Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Why Sparing the Rod Does Not Spoil the Child: A Critique of the “Strict Father” Model in Transnational Governance

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The United Nations Global Compact (UNGC) is one of the largest transnational governance schemes (TGSs). Its success or failure, however, is a matter of debate. Drawing on research in cognitive linguistics, we argue that when evaluators discuss the UNGC, they apply the metaphorical concept of the family: the UNGC corresponds to the “family,” the UNGC headquarter to the “parent” and the business participants of the UNGC to the “children” of the family. As a corollary, evaluators’ implicit understanding of how a family is best organized sets different benchmarks against which the governance structure of the UNGC is assessed. We describe two ideal models of “educating” UNGC business participants. Critics of the UNGC adopt a “strict father” model of transnational governance based on the idea that the proper education of inherently “bad” business firms necessitates obedience, discipline and punishment in case firms are non-compliant. In contrast, the UNGC’s advocates follow a “nurturant parent” model, which prioritizes empathy, learning and nurturance to support the moral development of “good” business firms. We develop the “UNGC-as-family” metaphor, explore its implications for transnational governance and discuss under what conditions these idealized models can serve as appropriate guidelines for TGSs. Specifically, we posit that following the behavioral prescriptions of the “strict father” model may, under certain conditions, jeopardize the organizational embedding and institutionalization of UNGC principles, and explain when and why it may be in the best interest of the UNGC and civil society to embrace the instructions of the “nurturant parent” model of transnational governance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2000). Hard and soft law in international governance. International Organization, 54(3), 421–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2010). International regulation without international government: Improving IO performance through orchestration. Review of International Organization, 5, 315–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baccaro, L., & Mele, V. (2011). For lack of anything better? International organizations and global corporate codes. Public Administration, 89, 451–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L., & King, A. A. (2008). Good fences make good neighbors: A longitudinal analysis of an industry self-regulatory institution. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 1150–1170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumann-Pauly, D., & Scherer, A. G. (2013). The organizational implementation of corporate citizenship: An assessment tool and its applications at UN Global Compact participants. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumann-Pauly, D., Wickert, C., Spence, L., & Scherer, A. G. (2013). Organizing corporate social responsibility in small and large firms: Size matters. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(4), 693–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behnam, M., & MacLean, T. L. (2011). Where is the accountability in international accountability standards? A decoupling perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21, 45–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berne Declaration. (2007). Clean words, dirty business: Corporate social responsibility—The disconnection between rhetoric and reality. BD magazine special issue 2007. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from www.evb.ch/cm_data/EvB_CSR_englisch.pdf

  • Berne Declaration. (2014). Internationale Outdoorfirmen. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://www.evb.ch/p15882.html.

  • Bitektine, A. B. (2011). Towards a theory of social judgment of organizations: The case of legitimacy, reputation, and status. Academy of Management Review, 36, 151–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boroditsky, L. (2000). Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition, 75, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Börzel, T. A., Héritier, A., Kranz, N., & Thauer, C. (2011). Racing to the top? Regulatory competition among firms in areas of limited statehood. In T. Risse (Ed.), Governance without a state? Policies and politics in areas of limited statehood (pp. 144–171). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2010). Governance without a state: Can it work? Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 113–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bougher, L. D. (2012). The case for metaphor in political reasoning and cognition. Political Psychology, 33, 145–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bremer, J. A. (2008). How global is the Global Compact? Business Ethics: A European Review, 17(3), 227–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • British Telecom. (2011). BT sustainability review. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from www.btplc.com/betterfuture/betterbusiness/betterfuturereport/pdf/2011/Better_Future_BT_sustainability_review_2011.pdf.

  • Bromley, P., & Powell, W. W. (2012). From smoke and mirrors to walking the talk: The causes and consequences of decoupling in the contemporary world. Academy of Management Annals, 6, 483–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, A., & Keohane, R. O. (2006). The legitimacy of global governance institutions. Ethics & International Affairs, 20, 405–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashore, B., Auld, G., Bernstein, S., & McDermott, C. (2007). Can non-state governance ‘ratchet-up’ global standards? Assessing their indirect effects and evolutionary potential. Review of European Community and International Environmental Law, 16, 158–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Centindamar, D., & Husoy, K. (2007). Corporate social responsibility practices and environmentally responsible behavior: The case of the United Nations Global Compact. Journal of Business Ethics, 76, 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L. T., Morsing, M., & Thyssen, O. (2013). CSR as aspirational talk. Organization, 20, 372–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelissen, J. P. (2004). What are we playing at? Theatre, organization, and the use of metaphor. Organization Studies, 25, 705–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelissen, J. P. (2005). Beyond compare: Metaphor in organization theory. Academy of Management Review, 30, 751–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane A., & Matten D. (2013). Should the UN Global Compact have sharper teeth? Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://craneandmatten.blogspot.ch/2013/01/should-un-global-compact-have-sharper.html.

  • Deva, S. (2006). Global Compact: A critique of the UN’s “public-private” partnership for pro-moting corporate citizenship. Syracuse Journal of International Law and Communication, 34, 107–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Djelic, M.-L., & Quack, S. (2008). Institutions and transnationalization. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, K., & R. Suddaby, R. (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, (pp. 299–324). London: SAGE.

  • Equator Principles Association. (2014). The Equator Principles III—2013. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://www.equator-principles.com/index.php/ep3/ep3.

  • Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Financial Times. (2010). Companies fail UN’s Global Compact. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8b19f9ee-1806-11df-91d2-00144feab49a.html#axzz2wQJoZw5h.

  • Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. A. (1990). The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network. Academy of Management Review, 15, 603–625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Compact Critics. (2010). Water corporations use United Nations to bluewash abuses. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://globalcompactcritics.blogspot.ch/2010/06/water-corporations-use-united-nations.html.

  • Global Compact Critics. (2011). Great news: Global Compact expels company that refuses to engage in dialogue with activists. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://globalcompactcritics.blogspot.ch/2011/06/great-news-global-compact-expels.html.

  • Greven, P. J. (1991). Spare the child: The religious roots of punishment and the psychological impact on physical abuse. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilé. (2013). Guilé funds activity report. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://www.ppt.ch/guilefunds/assets/files/test/RapportAnnuelEngagementGEEF2012_2013_Web_EN.pdf.

  • Haack, P. (2013). Managing the legitimacy commons in transnational governance: Why keeping bad apples, instead of sacking them, can lead to global sustainability. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://globalcompactcritics.blogspot.ch/2013/01/managing-legitimacy-commons-in.html.

  • Haack, P., Martignoni, D., & Schoeneborn, D (2013). Corporate responsibility as myth and ceremony: Bad but not for good. Working paper, University of Zurich. Available at SSRN http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2136509.

  • Haack, P., Pfarrer, M. & Scherer, A. G. (2014). Legitimacy-as-Feeling: How Affect Leads to Vertical Legitimacy Spillovers in Transnational Governance. Journal of Management Studies, 51(4), 634–666.

  • Haack, P., Schoeneborn, D., & Wickert, C. (2012). Talking the talk, moral entrapment, creeping commitment? Exploring narrative dynamics in corporate responsibility standardization. Organization Studies, 5(6), 813–845.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1990). Moral consciousness and communicative action. In J. Habermas (Ed.), Moral consciousness and communicative action (pp. 116–194). Boston: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallett, T. (2010). The myth incarnate: Recoupling processes, turmoil, and inhabited institutions in an urban elementary school. American Sociological Review, 75, 52–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1974). Transgovernmental relations and world politics. World Politics, 29, 39–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohlberg, L. (1981). The philosophy of moral development: Moral stages and the idea of justice . San Francisco: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kostova, T., Roth, K., & Dacin, M. T. (2008). Institutional theory in the study of multinational corporations: A critique and new directions. Academy of Management Review, 33, 994–1006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostova, T., & Zaheer, S. (1999). Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 24, 64–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G. (1996). Moral politics: What conservatives know that liberals don’t. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G. (2008). The political mind: A cognitive scientist’s guide to your brain and its politics. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

  • Lee, M., & Kohler, J. (2010). Benchmarking and transparency: Incentives for the pharmaceutical industry’s corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, 641–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, K., Cashore, B., Bernstein, S., & Auld, G. (2012). Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: Constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change. Policy Sciences, 45, 123–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. (1989). Decisions and organizations. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishina, Y., Block, E., & Mannor, M. J. (2012). The path dependence of organizational reputation: How social judgment influences assessments of capability and character. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 459–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nason, R. W. (2008). Structuring the global marketplace: The impact of the United Nations Global Compact. Journal of Macromarketing, 28, 418–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Overdevest, C. (2010). Comparing forest certification schemes: The case of ratcheting standards in the forest sector. Socio-Economic Review, 8, 47–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Overdevest, C., & Zeitlin, J. H. (2014). Assembling an experimentalist regime: Transnational governance interactions in the forest sector. Regulation & Governance, 8, 22–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paine, L. S. (1994). Managing for organizational integrity. Harvard Business Review, 72(March-April), 106–117.

  • Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. G. (2010). The United Nations Global Compact as a learning approach. In G. Kell & A. Rasche (Eds.), The United Nations Global Compact: Achievements, trends and challenges (pp. 234–247). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Potoski, M., & Prakash, A. (2005). Green clubs and voluntary governance: ISO 14001 and firms’ regulatory compliance. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 235–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasche, A. (2009). “A necessary supplement”: What the United Nations Global Compact is and is not. Business and Society, 48, 511–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasche, A., & Kell, G. (2010). The United Nations Global Compact: Achievements, trends and challenges. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rasche, A., Waddock, S., & McIntosh, M. (2013). The UN Global Compact: Retrospect and prospect. Business and Society, 52, 6–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risse, T. (2000). Let’s argue! Communicative action in international relations. International Organization, 54, 1–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenau, J., & Czempiel, E.-O. (Eds.). (1992). Governance without government: Order and change in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, J. G. (2004). Reconstituting the global public domain: issues, actors, and practices. European Journal of International Relations, 10, 499–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sagafi-nejad, T. (2008). The UN and transnational corporations: From code of conduct to Global Compact. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schepers, D. H. (2011). The Equator Principles: A promise in progress? Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business and Society, 11, 90–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G. (2003). Multinationale Unternehmen und Globalisierung. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of research on global corporate citizenship. Cheltenham (UK) and Northampton (Mass.): Edward Elgar.

  • Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 899–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., Palazzo, G., & Seidl, D. (2013). Managing legitimacy in complex and heterogeneous environments: Sustainable development in a globalized world. Journal of Management Studies, 50, 259–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoeneborn, D., Blaschke, S., & Kaufmann, I. M. (2013). Recontextualizing anthropomorphic metaphors in organization studies: The pathology of organizational insomnia. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22, 435–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sethi S. P., & Schepers D. H. (2014). United Nations Global Compact: The promise–performance gap. Journal of Business Ethics (in this Special Issue). doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1629-y.

  • Stansbury, J., & Barry, B. (2007). Ethics programs and the paradox of control. Business Ethics Quarterly, 17, 239–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, D. (2008). Global public policy, transnational policy communities, and their networks. Policy Studies Journal, 36, 19–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Guardian. (2012). Cleaning up the Global Compact: Dealing with corporate free riders. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/cleaning-up-un-global-compact-green-wash?INTCMP=SRCH.

  • Tilcsik, A. (2010). From ritual to reality: Demography, ideology, and decoupling in a post-communist government agency. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 1474–1498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tost, L. P. (2011). An integrative model of legitimacy judgments. Academy of Management Review, 36, 686–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Global Compact. (2010a). Global Compact introduces differentiation framework. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://www.unglobalcompact.org/news/74-10-15-2010.

  • UN Global Compact. (2010b). Blueprint for Corporate Sustainability Leadership. New York: UN Global Compact Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Global Compact. (2011). Global Compact Lead. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://www.unglobalcompact.org/HowToParticipate/Lead/.

  • UN Global Compact. (2013a). Global Corporate Sustainability Report 2013. New York: UN Global Compact Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Global Compact. (2013b). UN Global Compact 100. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://www.unglobalcompact.org/Issues/financial_markets/global_compact_100.html.

  • UN Global Compact. (2013c). United Nations Global Compact strategy 2014–2016. New York: UN Global Compact Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (2014a). Commit to actions! Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://business.un.org/commitments?locale=en.

  • United Nations. (2014b). Nestlé’s commitments to education first. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from http://business.un.org/en/commitments/3312.

  • Weick, K. E. (1984). Small wins: Redefining the scale of social problems. American Psychologist, 39, 40–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickert C., & Schaefer. S. M. (2014). Towards a progressive understanding of performativity in critical management studies. Human Relations, forthcoming. doi:10.1177/0018726713519279.

  • Wynhoven, U., & Stausberg, M. (2010). The United Nations Global Compact’s governance framework and integrity measures. In A. Rasche & G. Kell (Eds.), The United Nations Global Compact: Achievements, trends and challenges (pp. 251–264). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This paper benefitted from discussions with participants of research seminars at Copenhagen Business School and the University of Lucerne. We thank Dennis Schoeneborn and Stefan Schembera for helpful comments on a previous draft of this paper. Andreas Scherer acknowledges the financial support by the Swiss National Science Foundation (Grant Number 100014_137789/1).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, IBW, University of Zurich, Universitaetsstr. 84, 8006, Zurich, Switzerland

    Patrick Haack & Andreas Georg Scherer

Authors
  1. Patrick Haack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andreas Georg Scherer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Haack.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Haack, P., Scherer, A.G. Why Sparing the Rod Does Not Spoil the Child: A Critique of the “Strict Father” Model in Transnational Governance. J Bus Ethics 122, 225–240 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2218-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2218-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation