How can employment relations in global value networks be managed towards social responsibility?

Abstract

Ensuring social responsibility is a continued challenge in value creation processes that are globally dispersed among multiple organizations. We use the literature on interorganizational network management to shed new light on the question of how employment relations can be managed more responsibly in global value networks (GVN). In contrast to the structureoriented global value chain perspective, a network management perspective highlights the practices by which employment relations can be addressed in the context of plural forms of network governance. Using examples of GVN in the automotive and garment industries we illustrate how the network management practices of selecting, allocating, regulating and evaluating can enable lead firms and suppliers to effectively deal with social responsibility challenges on the level of whole networks. We also discuss how network management practices can address field-level and firm-level constraints for the management of multiemployer relations in GVN.

Political CSR at the Coalface – The Roles and Contradictions of Multinational Corporations in Developing Workplace Dialogue

“…Industrial Democracy is an important starting point for thinking about dialogue at the coalface, which is typically focused on employer-worker dialogue set within national institutional contexts (Hyman, 2004). However, in a global economy where 80 per cent of trade and 60 per cent of production (UNCTAD, 2016) are organised through global supply chains that are orchestrated by MNCs, traditional modes of labour governance need to be reconceptualised (see Helfen et al, 2018). Yet, the development of transnational modes of industrial democracy is challenged by a lack of institutional support at the transnational level.…”

Stakeholder Information Flow From Horse Entrepreneurs to Customers

“…Thus, in this case, the perspectives of Hoffmann (2018), where potential CSR paradoxes are primarily disproven, are parallel with the conditions of this study. Usually, CSR studies are focused on work conditions, workplaces, and the general conditions of human beings (see, e.g., Mena & Suddaby, 2016;Helfen, Schüßler, & Sydow, 2018). In contrast, current study emphasizes (corporate social) responsibility in the context of animal well-being, although the actors are still human beings.…”

Regulating the Sharing Economy: A Field Perspective

“…Thus, sharing economy markets include hierarchical and networks modes of governance, too. Just as supply chains still include hierarchical organizations as lead firms and suppliers and can be governed using market, network or hierarchical modes of governance (Helfen, Schüßler & Sydow, 2018), sharing economy platforms are typically hosted by a classic, hierarchical organization (Uber Technologies, Inc., for instance) and rely on various modes of governing market transactions. At the same time, the sharing economy typically involves even more dispersed and atomistic actors than those found in global supply chains, thus calling for different regulatory approaches.…”