Bargaining for corporate responsibility: The global and the local of framework agreements in the USA

Fichter Michael (), Stevis Dimitris and Helfen Markus
Additional contact information
Fichter Michael: Otto Suhr Institute, Free University Berlin, Ihnestr. 21, 14195 Berlin, Germany
Stevis Dimitris: Department of Political Science, Colorado State University, 200 West Lake Street, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1782, USA
Helfen Markus: Department of Management, School of Business and Economics, Free University Berlin, Boltzmannstr. 20, 14195 Berlin, Germany

Business and Politics, 2012, vol. 14, issue 3, 1-31

Abstract: Global Framework Agreements (GFAs) are still a marginal topic in political and academic discourses over global governance and corporate responsibility. In functional terms, GFAs are a commitment to include global labor standards with respect to human resource management as part of this broader turn to CR. But to what extent are these intentions and goals actually realized? Are corporations able and willing to implement GFAs in a joint effort together with the unions across a vastly diverse range of institutional settings and national arrangements? And do GFAs have an influence on core elements of a company’s business policy decisions? Drawing on the insights from an interdisciplinary and multinational project, this paper uses four case studies to explore the conditions and variations in GFA implementation in the USA. Although we observe, as have others before us, that key matters of business strategy such as investments, acquisitions, restructuring, or relocation are more centralized than corporate policies on labor relations, we provide some evidence that the implementation of GFAs can be moved forward by a confluence of external actor involvement and of corporate strategies motivated by a desire to streamline HRM practices (that include the goals covered by GFAs in their core business practices). This finding of the influence of external actor voice in implementation processes may also have broader explanatory power with respect to CR initiatives in general. And in theoretical terms it allows us to explore the interplay between macro structural explanations like the Varieties of Capitalism approach, and the strategic “micro-political” explanations. Our study, in fact, suggests a strong need to combine these in a more systematic fashion.

Date: 2012
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1515/bap-2012-0017 (text/html)
For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bpj:buspol:v:14:y:2012:i:3:p:1-31:n:2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.cambridg ... usiness-and-politics

DOI: 10.1515/bap-2012-0017

Access Statistics for this article

Business and Politics is currently edited by Vinod K. Aggarwal

More articles in Business and Politics from De Gruyter
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Peter Golla ().