Which of the following significantly increases complexity of social responsibility and ethical Behaviour of MNCs?
|
Abstract With the expansion of multinational corporations (MNCs), the alarming upsurge in widely publicized and notable corporate scandals involving MNCs in emerging markets has begun to draw both academic and managerial attention to look beyond home market practices to the pressing concern of CSR in emerging markets. Previous studies on CSR have focused primarily on Western markets, reserving limited discussions in addressing the issue of MNC attitudes and CSR practices in their emerging host markets abroad. Despite this incongruity in academic response to CSR in emerging markets, managers of multinational companies continue to face mounting and most often conflicting pressures to weigh among multiple strategic CSR responses in emerging markets. Such a task is often further complicated by the complexity of varying business norms and standards, regulatory environments, and stakeholder demands for CSR across national boundaries. With such a challenge in mind, I attempt to examine the explanatory factors in leading MNCs, otherwise recognized for accountability and integrity in their home markets, to employ inconsistent or negligent practices under CSR pressure in Chinese emerging economy. Preliminary findings reveal that discrepancies exist in how MNCs perform in CSR in home countries versus in host countries. While MNCs do have much to improve, the institutional environment in the emerging market, including the legal framework and the ethical culture, also needs to be improved by the host country governments, the industry associations, and local firms. Meanwhile, media interest and journalists, NGOs, third party monitors, industry stakeholders as well as consumer advocacy groups can raise the visibility of MNC's contradictory practices between their origin nations and countries with emerging economies and offer the pressures and incentives for MNCs to amend their ethical short-comings. This article also suggests implications for both theory and practice. Show Journal Information The Journal of Business Ethics publishes original articles from a wide variety of methodological and disciplinary perspectives concerning ethical issues related to business. Since its initiation in 1980, the editors have encouraged the broadest possible scope. The term 'business' is understood in a wide sense to include all systems involved in the exchange of goods and services, while 'ethics' is circumscribed as all human action aimed at securing a good life. Systems of production, consumption, marketing, advertising, social and economic accounting, labour relations, public relations and organisational behaviour are analysed from a moral viewpoint. The style and level of dialogue involve all who are interested in business ethics – the business community, universities, government agencies and consumer groups. Speculative philosophy as well as reports of empirical research are welcomed. In order to promote a dialogue between the various interested groups as much as possible, papers are presented in a style relatively free of specialist jargon. Publisher Information Springer is one of the leading international scientific publishing companies, publishing over 1,200 journals and more than 3,000 new books annually, covering a wide range of subjects including biomedicine and the life sciences, clinical medicine, physics, engineering, mathematics, computer sciences, and economics. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
 Review Article (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Multinationals’ misbehaviorUnder a Creative Commons license Open access AbstractMultinational companies have been a force for good but, unfortunately, some misbehave. Our comprehensive literature review on multinationals’ misbehavior reveals three ideas. First, most research focuses on the interaction between the multinational and its institutional context, but insights vary depending on whether the drivers of misbehavior lie inside or outside the multinational. Second, we find a dearth of studies on social and environmental misbehavior, and an overemphasis on the study of governance dimensions, especially corruption. Third, we uncover three implicit assumptions that shaped past analyses: data availability, bad contexts leading good multinationals astray, and a focus on topical novelty. KeywordsMisbehavior Corruption Labor exploitation Pollution Governance Multinationals Cited by (0)© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. Which of the following is a potential benefit to the host country of MNC operation?Potential Benefits of MNCs on Host Countries
Transfer of skills and expertise, helping to develop the quality of the host labour force. MNCs add to the host country GDP through their spending, for example with local suppliers and through capital investment.
Which of the following prohibits US companies from making illegal payments or other gifts?The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is a U.S. statute that prohibits firms and individuals from paying bribes to foreign officials to further business deals. Both the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) are responsible for enforcing the FCPA.
|
