Interactive effects of external environmental conditions and internal firm characteristics on mnes' choice of strategy in the development of a code of conduct
Business Ethics Quarterly 16 (2):137-166 (2006)
AbstractAbstract: Effects of globalization have amplified the magnitude and frequency of corporate abuses, particularly in developing economies where weak or absent rules undermine social norms and principles. Improving multinational enterprises’ (MNEs) ethical conduct is a factor of both the ability of firms to change behaviors in the direction of the moral good, and their willingness to do so. Constraints and enablers of a firm’s ability to act ethically emanate from the external environment, including the industry environment of which the firm is a resident, and the host country environment in which it operates. A firm’s willingness to engage in ethical conduct is determined by the effective bundling of internal resources and the commitment of those resources to social ends. The interaction of external and internal conditions carves out categories of expected firm behaviors and suggests interventions that would push these behaviors in a more positive ethical direction. With reference to integrative social contracts theory (ISCT), these categories of firms are examined, and a conceptual model for analysis is developed to explain the drivers of corporate choices in the adoption and implementation of codes of conduct, and the relative power of relevant communities to the process
Similar books and articles
Corporate Governance and Firm Value: The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility. [REVIEW]Hoje Jo & Maretno A. Harjoto - 2011 - Journal of Business Ethics 103 (3):351-383.
Ethical Behavior as a Strategic Choice by Large Corporations: The Interactive Effect of Marketplace Competition, Industry Structure and Firm Resources.Linda M. Sama - 1998 - Business Ethics Quarterly 8 (1):85-104.
The Interactive Effect of Internal and External Factors on a Proactive Environmental Strategy and its Influence on a Firm's Performance.Bulent Menguc, Seigyoung Auh & Lucie Ozanne - 2010 - Journal of Business Ethics 94 (2):279 - 298.
The valdez principles: Implications for corporate social responsibility. [REVIEW]Rajib N. Sanyal & Joao S. Neves - 1991 - Journal of Business Ethics 10 (12):883 - 890.
Connecting the two faces of csr: Does employee volunteerism improve compliance?Susan M. Houghton, Joan T. A. Gabel & David W. Williams - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 87 (4):477 - 494.
International codes of conduct: An analysis of ethical reasoning. [REVIEW]Kathleen A. Getz - 1990 - Journal of Business Ethics 9 (7):567 - 577.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Corporate social responsibility: review and roadmap of theoretical perspectives.Jędrzej George Frynas & Camila Yamahaki - 2016 - Business Ethics: A European Review 25 (3):258-285.
East Meets West: Tacit Messages about Business Ethics in Stories Told by Chinese Managers.Heidi Weltzien Hoivik - 2007 - Journal of Business Ethics 74 (4):457-469.
Past Trends and Future Directions in Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility Scholarship.Denis G. Arnold, Kenneth E. Goodpaster & Gary R. Weaver - 2015 - Business Ethics Quarterly 25 (4):v-xv.
Strategic Culture and Environmental Dimensions as Determinants of Anomie in Publicly-Traded and Privately-Held Firms.Jean L. Johnson, Kelly D. Martin & Amit Saini - 2011 - Business Ethics Quarterly 21 (3):473-502.
A Paradigm Shift in the Implementation of Ethics Codes in Construction Organizations in Hong Kong: Towards an Ethical Behaviour.Christabel Man-Fong Ho & Olugbenga Timo Oladinrin - 2019 - Science and Engineering Ethics 25 (2):559-581.
References found in this work
The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions.R. Edward Freeman - 1994 - Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (4):409-421.
Stakeholder Theory and A Principle of Fairness.Robert A. Phillips - 1997 - Business Ethics Quarterly 7 (1):51-66.
Organizational Justice and Ethics Program “Follow-Through”: Influences on Employees’ Harmful and Helpful Behavior.Gary R. Weaver - 2001 - Business Ethics Quarterly 11 (4):651-671.
Coping With Paradox Multistakeholder Learning Dialogue as a Pluralist Sensemaking Process for Addressing Messy Problems.Jerry M. Calton & Steven L. Payne - 2003 - Business and Society 42 (1):7-42.
If Fairness is the Problem, is Consent the Solution? Integrating ISCT and Stakeholder Theory.Harry J. van Buren Iii - 2001 - Business Ethics Quarterly 11 (3):481-499.