THE INFLUENCE OF CULTURE ON THE OPERATIONS OF MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (21) ◽  
pp. 85-93
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Tošović-Stevanović ◽  
Slađana Bajković
2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joss G. Vargas-Hernnndez ◽  
Edgar Ernesto VVzquez VVzquez

Author(s):  
Zahidur Rahman ◽  
Jannatul Ferdous Bristy

In the endeavor of conquering the worlds consumers, multinational companies face enormous risks. Such risks may arise from different political, economic, and financial factors. These factors are commonly referred to country risk as a whole. Focusing Bangladesh in this regard, objective of this study is to find out the level of country risk in terms of political, economic, and financial riskiness. Analysis of country risk has been done using an internationally recognized methodology named International Country Risk Guide (ICRG). For political risk analysis, primary data has been collected from 20 journalists, bureaucrats and policy makers, business persons, corporate professionals, and academicians with a structured closed-ended questionnaire. Results indicate that Bangladesh is in high risk position in terms of political risk, low risk position in terms of economic risk and very low risk position in terms of financial risk. Compositely, Bangladesh has been found to be a moderately risky country for investment.


2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (8) ◽  
pp. 2053-2076 ◽  
Author(s):  
Osamuyimen Egbon ◽  
Chijoke Oscar Mgbame

PurposeThe paper examines how oil multinational companies (MNCs) in Nigeria framed accounts to dissociate themselves from causing oil spills.Design/methodology/approachThe authors utilised data from relevant corporate reports, external accounts and interviews, and used sensegiving with defensive behaviours theoretical framing to explore corporate narratives aimed at altering stakeholders' perceptions.FindingsThe corporations gave sense to their audience by invoking scapegoating blame avoidance narrative in attributing the cause of most oil spills in Nigeria to outsiders (sabotage), despite potentially misclassifying the sabotage-corrosion dichotomy. Corporate stance was reinforced through justifying narrative, which suggested that multi-stakeholders jointly determined the causes of oil spills, thus portraying corporate accounts as transparent, credible and objective.Research limitations/implicationsThe socio-political dynamics in an empirical setting affect corporate accounts and how those accounts appear persuasive, implying that such contextual factors merit consideration when evaluating corporate accounts. For example, despite contradictions in corporate accounts, corporate attribution of oil spills to external factors appeared persuasive due to the inherently complicated socio-political dynamics.Practical implicationsWith compensation to oil spills' victims only legally permitted for non-sabotage-induced spills alongside the burden of proof on the victims, the MNCs are incentivised to attribute most oil spills to sabotage. On policy implication, accountability would be best served when the MNCs are tasked both with the burden of proof and a responsibility to demonstrate their transparency in preventing oil spills, including those caused by sabotage.Originality/valueCrisis situations generate multiple and competing perspectives, but sensegiving and defensive behaviours lenses enrich our understanding of how crisis-ridden companies frame narratives to alter stakeholders' perceptions. Accounts-giving therefore partly satisfies accountability demands, and acts as sensegiving signals aimed at reframing/redefining existing perceptions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document