The Role of Procedural Justice for Global Strategy and Subsidiary Initiatives

Christian Geisler Asmussen, Nicolai J. Foss*, Phillip C. Nell

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Research Summary: The global strategy literature highlights the role of headquarters (HQ) in realizing global integration benefits while enabling independent subsidiary strategic initiatives. We construct a game‐theoretic model of the interaction between HQ and subsidiaries, and, building on procedural justice theory, we analyze the motivational costs that can result from the anticipation or realization of HQ intervention in subsidiary initiatives. We also analyze the implications for MNC‐level value creation when HQ managers, fearing subsidiary managers’ emotion‐based reactions, refrain from intervening. We derive a number of counter‐intuitive results, for example, that good HQ behavior may involve forgoing opportunities for value creation, and that procedural justice systems may sometimes be counterproductive.
Managerial Summary: Headquarters (HQ) in multinational corporations are required to balance global integration and local autonomy within the organization. This balancing act sometimes requires HQ to intervene in subsidiary matters and to overrule the subunits’ decisions. While an intervention might create integration advantages, it may also have a negative impact on the motivation of subsidiary managers, who might feel that their effort and their decisions are overruled. We focus on such motivational issues and investigate how fair decision‐making processes applied by the HQ influence subsidiaries’ entrepreneurial behavior and their reactions to the overruling. Our findings show that, under specific conditions, HQ need to forgo value‐creating interventions, and that a strong focus on a procedural justice culture within the firm can be detrimental.
Original languageEnglish
JournalGlobal Strategy Journal
Volume9
Issue number4
Pages (from-to)527-554
Number of pages28
ISSN2042-5791
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Keywords

  • Headquarters
  • Subsidiaries
  • Procedural justice
  • Motivation
  • Initiatives

Cite this

@article{d0ed01e6bbf84151a5d6dbb25ef72877,
title = "The Role of Procedural Justice for Global Strategy and Subsidiary Initiatives",
abstract = "Research Summary: The global strategy literature highlights the role of headquarters (HQ) in realizing global integration benefits while enabling independent subsidiary strategic initiatives. We construct a game‐theoretic model of the interaction between HQ and subsidiaries, and, building on procedural justice theory, we analyze the motivational costs that can result from the anticipation or realization of HQ intervention in subsidiary initiatives. We also analyze the implications for MNC‐level value creation when HQ managers, fearing subsidiary managers’ emotion‐based reactions, refrain from intervening. We derive a number of counter‐intuitive results, for example, that good HQ behavior may involve forgoing opportunities for value creation, and that procedural justice systems may sometimes be counterproductive.Managerial Summary: Headquarters (HQ) in multinational corporations are required to balance global integration and local autonomy within the organization. This balancing act sometimes requires HQ to intervene in subsidiary matters and to overrule the subunits’ decisions. While an intervention might create integration advantages, it may also have a negative impact on the motivation of subsidiary managers, who might feel that their effort and their decisions are overruled. We focus on such motivational issues and investigate how fair decision‐making processes applied by the HQ influence subsidiaries’ entrepreneurial behavior and their reactions to the overruling. Our findings show that, under specific conditions, HQ need to forgo value‐creating interventions, and that a strong focus on a procedural justice culture within the firm can be detrimental.",
keywords = "Headquarters, Subsidiaries, Procedural justice, Motivation, Initiatives, Headquarters, Subsidiaries, Procedural justice, Motivation, Initiatives",
author = "{Geisler Asmussen}, Christian and Foss, {Nicolai J.} and Nell, {Phillip C.}",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1002/gsj.1341",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "527--554",
journal = "Global Strategy Journal",
issn = "2042-5791",
publisher = "Strategic Management Society",
number = "4",

}

The Role of Procedural Justice for Global Strategy and Subsidiary Initiatives. / Geisler Asmussen, Christian; Foss, Nicolai J.; Nell, Phillip C.

In: Global Strategy Journal, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2019, p. 527-554.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Role of Procedural Justice for Global Strategy and Subsidiary Initiatives

AU - Geisler Asmussen, Christian

AU - Foss, Nicolai J.

AU - Nell, Phillip C.

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Research Summary: The global strategy literature highlights the role of headquarters (HQ) in realizing global integration benefits while enabling independent subsidiary strategic initiatives. We construct a game‐theoretic model of the interaction between HQ and subsidiaries, and, building on procedural justice theory, we analyze the motivational costs that can result from the anticipation or realization of HQ intervention in subsidiary initiatives. We also analyze the implications for MNC‐level value creation when HQ managers, fearing subsidiary managers’ emotion‐based reactions, refrain from intervening. We derive a number of counter‐intuitive results, for example, that good HQ behavior may involve forgoing opportunities for value creation, and that procedural justice systems may sometimes be counterproductive.Managerial Summary: Headquarters (HQ) in multinational corporations are required to balance global integration and local autonomy within the organization. This balancing act sometimes requires HQ to intervene in subsidiary matters and to overrule the subunits’ decisions. While an intervention might create integration advantages, it may also have a negative impact on the motivation of subsidiary managers, who might feel that their effort and their decisions are overruled. We focus on such motivational issues and investigate how fair decision‐making processes applied by the HQ influence subsidiaries’ entrepreneurial behavior and their reactions to the overruling. Our findings show that, under specific conditions, HQ need to forgo value‐creating interventions, and that a strong focus on a procedural justice culture within the firm can be detrimental.

AB - Research Summary: The global strategy literature highlights the role of headquarters (HQ) in realizing global integration benefits while enabling independent subsidiary strategic initiatives. We construct a game‐theoretic model of the interaction between HQ and subsidiaries, and, building on procedural justice theory, we analyze the motivational costs that can result from the anticipation or realization of HQ intervention in subsidiary initiatives. We also analyze the implications for MNC‐level value creation when HQ managers, fearing subsidiary managers’ emotion‐based reactions, refrain from intervening. We derive a number of counter‐intuitive results, for example, that good HQ behavior may involve forgoing opportunities for value creation, and that procedural justice systems may sometimes be counterproductive.Managerial Summary: Headquarters (HQ) in multinational corporations are required to balance global integration and local autonomy within the organization. This balancing act sometimes requires HQ to intervene in subsidiary matters and to overrule the subunits’ decisions. While an intervention might create integration advantages, it may also have a negative impact on the motivation of subsidiary managers, who might feel that their effort and their decisions are overruled. We focus on such motivational issues and investigate how fair decision‐making processes applied by the HQ influence subsidiaries’ entrepreneurial behavior and their reactions to the overruling. Our findings show that, under specific conditions, HQ need to forgo value‐creating interventions, and that a strong focus on a procedural justice culture within the firm can be detrimental.

KW - Headquarters

KW - Subsidiaries

KW - Procedural justice

KW - Motivation

KW - Initiatives

KW - Headquarters

KW - Subsidiaries

KW - Procedural justice

KW - Motivation

KW - Initiatives

UR - https://sfx-45cbs.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/45cbs?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/sfxit.com:azlist&sfx.ignore_date_threshold=1&rft.object_id=2580000000014998&rft.object_portfolio_id=&svc.holdings=yes&svc.fulltext=yes

U2 - 10.1002/gsj.1341

DO - 10.1002/gsj.1341

M3 - Journal article

VL - 9

SP - 527

EP - 554

JO - Global Strategy Journal

JF - Global Strategy Journal

SN - 2042-5791

IS - 4

ER -