Multinational Corporations

  • Clarence Walton
Part of the Issues in Business Ethics book series (IBET, volume 11)


Among large organizations, 20th-century multinational/global corporations (MNC) constitute the fastest growing segment.1 And in this undulating world of power shifts among major organizations, the multinational corporation—only an adolescent a half century ago—appears to many as the powerful young adult ready to challenge governments. The likely answer to the question of which will be the victor in this match has some people worried and others pleased. Attitudes are shaped by facts and biases. Many people are in the tent pitched in 1971 by Harvard professor Raymond Vernon, who worried because “the multinational enterprise is not accountable to any public authority that matches it in geographical reach and that represents the aggregate interest of all the countries the enterprise affects. Suddenly, it seems, sovereign states are feeling naked.”2


Host Country Multinational Corporation Harvard Business Review Multinational Enterprise Foreign Affiliate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Mira Wilkins, The Emergence of the Multinational Empire (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970). See also, Orville L. Freeman, The Multinational Corporation: Instrument for World Growth (New York: Praeger, 1981), especially chs. 1 and 2.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Raymond Vernon, Sovereignty at Bay (New York: Basic Books, 1971), 3.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ibid.,ch. 1.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sir Arnold Hall, chairman of British-based Hawker Siddeley Ltd. John Humble. Quoted in John Humble, The Responsible Multinational Enterprise (London: Foundation for Business Responsibility, 1973), 2.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    United States Finance Committee Hearings, 1973.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jacques G. Maisonrouge, president of IBM World Trade Corporation, in comments to the International Academy of Management, New York, September 19, 1989.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Neil Jacoby, Social Responsibility (New York: MacMillan, 1973).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arvind V. Phatak, International Dimensions of Management, 2d ed. (Boston: PWS Kent Publishers, 1989), 4.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vernon, Sovereignty at Bay, 216.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ibid., ch. 5.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    World Almanac 1989, 1401.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    John Kenneth Galbraith, “The Defense of the Multinational,” Harvard Business Review (March–April 1978): 83–93. Corporate disclaimers about power and corporate claims of political neutrality are throwbacks to a model of operation taught in neoclassical economics. The disclaimer and the claim put the multinational in the position of a hypocrite and liar3-and yet their leaders may believe their own rhetoric.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dennis McCann offered a perceptive analysis of the ideological/theological nexus in his article, “Political Ideologies and Practical Theology: Is There a Difference?” Union Seminary Quarterly 36 (Summer 1981): 243–257.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paul VI, On the Progress of People (Washington, D.C.: 1967); and John Paul II, Laborem Exercens (Washington, D.C.: National Catholic Conference of Bishops, 1981).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dennis P. McCann, God’s Controversy with the Multinational Corporation (Chicago: DePaul University, 1987). Unpublished monograph.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Freedon (New York: Orbis Books, 1973). Reverend Robert McAfee Brown is a good example of a prominent Protestant theologian who is also committed to liberation theology.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ibid., 87.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Michael Novak, Toward a Theology of the Corporation (Washington: American Enterprise Institute, 1981).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    “Symposium”: Harper Magazine, December 1986, 37–40.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    John Kenneth Galbraith, “The Defense of the Multinational Company,” ZHarvard Business Review (March–April 1978): 88.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Joseph Ramos, Neoconservative Economics in the Southern Cone of Latin America, 1973–1983 (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Quoted by John W. Sewell, “The Metamorphosis of the Third World: U.S. Interests in the 1990s,” in The Global Economy, eds. William Brock and Robert Hormonts (New York: N.W. Norton, 1990), 129. Sewell’s article, one of many fine essays in the collection, forms the basis for the author’s analysis.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Richard T. De George, “Five Moral Rules for Multinationals Operating Overseas,” Ethikos 1 (January–February 1988): 7–10. Thomas Donaldson, The Ethics of International Business (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989), sees a need to distinguish between minimal and maximum obligations; even the former are woefully inadequate in Third World countries (ch. 2).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Anne M. Street, “Multinationals Square Off against Central American Worker,” Business and Society Review 52 (Winter 1985): 45–50.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Robert Thurow, “The Golden Goose Finds it Unleashed New Threats,” The Wall Street Journal, July 30, 1990, A4.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Donald Kendall, “Corporate Ownership: The International Dimension,” Columbia Journal of World Business 3 (March–April 1968): 13–21.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Howard Perlmutter, “Multinational Corporations,” The Columbia Journal of World Business 4 (January–February 1969): 9–19.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gary Gereffi, The Pharmaceutical Industry and Diplomacy in the Third World (Princeton: Princeton University, 1983); and Peter Evans, Dependent Development: The Balance of Multinational, State, and Local Capital in Brazil (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rebecca Scott, “Exploring the Meaning of Freedom: Post-Emancipation Societies in Comparative Perspective,” The Hispanic American Review 61 (August 1988): 421.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zacharias Moutourkais, “Power, Corruption, and Commerce: The Making of Local Administrative Structures in Seventeenth Century Buenos Aires,” The Hispanic American Historical Review 68 (November 1988): 171–172.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Marshall Eakins, “British Imperialism and British Enterprise in Brazil: The St. John d’el Rey Mining Company, 1830–1960,” The Hispanic American Historical Review 66 (November 1986): 696–741.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Enno Hobbing, “The Good Corporate Guest Helps Build the House,” Columbia Journal of World Business 2 (September–October 1967): 39–40.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    T.A. Litvak and C.J. Marcelle, “Guidelines for Multinational Corporations,” Columbia Journal of World Business 3 (July–August 1968): 35–43.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Risks are involved. One thinks of ITT and the violation of human rights in Chile by Pinochet Augusto Urgarte, Genaro Arriagarda, Pinochet: The Politics of Power (Winchester, Mass.: Lexington, 1989). Trans. Nancy Morris. See also, Ariel Dorfman, “Adios General,” Harper’s, December 1989, 72–76.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Penny Lernoux, Cry of the People (New York: Doubleday, 1980), 108–110.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    John Houck and Oliver Williams, Full Value: Cases in Business Ethics (New York: Harper & Row, 1978).Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ibid., 144–151.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Frank Tannenbaum, “The Survival of the Fittest,” Columbia Journal of World Business 3 (March–April 1968): 13–21. See the extended treatment in the paper by Richard G. Baumgart, “Multinational Corporations: New Dimensions in Community Power Research,” delivered to the Society for the Study of Social Problems, August 23, 1975.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Richard and Margaret Baumgart, “sMultinational Corporate Expansion and the Nation-State Developments,” paper presented to the 73rd annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, September 6, 1978.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers (New York: Vintage Books, 1898), xv–xxv.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    John Humble, Social Responsibility Audit: A Management Tool for Survival (New York: American Management Association, 1973), 21–30.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Yves L. Doz and C.K. Prahalad, “How MNCs Cope with Host Government Intervention,” Harvard Business Review (March–April 1980): 149–157.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Dennis J. Encarnation and Sushil Vachan, “Foreign Ownership: When Hosts Change the Rules,” Harvard Business Review (September–October 1985): 153–160.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Exxon Corporation, Annual Statement, 1990.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    William N. George, Strategies of the Major Oil Companies (Ann Arbor, Mich.: JMF Research Press, 1985), 7.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Anthony Sampson, The Seven Sisters (New York: Bantam Books, 1975), 28. See also, Robert Engler, The Brotherhood of Oil (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1977).Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    George, Strategies of the Major Oil Companies, 241.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Thomas Dunfee and Aryeh Friedman, “The Extra-Territorial Application of United States Antitrust Laws: A Pyramid for an Interim Solution,” Ohio State Law Journal 45 (1984): 883–992.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    This old study (1971) has not been refuted. See David W. Ewing, “MNCs on Trial,” Harvard Business Review (May–June 1972): 130–142.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Humble, Social Responsibility Audit, 33.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clarence Walton

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations