/document.

  • Lawton, T., McGuire, S., & Rajwani, T. (2013). Corporate Political Activity: A Literature Review and Research Agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(1), 86–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lukes, S. (1974). Power: A Radical View. New York: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, Y. (2001). Toward a Cooperative View of MNC-Host Government Relations: Building Blocks and Performance Implications. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(3), 401–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, C. (2008). Brussels versus the Beltway: Advocacy in the United States and the European Union. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft Power. New York: Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. A. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salorio, E. M., Boddewyn, J., & Dahan, N. (2005). Integrating Business Political Behavior with Economic and Organizational Strategies. International Studies of Management and Organization, 35(2), 28–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1947). The Theory of Social and Economic Organization (A. M. Henderson & T. Parsons, Trans.). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woll, C. (2007). Leading the Dance? Power and Political Resources of Business Lobbyists. Journal of Public Policy, 27(1), 57–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoffie, D. B. (1987). Corporate Strategies for Political Action: A Rational Mode. In A. A. Marcus, A. M. Kaufman, & D. R. Beam (Eds.), Business Strategy and Public Policy. Westport, CT: QuorumBooks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoffie, D. B., & Bergenstein, S. (1985). Creating Political Advantage: The Rise of the Political Entrepreneur. California Management Review, 28(1), 124–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Romann, E. (2020). How to Approach Nonmarket Strategy and Corporate Political Activity. In: Nonmarket Strategy in Japan. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7325-5_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics