We contend that the development of sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) theory has been impaired by a lack of paradigmatic diversity in the field. The contested nature of the concept of sustainability has been repressed in SSCM theory, which has led to SSCM cutting itself off from debates that could be the source of inspiration for the development of interesting theory. We adopt the problematization approach proposed by Alvesson and Sandberg (2011) in order to unveil some of SSCM's unquestioned assumptions, propose an alternative assumption ground and in this way move towards stronger theory in SSCM. We use paradoxical framing to make sense of the inherent tensions between the different levels of sustainability, and between the different types of theory being produced in response to the challenges of sustainability. We articulate a number of foundational assumptions for an alternative theory of SSCM that emerge from the various tensions identified between the different paradigms of sustainability. Finally, we identify a number of ideas for future research that would enable researchers to empirically explore the alternative assumptions.

No abstract

perspective AbstractPurpose: In acknowledging the reality of climate change, large firms have set internal and external (supplier oriented) targets to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This study explores the complex processes behind the evolution and diffusion of carbon reduction strategies in supply networks.Design/methodology/approach: The research uses complex adaptive systems (CAS) as a theoretical framework and presents a single case study of a focal buying firm and its supply network in the food sector. A longitudinal and multilevel analysis is used to discuss the dynamics between the focal firm, the supply network and external environment. Findings:Rather than being a linear and controlled process of adoption-implementationoutcomes, the transition to reduce carbon in a supply network is much more dynamic, emerging as a result of a number of factors at the individual, organizational, supply network and environmental levels. Research limitations/implications:The research considers the emergence of a carbon reduction strategy in the food sector, driven by a dominant buying firm. Future research should seek to investigate the diffusion of environmental strategies more broadly and in other contexts. Practical implications:Findings from the research reveal the limits of the control that a buying firm can exert over behaviours in its network and show the positive influence of consortia initiatives on transitioning to sustainability in supply networks.Originality: CAS is a fairly novel theoretical lens for researching environmental supply network dynamics. The paper offers fresh multilevel insights into the emergent and systemic nature of the diffusion of environmental practices in supply networks.

No abstract

This study investigates how knowledge diffusion occurs in a globally dispersed supply network, wherein buying firms and suppliers often do not have strong relationships and competitive tensions prevail. We elaborate the Network of Practice (NoP) view by examining a global supply network in the food sector that is as an exemplar of high global dispersion. This paper provides several novel insights into global knowledge diffusion. We introduce the NoP concept of homophily into the field of supply chain management to explain knowledge diffusion within global supply networks. We take a longitudinal perspective to show that although prior contractual ties (relational homophily) and co‐location (location homophily) initially drive knowledge diffusion, in the long‐term, shared practices (practice homophily) are the principal driver of knowledge diffusion. We demonstrate that buying firms’ assurance of procedural justice, together with the predominance of geographically dispersed suppliers and the emergence of nexus members, can help dampen supplier resistance to knowledge diffusion. The study shows that knowledge diffusion in a global supply NoP occurs in two complementary forms—broadcasting forums and action groups—which vary in breadth, depth, and tie diversity. Ultimately, we present vertical (buyer‐supplier), horizontal (suppliersupplier), and diagonal (non‐competitive) relationships as important refinements of the NoP view that characterize a global supply NoP. Overall, our findings offer a path for buying firms to establish adequate online infrastructure to support the emergence of decentralized and self‐organized knowledge diffusion in a globally dispersed supply network.

Research on supply network transparency is incipient and focused on how focal firms can improve monitoring of supplier misbehavior. This narrow focus has restricted advancements in the topic. Our research, firstly, shifts the focus from supplier to focal firm misbehavior, and secondly, focuses on Brazil as an exemplar of an emerging economy. We explore how institutional voids influence supply network transparency. We focus on how voids in regulation, labor market, and contracting systems provide fruitful land for buyer misconduct and undermine supply network transparency. We review legislation in five developed countries to contrast with legislation in Brazil and we synthesize six years of Brazilian law suits regarding outsourcing issues in the apparel sector. This study exposes that voids can ease pressures allowing firms to navigate 'below the radar' and sustain poor working conditions along the supply network. Within this context, society has limited information availability and accessibility -what we label inhospitable accessibility (due to the regulatory void), as well as limited proportionality between real risks in the supply network and traceability of those risks back to the buying firm -what we label blurred liability (due to voids in labor market and contracting systems), thus preventing supply network transparency.

PurposeThis study analyzes whether power in the supply chain, based on governance modes and network centrality, explain financial performance at different levels of analysis: buyers, suppliers and dyads.Design/methodology/approachThe study employs a dual macro-micro lens based on global value chain (i.e. market, modular, relational and captive governance modes) and social network analysis (network centrality) to assess the impact of power (im)balance onto financial performance. Different from previous research, this study adopts information reliability techniques – such as information entropy – to differentiate the weights of distinct financial performance metrics in terms of the maximal entropy principle. This principle states that the probability distribution that best represents the current state of knowledge given prior data is the one with largest entropy. These weights are used in TOPSIS analysis.FindingsResults offer insightful reflections to SCM research. We show that buyers outperform suppliers due to power asymmetry. We ground our findings both analyzing across governance modes and comparing network centrality. We show that market and modular governances (where power balance prevails) outperform relational and captive modes at the dyadic level – thus inferring that in the long run these governance modes may lead to financially healthier supply chains.Originality/valueThis study advances SCM research by exploring the impact of governance modes and network centrality on performance at both firm and dyadic levels while employing an innovative combination of secondary data and robust set of techniques including TOPSIS, WASPAS and information entropy.

No abstract