Résumés
Abstract
This study examines how internal support benefits the local interventions of international environmental NGOs. It addresses this question by examining 102 cases of interventions conducted by 5 Greenpeace national organizations in Europe. The results indicate that the benefits of internal support partially depend on the geographic scope of the environmental problems targeted by the NGO. While interventions that focus on international problems generally benefit from internal support, interventions that focus on local problems are generally more successful without support. Implications for the resource allocation decisions of international NGOs and for the generalizability of international management theories are discussed.
Keywords:
- International NGOs,
- National and regional organizations (NROs),
- Internal international support,
- Local advocacy intervention,
- Resource allocation
Résumé
Cette étude vise à mieux comprendre les impacts du soutien international dans la réalisation des interventions locales des ONG environnementales. Elle examine102 interventions menées par 5 organisations nationales de Greenpeace en Europe. Les résultats démontrent que les avantages du soutien international dépendent en partie de l’étendue géographique des problèmes ciblés par l’ONG. Alors que les interventions ciblant des problèmes internationaux bénéficient du soutien international de l’organisation, les interventions ciblant des problèmes locaux présentent une plus grande probabilité de succès lorsque réalisées sans cet apport. Les implications pour la gestion des ONG et pour les théories managériales sont discutées.
Mots-clés :
- ONG internationales,
- Organisations nationales et régionales (ONR),
- Support international interne,
- Interventions locales,
- Allocation des ressources
Resumen
Este estudio examina cómo el apoyo interno beneficia a las intervenciones locales de las ONG medioambientales internacionales. Esta cuestión es abordada examinando 102 casos de intervenciones realizadas por 5 organizaciones nacionales de Greenpeace en Europa. Los resultados indican que los beneficios del apoyo interno dependen en parte del alcance geográfico de los problemas medioambientales a los que se dirige la ONG. Mientras que las intervenciones centradas en problemas internacionales suelen beneficiarse del apoyo interno, las intervenciones centradas en problemas locales suelen tener más éxito sin apoyo. Se discuten las implicaciones para la generalización de las teorías de gestión internacional.
Palabras clave:
- ONG internacionales,
- Organizaciones nacionales y regionales,
- Apoyo interno internacional,
- Intervención local de defensa,
- Asignación de recursos
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- 2001. Inventory of global resources. Amsterdam: Netherlands: Greenpeace International.
- Anand, J., & Delios, A. (1997). “Location specificity and the transferability of downstream assets to foreign subsidiaries”. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 28, No, p. 579-603.
- Andrews, K. T., & Caren, N. (2010). “Making the news: Movement organizations, media attention, and the public agenda”. American Sociological Review, Vol. 75, N° 6, p. 841-866.
- Bansal, P., Kim, A., & Wood, M. (2018). “Hidden in plain sight: The importance of scale on organizations’ attention to issues”. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 43, N° 2, p. 217-241.
- Barney, J. (1991). “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”. Journal of Management Vol. 17, N° 1, p. 99-120.
- Baron, D. P., Neale, M., & Rao, H. (2016). “Extending nonmarket strategy: Political economy and the radical flank effect in private politics”. Strategy Science, Vol. 1, N° 2, p. 105-126.
- Berny, N. (2009). “Mastering national contextual challenges: The institutionalisation of lpo and greenpeace france compared”. Environmental Politics, Vol. 18, N° 3, p. 371-390.
- Berny, N., & Rootes, C. (2018). “Environmental ngos at a crossroads?”. Environmental Politics, Vol. 27, No, p. 947-972.
- Binderkrantz, A. (2005). “Interest group strategies: Navigating between priviledged access and strategies of pressure”. Political Studies, Vol. 53, No, p. 694-715.
- Bjorkman, I., Barner-Rasmussen, W., & Li, L. (2004). “Managing knowledge transfer in mncs: The impact of headquarters control mechanisms”. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 35, N° 5, p. 443-455.
- Bloodgood, E. A. (2011). “The interest group analogy: International non-governmental advocacy organizations in international politics”. Review of International Studies, Vol. 37, N° 1, p. 93-120.
- Bloodgood, E. A., Tremblay-Boire, J., & Prakash, A. (2014). “National styles of ngo regulation”. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol. 43, N° 4, p. 716-736.
- Bloomfield, M. J. (2014). “Shame campaigns and environmental justice: Corporate shaming as activist strategy”. Environmental Politics, Vol. 23, No, p. 263-281.
- Boddewyn, J. J., & Brewer, T. L. (1994). “International-business political behavior: New theoretical directions”. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19, N° 1, p. 119-143.
- Briscoe, F., & Gupta, A. (2016). “Social activism in and around organizations”. Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 10, N° 1, p. 671-727.
- Brouthers, K. D., Brouthers, L. E., & Werner, S. (2008). “Resource-based advantages in an international context”. Journal of Management, Vol. 34, N° 2, p. 189-217.
- Brown, L. D., Ebrahim, L. D., & Batliwala, S. (2012). “Governing international advocacy ngos”. World Development, Vol. 40, N° 6, p. 1098-1108.
- Buckley, P. J., Doh, J. P., & Benischke, M. H. (2018). “Towards a renaissance in international business research? Big questions, grand challenges, and the future of ib scholarship”. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 48, N° 9.
- Carmin, J., & Balser, D. (2002). “Selecting repertoires of action in environmental movement organizations: An interpretive approach”. Organization and Environment, Vol. 15, N° 4, p. 365-388.
- Dahan, N. M., Doh, J. P., & Yaziji, M. (2010). “Corporate-ngo collaboration: Co-creating new business models for developing markets”. Long Range Planning, Vol. 43, No 2-3, p. 326-342.
- Dale, S. (1996). Mcluhan’s children: The greenpeace message and the media. Toronto, ON: Between the Lines.
- De Lange, D. E., Armanios, D., Delgado-Ceballos, J., & Sandhu, S. (2016). “From foe to friend: Complex mutual adaptation of multinational corporations and nongovernmental organizations”. Business & Society, Vol. 55, N° 8, p. 1197-1228.
- Dellmuth, L. M., & Tallberg, J. (2017). “Advocacy strategies in global governance: Inside versus outside lobbying”. Political Studies, Vol. 65, N° 3, p. 705-723.
- den Hond, F., de Bakker, F. G. A., & Doh, J. (2015). “What prompts companies to collaboration with ngos? Recent evidence from the netherlands”. Business & Society, Vol. 54, N° 2, p. 187-228.
- Druckman, J. N. (2001). “On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame?”. Journal of Politics, Vol. 63, N° 4, p. 1041-1066.
- Dür, A., & Mateo, G. (2013). “Gaining access or going public? Interest group strategies in five european countries”. European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 52, No, p. 660-686.
- Elsbach, K. D., & Sutton, R. I. (1992). “Acquiring organizational legitimacy through illegitimate actions: A marriage of institutional and impression management theories”. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 35, N° 4, p. 699-738.
- Ferraro, F., Etzion, D., & Gehman, J. (2015). “Tackling grand challenges pragmatically: Robust action revisited”. Organization Studies, Vol. 36, N° 3, p. 363-390.
- Gamson, W. A., & Wolfsfeld, G. (1993). “Movements and media as interacting systems”. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 528, No, p. 114-125.
- Gibson, C. C., Ostrom, E., & Ahn, T. K. (2000). “The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: A survey”. Ecological Economics, Vol. 32, No, p. 217-239.
- Golden, B. R. (1992). “The past is the past—or is it? The use of retrospective accounts as indicators of past strategy”. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 35, N° 4, p. 848-860.
- Hadden, J. (2015). Networks in contention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Hänggli, R. (2012). “Key factors in frame building: How strategic political actors shape news media coverage”. American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 56, N° 3, p. 300-317.
- Hinds, P. J., & Mortensen, M. (2005). “Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication”. Organization Science, Vol. 16, N° 3, p. 290-307.
- Hoetker, G. (2007). “The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues”. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28, N° 4, p. 331-343.
- Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951). “The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness”. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 15, N° 4, p. 635-650.
- Howard-Grenville, J. A., Buckle, S. J., Hoskins, B. J., & George, G. (2014). “Climate change and management”. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 57, N° 3, p. 615-623.
- Howell, M., & Prevenier, W. (2001). From reliable sources: An introduction to historical methods. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
- Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). “Communication and trust in global virtual teams”. Organization Science, Vol. 10, N° 6, p. 791-815.
- Kaplan, S. (2015). Mixing quantitative and qualitative research. In K. D. Elsbach, & R. M. Kramer (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research organizational research: Innovative pathways and methods. New York, NY: Routledge.
- Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
- Kostova, T., & Zaheer, S. (1999). “Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise”. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24, N° 1, p. 64-81.
- Kourula, A., & Laasonen, S. (2010). “Nongovernmental organizations in business and society, management, and international business research: Review and implications from 1998 to 2007”. Business and Society, Vol. 49, N° 1, p. 35-67.
- Lambell, R., Ramia, G., Nyland, C., & Michelotti, M. (2008). “Ngos and international business research: Progress, prospects and problems”. International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 10, N° 1, p. 75-92.
- Lecy, J. D., Mitchell, G. E., & Schmitz, H. P. (2010). Advocacy organizations, networks, and the firm analogy. In A. Prakash, & M. K. Gugerty (Eds.), Advocacy organizations and collective action: 229-251. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Longhofer, W., Schofer, E., Miric, N., & Frank, D. J. (2016). “Ngos, ingos, and environmental policy reform, 1970-2010”. Social Forces, Vol. 94, N° 4, p. 1743-1768.
- Luxon, E. M., & Wong, W. H. (2017). “Agenda-setting in greenpeace and amnesty: The limits of centralization in international ngos”. Global Society, Vol. 31, N° 4, p. 479-509.
- Meyer, D. S. (2004). “Protest and political opportunities”. Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 30, N° 2, p. 125-145.
- Meyer, D. S., & Staggenborg, S. (2012). Thinking about strategy. In G. M. Maney, R. V. Kutz-Flamenbaum, D. A. Rohlinger, & J. Goodwin (Eds.), Strategies for social change, Vol. 37: 3-22. Minneapolis, MN; London, UK: University of Minnesota Press.
- Mintzberg, H. (2015). Rebalancing society: Radical renewal beyond left, right, and center.
- Mintzberg, H., & Westley, F. (2000). “Sustaining the institutional environment”. Organization Studies, Vol. 21, N° 1, p. 71-94.
- Murdie, A., & Urpelainen, J. (2015). “Why pick on us? Environmental ingos and state shaming as a strategic substitute”. Political Studies, Vol. 63, N° 2, p. 353-372.
- Oliver, C. (1997). “Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and resource-based views”. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18, N° 9, p. 697-713.
- Oliver, C., & Holzinger, I. (2008). “The effectiveness of strategic political management: A dynamic capabilities framework”. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 33, N° 2, p. 496-520.
- Oliver, P. E., & Myers, D. J. (1999). “How events enter the public sphere: Conflict, location, and sponsorship in local newspaper coverage of public events”. American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 105, N° 1, p. 38-87.
- Peng, M. W. (2001). “The resource-based view and international business”. Journal of Management, Vol. 27, No, p. 803-829.
- Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). “The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of five decades’ evidence”. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 34, N° 2, p. 243-281.
- Rietig, K. (2016). “The power of strategy: Environmental ngo influence in international climate negotiations”. Global Governance, Vol. 22, No, p. 269-288.
- Rootes, C. (1999). “Acting globally, thinking locally? Prospects for a global environmental movement”. Environmental Politics, Vol. 8, N° 1, p. 290-310.
- Rootes, C. (2003). Britain. In C. Rootes (Ed.), Environmental protest in europe: 20-58. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
- Rucht, D., & Roose, J. (2003). Germany. In C. Rootes (Ed.), Environmental protest in western europe: 80-108. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2001). “Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises”. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 22, N° 3, p. 661-681.
- Spar, D. L., & La Mure, L. T. (2003). “The power of activism: Assessing the impact of ngos on global business”. California Management Review, Vol. 45, N° 3, p. 78-101.
- Stroup, S. S. (2012). Borders among activists: International ngos in the united states, britain, and france. Ithaca, NY; London, UK: Cornell University Press.
- Stroup, S. S., & Murdie, A. (2012). “There’s no place like home: Explaining international ngo advocacy”. Review of International Organizations, Vol. 7, N° 2, p. 425-448.
- Stroup, S. S., & Wong, W. H. (2018). “Authority, strategy, and influence: Environmental ingos in comparative perspective”. Environmental Politics, Vol. 27, N° 6, p. 1101-1121.
- Suchman, M. C. (1995). “Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches”. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, N° 3, p. 571-610.
- Szulanski, G. (1996). “Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm”. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, No Special Issue, p. 27-43.
- Teegen, H., Doh, J. P., & Vachani, S. (2004). “The importance of nongovernmental organizations (ngos) in global governance and value creation: An international business research agenda”. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 35, N° 6, p. 463-483.
- van der Heijden, H.-A. (2002). “Dutch environmentalism at the turn of the century”. Environmental Politics, Vol. 11, N° 4, p. 120-130.
- van Huijstee, M., & Glasbergen, P. (2010). “Ngos moving business: An analysis of contrasting strategies”. Business & Society, Vol. 49, N° 4, p. 591-618.
- Venkatraman, N. (1989). “The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondance”. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, N° 3, p. 423-444.
- Weick, K. E., & Van Orden, P. W. (1990). “Organizing on a global scale: A research and teaching agenda”. Human Resource Management, Vol. 29, N° 1, p. 49-61.
- Wiersema, M. F., & Bowen, H. P. (2009). “The use of limited dependent variable techniques in strategy research: Issues and methods”. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 30, N° 6, p. 679-692.
- Yaziji, M., & Doh, J. (2009). Ngos and corporations: Conflict and collaboration. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
- Yaziji, M., & Doh, J. P. (2013). “The role of ideological radicalism and resource homogeneity in social movement organization campaigns against corporations”. Organization Studies, Vol. 34, No 5-6, p. 755-780.
- Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
- Young, D. R. (1991). “The structural imperatives of international advocacy associations”. Human Relations, Vol. 44, N° 9, p. 921-941.
- Young, D. R., Koenig, B. L., Najam, A., & Fisher, A. (1999). “Strategy and structure in managing global associations”. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, Vol. 10, N° 4, p. 323-343.