A social licence to operate: Corporate social responsibility, local communities and the constitution of global production networks

This article contributes to the theorization of the role of informal regulation (undertaken by leading firms) in the ongoing organization of global production networks. It does so through a qualitative case study of BHP Billiton's Ravensthorpe Nickel Operation (RNO) in the rural Shire of Ravensthorpe in Western Australia. This less tangible, and to date under-researched, dimension of global production networks is foregrounded through a focus on the corporate social responsibility strategy implemented by RNO in the service of achieving and/or demonstrating a broader ‘social licence to operate’. This ‘licence’ functions – beyond the corporation – as a legitimated and legitimating multi-scalar mechanism through which to gain and maintain access to mineral resources and thus to establish viable and ongoing global production networks. Further, this informal regulation is shown to shape social relations and qualities of place conducive to competitive global mineral extraction and to facilitate the positioning of local communities and places in mineral global production networks.

Corporate Environmental Responsibility in Demand Networks (summary section only)

Research on corporate responsibility has traditionally focused on the responsibilities of companies within their corporate boundaries only. Yet this view is challenged today as more and more companies face the situation in which the environmental and social performance of their suppliers, distributors, industry or other associated partners impacts on their sales performance and brand equity. Simultaneously, policy-makers have taken up the discussion on corporate responsibility from the perspective of globalisation, in particular of global supply chains. The category of selecting and evaluating suppliers has also entered the field of environmental reporting. Companies thus need to tackle their responsibility in collaboration with different partners. The aim of the thesis is to further the understanding of collaboration and corporate environmental responsibility beyond corporate boundaries. Drawing on the fields of supply chain management and industrial ecology, the thesis sets out to investigate inter-firm collaboration on three different levels, between the company and its stakeholders, in the supply chain, and in the demand network of a company. The thesis is comprised of four papers: Paper A discusses the use of different research approaches in logistics and supply chain management. Paper B introduces the study on collaboration and corporate environmental responsibility from a focal company perspective, looking at the collaboration of companies with their stakeholders, and the salience of these stakeholders. Paper C widens this perspective to an analysis on the supply chain level. The focus here is not only beyond corporate boundaries, but also beyond direct supplier and customer interfaces in the supply chain. Paper D then extends the analysis to the demand network level, taking into account the input-output, competitive and regulatory environments, in which a company operates. The results of the study broaden the view of corporate responsibility. By applying this broader view, different types of inter-firm collaboration can be highlighted. Results also show how environmental demand is extended in the supply chain regardless of the industry background of the company.

NAFTA and the apparel commodity chain: Corporate strategies, interfirm networks, and industrial upgrading

The apparel industry is one of the oldest and largest export industries in the world, with global trade and production networks that connect firms and workers in countries at all levels of economic development. This chapter examines the impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as one of the most recent and significant developments to affect patterns of international trade and production in the apparel and textile industries. Tr ade policies are changing the institutional environment in which firms in this industry operate, and companies are responding to these changes with new strategies designed to increase their profitability and strengthen their control over the apparel commodity chain. Our hypothesis is that lead firms are establishing qualitatively different kinds of regional production networks in North America from those that existed prior to NAFTA, and that these networks have important consequences for industrial upgrading in the Mexican textile and apparel industries. Post-NAFTA crossborder production arrangements include full-package networks that link lead firms in the United States with apparel and textile manufacturers, contractors, and suppliers in Mexico. Full-package production is increasing the local value added provided by the apparel commodity chain in Mexico and creating new opportunities for Mexican firms and workers. The chapter is divided into four main sections. The first section uses trade and production data to analyze shifts in global apparel flows, highlighting the emergence and consolidation of a regional trade bloc in North America. The second section discusses the process of industrial upgrading in the apparel industry and introduces a distinction between assembly and full-package production networks. The third section includes case studies based on published industry sources and strategic interviews with several lead companies whose strategies are largely responsible for the shifting trade patterns and NAFTA-inspired cross-border production networks discussed in the previous section. The fourth section considers the implications of these changes for employment in the North American apparel industry. © 2009 by Temple University Press. All rights reserved.

Is the sum more than the corporate entrepreneurship parts? the different effects of social capital on innovation, venturing, and renewal processes

Principal Topic Although corporate entrepreneurship is of vital importance for long-term firm survival and growth (Zahra and Covin, 1995), researchers still struggle with understanding how to manage corporate entrepreneurship activities. Corporate entrepreneurship consists of three parts: innovation, venturing, and renewal processes (Guth and Ginsberg, 1990). Innovation refers to the development of new products, venturing to the creation of new businesses, and renewal to redefining existing businesses (Sharma, and Chrisman, 1999; Verbeke et al., 2007). Although there are many studies focusing on one of these aspects (cf. Burgelman, 1985; Huff et al., 1992), it is very difficult to compare the outcomes of these studies due to differences in contexts, measures, and methodologies. This is a significant lack in our understanding of CE, as firms engage in all three aspects of CE, making it important to compare managerial and organizational antecedents of innovation, venturing and renewal processes. Because factors that may enhance venturing activities may simultaneously inhibit renewal activities. The limited studies that did empirically compare the individual dimensions (cf. Zahra, 1996; Zahra et al., 2000; Yiu and Lau, 2008; Yiu et al., 2007) generally failed to provide a systematic explanation for potential different effects of organizational antecedents on innovation, venturing, and renewal. With this study we aim to investigate the different effects of structural separation and social capital on corporate entrepreneurship activities. The access to existing and the development of new knowledge has been deemed of critical importance in CE-activities (Floyd and Wooldridge, 1999; Covin and Miles, 2007; Katila and Ahuja, 2002). Developing new knowledge can be facilitated by structurally separating corporate entrepreneurial units from mainstream units (cf. Burgelman, 1983; Hill and Rothaermel, 2003; O'Reilly and Tushman, 2004). Existing knowledge and resources are available through networks of social relationships, defined as social capital (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998; Yiu and Lau, 2008). Although social capital has primarily been studied at the organizational level, it might be equally important at top management level (Belliveau et al., 1996). However, little is known about the joint effects of structural separation and integrative mechanisms to provide access to social capital on corporate entrepreneurship. Could these integrative mechanisms for example connect the separated units to facilitate both knowledge creation and sharing? Do these effects differ for innovation, venturing, and renewal processes? Are the effects different for organizational versus top management team integration mechanisms? Corporate entrepreneurship activities have for example been suggested to take place at different levels. Whereas innovation is suggested to be a more bottom-up process, strategic renewal is a more top-down process (Floyd and Lane, 2000; Volberda et al., 2001). Corporate venturing is also a more bottom-up process, but due to the greater required resource commitments relative to innovation, it ventures need to be approved by top management (Burgelman, 1983). As such we will explore the following key research question in this paper: How do social capital and structural separation on organizational and TMT level differentially influence innovation, venturing, and renewal processes? Methodology/Key Propositions We investigated our hypotheses on a final sample of 240 companies in a variety of industries in the Netherlands. All our measures were validated in previous studies. We targeted a second respondent in each firm to reduce problems with single-rater data (James et al., 1984). We separated the measurement of the independent and the dependent variables in two surveys to create a one-year time lag and reduce potential common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Results and Implications Consistent with our hypotheses, our results show that configurations of structural separation and integrative mechanisms have different effects on the three aspects of corporate entrepreneurship. Innovation was affected by organizational level mechanisms, renewal by integrative mechanisms on top management team level and venturing by mechanisms on both levels. Surprisingly, our results indicated that integrative mechanisms on top management team level had negative effects on corporate entrepreneurship activities. We believe this paper makes two significant contributions. First, we provide more insight in what the effects of ambidextrous organizational forms (i.e. combinations of differentiation and integration mechanisms) are on venturing, innovation and renewal processes. Our findings show that more valuable insights can be gained by comparing the individual parts of corporate entrepreneurship instead of focusing on the whole. Second, we deliver insights in how management can create a facilitative organizational context for these corporate entrepreneurship activities.

Who or what decides how stakeholders are optimally engaged by governance networks delivering public outcomes?

As the problems involving infrastructure delivery have become more complex and contentious, there has been an acknowledgement that these problems cannot be resolved by any one body working alone. This understanding has driven multi-sectoral collaboration and has led to an expansion of the set of actors, including stakeholders, who are now involved in delivery of infrastructure projects and services. However, more needs to be understood about how to include stakeholders in these processes and the optimal ways of developing the requisite combination of stakeholders to achieve effective outcomes. This thesis draws on stakeholder theory and governance network theory to obtain insights into how three networks delivering public outcomes within the Roads Alliance in Queensland engage with stakeholders in the delivery of complex and sensitive infrastructure services and projects. New knowledge about stakeholders will be obtained by testing a model of Stakeholder Salience and Engagement which combines and extends the stakeholder identification and salience theory (Mitchell, Agle, and Wood, 1997), ladder of stakeholder management and engagement (Friedman and Miles, 2006) and the model of stakeholder engagement and moral treatment of stakeholders (Greenwood, 2007). By applying this model, the broad research question: “Who or what decides how stakeholders are optimally engaged by governance networks delivering public outcomes?” will be addressed. The case studies will test a theoretical model of stakeholder salience and engagement which links strategic management decisions about stakeholder salience with the quality and quantity of engagement strategies for engaging different types of stakeholders. The outcomes of this research will contribute to and extend stakeholder theory by showing how stakeholder salience impacts on decisions about the types of engagement processes implemented. Governance network theory will be extended by showing how governance networks interact with stakeholders through the concepts of stakeholder salience and engagement. From a practical perspective this research will provide governance networks with an indication of how to optimise engagement with different types of stakeholders.

Governance networks and stakeholders : engaging through salience

Across Australia, construction and redevelopment of public infrastructure, continues to be a key factor in economic development. Within this context, road transport has been identified as key building block of Queensland‟s future prosperity. However, since the late twentieth century, there has been a shift away from delivery of large infrastructure, including road networks, exclusively by the state. Subsequently, a range of alternative models, have emerged in infrastructure project delivery. Among these, governance networks have become a widespread mechanism for planning and delivering infrastructure. However, despite substantial public investments in road infrastructure that are made through governance networks, little is known about how these networks engage with stakeholders who are potentially affected by road infrastructure projects. Although governance networks undertake management functions, it is unclear what drives stakeholder engagement within this networked environment and how stakeholder relationship management is operationalised. This paper proposes that network management functions undertaken by governance networks incorporate stakeholder engagement and that network managers play a key role in creating and sustaining connections between governance networks and their stakeholders Drawing on stakeholder theory and governance network theory, this paper contributes to the literature by showing that stakeholder engagement is embedded within network management and identifying the critical role of network managers in establishing and maintaining stakeholder engagement.

Stakeholder engagement by governance networks

As the problems involving infrastructure delivery have become more complex and contentious, there has been an acknowledgement that these problems cannot be resolved by any one body working alone. This understanding has driven multi-sectoral collaboration and has led to an expansion of the set of actors, including stakeholders, who are now involved in delivery of infrastructure projects and services. However, more needs to be understood about how to include stakeholders in these processes and ways of developing the requisite combination of stakeholders to achieve effective outcomes. This thesis draws on stakeholder theory and governance network theory to obtain insights into how three multi-level networks within the Roads Alliance in Queensland engage with stakeholders in the delivery of complex and sensitive infrastructure services and projects. New knowledge about stakeholders will be obtained by testing a model of Stakeholder Salience and Engagement which combines and extends the stakeholder identification and salience theory, ladder of stakeholder management and engagement and the model of stakeholder engagement and moral treatment of stakeholders. By applying this model, the broad research question: “Who or what decides how stakeholders are engaged by governance networks delivering public outcomes?” will be addressed. The case studies will test a theoretical model of stakeholder salience and engagement which links strategic decisions about stakeholder salience with the quality and quantity of engagement strategies for engaging different types of stakeholders. A multiple embedded case study design has been selected as the overall approach to explore, describe, explain and evaluate how stakeholder engagement occurs in three governance networks delivering road infrastructure in Queensland. The research design also incorporates a four stage approach to data collection: observations, stakeholder analysis, telephone survey questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The outcomes of this research will contribute to and extend stakeholder theory by showing how stakeholder salience impacts on decisions about the types of engagement processes implemented. Governance network theory will be extended by showing how governance networks interact with stakeholders through the concepts of stakeholder salience and engagement. From a practical perspective this research will provide governance networks with an indication of how to optimise engagement with different types of stakeholders. 2

Stakeholder engagement by governance networks

Public awareness of large infrastructure projects, many of which are delivered through networked arrangements is high for several reasons. These projects often involve significant public investment; they may involve multiple and conflicting stakeholders and can potentially have significant environmental impacts (Lim and Yang, 2008). To produce positive outcomes from infrastructure delivery it is imperative that stakeholder “buy in” be obtained particularly about decisions relating to the scale and location of infrastructure. Given the likelihood that stakeholders will have different levels of interest and investment in project outcomes, failure to manage this dynamic could potentially jeopardise project delivery by delaying or halting the construction of essential infrastructure. Consequently, stakeholder engagement has come to constitute a critical activity in infrastructure development delivered through networks. This paper draws on stakeholder theory and governance network theory and provides insights into how three multi-level networks within the Roads Alliance in Queensland engage with stakeholders in the delivery of road infrastructure. New knowledge about stakeholders has been obtained by testing a model of Stakeholder Salience and Engagement which combines and extends the stakeholder identification and salience theory and the ladder of stakeholder management and engagement. By applying this model, the broad research question: “How do governance networks engage with stakeholders?” has been addressed. A multiple embedded case study design was selected as the overall approach to explore, describe, explain and evaluate how stakeholder engagement occurred in three governance networks delivering road infrastructure in Queensland. The outcomes of this research contribute to and extend stakeholder theory by showing how stakeholder salience impacts on decisions about the types of engagement processes implemented. Governance network theory is extended by showing how governance networks interact with stakeholders. From a practical perspective this research provides governance networks with an indication of how to more effectively undertake engagement with different types of stakeholders.

SOA for business networks - service delivery framework

The next generation of SOA needs to scale for flexible service consumption, beyond organizational boundaries and current B2B applications, into communities, eco-systems, and business networks. In the wider and, ultimately, global settings, new capabilities are needed so that business partners can efficiently and reliably enable, adapt, and expose services where they can be discovered, ordered, consumed, metered, and paid for, through new applications and opportunities, driven by third parties in the global "village". This trend is already underway, in different ways, through various early adopter market segments. For the small medium enterprises segment, Google, Intuit-Microsoft, and others have launched appstores, through which an open-ended array of hosted applications are sourced from the development community and procured as maketplace commondities. In the corporate sector, the marketplace model and business network hubs are being put in place on top of connectivity and network orchestration investments for capitalizing services as tradable assets, seen in banking/finance (e.g. American Express Intelligent Marketplace), logistics (e.g., the E2open hub), and the public sector (e.g., UK DirectGov whole-of-government citizen services delivery).