Professional service firms as agents of economic globalization: A political perspective

Abstract

In recent decades, numerous professional service firms have gone 'global' in search new markets and to support clients requiring services across nations. Whilst a lively debate has developed over the organizational implications of this phenomenon, the role of the firms in globalizing the wider world economy has received less attention. In this paper, we address this imbalance through an inter-disciplinary synthesis of the literature at the intersection of the professions and economic globalization and apply a political perspective to frame our analysis. Our contribution is twofold. First, we argue for a broadening of the research agenda to better elucidate the critical role of professional service firms as agents of economic globalization. This role, we argue, should become a core research theme given the firms are not just businesses offering services across the globe but also active participants in the globalization of the world economy. Second, we shed light on and conceptualize the specific power strategies deployed by the firms as part of their role as agents of globalization. We develop an integrative framework which, firstly, distinguishes between 'design' and 'implementation' and, secondly, specifies how the firms exert power to their advantage in each of these related areas. This model provides a theoretical scaffolding for understanding how professional service firms shape and indeed become hegemonic agents of economic globalization.

From cultural differences to cultural globalization: towards a new research agenda in cross-cultural management studies

“…And the process has of course been facilitated by Western-dominated intergovernmental organisations (e.g., IMF, WTO, World Bank) and the Western business professions through the promotion of corporate globalization and the development and enforcing of transnational regulatory regimes geared to opening world markets and maintaining "free trade" arrangements (Arnold, 2005;Boussebaa and Faulconbridge, 2019). This is one reason why critics view corporate globalization as little more than a new form or phase of imperialism, led by the United States, with support from other "G7" partners and segments of local elites within the targeted political economies (Antonio and Bonnano, 2000;Smith, 2016;Suwandi, 2019;Wade, 2007).…”

“…GPSFs' cultural globalizing work also extends beyond themselves and their MNE clients into the world of intergovernmental organizations and transnational professional associations (Suddaby, Cooper and Greenwood, 2007), and this also requires examining. In short, CCM/IB studies are needed on the (cultural) globalizing efforts and effects of GPSFs, an increasingly important subset of MNEs and a major agent of corporate globalization (Boussebaa and Faulconbridge, 2019).…”

In the shadow of empire: Global Britain and the UK business school

“…Also overlooked are related actors such as Western think-tanks (e.g. the Adam Smith Institute) and professional service multinationals whose work and lobbying significantly contribute to making the laws, rules and norms favouring and institutionalizing globalization/free trade (see, for example, Boussebaa, 2015, 2017; Boussebaa and Faulconbridge, 2016, 2019; Morgan, 2009). All these actors, in collaboration with co-opted or vassalized local elites, form an integral part of contemporary imperialisms but are largely obscured in the dominant educational narrative.…”

Recursive recognition in the international political economy

“…This is a problem because there has been a proliferation of governance tools in the international political economy from a range of actors, including the expansion of commensuration activities through benchmarks, indices, and the like (Espeland & Stevens, 1998). Such activities increasingly involve consultancies and global professional service firms (hereafter GPSFs) in advising all types of organizations (Boussebaa & Faulconbridge, 2019).…”