Explore the vast range of titles available.

Systems change requires complex interventions. Cross-sector partnerships (CSPs) face the daunting task of addressing complex societal problems by aligning different backgrounds, values, ideas and resources. A major challenge for CSPs is how to link the type of partnership to the intervention needed to drive change. Intervention strategies are thereby increasingly based on Theories of Change (ToCs). Applying ToCs is often a donor requirement, but it also reflects the ambition of a partnership to enhance its transformative potential. The current use of ToCs in partnering efforts varies greatly. There is a tendency for a linear and relatively simple use of ToCs that does limited justice to the complexity of the problems partnerships aim to address. Since partnership dynamics are already complex and challenging themselves, confusion and disagreement over the appropriate application of ToCs is likely to hamper rather than enhance the transformative potential of partnerships. We develop a complexity alignment framework and a diagnostic tool that enables partnerships to better appreciate the complexity of the context in which they operate, allowing them to adjust their learning strategy. This paper applies recent insights into how to deal with complexity from both the evaluation and theory of change fields to studies investigating the transformative capacity of partnerships. This can (1) serve as a check to define the challenges of partnering projects and (2) can help delineate the societal sources and layers of complexity that cross-sector partnerships deal with such as failure, insufficient responsibility taking and collective action problems at four phases of partnering.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) cannot be achieved without the contributions of multinational enterprises (MNEs). However, extant international business research hardly covers the private sector’s role in achieving international policy goals. This article conceptualises the SDGs as a goal-based institution. Building on institutional theory, it develops propositions that help explain MNEs’ engagement with SDGs. Exploratory survey results from 81 European and North American Financial Times Global 500 companies indicate that MNEs engage more with SDG targets that are actionable within their (value chain) operations than those outside of it, and more with SDG targets that “avoid harm” than those that “do good”. Differences in SDG engagement based on MNEs’ home- and host-countries and their industrial sectors are also explored. We draw policy conclusions for a more pro-active involvement of MNEs in sustainable development, and we define avenues for future international business research. In particular, cross-sector partnerships deserve further attention.

Inclusive businesses that combine profit making with social impact are claimed to hold the potential for poverty alleviation while also creating new entrepreneurial and innovation opportunities. Current research, however, offers little insight on the processes through which for-profit business organizations introduce social innovations that can profitably create social impact. To understand how social innovations emerge and become sustained in business organizations, we studied a telecom firm in Kenya that successfully extended financial services across the country through a number of mobile banking innovations. Our qualitative analysis revealed the strong role of being embedded in local networks and structures for initiating and implementing social innovations. Strong embeddedness enhanced the pragmatic and ethical imperative for internalizing social issues, but also provided access to diverse resources for implementing and legitimizing social innovations. However, hybridization processes that emphasized social issues introduced organizational tensions by increasing goal diversity and requiring adapting organizational processes and structures. The case shows how developing a mission-driven identity enabled the sustenance of social innovations by providing a meta-narrative that bridged goal diversities and rationalized organizational change.

The hybridization movement reflects the shift and convergence of market-focused corporations on the one hand and social oriented organizations on the other towards more integrated value-creating hybrid arrangements. Hybridity is usually defined as the combination of two different and usually contradicting institutional logics. However, the hybridity literature is incongruent, inconsistent and seemingly addressing different spheres of hybridity, rendering the institutional construct ineffective for empirical analysis between organizations of varied natures. The purpose of this study is to arrive at a conceptualization of hybridity from an institutional perspective that allows for empirical analysis and comparison of the hybrid nature of organizations across time and contexts. Adopting a taxonomical approach based on the societal triangle, a systematic review (n = 109) is conducted to identify characteristics, issues and challenges of eight archetypical hybrid and non-hybrid organizations. Consequently, the authors propose a thematic mapping of relevant issues into five clustered themes. This thematic map can be helpful in guiding the analysis of and comparison between a broad range of different hybrid organizations. This study adds to the existing definitional and terminological debate in the hybridity literature by shifting the focus from a typological classification towards a taxonomical approach of hybridity.

The information and digital age is shaped by a small number of multinational enterprises from a limited number of countries. This volume covers the latest insight from the International Business discipline on prevailing trends in business model evolution. It also discusses critical issues of regulation in the new information and digital space.

Issue Title: Special section on Enhancing the Impact of Cross-Sector Partnerships (articles 1-5) This paper addresses the topic of this special symposium issue: how to enhance the impact of cross-sector partnerships. The paper takes stock of two related discussions: the discourse in cross-sector partnership research on how to assess impact and the discourse in impact assessment research on how to deal with more complex organizations and projects. We argue that there is growing need and recognition for cross-fertilization between the two areas. Cross-sector partnerships are reaching a paradigmatic status in society, but both research and practice need more thorough evidence of their impacts and of the conditions under which these impacts can be enhanced. This paper develops a framework that should enable a constructive interchange between the two research areas, while also framing existing research into more precise categories that can lead to knowledge accumulation. We address the preconditions for such a framework and discuss how the constituent parts of this framework interact. We distinguish four different pathways or impact loops that refer to four distinct orders of impact. The paper concludes by applying these insights to the four papers included in this special issue.

Dedicated to Professor Peter Buckley, OBE, this volume of Progress in International Business Research explores the new challenges for MNEs, SMEs (small and medium sized enterprises) and INVs (International New Ventures) emerging from this changing and increasingly unpredictable political, economic, social and technological VUCA world.

The international operations of firms have substantial impact on the formulation and implementation of business ethical principles such as codes of conduct. The international sporting goods industry has been a pioneer in setting up codes and thus provides much relevant experience. Different sourcing strategies, degrees of multinationality and national backgrounds affect the contents of codes. Moreover, international (non-governmental) organizations prove equally effective in triggering sophisticated codes.

Increasing attention to the issue of child labor has been reflected in codes of conduct that emerged in the past decade in particular. This paper examines the way in which multinationals, business associations, governmental and non-governmental organizations deal with child labor in their codes. With a standardized framework, it analyzes 55 codes drawn up by these different actors to influence firms' external, societal behavior. The exploratory study helps to identify the main issues related to child labor and the use of voluntary instruments such as codes of conduct. Apart from a specific indication of the topics covered by the code, especially minimum-age requirements, this also includes monitoring systems and monitoring parties. Most important to company codes are the sanctions imposed on business partners in case of non-compliance. Severe measures may be counterproductive as they do not change the underlying causes of child labor and can worsen the situation of the child workers by driving them to more hazardous work in the informal sector. This underlines the importance of a broad rather than a restrictive approach to child labor in codes of conduct. The paper discusses the implications of this study, offering suggestions for future research.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide a realistic approach to navigate societies through and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the SDG agenda is not without flaws. Even before the pandemic, progress towards achieving the SDGs has been too slow. COVID-19 presents a stress test for the SDG approach. The SDG agenda provides three ‘logics’ that could help transform towards sustainable societies: (1) a governance logic that sets goals, adopts policies, and tracks progress to steer impacts; (2) a systems (nexus) logic that manages SDG interactions; and (3) a strategic logic that enables (micro-level) companies to develop strategies that impact (macro-level) policy goals. We discuss key hurdles that each of these SDG logics face. Transforming towards sustainable societies beyond COVID-19 requires that multinational enterprises and policymakers (better) apply these logics, and that they address operational challenges to overcome flaws in the present approach to the SDGs.