Property, control and room for manoeuvre: Royal Dutch Shell and Nazi Germany, 1933–1945

Boon, Marten; Wubs, Ben

doi:10.1080/00076791.2016.1205034

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For MNEs from Allied countries doing business in Axis countries and their occupied territories, remaining in enemy territory involved the localization of control, even if the subsidiaries continued under the foreign firm's ownership. Well-known cases of major MNEs, such as Ford, General Motors, and Royal-Dutch Shell in Germany, demonstrate how the operations of these companies were placed under the control of local managers and supported the Nazi war effort (e.g., Boon & Wubs, 2020;McCraw & Tedlow, 1997). In this way, essentially through a decoupling of control between the home-country headquarters and their host-country subsidiaries, these firms contributed to the war efforts of both sides of the conflict but retained the option to retake control of their foreign operations after the conflict was over.…”

Section: Mnes Geopolitics and Historymentioning

confidence: 99%

Should We Stay or Should We Go? MNE Decisions to Withdraw or Remain during Geopolitical Crises

DeBerge

2023

AIB Insights

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geopolitical crises can create conflicting obligations for MNEs operating in now-hostile host countries, often requiring a strategic balance between home-country pressures to exit and the importance of continuing business in the present or retaining the option to re-enter business in the future. To identify such strategies and the country- and firm-specific characteristics informing such strategic decisions, I draw lessons from business history and an analysis of ongoing MNE responses to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to provide insights into two specific options which managers can employ: namely, leveraging home country neutrality and relying on local partners to steward host-country operations. I also suggest steps managers can take to build resiliency for their MNEs in the event of future geopolitical crises.

show abstract

Section: Mnes Geopolitics and Historymentioning

confidence: 99%

Should We Stay or Should We Go? MNE Decisions to Withdraw or Remain during Geopolitical Crises

DeBerge

2023

AIB Insights

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…So far, this set of contributions primarily focuses on political risks originating in Nazi Germany during the interwar and WW II period and deals with organizational responses to these risks. Works by Wubs (2008), Boon and Wubs (2016), Kobrak and Wüstenhagen (2006), Jones and Lubinski (2012), and Aalders and Wiebes (1996) show that Nazi Germany created risks for both foreign and German MNEs and that companies often responded with a combination of cloaking and decentralization of their organizational structure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Countering Political Risk in Colonial India: German Multinationals and the Challenge of Internment (1914-1947)

Lubinski

Giacomin²,

Schnitzer

2018

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The idea that Unilever, for example, could be considered complicit with the Nazis came late to the company and only due to outside pressure (Forbes 2007). Also due to public pressure, Royal Dutch Shell continues to face questions about its war years operating in Nazi Germany (Boon and Wubs 2016). Publics pressured Hugo Boss to reveal its role in the war.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate Leadership and Mass Atrocity

Federman

2020

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the last Holocaust survivors quietly passing away, one might also expect to see accountability debates slowing to a trickle. Surprisingly, however, recent years show an upswing in corporate World War II-related atonement debates. Interest in corporate participation in mass atrocity has expanded worldwide; yet what constitutes ethical corporate behavior during and after war remains understudied. This article considers these questions through a study of the French National Railways' (SNCF) roles during the German occupation and its more recent struggle to make amends. This study demonstrates that ethical business leadership requires taking responsibility for past as well as current decisions. Most executives grappling with complex corporate histories work in isolation, in part because the scholarship on business ethics fails to provide guidance. Without such guidance, corporations often respond to accusations about their pasts with carefully crafted statements and legal strategies rather than deep expressions of moral leadership. To assist in remedying this tendency, this paper simultaneously encourages companies to engage in deeper reflection on corporate history, while urging scholars to help guide corporations through critical ethical conversations.

show abstract

Property, control and room for manoeuvre: Royal Dutch Shell and Nazi Germany, 1933–1945

Cited by 5 publications

References 24 publications

Should We Stay or Should We Go? MNE Decisions to Withdraw or Remain during Geopolitical Crises

Should We Stay or Should We Go? MNE Decisions to Withdraw or Remain during Geopolitical Crises

Countering Political Risk in Colonial India: German Multinationals and the Challenge of Internment (1914-1947)

Corporate Leadership and Mass Atrocity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About