business & international development

ESC-M5-STR-26-E-L-BOD#3

BUSINESS & INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Semester 1, 2016 – 2017

COORDINATOR Dr Ralf Barkemeyer

PROFESSORS Dr Ralf Barkemeyer

OFFICE 1428

TELEPHONE 055684 6312

E-MAIL [email protected]

OFFICE HOURS By appointment

COURSE DELIVERABLE DUE DATE WEIGHT ON

FINAL GRADE

Two multiple-choice tests

(individual) Sessions #5 and #9 10%

Student presentation (group

work) Sessions #2 to #9 40%

Participation in class

(individual) - 10%

Final Examination

(individual written exam) Session #10 40%

Kedge Business School and its professors, encourage you to use your Pro-Acts,

company projects and internships as privileged opportunities to apply the reflexions,

theories, concepts and tools presented during this course

2

Business & International Development

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Course Purpose & Objectives

In recent years, businesses have increasingly become influential actors in the

context of international development. Unilever help to generate rural entrepreneurs in

India; Pfizer have improved access to prescription medicine in Sub-Saharan Africa;

Daimler actively support the fight against HIV/AIDS in Sub-Saharan Africa; and

numerous companies publicly address the widespread problem of corruption throughout

their operations.

In this module, we will explore why and how companies have started to address

international development objectives as part of their CSR activities, and critically discuss

strengths and limitations of these approaches. The first part of the module will focus on the

state of international development and the nature of some of the key challenges faced in

this context. We will then explore key concepts – such as corporate citizenship and

political CSR – based on the analysis of specific cases in which companies have started to

address challenges such as corruption, human rights violations or HIV/AIDS. Finally, we

will critically discuss strengths and limitations of CSR and international development in

the context of governance for sustainable development.

Courses contribution to program objectives

KM4: Apply high standards of Integrity, Ethics and Social Responsibility

The private sector – and in particular large multinational companies – has become a

major player in international development. Companies are increasingly expected to

contribute to international development goals, either through their corporate social

responsibility and corporate sustainability initiatives or quite simply through their core

business activities. As such, corporate social responsibility and international development

are inextricably linked. This development has attracted considerable amounts of both

praise and criticism. MNCs are often seen as both the cause of and solution for

development challenges such as poverty, corruption or the depletion of environmental

resources.

Participants will get critical insights into how companies affect and are affected by

development challenges. At the same time, participants will learn how about the different

motivations of companies to address international development objectives. Crucially, the

course provides students with the analytical mindset to understand and analyze corporate

social responsibility activities in the context of international development.

KM5: Demonstrate critical thinking and the Ability to Perform in a Culturally

Diverse Environment

CSR, international development and sustainable development are broad, normative

and essentially contested concepts. Both international development and sustainable

development can be characterized as ‘wicked problems’ for which no immediate solutions

are available. A range of good practice and worst practice examples exist in the area of

3


business & development, at times focusing on the same companies that are simultaneously

portrayed as responsible corporate citizen and accused of irresponsible conduct.

The multi-facetted nature of international development and the various ways in

which the private sector is linked to development challenges are to varying degrees

subjective and context-specific. Cultural differences play a crucial role in what constitutes

corporate responsibility in a given national context. The course provides students with the

necessary conceptual basis and mindset to critically analyze corporate contributions to

international development regarding their substance and sincerity. The course is designed

and held in a way to encourage critical analysis and discussion of both conceptual and

practical perspectives on corporate contributions to sustainable development.

Course description

The State of Development; Business & International Development; Poverty

Alleviation; Infectious Diseases; Anti-corruption; Environmental Sustainability; the Role

of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives; CSR in the Context of Global Governance.

COURSE MATERIAL

Presentations, Cases and Exercises

The slides being used for presentations by both the professor as well as in student

presentations are being provided to the course participants through Campus Virtuel. The

same applies to the necessary background material for exercises and cases.

Core Readings

For each session, a number of papers are required as core readings. These papers

are available for download as PDF files via Campus Virtuel. The presentations, discussions

and applications of each session build on these core readings. The following documents are

required as core readings:

Session 1: The State of Development

1. Hart, S. L. 1997. Beyond greening: Strategies for a sustainable world. Harvard

Business Review, 75(1): 66-76.

2. WCED (Ed.). 1987. Our Common Future: The World Commission on Environment

and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Session 2: Business & International Development

1. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. 2011. Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business

Review, 89(1/2), 62-77.

2. Clay, J. 2005. Exploring the Links between International Business and Poverty

Reduction: A Case Study of Unilever in Indonesia. An Oxfam GB, Novib, Unilever,

4


and Unilever-Indonesia joint research project, Oxford: Oxfam GB, Novib Oxfam

Netherlands and Unilever.

3. Barkemeyer, R., & Figge, F. 2011. Fordlândia: Corporate Citizenship or Corporate

Colonialism, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 19(2),

69-78.

Session 3: Business & Development – Poverty Alleviation

1. Prahalad, C. K., & Hart, S. 2002. The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid. Strategy +

Business, 26(1): 55-67.

2. Jenkins, R. 2005. Globalization, Corporate Social Responsibility and Poverty.

International Affairs, 81(3): 525-540.

Session 4: Business & Development – Infectious Diseases

1. Matten, D., & Crane, A. 2005. Corporate Citizenship: Toward an Extended Theoretical

Conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1): 166-179.

2. Arndt, C., & Lewis, J. D. 2000. The macro implications of HIV/AIDS in South Africa:

a preliminary assessment. South African Journal of Economics, 68(5), 380-392.

Session 5: Business & Development: Child Labour

1. Kolk, A., & Van Tulder, R. 2004. Ethics in international business: multinational

approaches to child labor. Journal of World Business, 39(1), 49-60.

2. Lund-Thomsen, P., & Nadvi, K. 2010. Clusters, chains and compliance: corporate

social responsibility and governance in football manufacturing in South Asia. Journal

of Business Ethics, 93(2), 201-222.

Session 6: Business & Development: Anti-Corruption

1. Doh, J. P., Rodriguez, P., Uhlenbruck, K., Collins, J., & Eden, L. 2003. Coping with

corruption in foreign markets. Academy of Management Executive, 17(3): 114-127.

2. Donaldson, T. 1996. Values in Tension: Ethics Away from Home. Harvard Business

Review, 74(5): 48-62.

3. Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. 1999. When ethics travel: the promise and perils of

global business ethics. California Management Review, 41(4): 45-63.

4. Husted, B. W., & Allen, D. B. 2006. Corporate social responsibility in the

multinational enterprise: strategic and institutional approaches, Journal of International

Business Studies, 37, 838-849.

Session 7: Business & Development: Environmental Sustainability

1. Ruud, A. 2002. Environmental management of transnational corporations in India- are

TNCs creating islands of environmental excellence in a sea of dirt? Business Strategy

and the Environment, 11(2), 103-118.

5


2. Barkemeyer, R., Holt, D., Preuss, L., & Tsang, S. 2014. What happened to the

‘development’ in sustainable development? Business guidelines two decades after

Brundtland. Sustainable Development, 22(1), 15-32.

Session 8: The Role of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives

1. Kolk, A., & van Tulder, R. 2006. Poverty alleviation as business strategy? Evaluating

commitments of frontrunner Multinational Corporations. World Development, 34(5):

789.

2. Ruggie, J. G. 2002. The theory and practice of learning networks. Journal of Corporate

Citizenship, 2002(5), 27-36.

3. Barkemeyer, R. 2009. Beyond Compliance - Below Expectations? CSR in the Context

of International Development. Business Ethics: A European Review, 18(3): 273-289.

Session 9: CSR in the Context of Global Governance

1. Schepers, D. H. 2006. The Impact of NGO Network Conflict on the Corporate Social

Responsibility Strategies of Multinational Corporations. Business and Society, 45(3):

282.

2. Utting, P. 2005. Corporate responsibility and the movement of business. Development

in practice, 15(3-4), 375-388.

3. Finkelstein, L. S. 1995. What is Global Governance? Global Governance, 1(3): 367-

372.

4. Barkemeyer, R. & Figge, F. 2014. Corporate social responsibility in the context of

multiple environments: The impact of headquartering. Critical Perspectives on

International Business, 10(3), 124-151.

SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS

Supplementary readings for every topic and every session will be provided.

Alongside with a detailed description of the expected contents and topics of the student

presentation and for each section a list of complementary sources and papers are being

made available for the students through Campus Virtuel. However, it is also expected that

students conduct their own research for relevant sources and readings for their

presentations.

6


COURSE CONTENTS AND TIMETABLE

SESSIONS TOPIC READINGS AND CASES STUDENT

PRESENTATIONS MCQs

#1, Day1

morning

Introduction to module;

The State of

Development

See list of core readings for

session #1 above. -

#2, Day 1

afternoon

Business &

International

Development


session #2 above;

Case: Ford Motors in the

Amazon

Porter & Kramer

(2011)

#3, Day 2

morning

Business &

Development: Poverty

Alleviation


session #3 above;

Case: Unilever Project

Shakti

Prahalad & Hart

(2002)

#4, Day 2

afternoon

Business &

Development:

Infectious Diseases


session #4 above;

Case: Sleeping Sickness

Matten & Crane

(2005)

#5, Day 3

morning

Business &

Development: Child

Labour


session #5 above;

Case: Child Labour in

Sialkot

Lund-Thomsen &

Nadvi (2010)

MCQ on

topics from

sessions 1-4

#6, Day 3

afternoon

Business &

Development: Anti-

Corruption


session #6 above;

Case: Corruption in the

Construction Sector

Donaldson (1996)

#7, Day 4

Morning

Business &

Development:

Environmental

Sustainability


session #7 above;

Video: Darwin’s Nightmare

Ruud (2002)

#8, Day 4

afternoon

The Role of Multi-

Stakeholder Initiatives


session #8 above;

Case: UN Global Compact

Kolk & van Tulder

(2006)

#9, Day 5

morning

CSR in the Context of

Global Governance


session #9 above;

Video: Mine Your Own

Business

Schepers (2006)

MCQ on

topics from

sessions 5-8

#10, Day 5

afternoon Final Exam - -


TEACHING APPROACH/ INSTRUCTIONAL METHODS

A Word of Advice

Reading is an essential exercise in social sciences. The core readings are thus

essential and indispensable for the course. However, reading is only the basis. Only critical

thinking and discussion of the readings, presentations, and exercises will bring students to

a higher level of understanding and skills. Students are thus advised to read the core

sources but also to use their intellectual and critical capacities in order to develop and

substantiate an own point of view.

Organization of the sessions

This course is organised in a 1-week format with two sessions of 3h hours in the

morning and in the afternoon, respectively, on five consecutive days.

In sessions #1 and #2 on Day 1 students will be provided with an overview of

current international development challenges as well as the role of business in addressing

international development goals. Students will be familiarized with key concepts and

theories in this context such as corporate social responsibility, corporate citizenship and

shared value. In addition, we will discuss key drivers for the private sector to get involved

in international development efforts.

Sessions #3 - #9 follow a modular design. In the sessions #3 - #7, students will be

introduced to specific international development challenges and corporate efforts to

contribute to international development goals. Session #8 focuses on the role of multi-

stakeholder initiatives in the context of business & international development. In session

#9 we will explore the link between corporate social responsibility and global governance

more generally. In particular, we will critically discuss strengths and limitations of

voluntary, beyond compliance CSR activities from the perspective of global governance.

In all of these sessions, short lectures introducing the key issues as well as related key

academic concepts will be complemented by a number of case studies, video

documentaries and student presentations.

In session #10, the final written exam will be held. Throughout the module, we will

review the content covered in this module and students will have the chance to ask

questions regarding this final written exam.

Individual Assignments

Class exercises and cases and class participation 10%

Class participation of students in exercises and discussions represents 10% of the

final grade.


Multiple choice questionnaires (MCQs) 10%

There are two MCQs worth each 5% of the final grade; they have to be answered

individually during 10 minutes. MCQs serve to control learning progress during the course.

No documents are allowed for answering the MCQs.

Final written exam

Each student has to pass an individual final written exam of 180 minutes worth

40% of the final grade. Notes and other material are allowed during the examination.

Exams can cover all topics treated in the course and typically combine questions and

exercises of different styles such as multiple choice questions, short cases and short essay-

style questions.

Group work

In-class group presentation

There will also be a student group presentation accounting for 40% of the final

grade. Each group of students will be asked to present one academic paper (selected from

the key readings). Groups and academic papers will be allocated via Campus Virtuel at the

start of the academic year. Students of each group are expected to collaborate and to

coordinate their joint work. Presentations should take around 15 minutes and will be

followed by a class discussion (10-15 minutes) led by the group of presenting students.

The aim is to provide fellow students with an overview of the academic paper and its key

findings and contribution.

EVALUATION OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE

DELIVERABLE %

Two multiple choice questionnaires (5% each) 10%

Individual participation in class 10%

Group presentation 40%

Final exam 40%

TOTAL 100%

Methods Used to Evaluate Student Performance

Individual Assignments (60%)


Multiple choice questionnaires (10%)

There are two MCQs (session #5 and session #9) covering topics from sessions 1-4

and 5-8, respectively. Each MCQ consists of five blocks on one particular topic containing

five statements on the respective topic. Students need to indicate for each statement if the

statement is true or false. The grading follows the criteria shown in the table below.

Exceeds expectations Meets expectations Below expectations

1) Multiple choice

questions

All five statements per

topic correctly

answered

Not more than one

error on the five

statements per topic

Two or more errors

on the five statements

per topic

For every block of statements 2 points can be earned so that overall a maximum of

10 points can be reached. If there is one incorrect answer in a block of statements 1 point

will be deducted, if there are two incorrect answers in a block 1.5 point will be deducted.

Three or more incorrect answers yield 0 points. No documents are allowed for answering

the MCQs, and students have 10 minutes time to answer the MCQs. The MCQs are graded

individually.

Individual participation in class exercises, discussions and cases (10%)

Students’ individual participation in practical exercises, cases and discussions in

class will be graded individually. Class participation will be graded according to the

following elements:

Exceeds

expectations

Meets expectations Below expectations

1) Participation in

class discussions

Frequently; mostly

with valuable

comments and

questions

At least

occasionally; some

valuable comments

and questions

Never; no valuable

comments and

questions

2) Participation and

in-class group

work

Active; taking the

lead

Passive; following

others

Counterproductive

3) Presence Skipped no session

without legitimate

excuse

Not more than 2

sessions skipped

without legitimate

excuse

Skipped more than 2

sessions without

legitimate excuse

4) Showing up late Almost never Only occasionally Frequently

5) Disruptive

behaviour

Almost never Only occasionally Frequently


Final written exam (40%)

Each student has to pass an individual final written exam of 180 minutes worth

40% of the final grade. Notes and other material are allowed during the examination.

Exams can cover all topics treated in the course and typically combine questions and

exercises of different styles such as multiple choice questions, short cases and/or exercises.

The written exams will be graded individually.

The final exam is graded according to the following criteria:

Exceeds expectations Meets expectations Below expectations

1) Multiple choice

questions

All five statements per

topic correctly answered

Not more than one error on

the five statements per

topic

Two or more errors on the five

statements per topic

2) Case questions

Content Balanced and

comprehensive

presentation of relevant

information; fully on topic

of question

Information reasonably

reflects the most important

aspects; no major

omissions; answer mainly

on topic

Information does not support

the question; important

information or aspects

missing; answer not on topic,

confusing

Use of concepts

and theories

Evidence of full

understanding and

thorough use of theories

and concepts

Basic understanding and

valid use of theories and

concepts

Insufficient understanding

and/or erroneous use of

theories and concepts

Transfer of

analytical

concepts to case

Detailed and precise

application of analytical

criteria to the case

Most important analytical

criteria identified and

applied to the case

Absence of transfer or flawed

application of analytical

criteria to the case

Quality of

analysis and

conclusion

Strong evidence of critical

thinking; own conclusions

based on thorough;

thoughtful and balanced

line of argument

Some evidence of critical

reasoning; line of

argument without major

contradictions or flaws;

argument not overly one-

sided, some evidence of

balance

Answer inconclusive; little or

no evidence of critical

thinking; inconsistent line of

argument; one-sided

argument; analysis is vague,

too general or confusing

In-class presentation (40%)

Each student is part of a group that is required to give a presentation on one of the

key readings for this module. Presentations will typically be at the start at each of the

individual sessions (#2 to #9). Presentations should take around 15 minutes and will be

followed by a class discussion (10-15 minutes) led by the group of presenting students.

The aim is to provide fellow students with an overview of the academic paper and its key

findings and contribution. It is expected that the students undertake some additional

research for relevant material. The group presentation in class is worth 40% of the final

grade. All group members receive the same grade on the group work. This reflects the need

and responsibility of each group member to contribute to an efficient functioning and

coordination of the group – a situation that is typical for future professional situations as

managers in teams.


The group presentations are graded according to the following criteria:

Rubric Exceeds expectations Meets expectations Below expectations

Opening

statement and

overview

Clear opening statement, presenting issues

and the organization of the presentation,

catching audience’s interest and attention

Opening statement presenting the key

issues and structure of the presentation

No opening statement or no overview on

the presentation and topic given

Non-verbal and

verbal delivery

Did not read from notes and/or other

supports; clearly engaged audience

through consistent eye contact and

gestures; responsive to audience reaction;

Voice varied in pitch, volume, rate, and

emphasis; appropriate enthusiasm; free of

fillers (ahs, uhms, ers); highly effective

articulation and pronunciation; innovative

presentation mode or media use

Referred occasionally to notes and/or

audio visual materials; engaged audience

through eye contact and gestures; aware

of audience reaction; some variation in

pitch, volume, rate, and emphasis; some

fillers (ahs, uhms, ers); effective

articulation and pronunciation; adequate

use of media.

Only read directly from notes or other

supports; no or little audience awareness

and interaction; distracting mannerism;

little variation in pitch, volume or rate;

distracting presentation style; insufficient

media support.

Material Content highly specific, credible, relevant,

sufficient, interesting; evidence supported

topic; connection between support and

main points is clear; sources and

references of all materials used in the

presentation are comprehensively

provided in detail, including reference list

with no or very few errors.

Content adequately specific, credible,

relevant, sufficient, interesting; lacked

support for some points; sources and

references of most important materials

used in the presentation are provided.

Content not specific, credible, relevant,

sufficient, or interesting; ideas not

supported; no or very few sources of

materials used in the presentation are

provided.

Completeness of

topic

All aspects treated comprehensively in

great detail; illustration and treatment of

links between different aspects of the

topic

All major aspects of the topic treated in

sufficient detail.

Major omissions in the presentation,

important aspects of the topic missing,

incomplete or superficial treatment of the

problem

Logical

coherence of the

argument

Argument fully coherent and strongly

interlinked; meticulous build-up of the

line of argument; assumptions clearly

stated and reflected

Main line of argument consistent and

logical, no major contradictions; evidence

of a logical build-up of the different parts

of the presentation; no bold or

Argument incoherent or contradictory, no

or little logical flow; different parts of the

presentation did not build on each other;

bold or problematic (implicit)


problematic (implicit) assumptions assumptions

Rubric Exceeds expectations Meets expectations Below expectations

Organization

and structure of

the argument

Arrangement of ideas clearly related to

topic; well organized with introduction,

body, conclusion; good transitions

Conveyed the central ideas of the topic;

most information presented in logical

structure; adequate introduction, body,

conclusion; adequate transitions.

Had little or no focus on central idea or

topic; no or poorly developed structure;

introduction, body, or conclusion not well

developed and connected; lacked

transitions

Quality of

analysis

Approach and structure highly consistent

with overall purpose; strong evidence of

critical thinking; own conclusions based

on own research, strong evidence of own

ideas

Approach and structure consistent with

overall purpose; some evidence of critical

thinking; own conclusions developed;

some critical reflection of existing

materials

Approach and structure inconsistent with

overall purpose; little or no evidence of

critical thinking; no own conclusions,

pure repetition of existing materials

Professionalism

(double weight)

Presentation prepared very carefully;

exceeds standards; strong evidence of

proper interest in the tasks and topics

based on own research; evidence of in-

depth interaction and collaboration of

group members

Presentation prepared correctly; standards

respected; tasks have been seriously

researched and addressed; evidence of

coordination and collaboration of group

members

Presentation prepared superficially;

standards not respected; tasks have not

been taken serious enough; evident lack of

coordination and collaboration of group

members

Quality of

questions for

discussion

Correct number of questions for

discussion; questions building on

presentation and stimulating critical

debate of the topic with the audience;

questions reflect detailed understanding of

the topic

Correct number of questions for

discussion; questions building on

presentation and offering some further

thought; questions interesting and

adequate for the audience

No or not enough questions for

discussion; questions purely repetitive

compared to the presentation or

completely unrelated to presentation;

questions not interesting or inadequate for

the audience


BIOGRAPHY

Ralf Barkemeyer is an Associate Professor of Corporate Social Responsibility at

KEDGE Business School (Bordeaux). Ralf joined KEDGE in early 2015 from the

University of Leeds (UK) where he had been lecturing since 2010. Before, he worked as

Research Fellow and Lecturer at Queen’s University Belfast, Northern Ireland, from where

he received his PhD. Ralf received two Master degrees in Environmental Science as well

as Business Administration from the University of Lüneburg (Germany).

Ralf’s research focuses on the interface of business, environment and society. In

particular, he is interested in the link between CSR and development; corporate

sustainability reporting; and corporate sustainability performance assessment. Ralf is a

Fellow of the Higher Education Academy and Associate Editor of the academic journal

Business Ethics: European Review as well as a permanent editorial board member of the

journals Business Strategy & the Environment and Management of Environmental Quality.

In addition, he serves as an ad-hoc reviewer for numerous other academic journals. Ralf

has published widely, among others in journals such as Journal of World Business,

Ecological Economics, Nature Climate Change, Business Ethics Quarterly, Resources

Policy, Business Strategy and the Environment, and Environmental Science and Policy.

His research has been funded by funding bodies such as UN Global Mechanism, the

European Commission or the Swedish Mistra Foundation, but also by companies such as

ASDA and BMW.


ACADEMIC FRAUD

Definition

Academic fraud is a breach of ethics.

“Is achieved using unfair means or deception, to obtain material or undue moral

advantage, or with the intent to avoid the enforcement of laws”. (Translated from the

original source: Dictionnaire Juridique des Lois, 2010, available at: www.dictionnaire-

juridique.com/definition/fraude/php)

Plagiarism consists of attributing authorship by (partial or total) copying, imitation

or misappropriation.

The act of fraud is committed by one or more students/participants when they:

appropriate written or oral work to themselves when they are not the author (in

whole or in part) of the work, by omitting any references or quotations to the

author or to the owner of the work;

present any data that has been falsified or invented in any way;

use the identity of the author, attributing the contents of and/or a resource to

him/her, but without explicitly mentioning that they are not the author;

appropriate the creative work of someone else and present it as their own;

acquire exerts of texts, images, results etc. from external sources by including

them in their own work without mentioning the origins of the exerts;

summarise the original idea of an author by expressing it in their own words

but omit quoting the source;

cheat in an academic evaluation.

Plagiarism can occur in:

an academic article or book;

an exercise or a case study;

a study or a report;

a dissertation or a thesis;

any document of which the student/participant is not, but purports to be the

author.

Sanctions

Any student/participant having committed academic fraud, or having participated in

it, will be sanctioned by the professor in charge of the course. The professor can apply 1st

and 2nd level sanctions (detailed below). The professor will send a copy of the sanction to

the student’s/participant’s programme. The student/participant will be informed/and or

convoked by the programme director (or his/her representative) to a hearing prior to the

possible convening of the Kedge Business School Disciplinary Council. In the case of a

hearing of the Disciplinary Council, they can decide to apply 3rd and 4th level of sanctions.

Any student/participant guilty of academic fraud will receive one of the following

sanctions:


Applied by the professor in charge of the course, Kedge Business School

faculty member (1st and 2nd level):

o A grade of zero for the work concerned and a formal warning;

o A grade of zero for the course or module concerned and a formal warning.

Applied by Kedge Business School’s Disciplinary Council (3rd and 4th level):

o Suspension from the programme for one or two semesters;

o Exclusion from the programme.

N.B.: Plagiarism within a partner institution can result in these sanctions being applied by

Kedge Business School, notwithstanding partner’s decision.

business & international development

Documents