IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v6y1995i1p44-61.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Procedural Justice Model of Strategic Decision Making: Strategy Content Implications in the Multinational

Author

Listed:
  • W. Chan Kim

    (INSEAD, Boulevard de Constance, 77305 Fontainebleau Cedex, France)

  • Renée A. Mauborgne

    (INSEAD, Boulevard de Constance, 77305 Fontainebleau Cedex, France)

Abstract

How can a multinational formulate an effective global strategy? This paper attempts to address this question by assessing the effect of a procedural justice model of strategic decision making (Kim and Mauborgne [Kim, W. C., R. A. Mauborgne. 1991. Implementing global strategies: The role of procedural justice. Strategic Management J. 12 125--143.], [Kim, W. C., R. A. Mauborgne. 1993a. Procedural justice theory and the multinational corporation. S. Ghoshal, D. E. Westney, eds. Organization Theory and the Multinational Corporation . Macmillan, London, UK.]) on the multinational’s ability to formulate effective global strategies. There are five designing principles that define a procedural justice model of strategic decision making. These are: bilateral communication between the head office and subsidiary units; the subsidiary units’ ability to challenge and refute the strategic views of the head office; head office familiarity with the local situation of subsidiary units; a full account for the head office’s final strategic decisions; and application of consistent decision making procedures across subsidiary units. To examine the above effect, here we introduce information processing as an intervening concept to assess the match between the information processing requirements of multinationals’ global strategic objectives and the information processing capabilities provided by the proposed procedural justice model of strategic decision making. Here multinationals’ global strategic objectives are defined as global learning, the balancing of global efficiency and local responsiveness, global strategic renewal, and rapid global strategic decision making. The underlying assumption in this analysis is that if the dimensions of procedural justice facilitate the kinds of strategic information necessary to achieve the multinational’s global strategic objectives, the exercise of procedural justice can be judged to have a salutary effect on the content of global strategies. The results of this study, which are based on the experiences of 63 global strategic decision units, provide support for the effectiveness of this model of strategic decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • W. Chan Kim & Renée A. Mauborgne, 1995. "A Procedural Justice Model of Strategic Decision Making: Strategy Content Implications in the Multinational," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 44-61, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:6:y:1995:i:1:p:44-61
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.6.1.44
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.6.1.44
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.6.1.44?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dooms, E., 2005. "Control in multidivisional firms : Levels issues and internal differentiation," Other publications TiSEM bc7c1906-d54c-46e5-9d8e-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. D. Charles Galunic & Erin Anderson, 2000. "From Security to Mobility: Generalized Investments in Human Capital and Agent Commitment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, February.
    3. Tihanyi, Laszlo & Thomas, Wayne B., 2005. "Information-processing demands and the multinational enterprise: a comparison of foreign and domestic earnings estimates," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 285-292, March.
    4. Irene Pluchinotta & Akin O. Kazakçi & Raffaele Giordano & Alexis Tsoukiàs, 2019. "Design Theory for Generating Alternatives in Public Decision Making Processes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 341-375, April.
    5. Haiyang Li & John B. Bingham & Elizabeth E. Umphress, 2007. "Fairness from the Top: Perceived Procedural Justice and Collaborative Problem Solving in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 200-216, April.
    6. Splitter, Violetta, 2019. "Balancing continuity and novelty: The practical relevance of management research from the practitioners' perspective," SocArXiv v4su8, Center for Open Science.
    7. J Bryant & J Darwin & C Booth, 2011. "Strategy making with the whole organisation: OR and the art of the possible," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(5), pages 840-854, May.
    8. Markus Kreutzer & Jorge Walter & Laura B. Cardinal, 2015. "Organizational control as antidote to politics in the pursuit of strategic initiatives," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(9), pages 1317-1337, September.
    9. Busenitz, Lowell W. & Fiet, James O. & Moesel, Douglas D., 2004. "Reconsidering the venture capitalists' "value added" proposition: An interorganizational learning perspective," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 787-807, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:6:y:1995:i:1:p:44-61. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.