Regional market integration in Europe and North America has grown increasingly extensive. This integration has created institutions and structures to guide pancontinental political, economic, and social policies. At the same time, both regions are experiencing pressures of decentralization. These competing trends are transforming relationships between and among business, society, and government. This article compares and contrasts integration in North America and Europe, and discusses the implications of political, economic, and institutional changes in these two regions for business-government relations and the structure and strategic orientation of the corporate public affairs (PA) function. This article reviews recent literature on comparative political economy, business and public policy, and corporate PA, and it presents a conceptual model and research propositions, supported by case illustrations, of how integration and decentralization affect business-government relations and corporate PA in Europe and North America.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baron, D.
(1995). Integrated strategy: Market and nonmarket components. California Management Review, 37, 47-65.
2.
Boddewyn, J. M.
,& Brewer, T. (1995). International-business political behavior: New theoretical directions. Academy of Management Review, 19, 119-143.
3.
Cane, A.
(1999, February 8). Nokia seizes top spot in mobile phones. Financial Times, Section 2, p. 22-22.
4.
Castle, S.
,& Butler, K. (1999, March 16). Europe in disarray as entire commission quits over report. The Independent, Section 1, p. 1-1.
5.
Chandler, A. D.
(1962). Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of the American industrial enterprise. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6.
Chandler, A. D.
(1990). Scale and scope: The dynamics of industrial capitalism. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
7.
Charlemagne: The Brussels lobbyist and the struggle for ear time
. (1998, August 15). The Economist, 348(8081), 42-42.
8.
Christensen, S.
(1996). The new federalism: Implications for corporate political activity. In J. M. Logdson (Ed.), International Association for Business and Society annual proceedings(pp. 195-199).
9.
Commission of the European Communities
. (1992). Treaty of Rome. European Commission Public Information Service.
10.
Commission of the European Union
. (1995). Treaty on European Union. European Commission Public Information Service.
11.
Cook, R. G.
, & Barry, D. (1995). Shaping the external environment: A study of small firms’ attempts to influence public policy. Business & Society, 34, 317-344.
12.
Dickie, R.
(1984). Influence of public affairs offices on corporate planning and of corporations on government policy. Strategic Management Journal, 5, 15-34.
13.
Diebold, W.
(1988). Bilateralism, multilateralism and Canada in U.S. trade policy. New York: Council on Foreign Relations.
14.
Doh, J.
(1996). The Quebec Sovereignty Referendum and U.S./Canada relations: A U.S. perspective. North American Outlook, 6, 43-52.
15.
Galbraith, J. K.
(1967). The new industrial state. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
16.
Government of Canada
. (1989). The Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. Ottawa, Canada: Ministry of Supply and Services.
17.
Griffin, J. J.
,& Lenn, D. J. (1998, June). Corporate public affairs: A cross-national comparison. Paper presented at the 9th Annual International Association of Business and Society Conference.
18.
Griffin, J. J.
, Shaffer, B., & Mahon, J. F. (1998). The “new federalism” and the devolution of power fromWashington: Determinants of business political activity at the state government level. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA.
19.
Hillman, A.
, & Keim, G. (1995). International variation in the business-government interface: Institutional and organizational considerations. Academy of Management Review, 20, 193-214.
20.
Italy: Watch that plough. (1996, August 24). The Economist, 39-40.
21.
Kaufman, A. M.
, Englander, E. J.,& Marcus, A. A. (1989). Structure and implementation in issues management: Transaction costs and agency theory. In L. Preston & J. Post (Eds.), Research in corporate social performance and policy 11(pp. 257-271). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
22.
Kennely, J. J.
, & Gladwin, T. M. (1995). Patterns and trends in the management of global public affairs. In D. Nigh& D. Collins (Eds.), International Association for Business and Society annual proceedings(pp. 255-260).
23.
Langlois, C. C.
,& Schlegelmilch, B. B. (1990). Do corporate codes of ethics reflect national character? Evidence from Europe and the United States. Journal of International Business Studies, 21, 519-539.
24.
Leading global standards
. (1999, June 18). Financial Times, p. 3-3.
25.
Lenn, J.
, Brenner, S., Burke, L., Dodd-McCue, D., Fleisher, C., Lad, L., Palmer, D., Rogers, K., Waddock, S.,& Wokutch, R. (1993). Managing corporate public affairs and government relations: U.S. multinational corporations in Europe. In J. E. Post (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy 14(pp. 103-108). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
26.
Lenway, S. A.
,& Murtha, T. (1994). The state as strategist in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 25, 513-535.
27.
Lindblom, C. E.
(1977). Politics and markets: The world’s political-economic systems. New York: Basic Books.
28.
Mahini, A.
, & Wells, L. T. (1986). Government relations in the global firm. In M. E. Porter (Ed.), Competition in global industries(pp. 291-312). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
29.
Meznar, M.
, & Johnson, J. (1996). Multinational operations and stakeholder management: Internationalization, public affairs strategies, and economic performance. In J. B. Keyes& L. N. Dosier (Eds), Academy of Management best paper proceedings(pp. 357-361).
30.
Meznar, M.
,& Nigh, D. (1993). Public affairs management in multinational corporations. A review and theoretical development. In J. Pasquero & D. Collins (Eds.), International Association for Business and Society annual proceedings(pp. 181-186).
31.
Meznar, M.
, & Nigh, D. (1995). Buffer or bridge? Environmental and organizational determinants of public affairs activities in American firms. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 975-996.
32.
Olson, M.
(1982). The rise and decline of nations. NewHaven, CT: Yale University Press.
33.
Porter, M. E.
(1990). The competitive advantage of nations. New York: Free Press.
34.
Post, J.
, Murray, E. A., Dickie, R., & Mahon, J. F. (1982). The public affairs function in American corporations: Development and relations with corporate planning. Long Range Planning, 15, 12-21.
35.
Prodi makes pre-vote address
. (1999, May 4). United Press International.
36.
Rugman, A. M.
,& Verbeke, A. (1990). Global corporate strategy and trade policy. London: Routledge.
37.
Schuler, D.
(1996). Corporate political strategy and foreign competition: The case of the steel industry. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 720-737.
38.
Stopford, J. M.
,& Wells, L. T. (1972). Managing the multinational enterprise: Organization of the firm and ownership of the subsidiaries. New York: Basic Books.
39.
Survey—FT telecommunications review
. (1999, June 9). Financial Times, p. 7-7.
40.
U.S. Government
. (1994). North American Free Trade Agreement: Implementing bill, statement of administrative action and required support statement. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
41.
Vernon, R.
(1971). Sovereignty at bay: The multinational spread of U.S. enterprises. New York: Basic Books.
42.
Vogel, D. J.
(1996). The study of business and politics. California Management Review, 38, 146-158.
43.
Weidenbaum, M.
(1980). Public policy: No longer a spectator sport for business. Journal of Business Strategy, 1, 46-53.
44.
Windsor, D.
, & Preston, L. (1997). The rules of the game in the global economy(2nd ed.). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
45.
Yoffie, D.
(Ed.). (1993). Beyond free trade: Firms, governments and global competition. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
