Sustainability is an important topic in supply chain management research and practice. For buying firms, one of the most pressing challenges associated with sustainable supply chain management is that they frequently do not possess sufficient information on what is occurring in their complex supply chains, as demonstrated by numerous incidents lacking sustainability. Using eight in‐depth case studies across four industries and elaborating on information processing theory, we identify three forms of sustainability‐related uncertainty that each firm is facing in its supply chain. We refer to them as task uncertainty, source uncertainty, and supply chain uncertainty. The study shows that the extent to which these uncertainties translate into information processing needs depends on a newly identified boundary condition labeled uncertainty intolerance. With respect to the management of such information processing needs, prior research has pointed primarily at matching information processing needs with fitting information processing capacity and secondly at mitigating information processing needs with corrective measures. This study illuminates how some innovative firms occasionally employ a more radical sustainability‐driven supply chain modification mechanism. In doing so, this research exemplifies how sustainable supply chain management may eventually turn from an amendment to a firm's daily business to a decisive factor for shaping future supply chains. In addition, the study constitutes a nascent step to elevate information processing theory to the supply chain level.
Purpose – Sustainable supply management (SSM) has attracted considerable attention from researchers in recent years concentrating on how firms develop and use SSM capabilities to meet stakeholder demands. Acquiring and sharing sustainability knowledge with suppliers have been identified as critical success factors of SSM. The purpose of this paper is to identify the mechanisms that allow firms to effectively acquire and share sustainability-related knowledge with suppliers and how these knowledge generation and desorption mechanisms support the evolution of firm SSM capabilities. Design/methodology/approach – To address the research purpose, four longitudinal case studies, two industry leaders in SSM and two industry followers, were conducted at multiple consecutive points in time between 2008 and 2013. Findings – The results indicate which mechanisms constitute a sustainability-related absorptive and desorptive capacity and how they support SSM. Thereby, this research explains which mechanisms support firms to acquire sustainability knowledge, assimilate and exploit it and also share it with their suppliers over time. Research limitations/implications – This research sheds light on the development and refinement of SSM capabilities by studying the explorative and exploitative learning cycles within focal buying firms taking place over time. Findings indicate a multiplicity in applying absorptive capacity- and desorptive capacity-related mechanisms yields an ambidextrous ability to simultaneously exploit existing knowledge through incremental SSM improvements and explore new SSM knowledge for more radical refinements of SSM capabilities. Practical implications – The results provide a blueprint for firms, especially for sustainability followers, seeking to develop effective SSM capabilities. Furthermore, the results explain which mechanisms support firms to acquire, assimilate and exploit sustainability knowledge and also to share it with their suppliers. Originality/value – SSM knowledge acquisition, assimilation, exploitation and sharing takes place over time in focal buying firms. This ongoing process helps explain how an SSM capability development and refinement is manifested in both leaders and followers.
Purpose -This article investigates how buying firms manage their lower tier sustainability management (LTSM) in their supply networks and what contextual factors influence the choice of approaches. As most of the environmental and social burden is caused in lower tiers we use the iceberg analogy.Design/methodology/approach -Findings from 12 case studies and 53 interviews, publicly available and internal firm data are presented. In an abductive research approach, Transaction Cost Economics (TCE) conceptually guides the analytical iteration processes between theory and data.Findings -This study provides eight LTSM approaches grouped into three categories: direct (holistic, product-, region-, and event-specific) indirect (multiplier-, alliance-, and compliance-based) and neglect (tier-1-based). Focal firms choose between these approaches depending on the strength of observed contextual factors (stakeholder salience, structural supply network complexity, product and industry salience, past supply network incidents, socio-economic and cultural distance and lower tier supplier dependency), leading to perceived sustainability risk (PSR).Research limitations/implications -By depicting TCE's theoretical boundaries in predicting LTSM governance modes, the theory is elevated to the supply network level of analysis. Future research should investigate LTSM at the purchasing category level of analysis to compare and contrast PSR profiles for different purchase tasks and to validate and extend the framework.Practical implications -This study serves as a blueprint for the development of firms' LTSM capabilities that suit their unique PSR profiles. It offers knowledge regarding what factors influence these profiles and presents a model that links the effectiveness of different LTSM approaches to resource intensity.Originality/value -This study extends the application of TCE and adds empirically to the literature on multi-tier and sustainable supply chain management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.