Search results

The purpose of this paper is to argue for inclusion of evasive foreign direct investment (FDI) into search-based motivation typologies in international business.

Critically reassessing academic literature and using anecdotal evidence, the authors augment the theory of FDI motivation with the concept of evasion.

Evasive FDI is a firm-level response to denial-of-privilege by a state. Divergence of policy environments between home and host prompts relocation or international expansion of productive assets and often the affectation of ‘foreignness’ by the multinational enterprise (MNE). The role of responsibility evasion via FDI is understood in the research literature, mainly because of an emphasis on search-based motives and a failure to distinguish between escape and evasion. International business research is vulnerable to mis-identification of FDI motive which consequently distorts its strategic and policy implications.

The argument for inclusion of evasive FDI serves to augment the established, yet asymmetrically focussed typology of search FDI, demonstrating that evasion is conceptually and analytically distinguishable from search. Further, an augmented typology lends accuracy and insight to research into the reconfiguration strategies of MNEs and legitimation of the international business discipline itself, providing researchers with a more comprehensive account of FDI causation and offering new research paths.

This is a response to “Taming wicked problems”, a paper recently published in CPOIB in which modern slavery is framed as a wicked problem. The purpose of this study is to convey the author’s appraisal of its contribution to policymaking regarding modern slavery in global supply chains.

The author engages in a discursive review of “Taming wicked problems”, taking inspiration from its perceived strengths and weaknesses to expand on the problem of modern slavery as a challenge to international business (IB) researchers.

“Taming wicked problems” is welcomed as a provocative contribution to modern slavery research in IB, although it is perceived to give too little critical attention to the problem of modern slavery itself.

This is, by design, a subjective assessment of the treatment of modern slavery and policy from the perspective of an IB researcher who has previously studied the phenomenon without a wicked problem framing.

Modern slavery is a serious problem for IB scholars, as they have failed to extrapolate it from their analysis of international business strategy. This paper is intended to advance the disciplinary defence of vulnerable workers exploited to the ultimate benefit of MNEs.

IB must engage critically with international business strategies that heighten the risk of human rights violations. The persistence of modern slavery disadvantages all persons in employment.

This paper seeks to better define the offense implicit in modern slavery so to inform critical IB research into its causes and deterrence.

Modern slavery is a problem that international business (IB) research can no longer ignore. Multinational enterprises (MNEs) are often contributors to the persistence of modern slavery, by virtue of the regulatory challenge they pose to states and their insufficient oversight of supply chains. The purpose of this paper is to show that governance inadequacies with respect to modern slavery will be lessened if IB scholars give more attention to MNEs’ governing role within and beyond global value chains.

A set of arguments is presented in support of intensified effort in IB research with respect to studying the role of MNEs in transnational labour governance. The paper draws inspiration from IB theory and the conceptualisation of the MNE in neighbouring disciplines that regard it as a bearer of duties toward labour, consistent with its role in multilevel governance. Insights from the literature on global and multi-level governance are utilised.

The paper construes modern slavery as a multi-level governance challenge and argues that MNE capabilities and responsibilities with respect to labour governance and the deterrence of slavery exceed those identified on the margins of IB literature. MNEs are underappreciated as governors within the multilevel transnational labour governance system. The IB discipline is in a strong position to develop our understanding of the MNE’s different roles in governance and thereby contribute to the reduced incidence of modern slavery.

This paper represents an attempt to mobilise the IB academy to help eliminate slavery from workplaces that rely on MNE patronage or where labour rights abuses are made possible by MNE diversion of governance resources. It places particular emphasis on the use and abuse of MNEs’ governance capabilities in the sphere of international relations and calls attention to over-simplification of the MNE, IB’s primary unit of analysis.

Setting the multinational enterprise (MNE) apart on the basis of a weakly specified idea of foreignness may impede progress in international business (IB). The discipline lacks a paradigm to assimilate the idea of foreignness as an incident of internationality, a global condition describing the political context within which the MNE functions and which confers uniqueness on that institution. However, a plausible re-imagining of the MNE is possible and useful, and here a candidate for such an ontological shift is proffered. Rather than a firm struggling in one or more foreign contexts, the MNE is reconstructed as a foreigner contending with the responsibilities of a firm. The proposed re-imagining of the MNE is experimentally substituted for the received ontology in different IB research contexts. It transpires that this ontological revision maintains intelligibility in those contexts while usefully exposing new directions in which to pursue knowledge. In consequence of re-imagining the MNE, that institution may be situated more precisely amid the international system’s primal constituents, and links may be more effectively established with other bodies of research addressing the functioning of the international political economic system.

Yair Aharoni is a Professor Emeritus at the Faculty of Management, Tel-Aviv University. He received his DBA from the Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration. His doctoral dissertation – The Foreign Investment Decision Process – was published in a book version and was translated to Spanish and Japanese. He is a Fellow of the International Academy of Management and the Academy of International Business. During his long and distinguished academic career, Aharoni was the Daniel and Grace Ross Professor of International Business and later the Issachar Haimovic Professor of Business Policy – both at Tel Aviv University. He was the Thomas Henry Caroll Ford Foundation Visiting Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration (1978–1979). He was also the J. Paul Stitch Visiting Professor of International Business at Duke University (1987–1995) and the director of CIBER (Center of International Business Education and Research) (1992–1995). He published several dozens books and monographs in Hebrew and in English, more than 100 papers and chapters in books and more than 150 cases. For his academic achievements he was awarded both Landau Prize (2007) and Israel Prize in management science (2010).

This introductory paper aims to outline the reasons for optimism as well as for skepticism in regard to Russia's position in the group of BRIC nations and in the global economy.

The paper presents a brief overview of developments in Russia. This discussion serves as a contextual introduction to this special issue by embracing some of the common themes elaborated in the other papers that are featured in the issue.

The paper takes a balanced perspective by discussing both positive and negative trends in Russia's development.

The paper sets the context in which the other papers that comprise this special issue can be situated.

Modern slavery, one of the most abhorrent crimes against humanity, is a profitable international business (IB). It often operates in a hidden form in the global value chains (GVCs) governed by multinational corporations (MNCs). The purpose of this paper is to examine why slavery exists in GVCs and what this means for MNCs.

The paper borrows insights from the GVC literature to conceptually link MNCs and modern slavery. Different from the IB literature that predominantly focusses on the MNC as a single firm, the paper emphasizes the importance of paying attention to the MNC value chains and their complexity and fragmentation.

Three factors which help explain modern slavery in GVCs are examined: the complexity of GVCs and the challenges this poses to their governance, the business case for slavery and the conditions that enable modern slavery. These factors, taken together, provide an explanation why modern slavery can creep into, persist and thrive in MNCs’ GVCs.

The argument is put forward for the need for IB scholars to borrow from the GVC literature to help understand why slavery can exist in the GVCs of MNCs. This opens the opportunity for examining the MNC in ways not considered by IB scholars so far.

The paper addresses an issue long ignored in IB research and issues a call for IB scholars to study MNCs in a new way, namely, linking MNCs’ activities with modern slavery.