**7. Conclusions**

It takes two to make a quarrel but it takes many to either commit or combat corruption. This is evident from the above cases where the involvement of different parties from different organisations bought about the unethical practices.

The HR actions are almost the same for any bribery practices. However, these HR actions need to be applied in a concerted way across different organisations to combat corruption successfully. In this chapter, the issue has been discussed mainly from the HRM perspective of MNCs. However, it should be borne in mind that MNCs represent only one party in the game. Thus, the HRM of MNCs is not self-sufficient to combat corruption.

In the above case of bribery practices, we have seen that the boundary of law begins where the boundary of ethics ends. Thus, it is the Hamletian dilemma or decision to behave ethically or not is where HRM can exert its influence in the form of a positive check.

### **8. Recommended strategies**


take into account and must assess the personal integrity, morality, etc. of the founder and/or the heads of the organisations in granting license to set up a business, to raise funds from the market or to operate overseas. This can be done through a due diligence process.


### **9. Implementation mechanism**

The implementation of the strategy to combat corruption requires the concerted effort of different organisations.

In most of the cases of bribery practices of MNCs in the host countries, three parties are mainly involved, viz., the MNC, the host country government, and an intermediary. In the Halliburton case, UPB Geneva, HSBC Monaco, and Swiss bank acted as financial intermediaries to transfer funds from the donor to the recipient ([11, 18] at 6). In the case of Scancem, Unibank SA Luxembourg and Barclays Bank SA in Geneva, Switzerland acted as the intermediary [31].

A model may be used in combating corruption that involves the three parties working together for deploying a positive check mechanism by which HRM of those organisations can promote positive mediating forces that will create a culture of bottom-up pressure in the organisation and will compel the top executives to behave in an ethical way. Usually, banks are not actively involved in the transactions, rather they are facilitators of transactions.

Let us know about the mechanism with the help of an analogy. It is like a soccer game. The ball may be thought of as the ethics. Organisations are like teams playing with ethics with several members. The CEO of MNC or the Prime Minister of the host country acts as the captain and the Chairman or President acts as the coach. The activities of the organisations are constantly monitored by several referees, such as Banks, Transparency International (TI). Any player playing foul with ethics will be warned by the referee through institutional whistleblowing. Thus, a system of check and balance will be established through the mechanism. The model becomes effective only when the referees are granted authority and power to rule over the MNCs and governments.

The three parties can be brought together with the help of a tripartite HR alliance. The HR departments of the three organisations may develop necessary mechanisms to make the alliance effective. They will jointly carry out various HR initiatives identified above in the three organisations to promote positive mediating factors to combat corruption.

The implementation model is explained below with the help of a diagram (**Figure 2**).

*Bribery Practices of Three MNCs in the Host Countries: An Examination of the Issue from HRM… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.104810*

**Figure 2.** *Model for implementing recommended strategies.*
