Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

MNCs and International Accountability Standards Through an Institutional Lens: Evidence of Symbolic Conformity or Decoupling

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The recent proliferation of International Accountability Standards (IAS) has attracted significant academic interest, but the extent of their adoption and integration by global firms remains underinvestigated. Capitalizing on institutional theory and the typology of strategic responses to institutional pressures proposed by Oliver (Acad Manage Rev 16(1):145–179, 1991), this article uses an interpretive research methodology to analyze a sample of MNC practitioners’ views regarding IAS, and derive some insights in relation to expected patterns of strategic responses to these new institutional pressures. The article also presents relevant remarks relating to the usefulness of institutional theory in the context of research relating to IAS. The findings suggest patterns of engagement combining elements of both conformity and resistance, although the answers correspond most closely to a decoupling or symbolic conformity strategic response. The findings are fleshed out and their implications delineated/assessed.

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

  • Ang, S. and Cummings, L. (1997). Strategic Response to Institutional Influences on Information Systems Outsourcing. Organization Science, 8 (3), pp. 235-256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blowfield, M. and Frynas, J., G. (2005). Setting New Agendas: Critical Perspectives on Corporate Social Responsibility in the Development of the Developing World. International Affairs, 81 (3), pp. 499-513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carriga, E. and Melé, P. (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53, pp. 51-71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, T. and Lagreid, P. (2003). Administrative Reform Policy: The Challenges of Turning Symbols into Practice. Public Organization Review: A Global Journal, 3, pp. 3-27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darnall, N. (2003). Why Firms Certify to ISO 14001: An Institutional and Resource Based View. Academy of Management Best Conference Paper, 2003.

  • Davis, G. and Marquis, C. (2005). Prospects for Organization Theory in the early Twenty-First Century: Institutional Fields and Mechanisms. Organization Science, 16 (4), pp. 332-343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M. (2002). The Diffusion of Environmental Management Standards in Europe and the United States: An Institutional Perspective. Policy Sciences, 35, pp. 91-119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M. and Montiel, I. (2008). The Diffusion of Voluntary International Management Standards: Responsible Care, ISO 9000, and ISO 14001 in the Chemical Industry. The Policy Studies Journal, 36 (1), pp. 65-93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denscombe, M. (2003). The Good Research Guide. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. (1988). Interest and Agency in Institutional Theory. In L. G. Zucker (Ed.) Institutional Patterns and Organizations. Ballinger, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 3-22.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. and Powell, W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48, pp. 147-160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doane, D. (2005). Beyond Corporate Social Responsibility: Minnows, Mammoths and Markets. Futures, 37 (2/3), pp. 215-229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C., J. (2005). Building Corporate Reputation through CSR Initiatives: Evolving Standards. Corporate Reputation Review, 8 (1), pp. 7-11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gephart, R. (2004). Qualitative Research and the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 47 (4), pp. 454-462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodrick, E. and Salancik, G. (1996). Organizational Discretion in Responding to Institutional Practices: Hospitals and Cesarean Births. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41 (1), pp. 1-28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodstein, J. (1994). Institutional Pressures and Strategic Responsiveness: Employer Involvement in Work Family Issues. Academy of Management Journal, 37, pp. 350-382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R. and Hinings, C. (1996). Understanding Radical Organizational Change: Bringing Together the Old and the New Institutionalism. The Academy of Management Review, 21 (4), pp. 1022-1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., Suddaby, R. and Hinings, C. (2002). Theorizing Change: The Role of Professional Associations in the Transformation of Institutional Fields. The Academy of Management Journal, 45 (1), pp. 58-80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamann R. and Acutt, N (2003). How Should Civil Society (and the government) Respond to Corporate Social Responsibility’? A Critique of Business Motivations and the Potential for Partnerships. Development Southern Africa, 20 (2), pp. 255-270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiscox, M. J., C. Schwartz and M. W. Tofeel: 2008, Evaluating the Impact of SA8000 Certification, Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative Working Paper No. 47. Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.

  • Hoffman, A. (1999). Institutional Evolution and Change: Environmentalism and the US Chemical Industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42 (4), pp. 351-371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamali, D. (2006). Insights into Triple Bottom Line Integration from a Learning Organization Perspective. Business Process Management Journal, 12 (6), pp. 809-821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamali, D. (2008). A Stakeholder Approach to Corporate Social Responsibility: A Fresh Perspective into Theory and Practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, pp. 213-231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. and Lenox, M. (2000). Industry Self-Regulation Without Sanctions: The Chemical Industry’s Responsible Care Program. Academy of Management Journal, 43 (4), pp. 698-716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koenig-Archibugi, M. (2004). Transnational Corporations and Public Accountability, Government and Opposition, 39 (2), 234–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolk A., Van Tulder R., Welters, C. (1999). International Codes of Conduct and Corporate Social Responsibility: Can Transnational Corporations Regulate Themselves?. Transnational Corporations 8 (1):143-180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levis, J. (2006). Adoption of Corporate Social Responsibility Codes by Multinational Companies. Journal of Asian Economics, 17, pp. 50-55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logsdon, J., M. and Lewellyn, P., G. (2000). Expanding Accountability to Stakeholders: Trends and Predictions. Business and Society Review, 105 (4), pp. 419-435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lounsbury, M. (2001). Institutional Transformation and Status Mobility: The Professionalization of the Field of Finance. Academy of Management Journal, 45 (1), pp. 255-266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsden C. (2000) The New Corporate Citizenship of Big Business: Part of the Solution to Sustainability?. Business and Society Review 105 (1):9-25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D. and Moon, J. (2008). Implicit and Explicit CSR: A Conceptual Framework for a Comparative Understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility. The Academy of Management Review, 33 (2), pp. 404-424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meho, L. (2006). E-mail Interviewing in Qualitative Research: A Methodological Discussion. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57 (10), pp. 1284-1295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohan, A. (2006). Global Corporate Social Responsibilities Management in MNCs. Journal of Business Strategies, 23 (1), pp. 9-32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monshipouri, M., Welch, C., E. Jr. and Kennedy, E. T. (2004). Multinational Corporations and the Ethics of Global Responsibilities: Problems and Possibilities. Human Rights Quarterly, 25, pp. 965-989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogawa, R. and Scribner, S. (2002). Leadership: Spanning the Technical and Institutional Dimensions of Organizations. Journal of Educational Administration, 40 (6), pp. 576-588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes. The Academy of Management Review, 16 (1), pp. 145-179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M., Q. (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3rd edn. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, R. and Seyfang, G. (2001). New Hope or False Down? Voluntary Codes of Conduct, Labour Regulation and Social Policy in a Globalizing World. Global Social Policy, 1 (49), pp. 49-78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. (1979). Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay (2nd Edition). New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. (1985). Review Essay: Overboard with Myth and Symbols. American Journal of Sociology, 91 (1): pp. 51-155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasche, A. and M. Behnam: 2008, Towards a Model to Compare and Evaluate Accountability Standards – The Case of the UN Global Compact, Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Anaheim.

  • Rasche, A. and Esser, D., E. (2006). From Stakeholder Management to Stakeholder Accountability. Journal of Business Ethics, 62, pp. 251-267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, P. and Greenwood, R. (1997). Integrating Transaction Cost and Institutional Theories: Toward a Constrained Efficiency Framework for Understanding Organizational Design Adoption. Academy of Management Review, 22 (2), pp. 346-373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohitratana, K. (2002). SA8000: A Tool to Improve Quality of Life. Managerial Auditing Journal, 17(1/2), pp. 60-64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, J., G. (2002). The Theory and Practice of Learning Networks: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Global Compact. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 5, pp. 27-36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahlin-Andersson K. (2006) Corporate Social Responsibility: A Trend and a Movement, but of What and for What?. Corporate Governance 6 (5):595-608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. Sage, Thousand Oaks, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (2008). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas and Interests. Sage. Thousand Oaks, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shamir, R. (2004). Between Self-Regulation and the Alien Tort Claims Act: On the Contested Concept of Corporate Social Responsibility. Law & Society, 38 (4), pp. 635-664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolbert, P. and Zucker, L. (1996). The Institutionalization of Institutional Theory. In S. Clegg, C. Hardy and W. Nord (Eds.). Handbook of Organization Studies, Sage, Thousand Oaks, California, pp. 22-39.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Global Compact: 2009, ‘Policy for Communication on Progress’, http://www.unglobalcompact.org/cop/inactives.html and http://www.unglobalcompact.org/cop/non_communicating.html. Accessed 15 Feb 2009.

  • Waddock, S. (2004a). Creating Corporate Accountability: Foundation Principles to Make Corporate Citizenship Real. Journal of Business Ethics, 50, pp. 313-327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (2004b). Parallel Universes: Companies, Academics and the Progress of Corporate Citizenship. Business and Society Review, 109 (1), pp. 5-42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (2008). Building a New Institutional Infrastructure for Corporate Responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives, 22 (3), pp. 87-108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, G., Trevino, L. and Cochran, P. (1999). Integrated and Decoupled Corporate Social Performance: Management Commitments, External Pressures and Corporate Ethics Practices, Academy of Management Journal, 42 (5), pp. 539-552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westphal J. and Zajac, E. (2001). De-Coupling Policy from Practice: The Case of Stock Repurchase Programs. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46 (2), pp. 202-228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehouse, L. (2003) Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Citizenship and the Global Compact, A New Approach to Regulating Corporate Social Power?. Global Social Policy 3(3):299-318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, O., F. (2004). The UN Global Compact: The Challenge and the Promise. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14 (4), pp. 755-774.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willke, H. Willke, G. (2008) The Corporation as a Political Actor? A Systems Theory Perspective. In: Scherer, A. Palazzo, G., Eds., Handbook of Research on Global Citizenship,Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp. 552-574.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, L. (1987). Normal change or Risky Business: Institutional Effects on the Hazard of Change in Hospital Organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 34, pp. 671-701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. American University of Beirut, Suliman S. Olayan School of Business, Bliss Street, P.O. Box 11-0236, Beirut, Lebanon

    Dima Jamali

Authors
  1. Dima Jamali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dima Jamali.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jamali, D. MNCs and International Accountability Standards Through an Institutional Lens: Evidence of Symbolic Conformity or Decoupling. J Bus Ethics 95, 617–640 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0443-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0443-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation