Patterns of corporate influence in the host country: a study of ABB in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article draws on our four case studies to examine the nature of the relationships between ABB and its Canadian subsidiaries. Starting from a critical review of the literature, it develops a framework that is sensitive to three levels of analysis: the factors that shape the parent corporation's strategies, the characteristics of the host countries in which the MNC operates and the characteristics of the local subsidiaries themselves. The empirical material illustrates how innovation is generated by a two-way process, in which the initiative of corporate leaders challenges the ‘interpretation’ of local actors. In doing so, we point to a number of key omissions in the influential attempt by Bartlett and Ghoshal to use ABB to develop a managerial theory of the firm. This research also leads to broader considerations regarding the interface between markets and organizations. As distinct from the orthodox view, a transnational corporation may be conceived as a mediator between the market and a local subsidiary. In many ways, the global corporation channels and mediates the impact of external market forces on internal organizational actors, through a process involving the exercise of politics and power. The article has significant implications for decision making on human resource management. In particular it stresses that local managers, local unions, and employees can think and act strategically only in as far as they properly assess the limits of their respective sphere of organizational autonomy within the corporation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".