Performance Analysis of the Capability Assessment Tool for Sustainable Manufacturing

Abstract

This paper explores the performance of a novel capability assessment tool, developed to identify capability gaps and associated training and development requirements across the supply chain for environmentally-sustainable manufacturing. The tool was developed to assess 170 capabilities that have been clustered with respect to key areas of concern such as managing energy, water, material resources, carbon emissions and waste as well as environmental management practices for sustainability. Two independent expert teams used the tool to assess a sample group of five first and second tier sports apparel and footwear suppliers within the supply chain of a global sporting goods manufacturer in Asia. The paper addresses the reliability and robustness of the developed assessment method by formulating the expected links between the assessment results. The management practices of the participating suppliers were shown to be closely connected to their performance in managing their resources and emissions. The companies' initiatives in implementing energy efficiency measures were found to be generally related to their performance in carbon emissions management. The suppliers were also asked to undertake a self-assessment by using a short questionnaire. The large gap between the comprehensive assessment and these in-house self-assessments revealed the suppliers' misconceptions about their capabilities. OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2013, 5 3544

Development of a Framework for Sustainable Outsourcing: Analytic Balanced Scorecard Method (A-BSC)

“…To do this, the expert team defined a qualitative strategy map. For each perspective, critical success factors and their relationships were identified according to the team of experts and literature review [50][51][52][53]. Details are shown in Figure 3.…”

Pre-existent Training: Opportunities to Increase the Success Rate of ERP Systems Implementations for Sustainable Development Business

“…They have rapidly become the fundamentals for decision making progressions in many organizations, but also have often failed to deliver their expected benefits (Basu & Lederer, 2011), (Ghosh, 2012), (Reş, 2011), (Xue, Liang, Boulton, & Snyder, 2005), (Bresfelean, Bresfelean, Ghisoiu & Comes, 2006), (Ward, Daniel, & Peppard, 2008), (Subic, Shabani, Hedayati, & Crossin, 2013). A new ERP solution is of crucial importance for a company's future (at least in the next decade of subsistence) due to its all-encompassing character (Holland & Light, 1999): it automates core corporate activities (manufacturing, human resource, finance, supply chain management), incorporates top practices to assist rapid decision-making processes, cost diminution, and superior management control.…”

“…In the late 90's, studies showed that ERP implementations success rate was less than 40% and the great majority were behind schedule or exceeded the funds (Xue, Liang, Boulton, & Snyder, 2005), (Ward, Daniel, & Peppard, 2008), possibly due to poor cost and schedule estimations or changes in project scope rather than project management failure. Even in recent years (Eckartz, Daneva, Wieringa, & van Hillegersberg, 2009), (Subic, Shabani, Hedayati, & Crossin, 2013) after costly IT investments, numerous companies (65% from a case study sample) complained about their business cases that failed to identify and manage benefits in the deployment processes. Furthermore, 70% of ERP implementations proved to be unsuccessful (Al-Mashari, 2006) mainly due to (Eckartz, Daneva, Wieringa, & van Hillegersberg, 2009): business strategies, project delays, cost overruns and underestimation of the effort required for winning managerial changes.…”

Using the Electronic Industry Code of Conduct to Evaluate Green Supply Chain Management: An Empirical Study of Taiwan’s Computer Industry

“…Thus, GCSM plays a vital role in the improvement and implementation of a firm's competitive advantages [28,29]. When selecting supply chain partners, firms evaluate the social and environmental responsibilities of suppliers using publicly available information, self-assessment questionnaires, review of other non-proprietary information, develop of assessment tools, and on-site audits [14,30]. Environmental on-site audits allow for a deep and broad understanding of the supplier's capabilities and activities but remain costly.…”