This chapter shows that the use of bribery and corruption was a well-established multinational strategy over a long period. A striking number of ostensibly respectable industry leaders have engaged in grand corruption. Armaments and commodity trading were particularly prone to corruption, and the practice appears to be particularly prevalent in Africa. Grand corruption arose especially when business involved large contracts with governments. Bribery was fueled by the pervasiveness of corruption in the host economies in which multinationals operated, but the multinationals were active agents in facilitating corruption. The practice of bribery and corruption by multinationals was often the result of miscreant corporate cultures rather than rogue individuals. Governments were often permissive of corrupt practices by their multinationals, especially in Europe where bribes were tax deductible until recent years.

This chapter studies the historical evolution of the relationship between multinationals and dictatorial regimes. The chapter covers the first global economy (1860s–1930s), World War II, the Cold War (1948–1989), and the post–Cold War authoritarianism (1989–2010s) and shows that dictatorial regimes and foreign multinationals supported each other when the dictators’ political and economic agendas converged with the multinationals’ corporate goals. When these agendas stopped converging or if the multinationalss did not generate economic growth or political stability, the dictators were willing to violate existing contracts regardless of ideological affinities with the foreign investors. Moreover, multinationals were not passive actors in regime change processes that brought dictators to power, but actively promoted coups and legitimized post-coup dictatorial regimes when the previous democratic regime threatened their operations. The early twenty first century witnessed the rise of multinationals originating in dictatorial regimes, which adds a layer of complexity to these dynamics.

This chapter presents an overview of the ways in which multinationals have been enmeshed with notions of imperialism in India. It outlines the significance of the English East India Company in shaping interpretations of multinational-related imperialism in India and the divergent perceptions and strategies of British and non-British multinationals in colonial India. Independent India’s tryst with multinationals and the perceptions of Indian multinationals since the mid twentieth century are also explored and the chapter shows the interconnections between multinationals and imperialism that can be valid for other regions as well.

This chapter analyzes the dynamics of political bargaining among a firm’s internal stakeholders and the role of the virtues in addressing structural injustices that inhibit human flourishing, particularly among low-skilled employees subject to exploitative wages and discretionary managerial control. In such environments, workers may cultivate “virtues of resistance” that support practices of mutual aid, adaptive work strategies, and value articulation. These mechanisms partially mitigate the harms of organizational injustice and enhance political agency. Because these virtues are frequently “burdened,” insofar as their development and expression occur under conditions that compromise their connection to human flourishing, there is an obligation for managers to mitigate these injustices, a problem that has been largely overlooked within market ethics. Accordingly, the chapter – and the book – concludes by examining how the virtues of justice, respect, courage, and practical wisdom can inform managerial action aimed at redressing workplace injustice and promoting modes of organizational life that foster moral development or Bildung.

In this chapter, we argue that human flourishing and the virtues are constitutive norms of human agency, thereby grounding virtue ethics in action theory. Building on Chapter 1’s critique of the Market Failure Approach, we argue that human action cannot be understood solely through instrumental rationality, as Humeans maintain. Instead, we contend that human flourishing – the harmonious pursuit of intrinsically valuable goods – is the constitutive aim of agency. Since the cardinal virtues of temperance, courage, justice, and practical wisdom are essential to achieving flourishing, they function as constitutive standards of action. We show how practical wisdom enables agents to apply virtue concepts in concrete situations, unifying the demands of diverse virtues and resolving conflicts between incommensurable goods. Responding to critics of virtue ethics, including Kantians and situationists, we defend a substantive conception of practical reason that is sensitive to context. This chapter lays the foundation for the market virtues framework developed in Chapter 3 and throughout the book by articulating how agents flourish in market contexts – through virtuous, mutually beneficial exchange.

This chapter explores how multinationals were both embedded in gender norms and actively shaped representations of masculinity, femininity, and domesticity. Multinationals influenced gender roles through the products they marketed to male and female consumers, their gendered labor organization in production sites and company towns, and their hiring practices, which either expanded or restricted opportunities for women. Rather than following a single pattern, multinationals often created hybrid systems, adapting to local gender norms. Through case studies on household technologies – such as Singer sewing machines and Tupperware – and consumer and cultural products – such as Barbie, cosmetics, films, and gendered labor structures in company towns and managerial hierarchies – the chapter highlights multinationals as “gender accomplices.” It examines the factors that led them to reinforce rather than challenge existing norms, shedding light on their role in both maintaining and shaping gendered social structures.

This chapter introduces and explains the concept of market virtues – role-differentiated traits that enable agents to act well in market contexts – by building on the neo-Aristotelian framework introduced in Chapter 2. In response to the practical limitations of the Market Failure Approach (MFA), we elaborate the ideal of eudaimonic efficiency, which defines good transactions as those that enhance human flourishing without unjustly harming others. While cardinal virtues like justice and practical wisdom remain essential, they must be adapted to the unique norms of market institutions. We argue that market virtues such as honesty, trustworthiness, respect, and competitiveness not only mitigate market failures but also facilitate mutual benefit in ways that go beyond the MFA’s imperatives. Drawing on the work of Bruni and Sugden (2008; 2013), we defend markets as sites of moral formation, countering critics who view them as corrosive to virtue. We also address concerns about instrumentalism and the adversarial nature of markets. Ultimately, we argue that market virtues are both necessary for sustaining eudaimonic efficiency and constitutive of human flourishing within a market society, enabling individuals to constitute themselves as agents through virtuous participation in economic life.

This chapter examines the evolving relationship between multinationals and taxation, highlighting the historical dynamics of tax planning, avoidance, and regulation. The history of multinationals and taxation is marked by ongoing tensions between corporate strategies, state interests, and international regulatory efforts. From the nineteenth century onward national tax systems – initially designed for domestic economies – struggled to adapt. Early tax policies varied, with some countries taxing companies based on residence and others taxing based on the source of income. By the interwar period, rising corporate tax rates and concerns over double taxation led multinationals to develop sophisticated tax planning strategies. The post–World War II era saw the proliferation of offshore financial centers, often in newly decolonized nations seeking investment. From the 1980s, globalization and financial deregulation intensified tax competition, enabling multinationals to shift profits and reduce tax liabilities. In response, international organizations have sought reforms, but tax arbitrage remains a persistent challenge and a key element of global capitalism.

In the debate on the impact of multinationals on society, the “labor question” has occupied a prominent role for many decades. Surveying this debate, the chapter starts by outlining the main challenges posed by multinationals, in particular with regard to their ability to continuously reshape their production geographies. The main part of the chapter addresses two core issues. First, it provides a literature survey on the labor impact of multinationals, distinguishing between the Global South where the impact of multinationals occurred in the wider context of colonialism and, later, decolonization, and the Global North where discussion of the “labor question” revolved around issues of offshoring and labor relations practices. In the second part, the chapter analyzes the role of organized labor (especially trade unions) in multinationals, placing equal emphasis on domestic strategies and efforts to establish transnational bodies for interest representation.

This chapter presents a neo-Aristotelian account of stakeholder deliberation, arguing that a range of virtues is needed to ensure that consensus among stakeholders with large power imbalances is based on trust and authentic deliberation rather than zero-sum competitive interactions. We identify three stylized phases of stakeholder deliberation that highlight how the need to cope with vulnerability drives interactions with other stakeholders that, in turn, foster the development of a range of deliberative virtues. In the first phase, involving the acknowledgment of dependence and vulnerability, the virtues of justice, mercy, and benevolence help mitigate stakeholder myopia by enabling weaker voices to be heard. In the second phase, involving the establishment of common ground, the virtue of benevolence plays a crucial role in overcoming differences in modes of discourse by creating trust and goodwill between stakeholders and preventing deliberative processes from devolving into merely self-interested posturing and negotiation. In the third phase, the virtues of justice, courage, honesty, and practical wisdom reduce the risk of decoupling, ensuring that deliberative processes promote the flourishing of diverse market actors.