This paper explores Chinese multinational corporations’ responses to trade unions in host countries. Using an in-depth case study analysis of the policies on union representation and union–management relations in six Chinese multinational corporations, this paper demonstrates that Chinese multinational corporations’ responses to host country unions are primarily shaped by home and host institutions, rational choices of firms, and organizational learning. It concludes that while rational choice and institutional theory, the two dominant lenses used in existing literature, are helpful in understanding the industrial relations practices in multinational corporations, they need to be supplemented with an organizational learning perspective in an analysis of industrial relation practices in multinational corporations from emerging markets.
Björkman I (2004) Transfer of HRM to MNC affiliates in Asia-Pacific. In: Budwar PS (ed.) Managing Human Resources in Asia Pacific. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 253–267.
2.
BucklyPJEndwickP (1985) The Industrial Relations Practices of Foreign-Owned Firms in Britain, London: The Macmillan Press Ltd.
3.
ChildJRodriguesSB (2005) The internationalization of Chinese firms: A case for theoretical extension?Management and Organization Review1(3): 381–410.
4.
CollierRBCollierD (1991) Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
5.
CookeWN (2003) Global human resource strategies: A framework and overview. In: CookeWN (ed.) Multinational Companies and Global Human Resource Strategies, London: Quorum Books, pp. 1–17.
6.
DiMaggioPPowellW (1983) The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review48(2): 147–160.
7.
EdwardsTCollingTFernerA (2007) Conceptual approaches to the transfer of employment practices in multinational companies: An integrated approach. Human Resource Management Journal17(3): 201–217.
8.
EdwardsTFernerA (2002) The renewed “American challenge”: A review of employment practice in US multinationals. Industrial Relations Journal33(2): 94–111.
9.
EisenhardtKM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review14(4): 532–550.
10.
FernerA (1997) Country of origin effects and HRM in multinational companies. Human Resource Management Journal7(1): 19–37.
11.
FernerAAlmondPCollingT (2005) Policies on union representation in US multinationals in the UK: Between micro-politics and macro-institutions. British Journal of Industrial Relations43(4): 703–728.
12.
FossNJPedersenT (2004) Organizing knowledge process in the multinational corporation: An introduction. Journal of International Business Studies35(5): 340–349.
13.
GeppertMWilliamsKMattenD (2003) The social construction of contextual rationalities in MNCs: An Anglo-German comparison of subsidiary choice. Journal of Managment Studies40(3): 617–641.
14.
GunniglePCollingsDGMorleyM (2005) Exploring the dynamics of industrial relations in US multinationals: Evidence from the Republic of Ireland. Industrial Relations Journal36(3): 241–256.
15.
HamillJ (1983) The labour relations practices of foreign-owned and indigenous firms. Employee Relations5(1): 14–16.
16.
Khavul S, Bruton G and Wood E (2007) Learning during and after internationalization by entrepreneurial firms from emerging economies. In: 67th Academy of Management Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, USA, 3–8 August 2007, pp. 1–6.
KogutBZanderU (1993) Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies24(4): 625–646.
19.
MathewsJA (2006) Dragon multinationals: New players in 21st century globalisation. Asia Pacific Journal of Management23(1): 5–27.
20.
MilesJHubermanAM (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
21.
MuellerM (1998) Human resource and industrial relations practices of UK and US multinationals in Germany. International Journal of Human Resource Management9(4): 732–749.
22.
RosenzweigPMSinghJV (1991) Organizational environments and the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review16(2): 340–361.
23.
SchmittMSadowskiD (2003) A cost-minimization approach to the international transfer of HRM/IR practices: Anglo-Saxon multinationals in the Federal Republic of Germany. International Journal of Human Resource Management14(3): 409–430.
24.
TharenouPDonohueRCooperB (2007) Management Research Methods, Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
25.
TurnerTD’ArtDGunnigleP (2002) Multi-national corporations: A challenge to European trade unions?Irish Journal of Management23(1): 125–141.
26.
TuselmannHJAllenMMCBarrettS (2008) Varieties and variability of employee relations approaches in US subsidiaries: Country-of-origin effects and the level and type of industry internationalisation. International Journal of Human Resource Management19(9): 1622–1635.
27.
WeverKS (1995) Negotiating Competitiveness – Employment Relations and Organizational Innovation in Germany and the United States, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
28.
WhitleyR (2001) How and why are international firms different? The consequences of cross-border managerial coordination for firm characteristics and behaviour. In: MorganGKristensenPHWhitleyR (eds) The Multinational Firm: Organizing Across Institutional and National Divides, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 27–68.
29.
XiX (2007) Chinese enterprises should be cautious about trade unions issues in the internationalization process. Human Resource Development and Management (renli ziyuan kaifa yu guanli)7: 6–9.
30.
YinRK (2009) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
