Global value chains and supplier perceptions of corporate social responsibility: a case study of garment manufacturers in Myanmar

Abstract

Suppliers are embedded simultaneously in the global value chains (GVCs) of their lead firms and in the countries in which they conduct their production activities. To explain supplier perceptions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in GVCs, in this article, we develop a new typology by integrating buyer governance modes in GVCs and forms of supplier embeddedness (societal, network, and territorial). We advance literature on supplier perspectives on CSR in GVCs through an analysis of 19 garment manufacturers in Myanmar and their CSR perceptions, using in‐depth field‐work, interviews, and secondary data. The empirical findings indicate a variety of supplier perceptions of CSR, depending on the governance mode of the GVCs and the variegated combinations of societal, network, and territorial embeddedness. Understanding supplier CSR perceptions and their implementation in GVCs thus requires moving away from a sole focus on supplier responses to standardized codes of conduct and towards a greater consideration of different types of supplier embeddedness.

Garment Design Models Combining Bayesian Classifier and Decision Tree Algorithm

“…Over the past hundred years, the production model of apparel companies has evolved from artisanal production to mass production and then to mass customisation in order to keep pace with market changes and customer needs. Mass customisation requires garment manufacturers to produce customised garment products quickly and in large quantities to suit different customer sizes and individual requirements [ 16 ]. However, the individual needs of customers increase the difficulty of developing apparel products and prolong the product development cycle.…”

Mapping corporate social responsibility practices at the international level: systematic review and content analysis approach

“…With respect to exploiting institutionally weak countries, there are two main issues. First, MNCs will pursue a direct policy of shifting their operations to the countries with the weakest regulations to take advantage of cheaper production opportunities and reduced liability (Bae et al , 2021). In turn, these countries will be prompted into competing with one another vis-à-vis deregulation and tax enforcement (Kocher, 2021).…”

“…In the global south, however, corporate misconduct continued to be a cause for concern (Omoteso and Yusuf, 2017). Driven by the attraction of cheaper production opportunities, corporations increasingly turned their attentions toward developing countries (Bae et al , 2021; Nolan, 2017; Ruggie, 2017). It was not long before reports of exploitive and harmful business practices shocked consumers the world over (Hackett and Moffett, 2016; Ullah et al , 2021).…”

“…Many MNCs created individual codes of conduct for themselves, to appease their customers’ demands for formal CSR commitments (Berger‐Walliser and Scott, 2018; Tamvada, 2020). However, commentators soon began to question the implementation and overall impact of this self-regulation (Bae et al , 2021; Hackett and Moffett, 2016). While some suspected that these codes were nothing but lip service (Lebaron et al , 2017), others were concerned with the applicability of code elements (Tamvada, 2020).…”

Corporate social responsibility: A supplier-centered perspective

“…For example, if suppliers understand CSR in different ways or perceive it as a manifestation of economic or cultural imperialism (Jammulamadaka, 2015), the misaligned expectations and intentions between buyers and suppliers likely create problems, including a risk that suppliers claim code compliance, but maintain substandard working conditions (Barrientos, 2019). Accordingly, we require a better sense of how suppliers understand CSR, and the alignment between this understanding and buyers’ views as encapsulated in buyers’ codes of conduct (Bae et al., 2020).…”